1. Organizational Culture

Imagine a day when your leader announces a major change to take place on Monday. You had no prior knowledge, you received no further detail, you had not been involved in the discussions and decisions leading up to this moment. The desired outcome and indicators of success have not been mentioned. You have no access to the reasons why the change is happening, nor what will be required of you. Due to this reality, it is likely your confidence levels would decrease when it comes to leading others through the change.

Organizational Culture can be a great source of resistance if this description typifies the way a company operates, and seems beyond the sphere of influence of middle managers.

2. Lack of Awareness and Knowledge about the Change

Adults are babies in big bodies. We know that a child will always ask ‘why’; so too an adult, as this provides the reasons for the need to change and also the consequences of not changing. Through receiving that information, a middle manager would also understand more about the nature of the change. Yet, even with Awareness (the ‘why’ of change), there is still a need for greater depth to Knowledge (the ‘how to’ of change). 

• Imagine a Chef who has been told to change the pie menu, yet not given the recipe nor an understanding of why the prior item is ‘off the menu’.
• Imagine an Accountant who has been informed by the CFO the accounting system is currently outdated and must change, yet provided no insights into its failings and what is required to close the gaps.
• Imagine the IT Officer’s app has just been scrapped, with no reasons being shared, and no idea or direction as to how to evolve to a higher standard.
• Imagine the HR Officer receiving a directive to change the company’s uniform with no understanding of the what, why or new priorities.

The ‘why’ and ‘how to’ of change is imperative for a middle manager as it will fill in the blanks, opening the pathway to clarity, and further action.

Lack of Buy-In

We’re back to middle managers being real people, with real human needs first and foremost. You are a real person too, and consciously or unconsciously filter any change requests through your values, opinions, background experiences, history and credibility of the sender, and the list goes on. When something does not align to your realm of reality, why would you accept to adopt any change?

A middle manager is almost superhuman, stuck between those above (often out of touch with what’s really happening on the ground) and those below (who depend heavily on the one closest to them for support). Being there for both parties is a balancing act for any middle manager – how long could you continue to serve all those around you, compromising the very core of what matters most to yourself? 

Many moons ago, my mentor taught me to behold resistance, grab it and serve it; after all, it is only showing up to be heard. It simply wants attention, answers and opportunity for  alignment. 

If you lead a middle manager:

• Anticipate, and provide for the needs of the manager during change, before resistance shows up.
• Provide the what, why and how of change, so the puzzle is as complete as possible. 
• Allow time for the manager to process and explore the WIFM (What’s In It For Me) factor.
• Walk alongside the middle manager during change, providing consistent and relevant support.

The post The Top Three Reasons why Middle Managers struggle with Change @ Work appeared first on business en motion.

The post It’s ‘goodbye’ to expertise appeared first on business en motion.

Teams are more than a collection of individuals! They are a body of human interaction, to which dependency and common goals are key! The entity they form is what holds them together, one that acts as pieces of invisible string holding, pushing, yanking, pulling, smoothing on each other, bringing the cause and effect into their reality. Traditional team events have had limited success and even less impact back in the workplace for one main reason; they work with the people and do not access the relationship between the people. It’s time for leaders to re-think their approach to maximizing team synergy.

For example, a merger and acquisition is a change, one that cannot possibly work with the mentality that ‘two will become one’ as two will not want to become one, or if it does one will have more power than the other. It will live in the land of ‘who did what to whom, when’ and miss opportunity for ‘what is trying to happen’ in the any resulting friction. If the team is perceived as a set of individuals, any input will be perceived as competing opinions – certainly not a great basis for collaboration or synergy during complex changing times. Conversely, the space of the relationship will know what is a great way forward, as a relationship or system has the ability to generate, evolve and resolve. It will take any conflict as an indication of the needs of the system and the entity, not the individuals, and will focus on moving through the needs.

When the relationship is the focus of teamwork, it builds a collaborative entity beyond the individuals, whilst also creating an awareness that choice exists; herein is the key. When a relationship is at choice, it is able to take decisions collaboratively with greater interdependence and trust (and less baggage from individual experience), and become intentional and conscious about actions taken. Group coaching taps into a collaborative space, a collective consciousness, a corporate or team culture and builds what will nurture and sustain itself, regulate and correct itself, own and drive itself, feed and grow itself! What great return on investment, wouldn’t you say business leaders?

The post Leaders Must Reconsider their Team Approaches appeared first on business en motion.