What is a payday loan Payday Loans UK How do you apply

Organizational Change: Human Skills

July 30, 2012 in Change, Leadership, organizational learning, Personal Transformation

Previously, I’ve been talking about conceptual and technical skills for change.  This time I’d like to talk about the most important skills necessary for organizational change: human skills.  This is described as the ability to work as a group and to build cooperation within the team. Human skills are concentrated on working with people.

A leader with highly developed human skills is aware of his/her own attitudes, assumptions and beliefs about other individuals and groups.  They know themselves. They have done the work on themselves.  Therefore they can lead others into who they are becoming and it is here we create real organizational change.  Organizations that have ignited employees are on fire, they excel in every way.

Human Skills

Leaders with developed human skills create an environment where employees feel:

  • safe
  • secure
  • motivated
  • open attitude
  • ability to express opinions
  • a courage to speak the truth

To create motivation is also a leadership skill.  Motivational leaders formulate tasks in an exciting and attractive way, to create a vision that employees can pursue. Motivation and change comes hand in hand.  Vision and clear objectives are key ingredients.  Other factors that contribute according to Angelöw (2010):

  • knowledge and information – improves motivation when employees can access information
  • belief in one’s ability – the importance to feel confidence that I can make this happen
  • security – employees must feel secure and not threatened by the change

Source:

Angelöw B (2010) Framgångsrikt förändringsarbete : om individ och organisation i förändring, Stockholm: Natur & Kultur

Photo Credit

Leadership Styles

July 23, 2012 in All, Leadership, organizational learning, Success

What characterizes a great leader?  What are some leadership styles that some of your favorite leaders possess?

There are differing opinions on how a leader should be and how they should behave in different situations. Essentially, people prefer different leadership styles.

There are three features that, according to Nilsson (1993), characterizes good leadership: maturity, experience and knowledge.  Maturity and experience is something that we get with age and cannot be obtained with theory.  For instance, it’s common that it is seen as an advantage for women to have the experience of being a mother.  Raising children, or several children, gives you leadership experience.

The issue of leadership is interesting.  The ultimate existence of it might become triggering to people.  As a coach I have a mission and that is to bring out the develop the leadership styles in each and everyone, to ignite that spark that takes them to the next level of where they want to be in their career, business and life.  Some individuals seem to be natural leaders, while others, seem to be more comfortable in the role of follower.

For an organization to thrive there is a need for a mixture of leadership styles.  In a previous blog post, I talked about my passion for transformational leaders.  Clearly, today we talk about a variety different types of leadership styles:  transformational, emotional, situational, authentic and many more.  This new information about what it means to be a leader is something that can be characterized into the four specific forms of leadership styles, here formulated by House (1974) in his Path-Goal Theory.

Four Leadership Styles

The directive leadership style is task oriented, clarifies the goals and what has to be done in order to reach them.  It explains the consequences that will happen if goals are not achieved on time or not at all.  Discipline is used in order to get things done.  Usually by reward and/or punishment.  This style of leadership is more common in organizations like the Armed Forces.

The supportive leadership style is interested in how the employees feel.  They identify various needs and tries to satisfy them.  The supportive leader is trying to create a supportive and comfortable environment for employees so they will feel good at work.  This style of leadership would be representative for a HR division in a larger company.

The participatory leadership style gives space for employees to take responsibility and be more involved in decision making.  It is about creating a dialogue with employees in regular meetings where the possibility for feedback and communication can take place between leaders and employees.  This style seems to be very common in academic organizations where nobody really stands out as a leader, rather, it’s someone responsible that brings the others in for communication and common decisions making.

The achievement oriented leadership style is focused on the performance of the employees.  This might characterize sales organizations where the leaders expect the employees do as well as possible on a both an individual and organizational level. This leader believes that the work should be challenging and that employees take personal responsibility for achieving goals.

While theory teaches us the doing of leadership, today we know that there is something more that is needed.  It is who you are and where you come from in your leadership, your way of being a leader, that is important.  Most leaders don’t think about this.  They are just doing what they need to do and not thinking about who they are and how they are communicating when they want things to happen.  In order to really create change, you need to have the capacity to transform peoples attitudes, in order to do that you need to have done the work on yourself.  That is why leaders need coaching.  One of the most impressive tools I know, as a starting point for coaching leaders, is The Leadership Circle.  Contact me for more  information.

