I know a lot of managers have a problem both in terms receiving their own feedback or indeed, being able to give feedback because it does seem that management, if it seemed to be corrective, in other words, spotting what's going wrong all the time can leave people a little bit a little bit frustrated at work a little bit lacking confidence. Generally, I was asked to run a program in house for a firm in London. We had 15 senior supervisors have been like itself. They were non Fiona's. They were support staff on they. I had a very low sense of self worth as individuals, and I asked why? And that's what we only ever here when things go wrong, You know, nobody ever says a lot when it goes right, so I want to explore. Giving feedback is an important tool in your armory to engage people and get that organizational performance that you seek through other people. So I'll be talking a little bit about giving people feedback as well as being on the receiving end of it, and therefore we can look at something that's called the Bitter sandwich compared to what I feel is a better sandwich, and I know that when people are looking at feedback in the sandwich and looked of this online quite a bit, I think there's an opportunity that we can take to improve the way in which we give feedback. So what I mean by feedback generally? Well, it's about giving people some discussion about how well they're performing now. We did talk about this a little bit on the appraisal side of it, so briefing and assessing work is very important. I think the annual appraisal is a very useful tool. But I think it's wrongly applied because there's no point storing up for 11 months corrective direction for somebody when it's at the end of a particular period of time. And it's always just before pay reviews, etcetera, etcetera. I think you're gonna get feedback. It needs to be timely and appropriate at the right right time. If I was going to give an individual some positive feedback, I might find opportunity to do that in open office. I might turn to say somebody said Janet, I thought that was a good piece of work. You did that time. Thank you very much for that not to embarrass the person, not to make people feel guilty and so forth. Level it out, catch people. Doing something right is always being my men tra rather than as a manager, always being around to catch somebody when somebody's doing something wrong. If somebody hazard, then I would make sure that's 1 to 1. Timely and confidential to the individual. I'm here looking at way in which we can keep people on board and get that balance between being the sort of kitten, fluffy nonsense that you just running around with a big smile, acknowledging great work from everybody all the time because that just appears insincere on you're not running around like a bear with a sore head, grumbling and complaining when things going wrong. Because equally that is 22 extremes, neither of much use in my book. So let's explore feedback from the point of view of having a discussion with somebody. Now, I don't know what your experience is of people in authority, but think about this thing. Criticism become who likes it Now I've said before, you know, Okay, criticism. Okay, come here. Let me give you some criticism. You're useless, Manager. Not very helpful, So we don't like criticism. And, as I said before, even constructive criticism has that sort of negative connotations to it. You know what? Your experiences of head teachers standing outside the office there on a detention or whether you've been I don't remember the last time a police officer driving a car pulled me to one side of the blue flashing light to come over and congratulate me on how good my driving or so often people in authority is seeing ones who are corrective on, therefore disciplinary sort of approach, or whether you see people in authority is being balance off corrective as well as nurturing. So this word criticism, we don't like it. We can take that away and replace it with something better. And for me, it is constructive feedback. And this is much better than that thought off, giving somebody some constructive criticism. I'm criticizing you, but I mean it in the best best sense. I think we do better than that. So how would it be if you have a manager, senior partner or something like that? How would it be when you come back to your desk? Having been away for a while there's a post it note on it says, Could you pop into my office for 10 minute chat? Now then let's explore this. Andi, I've got this is on pages 29 30. Andi, that's what I'm working towards in the book. And you can see the bottom of page 30 this little chuffed chart. Okay? What? I mean, you're asked to drop in for a 10 minute chat on there on the Y axis. The degree of toughness you have for a 1 to 1 with your boss now, because that all depends on the relationship. A lot depends, You know, the being sent to see the head teacher. In my case, Headmaster wasn't always for the most beneficial experience home. So what's the view that most managers say? Uh, most employees say when a manager says Kony, can I have a 1 to 1 10 minute chant? It is curious one ounce people in open program that they tend to say well, somewhere towards the bottom. A little cross down there because experiences of music don't head teachers or police officers tends not to be always the best, so they're a bit cautious. I mean, you might be a bit higher up there with your boss. I wonder what your star think when you say, Could you just pop into my office and you close the door? Now? I don't know if you've ever had this sort of 10 minute chat. Let's suppose something has gone on that you're unaware off because you've been away. You've been dealing with the supplier or involved in a meeting, and the boss says, Kenny popping here on, uh, how does the conversation go? You don't know that something's gone wrong. Let's imagine something has gone wrong. They want to have a conversation with what's gonna happen. Well, probably he or she might say something like, Well, thanks for coming in. Good to see you. I'm glad that things getting sorted for whatever it was. Let's say something reasonably positive. So we're used to that sort off. Nice comment so people don't come into it. I called you in because I think you're a complete Muppet, you know, probably going to say something of itself. But then, of course, they views that little conjunction. That little word that we know. But what I mean, um, having said something positive that then say something, but And now how do you feel when they explain? I've just spoken with somebody. I'm not very happy. This has happened dirty, though. Then I I don't This is good enough how you're feeling when you're getting this criticism. That's negative, but you're going down the old red run, slipping and sliding all over the place, Getting down to the bottom end of it. You told off to be ticked off. How do you respond? Do you? Are you defense? Everything all goes. What's happened now? I don't know what they're talking about. This person may offload their anger with you. They're not very happy. You're not very happy. They get to the end of the conversation down the bottom of the red line. And then they say something like, I'm pleased we've had this conversation. Who is pleased you're there with carpet burns? Okay, they might say, Well, let let's get that sorted out and have no more of that. Whatever it might be, you feel well have lost the job, if you But where are we relative to the beginning? What's happened here? They've said something positive. They then given us this. This criticism on. Then we've got out of there intact. And at the end of matter, the 1 to 1 with that boss has been largely negative. So the next time they want to one want a 1 to 1 with you, You think? Oh, now what? Okay, they've used