|
 |
|
 We just posted the download page for the German version of the Responsibility Process poster. You can download it–and a number of other languages–in full color PDF and make as many copies as you like.
Read more about the project to translate the Responsibility Process into more and more languages to reach every corner of the globe, especially if you want to help translate into your language.
 In a previous post I called attention to “consent” as the root of “consensus” (as well as the basis for participation in any group).
What some people love and others hate about the process of consensus decision-making is that it requires participants to seek every group member’s sincere consent to move forward.
In fact, my definition of consensus is 100% agreement to move forward together.
So, why is consensus important?
- I measure team building by energy and direction. Without consensus, a group has no shared direction. Without consensus, people literally work at cross-purposes (and cancel out each other’s efforts) instead of amplifying each other’s efforts.
- When groups pursue a direction decided by majority or authority, those who dissent (either vocally or silently) display low energy. They lose their commitment.
- Remember the effect of low commitment on teams: the principle of the least-invested co-worker guarantees that when low commitment is present, it will always be more infectious than high commitment. The majority may “win” but the “losers” drain needed energy away from the “win.”
So, the real value of consensus decision-making is that it creates shared direction and high energy in a team. And isn’t that what we join groups to get?
5-Minute Practice Tip
To start becoming an expert consensus-builder, create a consensus continuum (in your head or on paper) similar to the one below. Then, when you’re in a group — any group — and attempting to decide a direction, when someone proposes a solution, immediately take a quick poll of each individual in the group.
Ask each person to rank his/her position as:
- Unqualified: Yes. Move forward.
- Perfectly acceptable. Move forward.
- I can live with the decision of the group. Move forward.
- I trust the group and will not block this decision but need to register my disagreement. Move forward.
- I feel no sense of unity as a group and think more work is needed before deciding. Stay put.
- I do not agree and feel the need to stand in the way of adopting this decision. Stay put.
The point of this practice is warm inclusion of dissenters. Inclusion gives dissenters a louder voice, instead of quelling them. The normal — and harmful — group dynamic is for the majority to beat-up the minority until they withdraw, which the majority then defines as consent.
To activate more team building when there’s a difference of opinion on a team, silence the majority and ask dissenters, “How can we change this proposal so it works for you?” Then listen.
Often dissenters solve their own “opposition” simply by being heard.
Start your practice on less-than-critical decisions. The key to consensus-building is steering away from “right versus wrong” arguments. (Use “Works for me,” or “Doesn’t work for me,” instead.)
And, above all, keep asking the group, “What could move us forward together?”
Leave a comment and tell me what you think.
Christopher Avery, PhD, is a recognized authority on how individual and shared responsibility works in the mind and an advisor to leaders worldwide. Build a responsible team (or family) and master your leadership skills with The Leadership Gift Program for Leaders.
 A while ago, I had the opportunity to accept — or decline — two new business relationships (one as a board member and one in a business venture). As I listened to my internal dialogue about the two propositions, I noticed I kept coming back to my fundamental belief: teamwork is an individual (not a group) skill and responsibility.
In the end, only I am responsible for the quality of all my work relationships. So, when I enjoy them, I’m enjoying my choices.
When I don’t like my work relationships, only I can do something to improve them.
What does this have to do with my decision-making process (or yours, when you’re asked to join a team)? Well, if teamwork is an individual skill, then when we elect to join with others:
- we retain our personal power
- we lend our consent to a group direction and purpose, and
- we incur a responsibility (aka, ability to respond) to speak up if/when we disagree with the group’s direction or purpose
Said another way, take individual responsibility for every relationship and act as if you are always participating in a consensus process, even if the relationship is based on authority, majority, or some other form of governance. Or, decline the relationship.
Contrary to the popular definition, real “team players” are never willing to “go along” with something about which they have strong negative feelings.
They remain conscience that all authority relationships are just agreements — consents — between them and others. They retain and exercise their personal power at all times.
When real “team players” disagree, they push back on others (whether they’re peers, partners, managers, bosses, or elected representatives), knowing that the group’s final agreement will either represent their personal consent to a direction and/or purpose or be the signal for them to withdraw their personal power from the relationship to move in another direction.
In my case, I eventually saw that I lacked sufficient passion for the work to participate patiently in one group’s process. Since my predisposition was to change the group’s direction, without serious passion to fuel my efforts, I’m better off not becoming a member. And the group will be better off, too.
“Going along” without passion or commitment creates two phenomena:
- Entire groups going where no member wants to go (i.e., group think, aka risky shift)
- People hanging out together with low commitment, low energy, low performance, resentment and low esteem.
When I exercise true responsibility, I empower, I approve of, and I co-operate with a wide variety of group decisions towards achieving an agreed direction and purpose. When I do this, it’s unnecessary to voice my opinion on every single detail — in other words, I don’t “sweat the small stuff.”
Exercising my responsibility means I focus on purpose, direction and values — and let everything else go.
So, these days it works best for me to treat every group action, decision and process as one that I “consent to” for as long as I choose to stay in the relationship.
