Organizations Need a CCJ — Chief Court Jester

The best decisions leaders make are based on reliable information, sound advice and counsel from their boards. That is the theory. Getting reliable information in the form of good data is often surprisingly easy. In addition, many organizations have access to internal and external experts for good counsel. The problem is when ego and politics clash with what the data and the experts say. This is why companies should have a CCJ — a Chief Court Jester. But as this position does not exist in organizational charts there is another solution: A coach is the perfect reincarnation of the medieval clown. Let me explain.

The corporate landscape is littered with examples of bad decisions driven by egos and politics. For instance, the reason why many have not heard of Blockbuster anymore is that in 2000, the former king of video rentals was so confident about its dominant market position that it declined an offer by the then fledging newcomer Netflix to collaborate. The graphic illustrates what happened next.

The Daimler Chrysler merger of 1998 has become a textbook case for how a failure of cultural compatibility and lack of flexibility can ruin a potentially powerful consolidation. The Germans thought they knew better. The Americans were frustrated about how hierarchies paralyzed the decision-making process and grew impatient.

In many cases, bad decisions are the result of group think, the fear of speaking truth to power, denial and other human failure as opposed to lack of information or expertise. Board members do not want to rock the boat. Direct reports may be too scared for their careers and many a whistle blower’s fate proves their fears right. This creates a toxic dynamic in which outward agreement with everything the CEO says is being rewarded while critical voices are being silenced and pushed into the margins of corporate Siberia. So, how do you get powerful executives to become open to real input? 

Enter the Clowns 
Historically speaking, the job of the court jester was to entertain the ruler. In her book “Fools Are Everywhere. The Court Jester Around the World”, B. Otto describes how jesters could come from a wide range of backgrounds: university dropouts, a monk who had been thrown out of a priory, exceptional jongleurs, or just funny people who happened to meet the right nobleman at the right time. Recruitment was informal and meritocratic. Even more crucially, jesters had the right to sit at table with their master and say whatever came into their heads.
How far they went is still a matter of historical debate. There is agreement that in most cases, the desire to remain employed — and stay alive — placed limits on how much truth they did speak to power. Overall, the jester did poke fun at the ruling elite and to variying degrees could put the finger on the real issue at hand. What then makes a modern-day coach a suitable replacement for a court jester or clown?

Reveal Instead of Expose
For starters, let’s face the elephant in the room: some cynics do think of our guild as a bunch of clowns. However, an underestimated trait of clowns is they are a non-threat. Coaches ask questions and help their clients to get to the bottom of things and to uncover the truth. Our job is not to expose but to hold a safe space and help reveal what is going on below the surface. Exposure comes with judgment. Jesters with a wish to live were at their best when they stepped in to reveal. When coaches help clients reveal things, they do so not to judge but to enable people to undergo a transformation. That work is future- and solutions-oriented. Exposure remains stuck in the past. 

Bring to the Surface what is Mostly Known 
Interestingly, the journey of discovery and revelation often makes people accept things about themselves which their environment has known for a long time but did not dare say. Essentially, we get to know ourselves. A Chief Corporate Jester/coach supports us in getting to know ourselves, which according to Thales of Miletus is one of the hardest things for human beings. 

The Denial of Our Humanity
That basic truth is often a surprise revelation for some. Even the most powerful executives and leaders are only human. Part of the truth about our humanity is our imperfection. On the contrary, a toxic environment often denies leaders their humanity. The temptation for the top executives is to buy into the lie of perfection. 

What good and qualified coaching does is speak truth to power without judgment and self-serving agenda. That also means, a good coach is no threat to other people in the organization. Even more so than a court jester, coaches can only be effective if they follow the cardinal rule of engagement with a client — do not become part of the system. Only outside the system can coaches really speak truth to power. Luckily for us, no one can order a quick beheading. The worst that can happen to us is dismissal.

The Advantage of Corporate Misfits
What else do coaches and court jesters have in common? Just as the court jesters of lore, coaches come from a variety of backgrounds. While many of us are not necessarily university dropouts or social misfits, we are to some extent the equivalent of the monk or nun who left his/her monastery because they realized it wasn’t their thing after all — or it was strongly suggested they’d leave. In today’s corporate speech, we would refer to this as a career change. That means, we use our broad experience from our coaching training and certification process including our careers which can span from corporate to the military, NGO to craftsmanship etc. 