this but word, and they said something positive, but I like what you did. But thank you for coming in, but whatever it was is, but that knocks it back down again. You get down to the end of the scale there. Unless there cause they were Oxbridge and they might have used in conjunction like however this person or me does a good job. However, they've screwed up this time of what have you done that that meant that they did what they did. So let us see if we can use a better way off conducting conversations like this. By all means, start the conversation something positive, then use a different conjunction. It's a very simple one. And let's give it a round of applause. Your attention. Teoh detail is usually pretty good on def. It was maintained in this situation. Things that improve. You manage your stuff extremely well by and large, Andi, if it was maintained across this particular area with what I saw this morning, things would be improving. So what we're doing here is to say something positive, linking it with an on drawing the but which sounds negative, putting it together. And how will you respond when someone says you do a good job? And if you maintained it over here, you definitely think Well, yeah, that's this. This person believes in me. They trust in me. They recognize something's gone wrong, and I won't be as defensive. You're probably not punching there saying, Oh, goody, goody opportunity for constructive feedback. But what we see is that it was okay. Well, what happened? Because the red line on your screen is a defensive one where the blue line is Well, okay, What happened? Tell me more. So we have this conversation, we work out what went on your open, their explaining It's not destructive. It is. Construct it, you get to the end, and then you're both happy that things will move forward and you now know what needs to be done to put it right. And they say, Thanks very much. It's good to have this open conversation. Glad we get that sorted out. And then the next time you're going to have a 1 to 1 with your line manager, you probably think that's not so bad. Maybe we can discover something else about improving the workplace. So what if reaction you getting from your staff when you want a one a 1 to 1 to give a little bit of and feedback on something that's gone wrong? Do they feel as if it's a negative experience? Well, there are they having an ambivalence off somewhere in between? Not say, Oh, goody goody, another opportunity to make some improvements. They're not going to feel like that were in the real world, it might be. Oh, I wonder what it is this time, and they won't feel so fearful about it because one we've used the red line. We've said something positive. Give it a tick. We then end up with what is a bitter sandwich. In the end, I don't like that on. Then they've said something nice at the end. So why are you sandwiching the negative bits, The better bits, the bits that people don't like? You made a mistake here I'm not happy want you get this sorted because that's a bitter sandwich on. At the end of the day, however, you dress it up with rid of fluffy white blue mouth BAP. Either side of it in the middle is still something that is not so good. What we've done with the Blue Line by saying to somebody, your attention to detail is usually pretty good, and if we could maintain it across this area as well, things would improve. Well, that's a better sandwich. I'm glad we've had this conversation on. We get to the end on Things are much better. So we've got these three parts to it. You're saying an introduction at the beginning. You're saying the core for conversation on at the end. You want to get by into moving things forward to your conversations. By all means, say to somebody, I appreciate the fact that you are able to sort a number of things out for me on If you could sort some of these other things out for May, then the department will progress that much better. It's a positive and say what you've done here has not been your best piece of work. You know you can do a little bit better than that. It's constructive on we can come up with a number of different approaches to be positive and constructive. As we go forward, you're then ending it with something at the end. That is, again a bye into improve performance. So I hope you feel that my little example here of the chuffed chart that people should leave you after the interaction, feeling better about things even if something's gone wrong, because you are wanting to work with them, to put it right, it's not. See how you can not people back unless you're fairly close to Attila the Hun in terms of pushing people around in the workplace. This is not to suggest that it's gonna work in every single situation, But I do hope you find that that's going to be something you can use to think the better sandwich rather than the bitter sandwich. I think there's a number things that we can look at from feedback point of view. These are in the notes and we're paraphrasing what's there are adding little bits and pieces as we go along. I think there's plenty of opportunity to look for opportunity to give people feedback, let them know how they're doing. The feedback doesn't have to be gushing. It doesn't have to be in sincere. It can be. Thanks for that. That's a nice piece of work. Goes such a long way to do that. Look for that opportunity. Let people know how they're doing management by walking about. OK, managing by walking about. Watch what people do and become aware of what people are doing given positive feedback on. But they won't fear your presence around the office. Right. Time and place is going to be important if it's going to be constructive feedback as the development opportunity do that one on one, not in front of other people. By all means give praise in front of other people. If it is a deserved, be sincere and see evenly applied across your workplace, not just the people you get on with most okay on. By all means reward good performance with some sort of recognition. I was in a situation late one evening, actually with a affirming in Birmingham. Onda, this supervisor there, Peter I was with somebody is working that it wasn't very, very late it was sort of 66 15. Something like that. We'd finished for the day. We were going to go and have a have a cold one, and then catch the train on somebody working late. He saw them and he said to her, Carol, I did see that bit of work you did this afternoon for that client. I heard good things said about that. The only thing I've got around me that I can actually give you as the reward was a knowing that she liked fruit teas was a sachet. That little, you know, envelope off a fruit tea and I can't leave anything else I've got at the moment. But please, this is my one of my fruit teas and know you like fruit trees. Please take that home. Have it this evening. You're probably going to do, and that's all I can offer. And she was so thrilled Now, sitting here in the cold light of day looking at me online, and I'm telling you, give someone a tea bag. You think I've lost the plot, But the fact that this chap, Peter Karen, I thank you for what you've done. It was a really good piece of work. This is the only thing I can give you. But it was a legal aid firm. You don't have a lot of money to slosh about on it was that acknowledgement. I know you like these. Enjoy this this evening and she was so thrilled and it was genuine. It was heartfelt. It was wonderful on the you know, that you look at the rights thing at the right time in that sort of way, be constructive and honest. Now demonstrate how we can be constructed with three steps when I finished this slide. Be constructive. But what can we do better? This this baseline is the minimum. We know that we can improve on that. It's constructive, but honest on duh. Treating