leadership development

November 19, 2009

There is a natural tendency to avoid asking questions when you are uncertain as to what the answers will be. As a result, managers often avoid asking questions. Instead, they just tell the employees the answers they really want to hear. It may seem like you are giving up control when you ask an open-ended question that engages the employee. But, it doesn't have to be a scary proposition. One way to encourage dialogue while still guiding the direction of the conversation is to use sideboards to frame the question.

Frame the question with sideboards.

Sideboards are the parameters that frame an issue. They are the "givens." Sideboards are the assumptions you have already made that are non-negotiable. In most situations, there is background information that must be considered before a conversation can progress. Those are the sideboards. Usually there are limitations (time, money, resources, etc.) that must be noted when you are exploring options. Those are the sideboards.

The challenge is to state the sideboards clearly before asking a question that involves the employee in finding the solution. Here are some examples of sideboards in action:

Given our current budget situation...which of our projects is the highest priority?

Assuming we will meet our end of the year objectives, what additional tasks should we pursue?

Knowing that our relationship with this client is tenuous, what options do we have for satisfying this order?

Given the restrictions placed upon us in the regulations, what alternatives should be considered?

As a manager, you can establish parameters that will help employees find workable, effective, and successful solutions to issues and challenges. Considering the challenges public sector agencies are facing today, it is critical that we define the parameters of the issue before asking for input.  Think about the sideboards.


September 15, 2009

I've been coaching a municipal executive who believes she is inclusive and respectful with employees.  The feedback we've gotten from her staff is that she is a micromanager.  They say she doesn't trust them and that she does not value their input.  Why the dicotomy?  These problems run deep and will be a challenge to overcome.  Still, there are some behaviors she exhibits that send a subtle message  that she really doesn't want to hear from her employees.  Here's the tip I'll share with her the next time we meet:

Make your questions open-ended.

This concept is a bit of a "duh." We all know that open-ended questions, those that require more than a yes/no answer, are more appropriate if you are trying to engage the other person in the conversation. Still, how conscious are you of the openness of your daily questions? Here are a few examples.

Example: "Do you like your work?" is not open-ended. You are likely to get a short, blunt answer to a question like this. An alternative way to ask the question which is open-ended is, "What about your work do you most enjoy?" The response is more likely to be robust enough to give you insights into the employee's motivations.

Example: "Are you going to make that mistake again?" is closed-ended and will likely put the employee on the defensive. It is parental in nature and does not allow the employee to participate in the problem-solving. An open ended alternative would be, "What are you going to do next time to make sure the outcome is more effective?"

Example: "Have you considered calling the vendor back?" is a question that is really a directive. You may have a clear picture of what the employee should do. In fact, you may have several suggestions for the employee. In time, you can offer your suggestions. However, if you want to engage the employee in solving the problem or if your goal is to coach them to higher levels of performance in the future, giving them the answer, even in the form of a closed question, is not the most effective approach. Instead, use an open-ended question like, "What solutions have you considered?"

My coachee has some work to do and it will start with being conscious of the questions she asks.


May 29, 2009

With budget cuts, layoffs, reorganizations, and associated turmoil, I've heard that some organizations are choosing to postpone or completely cut out long-standing leadership development efforts.  For the last decade we've talked so much about succession planning, talent management, and employee development.  Now, within a six month period, our twitch-speed attention spans have shifted to survival mode, forgoing many of the initiatives we've been saying are important.

I understand the need to live within our means--I do it daily with my own checkbook. Still, I can't help but wonder what consequences public agencies will experience by losing focus on such important initiatives. Aren't the veterans and baby boomers still going to retire (or at least leave the organization) in the relatively near future? Is anyone worried about the preparedness of the public sector workforce in terms of leadership capacity?

Your thoughts?