Being 'Intentional'!

A week or two ago, in a post titled '50 Things I Want To Do Before I Die', i had talked about 'What am I doing today to ensure the tomorrow i want becomes a reality?'

While the statement makes me feel 'energized', I have been struggling with 'How does one effectively action on a statement like this?' There only are 24 hours in a day!

I remember reading an article by Swedish psychologist, Dr. K Anders Ericsson on 'Deliberate Practice'. In this article he talks about how experts in chess, music, sports, etc acquire their superior performance by extended 'deliberate practice'.

'Deliberate practice' - aah! The term had sounded interesting to me when i had heard it, and is something i keep on coming back to and exploring.

What does one mean by 'deliberate practice'? If I'm a cricketer with a flawed front foot drive technique, i keep on working everyday on my front foot drive technique. There is an element of 'intentionality' about such kind of practice.

'Being Intentional' about how we spend our day can help. It has atleast got me started. Many times my days are a bit crazy and i am not completely in control of my time. But then i would have thought for few minutes in the morning what are the things i want to achieve/do today. That helps, but only to a certain extent!

I like 'serendipity' and prefer doing things only when they 'absolutely' need to be done :). 'Being intentional' about how i am going to spend this hour - the hour i am currently in works for me. I decide on things i want to achieve in the hour i am in, along with the order i want to do those things in.

I prefer not to multi-task. So if you see me working at a point of time, would you find me multi-tasking? No! You would usually find me 'zoned' into what i am doing. But if you happen to meet me after an hour's gap, would you feel i have multi-tasked in the hour gone by? Maybe - because you would find that i have completed a number of things which ordinarily might have taken longer to complete.

Being 'Intentional' about the hour i am in works for me! It leaves me happy and satisfied at the end of the day - i feel i'm actively shaping my tomorrow!

What works for you?

-

Sourav

A 'Concern'!

A few days back i received a call from a colleague. She said 'I was to facilitate a session beteween Leadership team and a group of individual contributors. But i might not be able to come to work tomorrow. Can you facilitate this session? I would help you prepare for it.'

I did agree and landed up facilitating this discussion between 2 Leadership Team members and a around 15 individual contributors.

There was a particular challenge/dynamic i faced during the discussion - 'When does one take up a 'concern expressed' for team/group/organizational level actioning?'

In the initial part of the discussion, I realized there were di-alogues happening in the room. One person was expressing a concern, while another person was responding to his/her concern. The concerns were being acknowledged, and many a times being taken up for actioning.

I found something amiss with this inter-personal dynamic. I thought 'How could a concern be acknowledged as a team/group/organization level action item without first being thrown around the room and debated?'

I subsequently made a conscious attempt to change the nature of the discussions. Every concern raised started getting thrown around to others in the room and debatd. I asked 'Have others had a similar experience? Has anyone else handled a similar situation successfully?'

The tone of the discussion changed. People in the room with differing opinions/experiences slowly but surely started speaking up.

With multiple people speaking about their experiences handling similar situations; we got a better sense of whether a concern expressed lay at the individual/team/work-group/organizational level.

It also made participants see that someone they considered 'their type' (and not from HR or Leadership team) had experienced a similar situation differently from the way they had experiened a situation. The face validity of possible solutions proposed was consequently higher as it came from someone perceived to be 'their type'.

What did i those who expressed concerns that were unique - not representative of a team/group/organizational level problem?

Well! I tried acknowledging his/her concern (s/he felt heard) but managed to make him/her aware that his/her concern maybe unique and may not be reflective of a larger problem. 'Feeling heard and acknowledged' seems to have a cathartic effect.

-

Sourav

Feedback on a Situation!

Something happened post Focussed Group Discussion (FGD) i was facilitating yesterday that has stayed with me.

I was discussing with the 'People Manager' concerned about what had been the major themes that had come out of the FGD.

I was telling the manager concerned what the group felt about how we could better structure/use in-person interactions (individual discussions between the manager and reportee's). I shared 'What they wanted more/less/started/stopped during these discussions?'.

Initial reaction of manager concerned was defensiveness. At one point, s/he expressed 'This is an unfair demand from me!'

His/her reaction made me aware of something i had forgot to make him/her aware about. My discussion with team was about 'what needed to change in the situation?' and was not about 'what the manager needed to do differently?'.

The subsequent question obviously is 'If these are the changes we want, who needs to do what differently? What would you need to do differently?'

Once i made manager aware that the focus of the discussion was on the situation and not the person, i sensed s/he became more receptive to looking at the feedback objectively.

I realize that the next conversation i need to have with his/her group would be around 'What does each stakeholder -manager and employee - needs to do what differently to achieve changes envisaged in individual conversations?'