5-Minute Practice Tip
Consider how each group decision or action literally can’t happen without your consent (even if by silent tolerance or permission). As you do this, make note of how you feel about your membership and your urges to speak your truth.
Leave a comment and tell me what you think.
Christopher Avery, PhD, is a recognized authority on how individual and shared responsibility works in the mind and an advisor to leaders worldwide. Build a responsible team (or family) and master your leadership skills with The Leadership Gift Program for Leaders.
 Click image to see full size On September 2, 2011 I was in Ashtabula, Ohio where I lived from the age of 7 into my college years. The high school alumni association called me to be inducted into their Hall of Fame for my work with the Responsibility Process and Leadership Gift.
 Click to see full size Other honorees included Captain Jed Larsen, (me), Vicki Sussman, Francis Montanaro, Craig Walrath, Paul Lewis (represented by his daughter). Not pictured are James Bollman and Dr. William Evans.
We each addressed the high school juniors and seniors (I showed a couple of Thom’s Responsibility Man videos.) Then we were treated to a luncheon as well as honored at the fifty yard line during the season-opening football game that evening.
Thanks to my wife Amy, son Thom, and brother Fred for traveling with me; to Stuart and Kim Cordell for hosting us; and to Virginia Buona and Norma Lillie — my second Mom’s during all those years — for attending.
 Here is installment #2 of Responsibility Man. Thanks again to son Thom for conceiving, directing, and giving voice to the character.
Thanks to Mario too. 
Comment below to encourage Thom and give him your thoughts about where this series should go.
 Dan Mezick
Last week Dan Mezick (agile coach, CEO of New Technology Solutions Inc., and AgileBoston volunteer extraordinaire) and I sat down “together” (on the phone) to talk about people and interactions at work. Dan wanted to pick my brain about the Creating Results-Based Teams workshop — why technical professionals should attend and what they will take away.
Listen to the Interview
If you just want the “meat and potatoes”of who should attend, why, and what they will take away, skip to Part 2 of 2. If you enjoy a wide-ranging dialog about people and interactions at work and human progress, then you will like Part 1 of 2.
Part 1 of 2 (23:55) (click to listen, right-click to download)
Part 2 of 2 (16:51) (click to listen, right-click to download)
More cool links for Creating Results-Based Teams
Upcoming dates, locations, discounts, and registration
Top agile company CEO endorses Creating Results-Based Teams
Recent evaluation by IT leaders of their experience with Creating Results-Based Teams
Posted in Agile, Coaching, communication skills, Management Training, Personal Development, Recommended Resources, Teamwork, work training
|
Tagged Boston Agile, Dan Mezick, interview, MP3, New Technology Solutions
|
How often does one of your colleagues let you down?
Such situations happen way too often, but you can turn them around. The key is your response (not the other person’s actions).
I recently enjoyed the opportunity to decide how to react to a co-worker who was bailing out of a conference call for the second time in a row. ”Steve” emailed me about not knowing what the subject matter of a conference call was (we had been clear when we scheduled it) and not being ready for it if this call was what he thought it was (it was).
This was the second time in a couple of weeks on the same bit of work. I wasn’t pleased that he wanted to get out of the call, but being mad at him wouldn’t have gotten me anywhere. So instead of taking it personally, I urged him to hold up his end of the deal. This was my response:
Steve, thanks for your apology. I’ve deleted our appointment for this afternoon.
Your last two emails give me the impression that you don’t know what you committed to, aren’t prioritizing it very high, and don’t have a handle on your schedule. I could be okay with that if I weren’t scheduling team time for you and depending on your input.
So how about this? When you recall what we agreed to and if you still want to do it, let me know. Then, after you’ve completed your part I’ll be happy to schedule a time.
My best, Christopher
This is the e-mail I received in return:
Hey Christopher -
You’re right and for that I apologize to you and the team. I’ve taken on too much and it’s gotten the better of me. There’s a part of me that feels like I can just keep piling it on but in the end there are casualties. In this case, it was your project and that sucks. I take full responsibility. I put your work at risk because of my poor planning. No excuses.
Given this realization and the evident lack of hours in my day, I’d like to respectfully withdraw from the project. I recognize that my image and brand is likely a bit tarnished because of this and that’s something I’ll have to own.
Again, my apologies for this. It certainly wasn’t anything other my own failure. I’ll learn from it.
Good for him for owning up. However I didn’t want him to quit because his work is valuable to our team. I was willing to separate from him as an alternative to putting my progress and team time in his hands and then waiting for him — but that’s not what I wanted. So instead I put the future of our relationship in his hands:
Dear Steve,
Thanks for being forthright. I appreciate you.
Regarding withdrawing, I understand, and, I wish you wouldn’t. You bring a lot of value and have history that is hard to replace.
Would you think about it for a bit and see if any other arrangement or possibility comes to mind? As I said in the prior email, I would be okay with you doing the work at your leisure and then let me know when you are ready to debrief.
