Archive for April, 2010
You don’t get anything from coaching………. honest….
Apr 25th
“We all know what it takes to get on in life and work and our own attitude and commonsense determines how we succeed. Workplace coaches and mentors are not needed.”
so said Anne Widdecombe at a conference in 2008. Wise words………
Steve Davis is 52 years old and is taking part in the Snooker World Championshipsat this week. He started the competition as a 500-1 outsider and in the second round he faced John Higgins the defending World Champion and hot favourite to take the crown again this year. Davis is a previous 6 times winner of the chamionship but his last win was in 1989 so he wasn’t expected to go further than his meeting with Higgins.
However, Steve pulled off a huge shock by beating Higgins and in an interview following the match he credited his victory to a technical change in his game. This wasn’t noticed by himself or a fellow pro but a visitor to his website, who pointed out that he was moving his head before completing his shot.
”My first reaction was: what does he know? But he was right.”
On receiving the e-mail, Steve had a look at a few videos of himself and saw that the visitor to his website was indeed correct. As a result his game has improved immeasurably culminating in his victory over World Champion Higgins.
I think this is the whole point of coaching. Steve Davis has been playing snooker for over 30 years and has many many trophies to demonstrate his skill and expertise in his field. If he can miss something as simple as lifting his head when playing a shot what can we pick up from a coach who can help us take a fresh look at our work and life issues?
Coaching can help us gain a different perspective on the issues we are focussed on, by a coach encouraging us to take an objective view of situations and look at the scene from a variety of views. The answers, as Anne Widdecombe believes, may well be within us but as Steve Davis has found out it often needs someone on the outside to help us find the answers.
Qualities you would want to vote for….
Apr 22nd
Our local weekly paper has been running a Q&A session with the main candidates up for election. This week one of the questions was “why should young people vote for you?”.
The Tory candidates answer was interesting, with the first part of their answer explaining that when someone votes for you they are placing trust in you and your abilities to represent them. They then went on to explain that they wanted voters to know that the candidate was approachable, would make time to meet people and that they were discreet.
It threw up two questions for me:
Is the ability to be discreet really an over riding reason to vote somebody into power?
Did they answer the queston with specific reasons as to why young people should vote for them?
The word discreet tends to conjure up images of personal ads rather than political candidates…..
Personalities count and not policies?
Apr 21st
So the second leadership debate is almost upon us and what did we learn from the first?
Nick Clegg’s performance appears to have energised the election, with the number of people intending to vote having gone up, with a surge in young people registering to vote in the last few days. He certainly appeared to be the most relaxed and assured of the 3 leaders in front of the camera, but did he really talk about his party’s policies in any depth?
I don’t think he did to any large degree. Instead he focussed on talking about his beliefs and values about politics and the need for a change in approach. Seth Godin has said “The only thing people judge about you is how an engagement with you makes them feel.”
The initial polls reflect how Nick Clegg made the viewers feel and it was clearly very positive.
The cliche is that “people buy people first”. The reason it is a cliche is that it is true. The advantage he has created for himself is that many people now like him and will therefore listen to him with a positive frame of mind . They will actively look for the positives in what he has to say and will give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the negatives.
Contrast this with Gordon Brown. During the first debate I thought he was very clear in his intentions, had specific policies for various scenarios and he talked about his values and how they defined his approach to life and work. The problem he had was the fact that he has been in government for 13 years and people have fixed views on him. Many people don’t like him and therefore don’t listen to him with an open mind. Of course they may not like his policies either! People who have met him have usually been struck by his sincerity and the strength of belief in his ideals, but he is not seen as a natural leader. He seems to lack the warmth and charisma demonstrated by Nick Clegg and he will have to work harder than Clegg to make himself heard. Brown has the advantage of authority, experience and strong values but if people vote for personalities he is likely to come up short.
Clegg will face a sterner test in the next two debates, as he no longer has the benefit of first impressions. People will have expectations of him and may well start to look more carefully at his specific policies. or they could go the way of X Factor, where viewers make their mind up who they like and vote for them week in week out, regardless of how well they sing!
Do people in the UK vote for policies or personalities?
Apr 14th
With the first of the leadership debates to be televised tomorrow, it will be interesting to see the impact it has on voting intentions.
We have two different types of characters in Gordon Brown and David Cameron, with Nick Clegg having a great opportunity to make an impression on a TV audience that is perhaps not as familiar with him as it is with the first two party leaders.