people without pulling them is absolutely fundamental in terms of grievance policies in every firm in the country, I hope. Think about the open ended questions. Okay? How do you feel? We could make improvements. What is it that's getting in the way? Those two statements are similar, but quite different. If you say to somebody, what could we do to improve your performance? You're acknowledging that their performance isn't as good as it could be, and they may have a different view. You may end up with conflict and an argument, However, If you say I'd like to look at ways in which we can reduce the barriers to good performance, what's getting in the way for you? What's not working for you? What's what's making things particular part of the project difficult? Well, it's about I t is about time. It's about resources is about. I'm not feeling good today or whatever it might be. Open ended question will be a lot better to get them to explore their ownership off the activity and make sure that you ask that right question. Remember what we said when we were assessing work? Do you understand? Imposes bombed them the ability to respond and say they understand. And then most likely, if they don't understand, to say nothing and try and working out later, seek clarification. Have I explained that it's sufficiently clean is anything that I have explained very well, which I can't do this with you watching online. I hope that I am explaining things clearly for you. I hope that replaying the recording will help you as well. Um, and to make sure that if there is something that's going to be done that you acknowledge, it keeps some detail, what's their recording? The action. Don't leave it to memory. Just make sure you've made a note appropriate place in the appropriate way about Well, we've agreed that this is gonna happen by that sort of time. Send a quick email. Good to have that clarification conversation. Caroline looking forward to getting this sorted by four o'clock this afternoon. If you need any help. Meantime, give us a shout. You know that's going to take you all of a minute to put onto a keyboard, but very valuable as a reinforcement of the action on the positive help and support you're giving on those reviews of performance, I think on an annual appraisal we can almost do away with if we get regular feedback. Now, I know that sounds a bit shocking. What I would say is that we don't review a performance on an annual basis. We reviewed performance on a regular basis appropriate to the individual. What we do review on an annual basis is the career development and the personal develop of somebody because we're trying to set our training budgets next year. What we're gonna do, Who needs washed in by Wayne. So the younger, less experienced people need mawr off the training that mawr mature and experienced. People need different sorts of help on intervention, which may or may not be. Training is not a sheep dip process learning development. It's an individual process. So let's have a not a performance review but a career review, a personal learning and development review if you want to call it that, because I would think this is quite a nice little cartoon. And particularly I was talking about Post it notes, stuck to whiteboards a little bit earlier on I'm started regret asking my team for suggestions from on New Year's resolution. So what about these three steps? The feedback. We'll put him up here. The 1st 1 is when you see somebody do something that's good. I like that. You should do more that I like that. That's good. And then the second thing is, I saw what happened there. What would you do less of that next time? Because they didn't produce the result that you were hoping for on then the try this next time, this might be a useful way of approaching it. Should would could easy to remember, should've would've could've should be more positive. Should do less of that runs. Don't do that again. That is not a good thing is less easy to take on board. But oh my God. Sounds like a real dragon. Do less of it. Do more of that. And then you're looking at ways in which people are changing their behaviours to improve on. They try something different next time to make those improvements that you seek that are aligned with the way that people work. I hope that's been useful again. Take your opportunity to review as you see fit. Explore what's within the notes on, uh, use that to change the way in which you interact with people so that they are engaged much more with what you're trying to achieve, aligned with the objectives off the department on the firm. More generally in this section, we're going to explore your style off supervision. What is your style of supervision on? There is a questionnaire within the notes on this is on page 33. Off the notes and night encourage you to have a look at that first before going through the conversation about to give on the recording. The reason for that is, is that you'll go to this fresh. There are 20 scenarios on I'm trying to match as closely as possible a general situation within a firm. Nothing specific to your firm. Of course, it has been tried and tested in a variety of different environments. I've worked in different industries using the same basic format I've developed on. We're looking at each scenario, and then you must decide which of the four scenarios A, B, C, D. Ways of responding to that scenario You would choose. So look at each one. Put yourself in a work context. Imagine yourself in that situation on Would you do A, B, C or D? And then, as you look through the notes, there is a score sheet at the end of that run through a few pages on your asked to circle or indicate each of those situations where they have responded. A, B, C or D Do columns 1 to 4 first on the scoring sheet. That's page 40 uh, respond to each situation. 20 off them on circle one letter in each of those four columns, which corresponds with the way in which you would tend to respond. Okay, Onda Ill. Then explain what your scores mean at the end of the exercise. So complete those 1st 1st 4 columns and then finally circle the same letter for each situation in the next four columns. Columns 5 to 8. Okay, 20 scenarios. Four. Options A, B, C or D Choose your option. Circle the letter as it falls in columns. Wonderful. And then the end of the process. Once you've completed or 20 then circle the letter corresponding for each situation in columns five, 28 Okay, let's move it forward. Having completed that and you're ready to move on with the recording, then let's explore the degree to which you would take control of a situation or the degree to which you would ease off. Let it go on. Do you remember the town on Bomber Schmidt? Um, continuum that we talked about on the motivation? There were some situations where you're using the full extent of your managerial, uh, position to sort out a problem, sort out the situation. There were other ends of the continuum where you let the staff sort out their own problems. So here we've got a continuum across on one side, on the right hand side, you're using your authority to make sure things happen. How it happens. Controlling Monnet. They're checking whether it happened on time, monitoring the standards being produced and correcting things if things didn't go very well. So what with those sort of situations appear to be compared with at the other end of the continuum? Rome Standing up, controlling everybody, making sure everything happened. Your we'll be having a very democratic way. You're collaborating with other people. You're engaging in conversation. You're exploring their ideas. You're discussing options that they've come up with. You are giving people freedom, delegating, letting them run with ideas that good to you. You are being inclusive to modify your approach according to