OntoSomething

Are you colluding? Reducing the gender gap in the next 50 years

The context:  The U.S.-Mexico border. A manufacturing plant. Steel.  A decidedly “masculine” environment.

A bit more context:   I was working with a leadership team during a period of 10 months, with the objective to helping its leaders and the team become a more cohesive, highly productive team as they integrated a new facility -- as well as a new set of leaders -- into its operations. In this team of 16, there were three women.

What happened:  One morning – after 5 days at the plant -- I had one of those “ah-hah” moments regarding gender and diversity.

The topic of the week for the leadership team was “asking for support” which was critically needed and difficult for them to do in general.  As I reflected on my experience with them, I realized that the three women in the group had really been an exception because of their ability within this context to support each other and the team.  

So I wrote an email to the three women to underline the importance of these well-developed skills to the team’s overall success. It was an email of general acknowledgment and support for them.

Collusion:  And then after writing the email I had one of those shifts when you realize something important. It was a lovely moment of self awareness: I had been significantly benefitting from the women’s support of me working at the plant and had not fully realized it.  Like the other members of the team, I had simply enjoyed that support which in turn helped me be much more successful with the team in general.   In a way, I had colluded with the team -- the men -- in not seeing, acknowledging and practicing this much needed behavior.  I "collude" when I go along with what's easy and what's rewarded (especially by those with power) when it is in conflict with what is truly needed from me as a participant in the system.  

These are the women who over the first 2 months of the project stopped by my office in the plant to make sure I took the time to eat, ask me what I needed, and offer to bring me something I may have left at home.  These are the women who provided a dose of attention and care on the human level. These are the women who have made a significant difference in my own experience and level of satisfaction in the work itself.  And these were the women who helped me be aware that without their special kind of support, I could not do as much for the whole of the team.

Diversity Issue:  I see this scenario in part as a diversity issue about gender. Many women do tend to develop the ability to support others by nature and nurture.  And while mostly all of us can point to supportive relationships that have been critical in our development and even survival, being supportive of others is almost always less rewarded in society than getting ahead.   For there to be more gender equality in society, men and women must develop an awareness of the full range of skills that are required to meet the needs of a healthy society. 

Reducing the gender gap:  Women in the workplace have clearly made strides developing skills generally attributed to men (because of the nature-nurture scenario) given our participation in the more formal work structures during the last 50+ decades, but the challenge for men in this area will continue to be in developing the ability to nurture and support others in an environment that still does not reward its people to do so.   Avoiding collusion will require that men -- and all those in societal or positional power -- first notice.  Notice and acknowledge the wisdom and abilty of those who are giving support to others.  Start to pay attention to who gives it, who benefits from it, the impact of it, and how they do it.    And then you, you turn your new awareness into the ability to nurture and support others by simply doing the same. 

A busman's holiday: Balanced Scorecards at the neighborhood cook-out

"What’s the latest thinking on balanced scorecard?" my neighbor asked me in front of a group at a casual cook-out, having just found out I am a consultant on topics including leadership development and talent management.

Oh boy, I thought, here’s a choice whether to defer the question or talk about scorecards in front of a group of people who likely don’t really care about the topic. Given it was the first time meeting this whole group, I decided it might be poorly received to do anything but amicably engage.

“What’s your situation?”, I asked, not knowing him, his organization, his role, nor his goals. I had just met him minutes before. He answered in one or two sentences, reluctant to give details. As usual his answer prompted more questions. So I followed his answer with another question. To this, there was joking by several in the group about me being the classic consultant who answers a question with a question.

While I can see the irony and humor of the observation, I am equally surprised how “clients” (paying or otherwise) expect to receive some sort of helpful wisdom without providing any information about their own context. In some fields this is called “malpractice.” The whole event harkened to the “quick fix” we talk about in the video of our ONTOS Global home page. See the video.

The “quick fix” reminds me of the all-too-common “best practices.” Organizations too often fixate on them as a panacea, another form of quick fix. I don’t believe in them because best practices may only be best for one individual or group in a given context under specific circumstances. One group’s “best practice” may be another’s idea from hell, useless for a group with a different goal, role, process, culture, behavior, skill set, and so on.

So balanced scorecard may be a great option for those needing what it offers. Or not. Instead, the real conversation is about what you are trying to measure and why, the quality of the metrics used, the people involved, and the extent to which the tool truly reflects what you’re trying to measure. But for that, I’d have to ask some questions.

International Advantage merges with Ontology Consulting to create ONTOS Global

We are pleased to announce the formation of "ONTOS Global" resulting from the merger of International Advantage LLC and Ontology Consulting LLC.

Blog posts from International Advantage site "KossTalk" have been migrated to the new ONTOS blog "OntoSomething".