The point is, there is a misunderstanding only coaches with the same industry background or experience as CEO can properly coach a CEO of a bank. The role of the coachee and the industry of the organization are only two factors on a much longer list of equally important variables systemic coaching takes into consideration. In fact, insisting on the same background and industry knowledge puts limitations on the coaching experience exactly because too much familiarity can potentially limit the coach’s questions, associations and ways of probing ideas.

The Power Combination
I cannot relate the same way to the experience of a CFO of a struggling sports company as perhaps the CFO of another sports company could. I am crap at numbers, and I am not much into sports. But I have faced existential threats, I am an immigrant, the son of a refugee, married to a spouse from a different ethnic background, have managed people, moved from continent to continent, raised three kids, provided consulting services to small businesses and Fortune 50 companies, worked in academia, journalism, etc., etc. As result, I can do change and ambiguity. I live diversity in my own house. I am used to feedback. Still, I cannot tell the CFO of our struggling sport company how to avoid a financial free fall. But that is not my job as a coach. That is what a financial consultant or a mentor would do. 

But as coach, I can come along to support the CFO and the organization to handle the challenges for the organization, the repercussions for the roles people have and the impact on the individual persons who fulfill these roles. Coaches merge the totality of their experiences with their training and utilize this powerful combination to facilitate the transformation of organizations and the people who are part of these organizations. This goes far beyond the balance sheet and cashflow problems our imaginary sports company has. The tangible financial impact of coaching can be to make the organizational transformation sustainable which will be required to ensure the continued success of the venture.

Following a Proud Tradition
Organizations and their leaders benefit immensely from insights, feedback and perspectives shared by someone from outside their system and thought processes. Revealing truth is hard but the potential upswing can make or break a leader and the organization. Against this background, I don’t mind being thought of as a clown. The reality is, as a certified systemic coach I follow a proud tradition — as long as you don’t expect me to don a red nose.

This blogpost was also published in German on crimalin.com on September 10, 2024.

Is Coaching Worth It — Literally WORTH IT?

What is the return on investment (ROI) of coaching? This is an important question for managers who consider opening their doors to the ever-increasing breed of coaches.

 

To quote Goethe’s Faust, “Two souls, alas, are housed within my breast […]” — because I am writing this as an MBA and business analyst but also as a coach. The coach in me will of course say the value of coaching is priceless and I will come armed with stats and graphs to prove it. For example, one study says the ROI for coaching is 529%, meaning for every $1,000 invested in coaching you get over $5,000 in return. The International Coaching Federation (ICF) reports an even better ROI of some 600%. 

 

Too Good to Be True?

So, the coach in me is happy and can feel smug. But then I get this funny feeling I always get when I look at spreadsheets with 10,000 rows, calculate an average and subsequently launch into my highly sophisticated process of analyzing the numbers, i.e. sorting, eye-balling, guessing and basically applying my very own bullshit radar. Here is why I find the 600% ROI claims worth investigating further (to put it kindly). In the world of stock markets, an ROI of 10% is considered good and it can range up to just under 30% for technology as of 2023. On the other end of the spectrum, the average ROI for a fast-food restaurant was 5% in 2022.

 

Whatever Google search terms I apply — and I am eager to learn where I got it wrong purely for personal financial gain — I don’t find any sector, industry, stock index, etc. with an ROI much above 30%. That means I cannot see myself taking that 600% ROI seriously for the simple reason that a CFO/CEO worth his or her metal will simply laugh me out of his or her office. Then there is the other thing: the 529% ROI is from a 2001 study. The 600% ROI quoted in the ICF study is more recent but from 2009. Either one is still being used, no wonder, by coaching companies. Such eye watering results are hard to kill. Dig a little deeper and you will find problems.

 

The Math Is Correct But the Methodology?

The formular to calculate the ROI of coaching is easy enough: Coaching ROI = (Benefit attained by coaching) / (Cost of coaching) x 100. That bit about “benefit” is the tricky part providing ample opportunity to misunderstand numbers and let’s be frank to fudge numbers. I am not a statistician but smarter people than me have mentioned the words sample bias, lack of control samples, independence of assessors, etc. when reviewing these studies.

 

Personally, I find it easier to check for additional factors. The study published in 2001 was the result of research that took presumably place in 2000 and earlier. Ditto for the ICF study published in 2009. If the data collection and analysis took about a year, the data were probably based on outcomes which occurred before 2000 and 2007, respectively. What did the economy do just before and after these studies were published? Between 1995 and 2000 it grew, a lot. Same for the years 2003 to 2008. The S&P500 more than doubled between 1995 and 2000. It grew much slower at around the time the ICF study was conducted but it grew.