My best, Christopher
And guess what? Because I didn’t fly off the handle and sever my relationship with Steve, and because I didn’t let him off the hook and at the same time gave him another chance, he came around and I received this response:
Thanks Christopher.
I certainly would like to continue on the project so thanks for that. I’ll do the work over the next week or so and reach out as soon as it’s ready to deliver.
Very much appreciate the opp.
And he did just that. The relationship is repaired and stronger as a result of both of our actions.
It takes courage to call someone on their behavior. When done with complete responsibility and compassion, it can result in lessons, growth, and even a new and improved relationship agreement.
Christopher Avery, PhD, is a recognized authority on how individual and shared responsibility works in the mind and an advisor to leaders worldwide. Build a responsible team (or family) and master your leadership skills with The Leadership Gift Program for Leaders.
 Imagine my delight when I saw Scott Dunn’s twitter post yesterday. I knew my topic last week at Agile 2011 was hot when 212 people crowded into a room with 200 chairs and then stayed energized for 3.5 hours!
The link in Scott’s tweet takes you to this chart.
I’m honored to be in the company of Chet Hendrikson, Ron Jeffries, Jeff Patton, Ashley Johnson (my scheduled co-presenter who gave this session last year), Jonathan Rasmusson, and Mary Poppendieck — agile rock stars.
To put this in perspective, 16oo people attended a reported 300 sessions over 4 days. That puts our session in the top 1%. What’s that mean? An ownership mindset and culture is on lots of people’s minds.
 Click image for full size Client and colleague Lloyd Glick uses design software for his machine tool business near Lancaster, Pennsylvania. He sent me the attached graphic inspired by a heart breaking story.
Lloyd explains:
Artwork is usually based on a thought or inspiration…… maybe a struggle or victory. Or to keep it simple, based on a feeling. This ‘creation’ is based on a feeling I have.
He went on to tell a story of heartbreak for a relative who is struggling in life. Lloyd sees this person stuck in the position of justify which is reinforced by those around him. The artwork is a metaphor for being stuck in a cage of one’s own choosing.
Thank Lloyd.
 I don’t know why people seldom end relationships well.
Maybe it’s because we all want so much to win — and endings threaten us with losing.
Maybe we’re annoyed that we don’t know how to derive any more mutual benefit from a partnership.
Maybe we’re embarrassed about promises we implied and haven’t kept.
Maybe we’re upset that another didn’t live up to our expectations.
For whatever reasons, when collaborations or partnerships cease to serve us, most of us start jockeying for position, politicking, and blaming our circumstances on our partners.
Sometimes endings even explode into battles. To describe it analytically, we might say that collaborative behavior diminishes — and positioning behavior accelerates — as the outer edge of a contract’s time horizon comes into focus.
No matter how lucrative the venture may have been for both parties, by the time the end actually comes, it’s common for one or both parties to want to get far away from the other. Counselors sometimes describe bad endings this way: We don’t break up because we’re fighting; we fight because we’re breaking up.
I won’t pretend we can do much to avoid endings. They’re as inevitable as beginnings.
But I have observed that we can improve the quality of endings by resisting three emotional traps:
- Unnecessarily burning bridges
- Harming one’s own reputation
- Bringing inhumanity to oneself and others
In my experience, we can expand our responsibility around ending relationships by taking the following actions during endings:
- Approach the end of a collaboration with the beginning in mind — recall the most vivid memory possible of the positive intentions and positive results the partnership produced.
- Thank your partner(s) for the opportunity, results, and trust they provided you.
- Acknowledge BOTH that you don’t see an immediate future that motivates you to continue investing in the relationship AND, that this is NOT a reason for either party to stoop to irresponsible behavior.
- Negotiate fairly and compassionately during the dismantling of infrastructure and the redistribution of responsibilities. Pay your fair share or more of these expenses. If you believe that either party may feel threatened, engage a facilitator to keep you responsible.
- If the other party exhibits difficult end-game behavior, show compassion and strive for resolution by de-escalating rather than escalating.
Want an example?
A long-standing joint-venture practice of a large well-known chemical company has been to always take on just a bit more than their share of the risk when dealing with a smaller/weaker partner.
Why? 1) Because they have deeper pockets and can afford it, so it isn’t really more risk to them. 2) It gives them privileged access to innovative ideas in the marketplace of entrepreneurism and invention.
Why? Because they are viewed as a “fair” partner to deal with when you are small, hungry, and a bit inexperienced.
Get started with this 5-minute stretch exercise
Reflect on one or more relationships that were once great collaborations yet ended poorly or in conflict. Use your imagination to revisit the best time of that collaboration. Now, envision a way to use your sense of ownership to craft a more responsible endgame.
Apply this vision the next time you begin a new collaboration — or relationship. I would love you to leave a comment or share your experience with this practice.
Christopher Avery, PhD, is a recognized authority on how individual and shared responsibility works in the mind and an advisor to leaders worldwide. Build a responsible team (or relationship) and master your leadership skills with The Leadership Gift Program for Leaders.
|
|
|
Recommend on Facebook