ONTOS Global, now based in the San Francisco Bay Area, enables leaders and organizations to transform their businesses across cultures. We work globally with leaders and groups to improve their effectiveness and help align, reinforce and sustain change by designing and integrating talent management systems and processes.

Learn about our unique value proposition by browsing our website and watching the video on our homepage at www.ontosglobal.com.

Group Harmony vs. Speaking Up - China/Colombia/US

I asked the team I was working with in China to identify their strengths. The words “good communication between us” made it on the flip chart page immediately….only to add to it later a few [???} question marks. The team was identifying their struggle with managing the fine line between polite communication to maintain group harmony with the stigma of speaking openly to one another about individual needs or wants. The question marks on the page were a call for help – they had things to say to one another.

This is the opposite problem that what I tend to find In the U.S., where we often do team-building work because, frankly, in many organizations in our society we’re not that great at it. We tend to be more outspoken and highly individuated relative to the rest of the world, and therefore, are not culturally predisposed to taking into account what the group may need at any particular time.

So when working in Colombia and China last month, which are both group-oriented cultures, my group interventions tended to touch on supporting members to individuate. Specifically, how can someone show up with one’s own views, preferences, and needs, so as not to provoke a negative reaction among the others in the group? This is critical because when people don’t speak up, valuable information, ideas, and the chance for departures from the norm, are lost. Leaders in group-oriented cultures often observe employees who don’t speak up and take ownership of organizational problems.

There are a number of ways to set up and work on this issue, but a key component to the conversation is to not forget that the agreed upon behavior (as in “we agree that we will give and receive constructive feedback to another”) must be actively supported by each person in the context of their culture. Indeed, the practice may be counter-cultural. (“Culture” can refer to that of a team, an organization, region, etc.) So while the team might come up with their own set of standards around the kind of communication they most want in the team, challenging them on how they will hold themselves and each other accountable to their commitments – especially necessary in times of stress -- is the real conversation.

World Cup or American Football? …What Your Preference May Say about You

I'm enjoying the irst match of the World Cup 2010 between South Africa and Mexico match right now and remember writing a piece on the topic in 2006 (still in the Quick Tips section of the website). The piece looks at linear vs systemic thinking styles. Which are you?

---

I had a green Pelé lunchbox when I was eight years old. At the time, I didn't even know who Pelé was and probably would have preferred Wonder Woman.

Times have changed. Now American kids love and play soccer more than any other youth sport. But then at about the age of 13, kids turn their attention to American football. I wonder why. Of course, most of the rest of the world loves soccer intensely ... children and adults.

What can soccer and football teach us about each other? Answer: Lots. Here's one consideration: It may reflect your approach to life.

For example: American football correlates perfectly with the overriding American thought process: Work in teams. Go straight. Push hard. Move little by little, yard by yard. At any given moment, it's mostly offensive or mostly defensive. Work out the strategy ahead of time. Push it through to the goal.

In some cultures, soccer correlates more closely with the thought process: Focus on stars and power plays. Go forward and backward according to the conditions. Manage the offensive and defensive at the same time. Change the approach as the conditions dictate. Work it around from different angles until you score.

5 Tips: How to be a Multi-Talented, Global Player -- Using Both Football and Soccer

1. Ask your colleagues and friends for personal feedback on your thought process style: football or soccer? (Do you rely on one style entirely?)

2. Experiment with your less-prevalent style. Example: Recently I was negotiating the price of an item, and we did not agree. Realizing we were stuck, I changed the subject to other aspects of the sale, returning to the issue of price at the end. (I had made no other concessions during the conversation.) Then he agreed to my desired price. Why? Soccer mentality.

3. Trust others to resolve things in their way. I regularly see people criticizing others' styles (soccer or football) up until the day that s/he receives a positive result. Then there is surprise from the criticizer, as if it was just luck! This is a sign of one-dimensional thinker.

4. When negotiating anything, focus on the outcome you both want (the goal) ...not the method. By getting underneath the positions each party holds and finding out what really matters, many more options can emerge. Ask: Why is this element important to you?

5. Strive to be equally adept at both styles (football and soccer). Then use the appropriate style depending on the circumstances. How? Meet with people you work with (your team, counterparts, clients, etc.) after resolution of issues (or ½ way through) and discuss how you work together. What worked about the styles or process? Were there moments in which a style did not work?

I like to think of thinking style preferences as part of a set of cultural preferences that each of us have based on our DNA and life experiences. Being able to identify and integrate best aspects of any given culture into one's own style helps us in that by having a wide range of skills makes life easier. It allows for more opportunity for win-win results when navigating our daily experience and lives.

I hope you enjoy the World Cup series, if that is your preference!