 

Why all this history? Because the ROI formular takes the benefits of coaching including for example increased productivity comparing them against the investment costs of coaching. However, coaching is only one line item under investment costs. I am having a hard time believing coaching alone resulted in productivity improvements for example. 

 

Refocusing on What Organizations Call their Biggest Asset

Writing as a coach now, I argue improved efficiency and/or productivity numbers are a byproduct. The main product is the preceding transformation of people if coaching is done well. That’s the fuzzy bit in the formular to calculate the ROI of coaching, the real “benefits attained by coaching”. But most organizations should not have a problem with that because they say people are their most important asset anyway, right?

 

Let me try and change the perspective a little when I reiterate my earlier statement the value of coaching is priceless — under the right circumstances. As executive manager, you play a crucial part in ensuring coaching takes place under the best possible circumstances. You can argue with better byproducts, but your focus needs to be the people in your organization which is a significant part of your job description anyway — people. How then to create the right circumstances? Let’s take the challenges organizations face regarding diversity, equality, and inclusion (DE&I), the latest variables that have been identified as high impact factors for efficiency and productivity gains. There is one easy way to create the right environment — the top brass needs to seriously want the transformation and must be willing to be coached to transform themselves first. 

 

Bottlenecks Are at the Top

I would not be surprised if 90% of executive management teams would agree DE&I is important and a transformation is needed. Based on “what I hear in the market” a big chunk of these executives really mean everyone else but them needs to undergo a transformation. This is not unusual. The running joke among coaches is that when our clients say they want to change, what many of them really mean is they want everyone else to change. Change is hard because it brings uncertainty and we don’t like uncertainty. 

 

What about the coaching “targets”, the employees? A large share will have one question in mind, namely “what does this transformation mean for me”. They won’t speak the language of efficiency gains, increased productivity nor will many of them speak “DE&I” and their organizational benefits unless inclusion, equality and diversity relate to their own day-to-day work. Your female workforce may develop hopes for promotions for management positions while the post-modern whipping boy (i.e. white middle-aged male) will fear losing out because to make it look good, the next VP of Marketing better be a non-white woman.

 

To help your organization handle the uncertainty let them see the executive team walk the talk. If you don’t believe in the necessity of your own transformation as a manager — and your organization lets you get away with it — it might be better for everyone to forget about transformation. Here is why. Transformations are expensive and above all exhausting. The assumption coaching can serve as a band aid to get your people over the hump while you or your managers carry on as the always have will only cause frustration and headaches. 

 

People Power

The truth is successful transformations also mean change for the executive management. Examples for that are Google’s restructuring into Alphabet, Microsoft’s re-focus on a common purpose after Satya Nadella took over from Steve Ballmer, Amazon’s continued outward focus on the customer rather than a navel gazing profit focus, and Toyota’s efficiency drive that gave the world just in time delivery. What do all these companies have in common? They focus on people, the customer and/or or their employees and to really want change. For example, the focus on employees resulted in authorizing Toyota’s front-line workers (the ones who tighten the screws during assembly) to suggest local improvements and brought us just in time production. Google examined what teams work best based on the thousands of teams working for the company and published the results: the top factor? Psychological safety. And for all the hate Mr. Bezos received for getting even richer during the pandemic, all he did was pay attention to what we needed and wanted and then provided it.

 

Some organizations make it look like they focus on people but in praxis do what they can to avoid change. For instance, they reward high potential talent with executive management courses which can easily set the education budget back $45,000 per talent. The problem often is these high potentials come back with a lot of enthusiasm and a lot of ideas on how to change things. However, the organization is not ready for change. Doing that with one high potential may not cause any issues. If this turns out to be a pattern, you end up with an entire group of high potentials who take notes, get disgruntled — and may easily opt to leave. Some providers of executive training courses have taken notice and collect statistics on how many members of an average training cohort change jobs within four to six months after returning to their respective organizations. That’s $45,000 down the drain for the organization and that’s just for starters. 

 

Realizing that your organization requires change is one thing. Not getting lost in smokescreen activism because you subconsciously try to avoid change is the challenge. Therefore it is a good idea to seek coaching for the executive team first so that a real willingness to change can trickle down the organization. It starts at the top. Getting back to the concept of ROI of coaching perhaps it helps change perspectives. What if the primary objective of coaching is not more efficiency, productivity, etc.? What if it is to help people transform themselves first and with them the organization resulting in efficiency and productivity gains? That kind of ROI is easier to calculate anyway.