 

Photo Credit

Change: Tools Needed for Organizational Change

July 16, 2012 in Change, organizational learning

For the last few weeks I’ve been talking about change.  Today is about what we can learn from theoretical tools for change that are developed from previous studies of organizational change.

Change Process

Kotter (1995) made a study of over 100 companies in various industries and their approach to create change processes.  He claimed that its important that the companies divide the process into different phases and assign the change enough time.  The different phases is seen as an eight step process that assists in organizational change.

Step 1 – Establishing a sense of urgency

Step 2 – Forming a strong guiding coalition

Step 3 – Creating a vision

Step 4 – Communicating the vision

Step 5 – Empowering others to act on the vision

Step 6 – Planning for and creating short-term wins

Step 7 – Consolidating improvements and producing still more changes

Step 8 – Institutionalize new approaches

Here we can see that part of these steps is representative for coaching as well.  The reason why a client wants to hire a coach is that there is a sense of urgency – for instance; I want to lose weight.  We are forming a coalition in what we call designing the alliance.  The next step is to create a vision and have the client communicating and owning the vision.  Who will I become if I’m losing weight?  We are now ready for step 5,  empowering for action to act towards the vision.  In this context a clear strategy is created with long term and short term goals.  We are now together, consolidating improvements and seeing what other results will happen when the client is losing weight.  From this a whole new approach has become realized.  That this may not be an issue of losing weight, it is a question about how I respect myself and how I care for myself.

Other tools for creating change that might be more popular are found in the SMART model, developed by Latham and Locke (1990) who argue that smart, formulated goals facilitate project work and make them concrete.  Concrete objectives allow project members to know where they stand in relation to the project plan.  SMART-model is commonly used by coaches as a way to create accountability with their clients.  The letters symbolize five different criteria:

S = Specific.  The goal should be well defined and clear.

M = Measurable.  The goals need to be measurable in order to evaluate.  When you have something to measure, you will know if the goals are attainable.

A = Accepted and in some circumstances this letter represents Achievable, which means that everybody involved must agree upon the goals when they are set.

R = Realistic.  Goals should be realistic in relation to resources, financial knowledge, time and the project team process.

T = Timed.  There is a specific time limit for the project, where the result could be measured.

For a coaching client the SMART goals could be defined according to the following:

“Before the end of this summer, 31 of August,  I’m going to lose 10 pounds.”

This is a clear goal, losing weight is specific, its measurable, achievable and even realistic with a clear time limit when the measurement can take place (weight control).

Here you see the relationship between organizational change processes and individual coaching.  What I love with coaching is that it has the capacity to transform people’s lives.  It does not focus on changing the behavior, it focuses on changing the value system that exists under your behavior.  Working with someone that uses tools (for instances EFT, Hypnosis or Theta Healing) which can help you with accessing your subconscious values, belief systems and combining that with coaching, then it is an easy way to reach the break through you want to see happen for yourself.

Photo Credit

Organizational Change: Technical Skills

July 9, 2012 in Change, Leadership, organizational learning, Personal Growth

Technical SkillsIn the previous blog post I talked about conceptual skills.  Here I’m going to talk about the technical skills required for change.   Consider this as a specialized knowledge, analytical ability and the capacity to use tools and techniques. Coaching can also be seen as a specific technical skills set.

When creating change it can, according to Beer and Nohria (2000) take two forms, the hard or the soft way.  The hard way, referred to as the E-theory is usually based on economical values.  This kind of change is aimed towards reaching economic goals, reorganizations, staff cuts or reduction of the company’s scope.  It can be seen as a “top-down”  approach, where management determines and establishes the strategy and the processes for the upcoming change.  Here a more military leadership style is needed and the rewards are often of a monetary nature.  The change,  in and of itself,  is usually quickly conducted as the approach lacks the focus on commitment from the employees.

The O-Theory

The soft way of change is presented in the O-theory.  The approach here is to develop a corporate culture and employee skills by allowing both the individuals and the company, learn and be a part of the change.  This is done through feedback and reflection on the situation and which a strategy is jointly developed.  This approach has a clear bottom-up approach, where all employees are encouraged to provide feedback and comments on the upcoming change.  The intention is to get the employees so emotionally involved that they want to help the company to move forward in the change process.  This is helpful for building the soft values in the organization in terms of culture, values, behavior and attitudes.  This is a great approach for improving corporate spirit and the morale within the company.