the ideas they've got and much more freedom. So that blue bar of Tannenbaum and Schmidt was suggesting that authority using your authority wanted to the scale. But your job is to improve the motivation, the ability and the confidence of your people, so that you can get on with what you need to do, letting them get on with what they can do, so we might start with people on the right hand side of the screen where you use your authority. If people don't know what to do, you need to tell him If people don't want to do it, then it's about identify what their job is, making sure they do what they're paid for. Okay, we're not running a ah club here. We're running a business where people come along and do the work required off them to get their pay. There's a very grown up way of viewing the world, I know, but let's face it, that's what it's about. We want to make sure the work gets done micromanaging if people are not stepping up to the plate. But clearly not many people stay like that for very long because, quite frankly, you need to get rid off. Um, if provided outside of work, there's nothing getting in the way, and that's made clear in each of the statements where necessary on the score sheet on the questionnaire of which you've completed the scoresheet. So that's the right hand side of the column On the left hand side is where you would ideally want to get your people because they can be able to get good at stuff. Mastery in Dan pinks terms. They can have some autonomy to do it their way. That's again within then. Pinks, view of things. Why? Because they are sharing the same sense of purpose that everyone else in your firm has. They're there to save Fiona's time. They are there to help and support clients. They're all on the same page. So therefore, we could be a little bit more inclusive in their ideas, their approaches and so on and so forth. So there we have, um, the overview of the extremes of the situational leadership model that we've been looking at for the supervisors program. Where are your people, Andi? Where are they? For the tasks they've got to do? You see one person, um, may for any given task, be it one into the scale. But give them a different task. And there, at the other end of the scale, I may be a very capable, confident, competent, well motivated, able on and confident person to do the work. And you could delegate to me and let me get on with it. Give me a new task. Oh my goodness, why would I intuitively know how to do everything? I'm actually at the other end, so it's a very flexible on. The arrows are headed in both directions. Sometimes you need to go back to the basic. Sometimes you can bring them on a little bit forward. It's very, very dynamic, very flexible. So here we've got two parts to it. One is the job to be done. On the other is the person doing the work. People do jobs. Jobs get done by people. So let's explore that in a little bit more detail. What do we mean by work being done? The task orientation that you is a supervisor has where you are standing up, pointing the direction. I'll give it a definition. You could read it. It's the degree to what you control. What's going on. A SARS. The job is being done, making sure people know what their role is, the the what? When, where, why and how of a job. And if there's a team of people indeed, an individual, you can say, OK, what are we trying to achieve here? What what is the goal? Is that aligned to the business objectives and strategy. Absolutely. That's what we're aiming to do. Okay, well, if you do that, then I can do this. And then when I've done that, you can do that. And then she can do this on we bring him in to do that pities organizing things in a project way, for example. So you may have to point a bit of thinkable. You go into that bit first, and then two o'clock will review that. And then I can get product to do that, and we'll get a gender to have a look at the other things over there. When are they going to be done? That we sent two o'clock so that this could be done. It will take until so three oclock and we can get things ready to get in the green or the red bag for postage or whatever it might be. These things may be made explicit on. Then you'll make sure browned lunchtime. That person with the first task is getting on with it, and we'll have it finished by two o'clock so there's no delay and that somebody else is ready between two and three for their particular parts off it. So it's a bit of hands on management, and if it's not going as well as you wanted it do, you may be able to put people back on track. Remember, leadership? His path. Finding management is about path following, and supervision is about the more hands on aspects off, making sure that people are okay, step by step. So it all hangs together. That's the task people don't forget. Course. We need to look at the people that were involved with. So the degree off relationship orientation you give people, I must say at this point, it is never zero. Sometimes people need less off your engagement as an individual, and sometimes they need a lot more. So let's define relationship orientation. That's extent with you as the supervisor to the staff member that the leader is opposed to follow, engages in a two way conversation with somebody orphans, the team of multi way communication, giving people what's called social emotional support. That is by letting people know that you are there to help them give them some support along the way, step by step, sometimes need to do a lot more of this than others Maybe it's the degree to which you are telling on listing on, responding, on, asking and listening. Andi, they are responding. Sometimes we need to do a lot more of this, sometimes a little bit less. Sometimes we need to be able to ask questions of people. Sometimes we need to do a little bit of listening to the answer. Sometimes we need to hear what they've said before. We asked the question, and we need to listen to the response before we think about the next question. So it's a dynamic. Communication is obviously to weigh when, as the little image here with our bubble people is to bring them on board. So it may be facilitating interactions within the work group within the team, one to another with you, with others with people in other areas of work. You're not in the accounting function of the firm that maybe they need to talk with some people there. If you're not involved in the client facing areas, more of the back room person, then maybe some of those things will be appropriate in that way. On your giving people that supportive, constructive feedback on how they're doing. Sometimes they need a bit of this. Sometimes they need a lot more of it. Sometimes they need a little bit less of it. So task orientation, people orientation. Relationship orientation can be represented quite simply as two dimensions off. A very straightforward model. It's called The Situational Leader on in the World Leader. You could put situational supervisor that's situational manager. It's the same sort of thing. Just the activities within each particular approach will vary a bit across the bottom. On the X axis, you have the task or directive behavior and rather like the can Obama Schmidt. Sometimes you need to be very, very high on that scale. Using my pointer, you sometimes are operating down there because people need your help. Support guidance Instruction on your job, if you will, is to grow people's task maturity so that they become much Mawr able, much more motivated, much more confident to do the work, and you then don't have to be as involved in the task or directed behavior. So that's the task. The other dimension on the Y axis up here on the left. Sometimes we have to do a lot of this supportive relationship behavior. The talking the listening, the asking questions, the