This blog post was original published in German on September 19, 2023 on crimalin.com.

 

 

Empathy in the Business World Is Overrated

People demand empathy from their managers. An entire industry has sprung up promising to transform managers into empathetic leaders. What made me curious about the role of empathy in human behavior started with a little experiment I conducted a while ago. I consulted an authority on the topic — in this case religion — and ran a search for the word “empathy” in the bible. My hypothesis was, somewhere in the bible’s 66 chapters, the authors would capture something on “empathy”. Lo and behold, the book has very little to say about it. The NIV translation has one mention of the word in Hebrews 4: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.” 

Empathy Can only Get You So Far

The reason why I think empathy in leadership is overrated is my theory that it is often based on expectations that have nothing to do with what empathy means. I would not be surprised if a big chunk of employee respondents who say “empathy” is a crucial trait in a manager are actually looking for something else. For example, some really want a cuddle group. That is not what your team is about. The same goes for psychological safety, the holy grail of high performing teams. This safety refers to a safe space for you to get challenged and even uncomfortable. That is the opposite of a cuddle group which will not help anyone in their professional growth. 

In short, real empathy is not about having a friendly and ever affirming manager. It is simply the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. Empathy is a valuable trait but I find it stops short of what you need if you are growth oriented. The first step is to understand and accept you yourself have the biggest role to play in your growth. I define growth in a broad sense and do not limit it to a career advancement plan. Growth encompasses personal development, too. Second, your desire to grow requires you to self-reflect. The Greek philosopher Thales of Miletus once said: “The most difficult thing in life is to get to know yourself.” This is not something you can delegate if you are serious about your personal development. But you can ask for help.

Asking for Help Is Your Job

Help is the operating word here. If you need help, I have a challenge for you: what type of leader or manager do you need if you are serious about professional and personal growth? Do you want a leader who is empathetic, i.e. who is aware of your feelings? Or do you want a leader who has a desire to take action and help? These are two different things because empathy is just the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

Perhaps even more challenging, who is going to help you advance more, a friendly manager who is aware of your feelings and that’s it — or a manager who has his/her outbursts but understands where you want to go and helps you despite letting off steam? One way to figure out how to respond to that question is to ask yourself which leader will broaden your horizon. If your manager is focused on practical help AND empathic, all the better. But I invite you to consider what is more important for your growth, the feel good factor or practical help in broadening your horizon.

People with Scars Find Each Other

I wish I had come up with this profound statement but I overheard it at a dinner party years ago. It has stuck with me for several reasons. First, I get to see the truth in that every time I encounter people with scars. Second, it has shaped my opinion about empathy, especially empathy in the business world.

With “scars”, I mean significant negative events which cut your life into a before and after. These scars are the result of acute suffering. The wounds may have healed but the impact is so severe, that subsequent events will be evaluated differently than before. 

Here are some examples: I have friends who lost one of their sons to suicide. No family gathering will ever be the same for them as the ones before. Other friends have lost their businesses not of their own fault but due to criminal actions of competitors. They felt the loss of reputation so severely that they had suicidal thoughts. They, too, need to make a conscious decision about how they view competitors. Surviving a potentially terminal illness will make you view every medical checkup from a very different point of view afterwards. Of course, this is highly subjective but I hope you get the idea. 

From Scars to Compassion

War experiences are another thing. To illustrate, I was born 25 years after WWII ended. Among my elders were many veterans. My own father had been bombed out and shot at from all directions when he and his brother crossed a war-torn Germany. As teens, alone and on their own. When he entered the labor force, “empathy” was not a thing, certainly not something you talked about in the context of your career. But he said one thing I haven’t forgotten. The best bosses he ever had were the ones who had been serving in WWII. They were often focused on getting things done rather than politics. They were direct and sometimes tough but they were able to move on. They were “humane”.

That statement always made me curious especially as my father was not an admirer of military attitude and his parents had made it a point not to join the Nazi party. I would have expected the opposite and I am sure there were plenty of examples of embittered soldiers who returned and never learned how to deal with their experiences. 

However, those who were great managers may have taken important lessons from the horrors they had seen. 