Technical Skills and Tools

Understanding these two approaches can be one way of seeing how change can happen in the organization.  But there is also a need for tools that can assist the change process.  Coaching is one tool.  But what is the theory that can be found behind this understanding?  Next blog post will explain that further.

Photo Credit

 

Organizational Change: Conceptual Skills

July 2, 2012 in Change, Leadership, organizational learning, Success, Uncategorized

conceptual skillsThis week we are going to take a look at how conceptual skills are necessary for the process of organizational change.

One of my friends has a background as an entrepreneur and business person. At just 20 years old he achieved his first seven figure income. He went on to take his company to the stock-market and became financially free when it sold. The interesting part is that he never had an higher education – never spent the time studying theories and acquiring conceptual skills. Instead his learning was based on his personal life experience.

Importance of Conceptual Skills

I once asked him, “What was the turning point for your business that really brought about success?” He had actually never thought about the turning point. But he told me that the company came to a point where he realized that he couldn’t progress by himself, so he employed someone who had just graduated from economic school. This person started to implement everything he had learned in school and took all the economical theories and conceptual skills into the business.   From that point the company started to grow to a whole new dimension.

Experience is great, we can create a lot from experience. But there will always be a point where we need theories and conceptual skills that can take us to the next level. Conceptional skills can be seen as the ability to see the organization as a whole and the capability to recognize how the different functions within the organization are interdependent. For a company to excel there is a need for conceptual skills. My friend did not have conceptual skills but he made sure that he got someone who did. That took his business to the next level.

When we look into what we can learn from change management, we can see there are various forms of change:

- revolutionary versus evolutionary

- planned versus unplanned

Revolutionary changes are aimed to change the deep structures of an organization. This type of change can be triggered by a crisis or promoted by state interventions. For instance when the EU gives funding to its member states for the purpose of creating change in social system and structures, this is an external force that’s triggering organizational change. The European Social Fund can be seen as an institution with a mission to mainstream the policies of its member states into increased harmonization related to different policy areas.

Evolutionary changes can be seen as improvement projects that takes the phase of a process. It’s usually the people that are the recipients of the change that are the ones that are part of the process of designing and implementing the change. A project that aims to gather the target group in a process work, can be seen as an expression of what it means to work evolutionary.

When a change is planned it’s easy for a company to bring in external experts and inside staff responsible for making the planned change happen. Usually it’s planned by the management and maintained by technical specialists who are committed to make it work. It follows a hierarchical design to ensure order and progress.

Unplanned change originates from unanticipated events or crisis that impacts the organization. Here internal communications become important since there is an urgency for action. In best case situations, organizations have formulated strategies and structures for how to handle the eventuality of crisis.

There are various reason why change happens and external dimensions are seen as the most important forces. This list is presented by Alvesson and Svenningson (2007):

  • Political
  • Technological
  • Cultural
  • Demographic
  • Economical
  • New knowledge
  • Market changes

While change might be imposed from outside, the change itself can be seen as a process that has a beginning and a clear end in mind. There is a goal to reach. The first phase is aiming preparation and planning towards convincing the people concerned that the change is needed. It is important to educate and involve the staff in order to reduce resistance.  This can be done through engaging speeches from influential people.

The second phase is assisting the change with conducting the change outline in the planning phase. The third step is to refreeze the organization in line with it’s newly implemented changes. The success of a change is understood in terms how the staff will accept and understand the reasons for it. While negative attitudes of change will be viewed as if they were pushed upon the staff, an accepted and understood change is much more likely to settle as the new way.

Sources:
Alvesson, M and Svenningsson, S (2007) Organisationer, ledning och processer, Studentlitteratur AB: Lund
Dawson, P (2003) Understanding organizational change. The Contemporary Experience of People at Work, Sage: London
Jarvenpaa, S and Stoddard, D (1998) Business Process Redesign: Evolutionary Change, University of Texas: Austin
Knowles, H and Saxberg, B (1988) “Organizational leadership of planned and unplanned change: A systems approach to organizational viability”, in Futures, Vol 20, Issue 3, p 252-265
Lewin, K (1951) Field theory and social science, Harper & Row: New York

Photo Credit

Password Reset

Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.