Month: April 2022

In Lesson13 of WFED578 the topics reviewed included a summary on how consultants typically sell information, ideas, and recommendations.  However, the process consultation approach is different in that it is all about client involvement and includes:  Helping clients learn at their own pace, Helping clients to have insights, and Helping clients to solve their own problems.  This is done by the consultant being able to sell this helping relationship.

Through my thinking of how to answer the assignment question of ‘How do you intend to sell this helping relationship to the client’ I reflected on many elements of the course along with the extra credit sessions held over the past months.  I thought about the sponsor, the clients, the multiple levels of employees involved, and differences in the groups that will be involved in the process.  In a phrase, my answer to the questions would be ‘by asking questions’.  Rather than showcase how this process worked for another client and it will work for you too!, I’d ask about the organization, what they felt the problem is, how they felt the problem came to be, and what steps they have taken to ‘solve’ the problem.  I would sell the helping relationship by showcasing how I would facilitate and how the work and implementation would be completed by those involved because this is the only way to make it stick when I leave.  I would additionally relay the principles of process consultation in being very transparent.  Finally, I would assess the potential client/consultant relationship and discuss the timebound nature of the exercise.  These elements would broadcast what could be done rather than a hard-sell of how I’d provide the solution.

During this example I thought about a recent experience where the company I work for and a customer of ours hired a joint process consultant.  Both our company and the customer wanted the influence and assistance from a 3^rd party to assist in our working efficiency.  During the time I, and those involved, continued to ask the consultant for ‘the answer’ and he continued to ask us questions.  He reiterated multiple times that the answer was not going to come from him and that that answer would come from us and our work.  He worked thru our processes and at each stage continued to ask questions he then would ask what questions we had for each other (our company and our customer).  Overall, it was interesting to remember this experience and now be able to place the methods used by the consultant.

Looking back on this experience of learning of process consultation, thinking about the initial meetings I could have as a consultant with potential clients, and the real world example I was part of they all weaved well to better my learning of the process consultation, roles, and implementation.  It was one of the times I was pleased to have tenure in the industry, rather than jumping into this degree shortly after undergrad, because it more clearly highlighted the theory and real life practice.

In Lesson12 of WFED578 the topics reviewed included Critical Thinking.  This notion refers to thinking being disciplined, that displays mastery of intellectual skills and abilities, related to thinking about one’s thinking while thinking to make the thinking more clear/accurate/defensible, and guards against the tendency to rationalize to get what the thinker wants.  Related to Critical Thinking is the notion of Groupthink which is when all in a group think alike.

Through my thinking of how to answer the assignment question of ‘Describe an occasion when you observed groupthink’, I thought about a recent experience working with a cross functional team.  I was recently promoted to lead a group that needed the skills of our Digital Team (their focus and expertise is in building phone apps, data portals, and back-end cloud storage management).  It was brought to my attention that their individual projects were not meeting expectations and I had the opportunity to observe the leader of the team give a presentation on a project.  I witnessed the presenter make sweeping generalizations of the project he was presenting for funding.  The leader cited a peer who had a differing point of view, and he attached their thinking giving reasons why his idea would work better.  He gave the group choice A (the other leader whom he said would fail) and choice B (his idea which he gave certainty would work).  The leader used, what I learned now is red herring information, of a much much larger company with many more resources and what a success the method he presented could be.  I witnessed the team become enthused,  and act as if this idea was in competition with the other leaders.  Not knowing the roles/levels, I saw one person make a statement about how they should go ‘all-in’ with the idea and others followed (I later learned this was a direct report of the leader).  Finally, I saw what was learned in the powerpoint, an appeal to authority where the boss concurs, and everybody knows this will work.  Groupthink was shown and all appeared to be bought-in to the leader’s idea.

During this example I reflected on how Groupthink was affecting the atmosphere of the team.  It was, as our lesson taught, a danger to critical thinking because members of our group were making faulty decisions due to the pressures causing collaboration assessment by the group members related to the leader.  The presentation and resulting Groupthink was taking away individual ideas.  There was, as shown in this week’s powerpoint, an illusion of unanimity and self-censorship based on the trust and certainty placed towards the leader.

Looking back on this experience and how it made me feel I realized at the time that there was a potential lack to showcase or suggest an idea that was different than the leader.  I realized that the leader did not have all of the facts and treated the project as a competition with another leader who had expressed concern of previous ideas.  I also learned the leader was being observed by Human Resources for creating a culture of thinking that their group was smart, and others were dumb.  The example fit well with this Groupthink assignment.