responding, the collaboration with others and so forth and sometimes relatively less. And what this model creates for us are four core areas. Now, quite clearly, the world doesn't fall into four quarters. So don't take this one bit all the other bit. It's a blend. It sort of, uh uh, crossover between one area and the next. If you think about when you give when you maybe have a new recruit, for example, what's the world gonna be like for them on the first day? Well, our first day, if somebody is actually down here on the bottom right hand side that says, Well, tell me how we do things around here. You How do you lay your letters out? What's the default typeface? Is it aerial? Is it times Roman? Is it caliber? Is it open Sands or what is the? You know, every firm will have its own particular approach. Tell me how to do things. How you Where is the photocopy? Where is the printing? Do I need a departmental code? Big firms may allocate the printing to in house printing to a particular coat. All that sort of stuff is a lot for people to learn, to integrate themselves into your department, and it's all about the job. Here is the job. Here is the objectives of the job thes the key performance indicators. This is the purpose of it. These are the key task that need to be done. Just give me clear instructions. Tell me what to do. That's the first point you can see. It's high task directive behavior from you. You'll give people work. You just throw them a desk, throws a work at them and let them sink or swim. You're going to monitor them. You're gonna get some feedback from them. You're going to give them to more feedback on the supportive relationship. Behavior is generally a little bit low, inasmuch as here's the job, do the job and you want to get them away from first base so that they move from this area here at the far right end of the bottom scale. You want to move them along so they become better at the job on when they become better at the job. Then they'll come to you and say, Okay, boss, I understand what's required here, but why did we do it that way. In my last firm, we used to do this, or I thought this would be a good idea on What you're doing is engaging with them, smelling your approach. Well, thank you for asking the question, but do you remember that it needs to fit in with other departments? Or if the Fiona's do this or whatever, Nobody in a job paying the sort of salaries that you pay will learn their job in a few hours. They will develop their skills over time, develop their understanding, fit in with the team on that will make their lives a lot easier. So now you are still making sure that they understand what constitutes a job well done and engaging so people don't stay often at level one. They develop rapidly to level two on. They know you are the go to person to solve the problem for them. So what you've now got, of course, is a group of people who are solution seekers. They have a problem. They get along tap on your desk, knock on the door yourself. The problem now that how often have you felt? I've got my own things to do I need to grow them beyond May? I need them to let go. My metaphorical apron strings. I need them to be able to tie their own shoelaces a bit. How can I do that? Well, now we need to move people along as they become slightly better at the job. More things get done. They know what's going on. We can then move from across here on when they say, Can you help me? Are not too sure what to do with this. Instead of telling them what you're explaining how you would solve the problem, you could say something along the lines off. I need to finish this piece of work, have a think about cash flow, and then come back and tell me 20 minutes what you think is the best way of handing that. Andi. We'll discuss it so they go away. Think about it. Come back to you. How are they going to feel when you have encouraged them to solve the problem? How are they going to feel that they thought about it. So instead of level two, listening to what you would do to put it right at level three, you have helped them think through how they will solve the problem. What's that doing to their motivation? Their ability and their confidence are participative style. Switch from 2 to 3 is very important because now you're developing problem solvers who not come and ask you what you do but think like you would think that's the participation in style. And then, of course, we're down the level for here where people are up to speed. You're getting that navalny off, then pink situation where people are able to be good at what they do mastery their autonomous. They could do it their way to deliver the outputs that you're looking for on they have that really strongly airline sense of purpose which matches what you want in the department and indeed what the whole firm is looking for. So this river here, this flow from one side to the other is very much a process. And if you think about can Obama Schmidt for that continuum, that box one level one, you're using your authority to make sure it happens in a box for the followers are using their ideas to get the work done. And we've now dis described couple stages stage to stage three that grow people from the right hand side through to the left hand side. And your job is to grow people they love to grow toe handle mawr, interesting tasks, a few more challenging tasks. We want to take away the barriers at each day so that people can perform well. So what does it look like? Well, what we're trying to do here is to give people instructions that they know how to engage. If you sit around at home and you play a few games with the family friends, trivial pursuits, whatever did somebody wants to give you the instructions, going to read the little instruction book, how the game is played? How do we play these card games? How do we play these board games? So instructor, and then you start playing, have a little trial. Things go wrong, somebody will explain how they would put it right. That's training, and I learned this very much from 16 years off. Schoolchildren, sports training, rugby training on track and field that trainers are very powerful people who can help people improve their performance. But eventually you gotta wean them off so they can think during the game they can think during the event that keep running to the the trainer, too. Get them to improve their gotta think their own way of solving the problem on. Then, finally, it's one of mentoring. So this four stage process actually matches very closely with the ah Maslow's pyramid. Level one is about Give me the instructions so I could do the job that will give me job security level to give me a little bit more training on. I'll fix my job in with Everyone else is so I have a sense of belonging. Get me to think like you think, which will help me feel good about myself and what I bring to bear coaching people to improve their performance. Great self esteem from that. And then finally you are giving people that mentoring that that step up. And then people are innovating on their self actualizing in Maslow's terms, which is really what you're aiming for. So there we have the approaches that we've got on. Then we can look at the score sheet on, define how we can make easy ways to improve. So what we're explaining here is that when you have put a circle. In COLUMN one, you have chosen the alternative A to D that looks at situations where you've chosen to give specific instruction on monitor. So that's your column total In column one column two You've decided to give it instructions. Explain why support dialogue, Clarify things and you've monitored to some degree a circle in the response to Colin free that you have shared ideas with the follower. You made a joint decision or they've made a decision with a bit of encouragement and facilitation