Articles
Browse every published article connected to Yvette Bethel, with exact attribution and full-archive search.
Articles
Browse every published article connected to Yvette Bethel, or search within this exact expert archive.
I always marvel when I sit in meetings when assigned actions were not taken and the responsible Manger would say, “I gave that project to one of my supervisors and they were unable to finish.” The underlying message in this blaming statement is that the manager delegated the responsibility so he doesn’t have to be held accountable. What is Blame?
These leaders are newly appointed to a leadership role because they have the qualifications and the results to match. The company sees potential in these individuals because they are technically sound, highly driven, and talented. Their employers have big plans for these new leaders. However, in some instances, persons reporting to them don’t feel engaged, they feel fearful. They don’t feel energetic, they feel drained, voiceless, over worked and undervalued. Based on interactions with a wide variety of businesses here are some characteristics of inexperienced leaders:
You hear the words team, teamwork or team building at the office, some of us more than others. But do authentic teams really exist? Or are you a part of a disconnected group of people who happen to work for the same employer, all with different agendas? Sometimes employees are lured into thinking a team exists because the word is used so often. Unfortunately, they end up feeling confused or betrayed because they experience an isolated feeling when collaboration is anticipated, or when relationships they thought were healthy turn out to be one sided or exploitative.
One of John Maxwell’s law of leadership is called the Law of the Lid. According to Maxwell, “Leadership ability determines a person’s level of effectiveness.” In other words, the leader cannot surpass his or her own ability to lead. By extension, the skills of persons reporting to a leader rarely exceed the leader’s capability to lead either because they are not developed adequately or persons do not feel safe demonstrating their true skills in the presence of their leaders.
In an era wdhere the authenticity of news and facts are coming under constant scrutiny it is important to also take a look at political correctness. Political correctness is supposed to be a system of behaviour that requires persons to express themselves or act in a way that is inclusive and respectful toward persons who are being discriminated against.
Emotions operate like a virus, traveling from person to person, creating a collage of feelings. When emotions are allowed to flow unabated, they can cause a virus that connects with the team that can be productive or unconstructive.
A Manager recently exclaimed in a discussion, “Leadership theory is fallacious!” Based on her experience, it seems to be impossible to be a leader in her organization which she characterized as dishonest, abusive and highly controlling. From her perspective, her attempts at being an effective leader are futile because demonstrating leadership competencies is not valued or even possible.
Feedback is a curious thing. The intention behind offering it is to bring about positive change, to modify behaviour. However, when criticism is offered, even when it is skillfully embedded in a non-judgmental tone, sounding supportive and authentic, persons on the receiving end can still feel attacked or embarrassed so responses like withdrawal, defensiveness or anger can result. When criticism is condescending, or even bullying, organizations stand to lose good people or cause top performers to hold back.
When cultural change is the order of the day, it is not possible to deconstruct one culture and then construct a new one. What is usually the case is the old and the new culture coexist while cultural change is happening. Depending on which culture remains dominant over time, the one has the power players behind it is the culture that will prevail. Whenever there is a change in leadership, there can be potential for changes in culture. New CEOs bring the potential for new values, new ways of being, new standards of behaviour and new results.
When creating a culture characterized by engaged employees, one of the more influential resources for transformation are the leaders of your organization. When leaders are immobilized by a controlling culture, dishonesty, disorganization, those who withhold information, or even bullying, transforming into a culture that leads to engagement works best when there is a vision for the change and authentic commitment to the vision. Shifting from Immobilization to Empowerment
There is a whole spectrum of possibilities when it comes to decision making authority. In organizations that value structure and control, policies and procedures form a framework for day-to-day work. Policies, range from very granular, dictating all imaginable actions, others are flexible enough to allow discretion yet provide structure. Then there are organizations that have no structure at all. When there is no structure, employees who need it suffer and complain, those who don’t may be comfortable in this environment.
When we think of a straight shooter we tend to think of persons who can be depended on to communicate the truth. While this is accurate, straight shooters come in many varieties. There are persons who use straight shooting to support members of their teams and others use it to destroy. Some are consistently straight shooters because they value integrity and others use it as a deliberate strategy to hurt or manipulate their coworkers. Some persons who consider themselves straight shooters are blunt, others communicate the truth more elegantly.
To sustain desired behaviors, it is important to model them. Modelling happens when a person consistently demonstrates behaviours that point to a particular value system. Whether the modelled behaviour is intentional or not, it gives permission to others to demonstrate actions that reflect a similar value system. In other words, modelling provides observers with the creative freedom they need to exhibit values authentically.