The leadership qualities they can demonstrate will have a huge impact in the way people choose to vote, as people tend to want to associate with people who have similar ideals and values as themselves. A leader must be able to communicate his vision in terms that cause followers to buy into it. He must communicate clearly and passionately, as passion is contagious.
A good leader must have the discipline to work toward his vision single-mindedly, as well as to direct their actions and those of their party toward the goal. A leader does not suffer “analysis paralysis” but is always doing something in pursuit of the vision, inspiring others to do the same.
Some of the qualities to look out for are:
Integrity A person of integrity is the same on the outside and on the inside. Such an individual can be trusted because he never veers from inner values, even when it might seem useful to do so. A leader must have the trust of followers and therefore must display integrity.
Honest dealings, predictable reactions, well-controlled emotions, and an absence of tantrums and harsh outbursts are all signs of integrity. Such leaders will be more approachable by followers.
Dedication A leader inspires dedication by example, doing whatever it takes to complete the next step toward the vision. By setting an excellent example, leaders can show followers that there are no nine-to-five jobs on the team, only opportunities to achieve something great.
Magnanimity A magnanimous leader ensures that credit for successes is spread as widely as possible throughout the company. Conversely, a good leader takes personal responsibility for failures. This sort of reverse magnanimity helps other people feel good about themselves and draws the team closer together. To spread the fame and take the blame is a hallmark of effective leadership.
Leaders with humility recognize that they are no better or worse than other members of the team. A humble leader is not self-effacing but rather tries to elevate everyone. Leaders with humility also understand that their status does not make them a god.
Openness means being able to listen to new ideas, even if they do not conform to the usual way of thinking. Good leaders are able to suspend judgment while listening to others’ ideas, as well as accept new ways of doing things that someone else thought of. Openness builds mutual respect and trust between leaders and followers, and it also keeps the team well supplied with new ideas that can further its vision.
Creativity is the ability to think differently, to get outside of the box that constrains solutions. Creativity gives leaders the ability to see things that others have not seen and thus lead followers in new directions. The most important question that a leader can ask is, “What if … ?”
Fairness means dealing with others consistently and justly. A leader must check all the facts and hear everyone out before passing judgment. He must avoid leaping to conclusions based on incomplete evidence. When people feel they that are being treated fairly, they reward a leader with loyalty and dedication.
Assertiveness The ability to clearly state what one expects so that there will be no misunderstandings. A leader must be assertive to get the desired results. Along with assertiveness comes the responsibility to clearly understand what followers expect from their leader.
Sense of humour Effective leaders know how to use humour to energize followers. Humour is a form of power that provides some control over the work environment. The use of humour also helps relieve tension and defuse hostility
While the above are qualities found in all good leaders, I think it will also be interesting to see who “acts the part” of the next Prime Minister. In previous companies I have worked at you could usually accurately forecast who would be the next manager as they tended to exhibit the behaviour expected of a manger. Their opinions were respected by their peer group, and they exerted an influence over others through their actions, attitudes and views – they walked the talk.
It will be interesting to see whether Gordon, David or Nick are walking the talk tomorrow!
On the other hand, if you think people vote for policies not personalities here is a link you should check out:
http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/
Tell us if your preconceptions of how you think you will vote match the feedback you get from the site. 
How bad is your manager?
Apr 12th
Recent research in the UK has indicated that 47% of people have left a job due to bad management.
A survey of the UK workforce (3,000 adults surveyed by OnePoll), conducted on behalf of the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) also revealed that 50 per cent believe that they could do a better job than their current manager and a similar number (49 per cent) said they would be prepared to take a pay cut, in order to work with a better manager.
68 per cent of managers surveyed confessed to being ‘accidental’ managers, not aspiring to occupy management roles at the start of their careers. Two in five admitted to not wanting the responsibility of managing people at all, while 63 per cent of managers say they had no management training.
Ruth Spellman, CMI CEO commented: “It’s not surprising bad management is such an issue in the UK. We invest less in our managers than our global competitors and it shows. It’s telling that the majority of individuals never set out to manage people, and have not been trained to do so. If we’re going to stay competitive internationally, the Government and employers need to address this worrying skills gap.
Does this research match your experience? What kind of managers have you worked for? What kind of training/coaching have you received during your management career?
Post a comment and share your experiences.