from you, The leader leader follower. Therefore, if you're circling, Column four has demonstrated that you've turned over responsibility for the decision and how it's gotta be implemented to the other person and you've given them encouragement. Remember, relationship orientation is not zero. It's just a little bit less so. That's your, um, you're way of looking at this to think of through your style of decision making in the workplace situation. So what does it mean? Well, I have put in the appendix off the workbook, a variety of different types of character, depending on your responses, but essentially the higher the figure that you've got in each of those four columns than the more dominant that style is. If you've been able to spread your scores around, you got 20 points to spread around, if you will, that you may have a flexibility to adopt different styles depending on the situation. The ideal, incidentally, is tohave five in each of the four columns. Because you are able to direct give instructions, you're able to explain decisions with support dialogue. You're able to engage in discussion about how to improve your able to recognize situations when you would let go. So the higher your score, the more dominant style, but more spread out the let the numbers. Are the mawr flexible your style? So please use the scoresheet, the the sheet back of the workbook to have a look at the different sort of characteristics there, and that is about style, flexibility and style dominance. But remember, the only purpose of U as a supervisor is to be effective. So how do we turn this into something to do with effectiveness? Well, the school sheet. Hence the reason for completing it before we got this far, because everything will make sense for Scoresheet has columns 1 to 4. Our style range columns talked about that. The other four columns columns 5 to 8 are the style effectiveness condoms and you'll see at the bottom of column five. You're invited, too. Multiply any figure in that column by minus two, because effectively, what I'm saying is that a response that falls in the column five is not a very effective way of dealing with things. Okay, what's that is, say is that won't is going to be the advantage off taking these away for a second. What's gonna be the advantage off giving clear instructions, How you want something to done, how you want something done with a very a seasoned professional person that works for you and your micromanaging that it's completely ineffective and in fact could be quite damaging to take away an idea that's a good one and implemented yourself because you think you should leave in that other person thinking Well, I don't get any credit for that, then will I? On equally. If somebody is not stepping up to the plate and you ignore it, then it won't heal itself. You can't mentor somebody who isn't turning up for work on time, getting on the basic tasks or in fact, is disruptive. You've got to recognize that this person needs something quite different. So with that in mind, thinking of these decisions styles any circle. In column five you've scored minus two minus one for six, plus one for column seven on plus two for column eight. So with your 20 responses put into those five Earth columns 567 and eight, what do we have? Well, if you put 20 responses in column five, you scored minus 40. And if you put 20 responses in column eight, you've got a figure of plus 40 so they score ranges between minus 40 and plus 40 which doesn't make a lot of sense with zero in the middle. So what I've invited you do is to add 40 so that puts your response on 80 point scale. Multiply that by one and 1/4 makes 100 point scale. So now you get a percentage style effectiveness rating. I can tell you that if you're sort of 55 65% that's fairly modest. 65 75% is good. 75 to 85% is very good on 85% Wilmore means that you've got a very effective style of management. So what can you do with this? Well, apart from understanding what your dominant style is, which will see in this in the sheet at the back of the workbook. Apart from that, what you can do is to go and have a look at your score sheet and have a look at any response you gave in column five or six and say, Why didn't I give the response that sits across in column seven or eight? Because that will be the more effective way of dealing with that particular situation. What did I put in each of those 20 scenarios, which, after all, will not explain the complete picture off your staff or your work or your firm on the processes that you are managing within that organization? What it is, an indicator off something going on there that suggests this is a situation in which you should give instructions or get some dialogue, but monitor a little bit yourself or get some joint decision making or let go completely. So obviously, the higher the score. In percentage terms, the more effective things will be on your action from here is to go through the responses and have a look of columns five or six and say, Why not seven rate? If you are Ah, high scorer and you put some in columns seven, then have a look even at those and say, Why not call him eight? Because what we're showing you here is that when the letter that falls into columns 1 to 4 also falls gives you a figure in column eight column eight, if you like, is the most effective way of dealing with each situation. Five situations. The letter falls into column one in eight. Those are situations which you need to control. Instruct Monitor Columns two and eight Where the letter corresponds. Are situations where it's most effective to make sure people trained properly that you give some indicator of what you would do. Get some clarification, support dialogue, understand how it fits in with other people. So that's two and eight. Columns three and eight are situations way. It's a coaching situation where you need a joint decision making all let the following make the decisions with a bit of encouragement. Coaching in the workplace is a very powerful tool on then columns four and eight are situations where, on the strength of it, people can get on and do it themselves. So I hope that helps explain what the model is all about. It's the situational supervisor model. Take 60 seconds to think. What is this person like? In terms of their motivation, ability, their confidence? What does the task demand off them? What do they want from me? In order to me to be a most effective supervisor to help along on, I have to say it probably won't happen. But if you are surrounded by Muppets, you need to spend most of your time in columns one and two. If you're surrounded by highly capable, competent people. Brothers, I fortunately I'm now. Then I will spend most of my times in Column three and four. Okay, do you remember as a last comment here that it is a one waste? It's not a one way street people don't not progress. Two column for every now and then, somebody will go forgotten something. What I do here so they'll slip back one or possibly two spots. Don't do as I once did many years ago. Very capable support staff she was working on spreadsheets for the first time. Quite capable keyboard operator. Good attention to detail, very numerous, and I forgot how to do percentages in a spreadsheet. So I was just about to leave the office. Let across the desk, took a mouse click, click click there. And that's what you do when I left thinking, Haven't I been a clever boy? I've told her what to do. Trouble is, when I was on my way to a meeting, I had a need to phone the office. I spoke with her very short with me on later on. When I got back. That said to one once said, You didn't seem particularly happy with things. What was the problem? She said, Well, when I ask you, how was I to do something, you let straight across the desk, show me what to do right in front of