Yvette Bethel's latest book, Interconnectivity, Flow, and Balance Model (IFB) introduces an operating system that functions in the background of organizations, families, and multiple other types of communities. Like computer operating systems, IFB is ever-present, not always perceived, and prolific. It arranges your organization’s internal ecosystem around inherent rules of behavioral, change, and other systems that guide daily activities, meaningful change, and innovation. When IFB malfunctions, the organization can still operate but there can be disruptions, unintended results, or delays.r
When office politics prevail in a work environment, trust levels are usually low. This is because office politicians are perceived as willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want, and this can include deception, threats, attack and a myriad of other undesirable activities. Office politicians are perceived as having no qualms about taking aggressive steps to achieve their personal goals, they are willing to sacrifice relationships in order to achieve this, using competitive tactics that divide instead of unite.
I have witnessed a number of leaders who have meaningfully transformed themselves and their leadership. In each case, the first step was the most difficult. This is because when these leaders were ready for deep transformation, it meant it was time to come face-to-face with the reality of who they really are. They had the courage to face themselves even though it was a destabilizing proposition.
When I speak with leaders I tend to attune to their language in order to understand their orientation toward the team. Some leaders speak about themselves profusely, using the words “I” or “me” so often that it sounds like they the only person in the department. Sometimes these leaders refer to the team as “my” team, as if the team is some type of possession.
At certain times in our careers we need to make decisions about up-leveling our lives and careers. Some persons are loyal to their organizations, waiting for their supervisors to recognize their contributions and potential. They wait and wait, and sometimes they are rewarded with a promotion if they wait long enough. This is because the longer they wait, the more likely it will be that they will be the best choice, sometimes the only choice.
No animal two cultures are the same, even if they have similar qualities these characteristics manifest in different ways. I have encountered collaborative work environments where persons can be ready and willing to work together, I have also come across innovative teams that are focused on creating, planning and implementing. On the unproductive side of the spectrum I have encountered cultures that are exceedingly dysfunctional and this characteristic persists because there is no accountability to healthy behaviours.
We all have some type of value assigned to us based on how others perceive us. Whether we buy into these perceptions or not depends on if we are intrinsically or extrinsically motivated. For those who are intrinsically motivated their personal value is internally defined. It is unwavering in the face of other’s opinions. For those who are extrinsically motivated, they try desperately to navigate the landscape of public opinion, which can sometimes be quite demoralizing. How persons can devalue others
Power, in and of itself is neither positive nor negative, it is the intent behind it. Jackie is a manager who is ambitious, and focused on her movement up the corporate ladder. She aligns herself with executives and other coworkers who can help her attain her ambitions. She is prepared to throw her colleagues under the bus, or highlight their errors so she can appear to be the best, or from her perspective, the only option for a promotion within her department.
In work cultures where control is highly valued, sometimes the control regime starts when the business was initially established, but more often it happens when the organization enters into growth mode and the previously loose structure needs to be tightened in order for the business to leave survival mode and grow. The intent behind implementing controls and structures is usually to facilitate growth standardize practices, minimize errors, and create efficiencies.
Destabilizing for stability may sound counter-intuitive but the status quo is being challenged around the world. Donald Trump won the US presidential election; Brexit shook up the European Union; and the Russians allegedly hacked multiple international elections. Each country is at a different stage of cultural evolution, forming a unique piece of the global mosaic. As a result, each country brings something specific to and needs something unique for its contribution to global balance. Let’s take a look at this more closely:
Communication can be a two-person sport. You meet someone, get to know her, then take the steps you need to keep the relationship alive and warm. With other introductions, you are delinquent allowing the would-be relationship to die a natural, disconnected death. The same is true in teams, when a new person joins a team, the new person forms a relationship with each person on the team. So, if a team has 5 persons, the new employees will have a unique relationship with each person on the team, and perhaps persons outside the team, depending on workflows and other needs for connection.
The Wells Fargo scandal is an interesting case study that presents the question, did the employees cause it, or was it the culture? On one hand, the CEO indicated the scandal happened because of employees. On the other hand, it appears that employees responsible for sales were under duress because of extreme demands.
When office politics prevail in a work environment, trust levels are usually low. This is because office politicians are perceived as willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want, and this can include deception, threats, attack and a myriad of other undesirable activities. Office politicians are perceived as having no qualms about taking aggressive steps to achieve their personal goals, they are willing to sacrifice relationships in order to achieve this, using competitive tactics that divide instead of unite.
Transparence is important to the creation of the emotional stability of a team because it is essential to trust building and trust building is central to employee engagement. Managers are not proficient with disseminating information for numerous reasons. One commonly encountered reason is to maintain their power structure. There are employees who demand information they need to perform but sometimes they confuse transparence and confidentiality, demanding information that is private and could cause harm to others.