• When you have faced death, what’s the big deal about a missed deadline or more minor mistakes? 
• Extreme situations can bring out the best in some people and that can bring out the best in others. 
• In suffering they have received compassion — help — and decided to give back. 
• With suffering comes authority that projects up and down the corporate ladder. 
• As stated before, people with scars find each other. There is an understanding about the impact of suffering that does not require words and shows primarily in action.

People with scars were forced into a gray area where the challenges were often so deep that black and white are not always helpful categories when we try to make sense of things. I wonder whether religious texts such as the bible have so little to say about empathy because the impact of compassion is much greater because it is action oriented. So, what is compassion? It is a sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others that is action oriented and comes with a desire to help.

From Compassion to Growth

Black and white are really comfort zones and, as British journalist Anita Anand once said, “we elbow our way into the gray zones” because it is often a forced entry for us. To do that, we leave the black/white of certainty and that is uncomfortable. Meeting compassion in that area is most helpful to be able to stay, explore and make sense. Compassionate people want to help you do that. A compassionate manager is willing to enter this space with you so that you can learn from your mistakes.

Some scars are visible because life can be tough. They may come across as a little edgy or rugged. In many cases, this is because they have no time for pretense. They may be direct, even blunt. They may not be your idea of empathetic. If you start digging deeper, they may have learned compassion with themselves and others more so than the empathetic leader down the hallway. And when you are young and have already developed your own scars, you will find each other.

So, what do you do as an employee who wants to learn and grow?

• Take action yourself. You cannot delegate personal growth to others. 
• Develop a curiosity about yourself: what is it you really want?
• Identify people with scars in your life.  
• Ask for concrete help.
• Test whether the person actually does provide help; if not, move on. Mere empathy from others won’t get you places if all you get is just someone who can relate. 

The last word goes to one of two friends of mine who was financially ruined by the criminal activities of a competitor. “I have not become bitter. If anything it has made me more compassionate.” And then he proceeded with the offer to connect me with someone who could be helpful for the next business venture.

The original article was first published in German on crimalin.com on May 31, 2024.

Perfection is Boring

The goal is not perfection but growth because perfection is boring. Growth, however, is exciting:

• We are never too old to learn and grow unless we decide not to. We will never reach perfection but any small thing making us grow is good – and good enough.
• Growth is not about closing the gap between our current abilities and a nebulous state of perfection. This way of thinking reveals a belief that there is a point at which we cannot grow anymore. That is limiting. On the contrary, growth widens our horizon.
•  Perfection can make us less compassionate with others and ourselves. Motivational speakers and gurus like to say “when you fall, pick yourself up and try again”. Probably more often we just stumble or reach a plateau. Recognizing people who have stumbled take another step, lets us become aware of how the dynamics of growth make it easier to have compassion. 

The Conversation You Don’t Have

Coaching is supposed to help our clients make sense of what is happening around them – to reflect their actions and reactions to developments in their organizations. Many coaches like to use the image of an iceberg to illustrate how this “making sense” often occurs when we look at what is going on beneath the surface. One way we do this (shhhh, trade secret) is asking ourselves and our clients the following question: “What discussion is it you do not have?”

 

One of the things I routinely pay attention to during the first encounter with a client, organization or group is the “room temperature”. More specifically, walking down office hallways or corridors, I check whether I hear laughter and/or an animated discussion about a job-related matter. This is one of my favorite things to take in — and I did not learn this at the Harry Pooter Hogwarts School for coaching. I learned this method from a mother who tried to find the right elementary school for her young children.

 

The “Mom-Methodology” 

As she walked down the school’s hallways, she trained her ears on the class rooms and where possible the teachers’ lounge. No laughter from either set of rooms and “stakeholders” (i.e. students and teachers) and that school was struck off her list. For some reason, this “mom methodology” struck a core and it has stayed with me over the years. I even stopped pursuing a job opportunity after visiting the site and discovering it failed the laughter test.

 

Before you now assume I am just interested in fun factories and who can play the best prank on their colleagues, that is not what I am after at all. On the contrary, the ability to laugh and smile and the level of engagement I see in a lively conversation – maybe even a passionate disagreement – tells me more about an organization’s culture than any poster on the wall about goals, achievement, purpose, etc. In my experience smiles and active discussions about job projects are two indicators for a trusting atmosphere that transcend even different types of organization. 