everyone else, maybe look a complete idiot in front of the rest of the people in the office. She was a level for for most of the work she did. All she was saying was that she dropped back to coaching style, and I thought the quickest way is to do it for her. In fact, what I should have said is, I also forget equations that he used to sort out the figure. What I do is find another spreadsheet that will tell me how to find the solution to the problem. In other words, I would share with her my thinking, which, of course, is Level three rather than do number one do it for her or just this is how you do it. Click, click, click, click. She waas that level for She only slipped back away, but I treated at the wrong end of the scale, and it did mess up the situation. She was not remotely happy. Fortunately, that situation was resolved. So do make sure that you're thinking carefully on not shooting from the hip, In which case, with that completed, let's turn on to have a look at the next part of the program, which is to explore conflict with that anecdote. Good thing to start thinking about. So just before we deal with a conflict that I've just created from that anecdote, do remember to track your learning development in the workbook. There's a section there for you to explore what you're going to do is a way of improving your behaviors in a particular area. What you're going to do to look at your learning development. You're obviously gonna be reading the workbook and so on and so forth. And it's all part of your personal development plan to improve your behaviors when supervising other people within your firm. So, conflict management, What's it all about? Well, what we're gonna do is to explore what is what the American offers off this call the a conflict mode instrument. In other words, what is the approach that you would tend to take to a given situation? The conflict. So what have we done? Well, we've created a questionnaire for you. It's quite a comprehensive questionnaire. I'm not the author of it. So bear with me when you look at the content on, but it is a very powerful and long, well established tool to have a look at how you tend to respond to conflicts before go into anything any further. Please turn to Page 43 off the workbook and have a look. We're looking there at some measurement off the way in which you handle conflict. So planes again look at the world from the point of view of you at work, how you deal with situations at work with more senior people, more junior people, your peer group and so forth. And have that in mind when you look at the paired statements in the questionnaire Mayor invited to come down one side or the other on either prefer, given the pair off observation statements whether you tend to do a or b okay into that question, there starts on page 44. I'm not the also. So forgive the, uh, split infinitives in there. Somebody did point that out recently. Thank you for that. Um, and have a look when you've done that, then I'll take you through what each of the mean and again the same sort of thing comes up is the degree of knowing what you tend to favor because it reflects the situations that you find yourself in at work on with. Then explore whether or not you can flex those behaviors. Those modes on indeed used, um, in the right place in the right way and therefore, as a supervisor, b'more effective that managing conflict so over to you work on that questionnaire. Look at the score sheet. When you've got the scoresheet completed and you've totaled up all the figures, they're you know which of the five core areas you favor. The higher score. Which ones you tend not to favor the lower scores on page 46. Okay, well, I hope you've got it, because the next slide will make a lot more sense when you've completed that question here. So I want to make sure your scribbled before you go forward, because what the model is all about is the degree to which you will apply one of two dimensions. And that is the degree to which you push your own agenda assertive. Get the outcome you want, or you are non assertive. You bother about your own particular outcome. The other person could take the initiative on the degree to which you agree to cooperate with the other party or, in fact, your non cooperative as well. So I would tend to say, non assertive, unassertive for assertive one dimension and the degree of corporations, the other. What the authors have created of five alternatives run in each quadrant on one slap bang in the middle. So what they're saying is that if you scored particularly high and what does that mean? Well, you've got 30 statements across five different styles that's clearly going to be six is the midpoint of the scale on each of those 55 sixes or 30. So six is the median score on what they're saying. If you've scored particularly high in the context of that is nine orm or up to 12. You have scored particularly high with that particular approach to conflict. Andi. If you've scored somewhere between zero and three on the lower end of that scale, then indeed, you are tending not to favor that particular approach to dealing with conflict. What the authors suggest is that each of them is appropriate in certain circumstances, in other words, where it could be used. And it will demonstrate again in the notes where using it, particularly in a variety of different situations in which you favour a particular style. It may have some negative effects for you, and if you favored one style only 30 points to share, it is likely that you're relatively low on some other styles, and you may have a perfect six across the middle in which case. It's just a matter of saying Well, OK, I can adopt all the styles. What do I have to do with them? Where would I best use them? If you schooled particularly high, have a look at one that you score particularly high in and well illustrate in the notes. What's wrong with playing particularly high? And if you have therefore scored, particularly though, on some other style or styles, and have a look at the notes there and say it? Okay, what's the drawback off? Not using it very much. So that's where we are. Let's go around and explain where we are, and I'll just give a brief reminder off that part when we get there. Okay, If you collaborate with the other party and you push your agenda, it sounds like you're on the same page or collaborative. So if somebody else wants what you want, Andi, you're happy with that. Then there is a conflict situation. Well, it sounds like there wouldn't be much conflict, but if there was potential for ah, degree off collaboration, and that clearly is going to be a great benefit on everybody is on the same page. So how do we deal with conflicts where we are going to be in situations where we agree. Well, in which case we just agree this is the right way forward. There is potential for conflict. But both collaborative. We are cooperating with the other side and we are pushing our own agenda. Then well done. That's good to know. Now what's the downside with being collaborative? You may in fact be pushing your agenda, but mawr cooperative than you need to be. Are you absolutely certain that you're getting everything you want? Are you absolutely certain they are getting all that they want? Collaborative may be very, very handy tohave, but maybe there's other styles that would be more appropriate for a given situation. So you may have situations where you are pushing your agenda, but actually collaborating with somebody when perhaps you should be pushing your agenda but not collaborating quite as much. In other words, competing, you may have to come away a little bit and say, Well, I want many I know I'm getting what I want, but really, I shouldn't be collaborating, cooperating with you on this matter. I think I should stand my ground. So here there are