Feedback is difficult to accept if we view it as 'feedback on us'. Feedback is easier to accept, if we view it as 'feedback on a situation in which we are one of the parties involved' - probably it is also a more constructive way to look at a situation.

-
Sourav

'Conversations' in Work Teams

Last week i started planning 'deep-dive' meetings with work teams. In my previous role, i used to experiment with something similar - 'Branch Visit' meetings is what i used to call them.

I had already completed introduction sessions with these teams. I was wondering how should i structure the upcoming sessions.

Should i ask them to tell me about their positive and negative experiences in this company, and explore how we could have more positive experiences at workplace? This is something which i have explored in my previous role.

But somewhere down in my gut, i felt uneasy about using the above mentioned method. I felt I should explore a different way of conducting these conversations.

I had a few options. I could use the process route - what do you feel about effectiveness of HR processes in your team? I could use the experience route - tell me about positive and negative primary experiences you have had in last 1 year?
I chose neither of the above.

I decided to experiment with something I had hypothezied a few months back. Basis of any effective HR process is 'adequate number of quality conversations'. So today, in my first deep-dive discussion with a 15 member strong work team, we had conversations around:

• What are platforms for conversations (e.g.-One on Ones) that exist between your people manager and you?
• Are these platforms scheduled in adequate frequencies? You have conversations with your people manager in what frequency (once in --- hours/days/months)?
• Do you need more platforms and if yes, what would they be?
• What gets discussed in these current mediums/platforms?

We additionally explored the following questions. In current/envisaged mediums/platforms what would you want to, with your people manager,

• converse more about?
• converse less about?
• start conversing about?
• stop conversing about?

Today's discussion was energezing. I had planned a discussion for 90 minutes. The discussion actually lasted 110 minutes - and even then i had to stop it - the energy of the group just wouldn't ebb.

By the end of the discussion, i had 5 white boards full with data.

The experiment seems to be working. 'Conversations' does seem to be a useful unit of analysis for working on effectiveness of HR processes.

-
Sourav

Establishing Connect!

So here I am, trying to understand the ecosystem i work in and establishing 'connect' with my stakeholders.

Hey, but first hold on! Who are my stakeholders?

Only after you have figured out who your stakeholders are, do you get to the next stage. This next stage is about establishing working connect with each stakeholder.

I have been wondering - what does a 'working connect' mean?

I have been going through these series of introduction rounds. Yes, you are supposed to be in a listening mode, and get 'inducted'. But should getting inducted only be a passive process - a one way street?

So after having had a few of these introduction/induction sessions with stakeholders, I came up with a model for structuring these discussions.

With every stakeholder, in the first meeting, I am:

• establishing a 'connect' frequency - an agreement on how frequently should we meet in a structured fashion. The question is 'We will meet once in -- weeks/days/months?'

• contracting the first thing we would work jointly on and make a difference in. It may be a low hanging fruit or an easy win. But that is okay! The essence is to have this mutual feeling of having worked on something together and achieved success (Think of a football team. Would you expect them to build team spirit only by sitting on the bench or playing in the field too?)

'Getting our hands dirty together' is a visual that comes to mind.

I am intrigued to see how 'outcomes' shape up.

-
Sourav

50 Things I Want To Do Before I Die!

A few years back I started wondering 'What are the things I would want to do during my lifetime?'

I started penning down the initial thoughts that came to my mind. Soon I had made a 'must-do' list consisting of '50 items'. I chose to title this list, '50 things I want to do before I die'

Every few months I would scan this list. I'll be left with mixed feelings. I would feel happy and satisfied about the things I would have done. I would feel impatient and anxious about things I would not have done. Almost always I would be left with the feeling, 'there is yet so much to do!'

But that feeling isn't what worried me!

I would often find that I have not even taken the initial steps towards many of the things I wanted to do. I used to get a bit frustrated and wonder 'what are the chances I will even attempt these? Was it a mistake to make an ambitious list- one which would have more misses than hits and hence would cause more frustration than happiness?'

I realized, over time, where I was possibly going wrong. I got a hint from the way I had titled my efforts '50 things I want to do before I die'.

When you hope, and everyone I hope does so, you will live long enough; actions can get deferred. There is always a tomorrow. But tomorrow would never come if we don't create 'that tomorrow' through today.

So the question is 'What am I doing today to ensure that tomorrow I want becomes a reality?’

‘Deferment of gratification' should not lead to 'deferment in action'.

Ever since I have re-directed my efforts, life has been much more enjoyable. I am shaping the today, what I am in control of in an attempt to create the tomorrow.

I have removed the 'before I die' section from the title of my efforts. It is immaterial when I achieve what I want because anyways I am working towards it today.

So the title of my efforts now read '50 things I want to do'!.

I am happier, now, most of the times!

-
Sourav