Herb Stevenson, CEO, Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc. · PDF fileAlex Williamson,...

Herb Stevenson, CEO, Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc.John Crum, Co-President, Seaman Corp

Alex Williamson, Co-President, Seaman Corp.

How to Use the 2 in a Box Collaborative Leadership method

Using Various Coaching, Development, and Dialogic approaches

How to use the value of differences and disagreements for better solutions

Understanding the Holistic principle that ◦ 1 + 1 = 3

4/18/2011Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc. 3

“...the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given circumstances, to choose ones own way”

—Viktor Frankl’s lessons from living through the holocaust


Method


A co-leadership method based on◦ Self Awareness◦ Engagement◦ Dialogue◦ Holism: The leadership dyad is more than the sum

of the two individuals… (1 + 1 = 3 )


All true leaders have a great deal of self awareness surrounding their emotional intelligence and social intelligence


A commitment to the structure A willingness to stay engaged regardless of

the tensions—time-outs used well An acceptance that differing opinions are

critical to success An understanding that divergent opinions can

result in better strategic decisions An agreement to reframe from blame and

shame games


An exchange of ideas seeking to create new information, understanding and the best strategic decision.

Requires clear listening skills—no internal debate before the other is finished.


Development Process


The Dyad must go through a process of

◦ Defining the parameters,

◦ Determining the common ground, and

◦ Discovering the potential


Definition is the normal process of developing sufficient understanding of each other to create safety and sufficient respect to work together

A clarifying process of ◦ Who and what are you? ◦ who and what am I? and ◦ who and what are we?


After a period of civility, there comes a need to establish common ground.

Typically, there is a heightened awareness of differences in approaches, styles, and personalities that continues the separation.

Trust and common ground requires facing the conflicts and differences with a high degree of emotional and social intelligence.


Valued interdependence: Differences move from sharp edges to ways to weave strengths into better decisions

Identity to Dyad: Clear definition and boundary as individuals lead to greater awareness of the dyad

Holistic synergism: Dyad becomes more than the sum of the two individuals, where 1 + 1= 3


The value of the two in a box leadership method is that the performance of the Leadership Dyad is more than the sum of the two individuals as separate leaders.

e.g. Seaman Corp. 45% real growth and triple profits in a recessionary period.


Coaching Process


Self Awareness Assessments◦ MBTI2Q –Personality Type◦ TKI---Conflict Style◦ FIRO-Business—Interpersonal relations preferences◦ 360 Feedback Using ECI or ESCI Instruments

Detailing and Modeling engagement◦ 4 hours each 2 X per month for a year

Supporting the tensions through mirroring Allowing the heat to create something new by

containing and not solving.


Develop an Executive Education through top-shelf schools and stretch exercises to address:◦ Developmental edges Dartmouth or Harvard Executive Programs◦ Skill based flat sides e.g. Wharton◦ Opportunities for growth e.g. CCL Looking Glass


Requirements for Success


Based upon research and observation by Oliver Wyman’s Delta Organization & Leadershipgroup, there are 10 requirements for avoiding the risks and ensuring the success of co-leadership:

Adapted from “Designing Effective Co-Leadership” Oliver Wyman-Delta Organization & Leadership, http://www.oliverwyman.com/ow/pdf_files/Designing_Effective_Co-Leadership_WP.pdf

4/18/2011 20Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc.

The co-leaders need to work together to achieve both clarity and alignment on the direction for the operations.

There can’t be two visions, two strategies, or two different sets of goals.


Be clear about their own roles—specifically,

◦ what work they will do together

◦ what work they will do on their own

◦ to understand the degree of latitude that they have to act individually.


Identify the specific decisions the co-leaders have to make together.

Construct a decision-making matrix,

Identify the decisions to be made,Determine decisions that can be made by an

individual alone, with one just informing the other, Define decisions that require concurrence by the

other and decisions that need to be made jointly.


There must be clarity about “how will we run the place together” including

◦ the flow of information,

◦ the structure of meetings,

◦ the planning and control process,

◦ decision making, etc.


Establish ways to resolve differences without having to involve the next higher level of management or the board. This includes:

◦ how such conflict will be raised, managed, and resolved.