situations when somebody will quite clearly have a new agenda, which you do not agree with, in which case you'll be competing. So what's the problem with pushing your own agenda? Which does mean that if you are the sort of supervisor that continues to push their own agenda, don't be surprised if your support staffs eight year whatever. Yeah, I had a boss a bit like this. Sure, we call him Dave in the past, where he said, OK, come into a meeting with the department. OK, we've got this problem with X Y and said, I've thought about it. I think we should do this. This is the best way forward. Any suggestions on whatever suggesting you heard it wasn't is going to be as good as his on an end. After a couple weeks of doing this, we all said, Yeah, whatever. Yes, Dave, I think brilliant may absolutely will do it. He was the boss. Let him get on with it. What's the point? It's hardly worth the effort. So you where is it best used? Well, winning on the side of right on the other party is maybe not quite as on the same page as you are, and you want to get work done. The employment law dealing with people in the appropriate fashion, discrimination in workplace, all that sort of thing. I do not make the law. I just make sure that people follow it absolutely fine as far as any potential for discrimination in workplace, which were exploring Part two off. The program, by the way, is being dealt with. But I do recognize if I go into a meeting is as the boss, I will say, OK, we've got this problem. I'd like to hear your thoughts and ideas off cause effect what we can do, how we can deal with it, what the issues might be, what the best options might be, because if somebody else is coming up with an idea I hadn't thought off. Brilliant. And if something has come up with an idea that matches mine brilliant. If something comes up with an idea that I don't think works well, I can still reward the effort that came. Thank you for coming up the idea. I'm glad you be thinking that through that sounds it could work if this would happen on building on it. This may not work because they, in other words, a reason why it won't happen couldn't happen. Bang in the middle is compromising, I suppose. It all five off the various ways of dealing with conflict, it's the it is the one that gives you the brownie points for the longer term. It is not actually getting everything you want and therefore you have to give up a bit on everything that you want. It is cooperative with then on. That's absolutely fine. But what it means is that there is a win win situation which I think is perfectly nonsense when it comes to thinking about dealing with conflict. Because if you're driving for a win win situation, in my experience, if you get two parties, both which want to win, I think they call that a competition. Okay, on da very, very rare that there is a dead heat. I remember in a school event, cross country. I was some way down the pack, the pecking order on the finish. But a pal of mine and I both approached the finish line and we decided to go through exactly together because we wanted to be whatever it wills fifth equal or something in the cross country. But even then the schoolmaster said, Well, what have you got? A win? So we go alphabetical on my end happened to begin a lot earlier than s for Smith or whatever. So I got a slightly higher placing. So that calm, that sort of, you know, compromising situation never really happens in practice. So I think that a situation which is about compromising is a gain gain and mutual gain on that might be a better way of viewing it. What's a non assertive, non cooperative approach? Well, that's avoiding the issue Now. Clearly, some of your staff may realize that having conflict work is not a good thing that may just avoid anything that's going to be uncomfortable. Wait, let's face it. Given a choice of having conflict or not, then most of us might feel that conflict is just a wasted effort. It's embarrassing. It's difficult. I can't handle it. Just get on with it. It's a perfectly reasonable behaviour. But of course, with the head stuck in the sand is not a very attractive place to be and therefore may be missing out on things. So what's the upside of avoiding conflict. Maybe the conflict is irrelevant to you. Maybe the conflict is not important. Maybe it's not worth bothering about perfectly reasonable behaviour ons used on avoidance process To avoid the battles, you don't need to be dragged into everything. How do we distinguish between them? I'll come onto that in a moment to What's the problem with avoiding things is that quite clearly people could be running roughshod over your feelings, thoughts and ideas, in which case that's not very helpful, your non assertive and you were uncooperative. People may feel unhappy with the fact that you're not cooperating, either on that may lead to conflict. Now Cooperative, non assertive is accommodating, and that's very good in a kind facing situation where somebody says, I want you to do this and that may be a non assertive response. But say, Yeah, I could do that for you. The upshot of it is, is that by accommodating may build up points for later or well and good, so credits and favor bank and so forth. But beware that it's not pushing your agenda so accommodating may lead you to be doing things that you are less comfortable with. particular. If you're accommodating when you should be perhaps compromising or looking at saying, Well, OK, I can't accommodate all of that. But I can collaborate with you if you agree to do this for me as well, and that's moving yourself across the model. So each of these five areas are absolutely fine. So when would we want to be collaborative? Well, here's a situation. If you do this, I'll do that. Then I'll do that and you do that will collaborate. We'll both achieve the outcomes we want Absolutely fine. It can take time. That's one of the downsides. It may be that you are pushing your agenda but cooperated with things that you shouldn't be in which case may be come back, compromise or indeed, um, but moving to another area, as I suggested with competing or so on compromising is stuck in the middle. That may be fine, but I found when I've compromised with members of staff over attendance or bits and pieces with the way in which they engage with work, I found that I compromise and then I have to compromise again. Then a compromise again. And I really wish that I hadn't compromised quite as much. I've been a little bit more saying Look, these are the rules off engagement they apply to everybody. Just stick with that and be a little bit more assertive on certain things. I was just trying to accommodate other people to fit in with their situation. Outside of work. It's my boss, John, who said Sometimes life is hard. If this person's having a problem with their partner at home, really, it's not anything we can deal with. They must deal with it. We have a business to run Andi. Therefore, this is the way of doing it and that's actually a far better. Competing is fine, but as I said, Don't overplay it if you don't do it, you know pushing your agenda. So what you should have aimed to achieve is six on each of the scores on the evaluation sheet for this particular excise there on page 46 6 across area, it's called nine or above. Then have a look. See the downside of over playing some of these scoring 0 to 43 or four bottom into the scale, then have a look at the down side of not to using a particular approach on. Remind yourself where you can use Thies to be able to deal with conflict in a lot more successful fashion. Being complied is all well and good on there. Love you for that. But in fact, it may not be the best outcomes, in which case we can deal with conflict and avoid them in team meetings.
Introduction
Workbook
3660 Users
41 Courses
143 Reviews