 

You Can Fake a Lot — Genuine Smiles and Laughter Not So Much

For example, for years, I worked with a niche consulting company. Like most managers, I had a little office while employees were seated in a larger space inside the office floor. We managers could see and hear them. What I saw and heard was relaxed conversations among the different teams and there were smiles. Someone would crack a joke. Mostly, however, the content was work related. That told me several things about the team and the company. I believe we all agreed “we were in the same boat and took our clients’ needs seriously”. I believe this because our arguments did not get personal and they were usually about how to make things better. They also occurred in a respectful tone. In addition, we addressed frustrations about things to the relevant persons and not to other colleagues behind their backs. The outcome was not just great work for the most part. It also meant the managers generally knew no one tried to goof off. In addition, the employees on the floor felt safe enough to have a relaxed conversation within earshot of practically every manager. They actually enjoyed working for our company.

 

The same applied to a museum I used to work for when I still harbored ambitions of becoming a top level historian. The museum’s theme was warfare and I was part of the team that was tasked with getting the holocaust exhibition off the ground. You get the picture: serious stuff, nothing to joke about as we were not exactly dealing with the finer things of the art world. Still, there were smiles and laughter and boy, would we have animated discussions about the holocaust. You can smile and still respect the institution and the purpose of what you do. Neither organization had posters on the wall. They did not need them.

 

How Do You Talk About the Latest Business Buzz?

Another thing to watch out for is the latest hot topic that makes its way into the water cooler conversations and the executive management meetings. We have had the gender pay gap, working from home (WFH), more recently diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and by the time this article has been published we may well have moved on to the next topic. As important as these topics are, they also provide organizations with a perfect excuse to have plenty of meaningless meetings and discussions to shirk the actual challenges. For example, do people just complain and blame “the higher ups” or do they engage in a constructive discussion about how to bring about a positive change without fear of being overheard by manager or other colleagues?

 

If you happen to be part of an organization that haggles about the number of days employees can work from home or whether quota for minority groups will help you improve on your DEI rankings, ask yourself whether this is the real conversation that needs to happen. 

 

In many organizations this is really a power struggle that pitches management against its employees. If the argument is reduced to how many WFH days, or whether two more non-white and non-male executives will finally make the organization a great place to work, spare a thought for the following question: Is what really plays out a purely transactional power struggle? This is important because power struggles end up with a loser. As of 2024, in many Western countries, that may well be management. If only for the simple reason that the labor market is currently tilted towards employees. 

 

Discover the Real Issues

We forget the losing side (and in a few years that may be employees) and the winners are part of the same organization. In the end, the organization loses and with it every one. The call for more WFH days, transparency about unequal pay for men and women and/or minority employees, and more diversity is an invitation to explore the underlying issues. For instance, what does it really mean when the conversation is not about what is best for the organization but what managers are prepared to give and what employees want? If it is really a power struggle as described above, managers should take note. In my opinion, arguing over the number of WFH days, the number of minority candidates in management positions, etc. is often a superficial discussion about deeper issues around organizational culture. 

 

If instead your organization engages in a discussion about symptoms, take a step back and ask yourself whether this is not a premature move addressing a detail that is not yet relevant. Before addressing how to do any of the topics listed above as examples, management and employees can ask themselves simple questions to gain an understanding of deeper issues. 

• What problem exactly is an increase in WFH days or minority representation in management going to solve in your organization?
• Whose problem is it going to solve?
• How are these fixes going to solve these problems?

 

Can your employees really define what they value about the supposed fixes? Equally important, what about the temporary physical absence of your team members makes management really uncomfortable? What are the reasons there are far too few minorities represented in your organization’s management? Whatever it is, simply increasing WFH days and/or the number of minority representatives might not fix it. It will only allow managers and employees to temporarily avoid the conversation that should really take place. 

 

This can be a scary prospect for an entire organization, department or maybe just a team because it can expose insecurities and dissatisfaction about the job, the team, the organization and one’s own performance. However, done right, it is also a tremendous chance to achieve a transformation that will improve the team, the department and even perhaps the entire organization. 

 

Coaching Is Designed to Create the Space to Achieve a Transformation

Coaching can help organizations get it right. As described above, it is the coach’s job to help make sense of things beneath the surface. Part of how a coach does this is to create the space where this is possible to do in a psychologically safe way. A psychological safe space is not to be confused with a cozy comfortable space. Rather, it is a space where the coach and the coachees discover the underlying issues together. That psychological safe space allows people to bring them out in the open without judgment.