◦ how to address conflicts in front of the people they jointly lead, if at all.


The co-leaders must design ways for people to work across the internal boundaries of the operation below them, e.g. the co-leadership structure could be repeated in subordinate operations

◦ E.g. FTR Sales and Technical


Manage reality and perception. Not only must the co-leaders work together, they must be perceived as working together.

The co-leaders must carefully plan and effectively build and support the perception that they are on the same page and working well together; e.g. FTR Sales meeting in Florida


Must spend significant amounts of time together, face to face.

Effective co-leaders create regular and frequent time on the calendar reserved for their own work time, without others present.

◦ E.g. Monthly CoP Retreats and Quarterly CEO retreats


Reward congruent with the various levels of system in which the leaders will operate:

◦ For Organizational performance◦ For Two in A Box Performance◦ For Individual Performance

◦ e.g. Performance measures of Seaman Corp.


As proposed here, it does not work well as a horse race between two thoroughbreds.

Must be considered a structure for next 5-10 years.

Otherwise: ◦ Creates a zero sum game◦ Leads to a loss of talent◦ Never develops 1 + 1 = 3


In the midst of the defining and negotiating process, where frustration can be present.

Commitment to staying engaged is leading to more understanding of each other.

Combined perspective leading to wider and deeper vision of what’s possible for SC

The Co-Leaders are experiencing 1 + 1 =3, where together they are more than as two individuals.


Impact of the developmental process is

◦ Increased indepth dialogue◦ Ability to handle conflict constructively◦ Stronger commitment to decisions◦ Greater alignment throughout the organization◦ Commitment to stay engaged instead of subvert

when in disagreement


Creating a Duel or a Leadership Dyad


“...the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given circumstances, to choose ones own way”

—Viktor Frankl’s lessons from living through the holocaust


Choice requires Reflection◦ Accepting Big Reactions will occur◦ Accepting Responsibility for all acts◦ Repairing the relationship when necessary◦ Always staying engaged.

We will judge and we will learn. How much is your choice


Two in a box leadership utilizes:◦ The strengths of each leader and◦ The differences of each leader ◦ to invoke a creative tension that results in

performance greater than could be derived as two individual leaders.◦ i.e. 1 + 1 = 3


Hard wired to ask questions◦ Judgmental questions evolve from culture,

family, business experiences, and social influences that can become our management style

◦ Learning questions evolve from our natural curiosity and openness that can become our leadership style

Adapted from Marilee G. Adams, (2004) change your questions change your life: Discover the power of Question Thinking. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.


Judger/Manager: Relies on time tested methods of success, often seeking personal safety and comfort by recycling old, familiar ways of thinking.

Learner/Leader: Relies on the larger picture by staying curious and open to any situation and all the people, places, and things that may show up.


What’s wrong? Who’s to blame? How can I prove I’m right (and your wrong) How can I protect my turf? How can I be in control? How could I lose? How could I get hurt? Why is that person so clueless and frustrating? Why bother?


What works? What am I responsible for? What are the facts? What’s the big picture? What are my choices? What’s useful about this? What can I learn? What is the other person feeling, needing, and

wanting? What’s possible?


Judgmental (of self and others) Reactive and automatic Know-it-already Inflexible and rigid Either/or thinking Self-righteous Afraid of difference Personal perspective only Defends assumptions Possibilities seen as limited Primary mood: protective


Accepting (of self and others) Responsive and thoughtful Values Not-knowing Flexible and adaptive Both/and thinking Inquisitive Values difference Considers perspectives of others Questions assumptions Possibilities are seen as unlimited Primary mood: Curious


Win-lose relationships Feels separate from others Fears differences Debates Criticizes Listens for:◦ Right/wrong◦ Agree/disagree◦ Differences

Feedback is perceived as rejection Seeks to attack or defend


Win-win relationships Feels connected with others Values differences Dialogue Critiques Listen for:◦ Facts◦ Understanding◦ Commonalities

Feedback is perceived as worthwhile Seeks to resolve and create.


Herb Stevenson, CEO, Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc. · PDF fileAlex Williamson,...

Documents

Transcript of Herb Stevenson, CEO, Cleveland Consulting Group, Inc. · PDF fileAlex Williamson,...