In Lesson11 of WFED578 the topics reviewed included Process Consultation in Action.  Detailed were the topics of the First Contact and Entry with Groups, an Exploratory Meeting, the Selection of the Setting for engagement, and Methods of Work.  In Methods of Work the details included how to become known to the group, establishing a relationship, being visible, and being available.  It is here that I thought of the idea of ‘suspension’ and how when engaging with a new group that it may be a challenge to feel understood.  It could be easy to respond with frustration however suspending this impulses to respond could be beneficial and allow the conversation to continue. Suspension avoids confrontation and debate.

Through my thinking of how to answer the assignment question of ‘Briefly describe a time when you altered your behavior to “go with the flow.”  Why did you do that and what was the outcome?’  This week the group I lead was finalizing work with our Ventures Team on an equity investment in a company.  The majority of the group members had not worked together, and the goal was to finalize the presentation to show our President and CFO.  As the presentation was shown I realized the flow was challenging to understand.  The slides were not meshing well, and I felt our President would ask many many questions based on the lack of flow and storytelling for the investment.  I made a comment about potentially updating and was bluntly told that ‘this is the format we always use and this is customary’.  I again relayed some concern for the content and was told ‘we’re not changing the slides’.   Rather than address further I ‘went with the flow’.  I suspended my thoughts although I felt I was right and was frustrated.  We continued to review the content and focused on the materials.  There was no confrontation.  After the meeting I called the Ventures Leader and asked if we could review the deck with our President only and without the CFO based on some many new members of the team.  It was my thought that our President would convey her thoughts.  He agreed and during the meeting our President asked many questions and suggested a lot of changes to the presentation and flow.  No one mentioned that we had talked about making potential updates and she and the Ventures leader took credit for how well they thought the presentation flowed after the updates.

During this example I reflected on my ability to suspend my reactions.  I took the approach to go with the flow during the meeting and approached the person that frustrated me in a calm manner during a one on one call after the meeting ended.  The example related well to Entry with Groups as many were new along with methods of work and most directly the term Suspension.  The approach, in my opinion, worked.  The Ventures leader most likely realized my approach and how I made him look good in the situation as well in working with the President.

Looking back on this experience and how it made me feel, I think when I was a younger leader, I would have made it a point to get my direction across.  I would not have backed down and not have suspended my reaction and confrontation would have ensued.  Although I might have been right, I would have caused tension within the group.  Being in this situation in the past taught me how to better lead and suspension was key element.

In Lesson10 of WFED578 the topics reviewed including Dialogue which refers to the awareness that every person has differing assumptions and that mutual understanding in most cases is an illusion.  Dialogue aims to build a group that can think creatively and together.  The role of a consultant related to starting a dialogue was reviewed along with the term ‘Suspension’ which relates to a point in a conversation when a group member feels their point was not understood.  Sometimes the person can respond with anxiety or fear however there is the option to not display emotion.  Suspension means to suspend our perceptions, feelings, judgements, and impulses.  This allows the conversation to continue.  The technique avoids unproductive confrontation and debate.

Through my thinking of how to answer the assignment question of ‘Describe a conversation in which you consciously suspended your answers to some questions.  Did the person you were conversing with fill the silence and provide additional information?’, I thought about a recent planning meeting with my boss.  Our group was slated to presentation to an international customer in the coming week and I had spent a lot of time preparing for the visit.  I conversed with our sales partner to understand the goals/objectives, I met with our team to prepare presentations for the event, I summarized these presentations with cross functional teams involved for buy-in and adjusted based on their comments, and then I put together a short summary to review the presentation with my boss.  My boss was not receptive to the presentation and based her thinking/direction from the last visit with the group prior to the pandemic.  She bluntly asked if I had pressed the sales rep hard enough or told the cross-functional teams what to do rather than ask them for feedback.  I was angry and did my best to not show this in a non-verbal way over the Zoom meeting.  I paused and looked at down at my notes rather than answer her aggressive questions.  I felt I provided all of the information to answer her questions and remained silent knowing that the conversation could take a messy turn if I voiced my opinion.  She filled the silence and provided direction of what she wanted me to do over the next day and how to report back to her.

During this example I reflected on many of the elements of this week’s lesson.  Thoughts are I displayed suspension.  I could not get my point across that I did all that she asked for.  I did not feel it best to challenge her assumptions based upon the last time we were together with the customer 2yrs ago.  I composed myself and suspended my judgement and impulse to react in an angry aggressive tone to match my boss’s communication style.  This allowed the conversation to continue the next day and avoided confrontation.

Looking back on this experience and how it made me feel, I think I have matured to respond this way and now know I was utilizing ‘suspension’.  When I was younger in my career, I would have challenged my manager and then caused tension and a difficult relationship to occur.  My boss followed up with some of those involved and realized I had followed a sound process and during our next meeting relayed how her communication may have been too aggressive without having all of the information.