 

For example, on an individual level, the superficial power struggle over the number of WFH days can point to insecurities of a manager who wants to have control. On the other hand, it can also be an indicator for employee dissatisfaction about work related issues. Now imagine a shift in the discussion from what “I want” to for example, what would it take for people - both managers and employees - to enjoy coming to the office. What would it take to come up with a working environment that meets the needs of the organization which in turn may lead to a (re-)discovery of the organization’s mission and vision? Will this be fixed only by adding two more women to the management team?

 

From Power Struggle to Win-Win

After these steps, you can talk about symptoms and how to address them. Maybe your organization does not even need more policies. Instead you can have a solution-oriented talk that takes into account the organization’s needs as well as the individual employees’ and managers’ needs. That’s a win-win and not a power struggle. Lastly, if you suddenly find these conversations take place around the water cooler without concerns of being overheard and with a little laughter here and there, it might even tell you that the coach you engaged to address such issues was worth the investment.

 

The original article was first published in German on February 2, 2024 on crimalin.com.

 

Reaching Your Potential Is A Choice

There are five elements that help you on your journey to your full potential.

1. Build character
2. Make mistakes
3. Absorb, filter, and adapt
4. Embrace imperfection
5. Have fun

 
Character
Build character to reach your full potential. Character is your capacity to prioritize what you care about over your instincts – or how you think, feel, and behave – especially when you’re under pressure.
 
Mistakes Help
To build character, one of the most important habits you can adopt is to make mistakes.
 
Learn, rinse, repeat
Absorb, filter, and adapt while you work toward mastering your chosen skill. Doing this is a choice, one that’s completely distinct from your genes or even the opportunities you were born into.
 
Screw Perfection
Embrace imperfection. Research shows that perfectionists have no advantage when it comes to skills acquisition or mastery. In fact, they often perform worse than their peers. They also resist situations and tasks outside their comfort zone, which restricts their ability to broaden their skills and experience. Remember – making mistakes is essential for learning, which goes against a perfectionist’s instincts.
 
Joy vs. Outcomes
When it comes to mastering a difficult skill, the number of hours you put in matters less than how you spend that time. Harmonious passion is a term that psychologists use to describe a state in which practice is motivated by the joy of learning rather than an obsession with the outcome.
 
Play
Harmonious passion is deliberate play — the midpoint between consciously practicing a skill and free play. At this intersection, developing new skills becomes fun and satisfying. Deliberate play gives you the freedom to mix things up – or adapt – and generate energy, while maintaining a structure that supports learning.
 
Adapted from the Blinkist Adaptation of Hidden Potential by Adam Grant

My Life Will Be Short

Here is some very poignant advice about how to live your life from people who should know. How do they know? Because they are terminally ill.

Almost ten years ago, I found myself wondering about the exact same things. I am grateful my leukaemia turned out to be treatable — but at the time I didn’t know and I had to think hard about whether my life had been worth it up to that point.

The thing is, we are all terminally ill. We age and when we stop aging we die — despite all the Botox, anti-aging cremes, detox, mindfulness and what not. 

So, make it count. Here is how — in one short sentence from each person sharing their view.

 

‘I don’t sweat the small stuff any more’

‘Don’t waste energy fighting’

‘Having a sense of purpose brings joy’

‘It’s not about the quantity of time I’ve got, it’s the quality’

‘Cancer sorts out what really matters’

‘Sharing your feelings helps’

‘My illness stripped me of my fears’

‘Stop worrying about having a good job or needing a big house’

‘Find gratitude’

‘Go to the parties. Stay out late’

‘Have a goal. Don’t accept defeat’

‘You are enough; you make a difference’

‘No matter how you feel, get up, get dressed and get out’

‘I’ve stopped caring what others think’

‘Never create a new regret’

‘I realised what I really wanted to do’

‘Leave the damn house’

‘Just buy it. Do it. Go and get it’

‘I soon realised what I liked about life’

‘Look after yourself first’

‘My favourite saying is: it is what it is’

‘What’s the point of earning, earning, earning, if there’s no joy in your life?’

‘Be authentically you’

‘Keep things simple’

‘Switch every negative to a positive’

‘Success, status, reputation – they are not important’

‘Your energy is valuable’

‘Don’t mess around. Be direct’

‘I should have trusted myself more’

‘Treat every smile like it’s your last’

This list is based on ‘My life will be short. So on the days I can, I really live’: 30 dying people explain what really matters, published in The Guardian on January 27, 2024.