Note to self: Don't say what you're NOT going to do

In indirect cultures, a standard piece of advice is to not be too direct or risk the possiblity of damaging a relationship. This week, here in China, I was reminded just how sensitive this point can be.

I was teeing up a kick off presentation to the mostly Chinese leadership team, and described to my Chinese counterpart a few of the introductory remarks I would make. One of these remarks was to state that my coaching and observing was not to JUDGE them but to find ways to support them in their leadership capacity.

My counterpart reminded me that saying I would NOT be judging them would likely put the idea in their mind that I was there to judge, and it would be preferable to simply state that my role was to find ways to support them.

So in the spirit of being clear and direct, I would easily have missed this point. Assuming that this audience would jump to "judging" is perhaps built in my own cultural frame of reference. By doing so, I pollute this audience with an interpretation that they may have not even considered.

Seems like such a subtle nuance, and yet these sorts of cultural sensitivities can and do make a palpable difference in the outcomes we achieve.

Pondering in China: The one-child family rule and its implications

An interesting fact I learned today, per the human resource director of my client here in China:

If you were born during the 1-child/family rule in China, and you marry someone who is also an only child, you are allowed two children. But if you come from a family where one of the parents is not the only child, you are permitted only one child.

With these rules in place for China, projections show that India will have a larger population by 2014, since they have no such restrictions. Currently, India already has more people between the ages of 18-35 than does China.

The Chinese government will have to grapple with how to pay for its aging population and how the young will take care of its older people.

I wonder the psychological impact of a nation of people without brothers and sisters. How does that change family dynamics and cultural preferences over time? As the H.R. director pointed out, "Can you imagine the consequences that every child has 6 people taking care of each child?" (2 sets of grandparents and the 2 parents)

From a cultural perspective, I also wonder about the collectivist orientation that is so strong in Chinese culture. A collectivist culture focuses on social affiliation, with value placed on dependence; where the "we" predominates over the "I". Could it be that the Chinese become more individualistic, valuing independence and focusing on "self" over time? How would that show up in the workplace? What are the implications?

These questions, among others, to be pondered as I'm here near Shanghai this week.

A globalized world means being more aware of individual cultures...

In the case that you're still thinking that a globalized world means less attention to adaptation of local cultures, read this.

New York Times article, April 18th: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/arts/18abroad.html?th&emc=th

An excerpt:

"The common denominator of popular culture ...seems to have just intensified the need people now feel to distinguish themselves from it. And global technology has made this easier by providing countless individuals, microcultures and larger groups and movements with cheap and convenient means to preserve and disseminate themselves. Years ago a language like Cimbrian, a Bavarian dialect today preserved by just a few hundred speakers in northern Italy, would have been doomed to extinction; now Cimbrian speakers, according to a recent German newspaper article, turn out to be getting their own online newspaper and television show. The language is being sustained by the same global forces that might promise to doom it."

Leaders: Who do you withhold your feedback from?

Many leaders pride themselves on being impartial and fair. They perceive themselves to have the same expectations for all and hold others to a relatively similar standard. This is more true, of course, in certain cultures than in others. Specifically, an emphasis on fairness tends to be present in those cultures who focus on the uniform application of rules, standards, processes, and procedures, rather than on an emphasis on difference, uniqueness and exceptions. (1).

But now suppose one such leader realized that she is unconsciously treating some individuals on her team quite differently, in terms of equal opportunity for feedback.

Research shows - as well as my experience - that leaders give more quantity and quality feedback to people who are most like them. They give less quantity and quality of feedback from those who are most different from them.

A recent example is the leader who told me he feels uncomfortable giving feedback to members of his team who speak with an unfamiliar accent -- even though their work product is consistently high. He feels "uncomfortable" discussing this with them. This leader astutely made the connection that there was another person who he regularly worked with who he perceives has many deficiencies in relation to the work, and yet because he has no accent, he continues to enjoy more opportunities than the others.

The micro-inequities that exist in organizations have a shocking impact on the experience of individuals who do not have the privilege of matching the boss stylistically or culturally. In turn, the organization suffers, of course, because it cannot fully develop -- and subsequently benefit from -- each employee's strengths.

As a leader in your organization, consider for yourself who gets consistently more of you and who gets consistently less of you. Could it be that you, as leader, are a major contributor in creating "winners" and "losers"? In other words, are you deciding who succeeds in your organization and who doesn't, based on your own fears or frame of reference?

So engage with everyone, and if feeling uncomfortable, simply state your true intentions; that is, to more adequately support each other in reaching the goals of all involved: you, them, and the organization.

(1) Definitions are of cultural preferences "universalism" and "particularism" and come from the Cultural Orientations Indicator (COI), from TMC, a Berlitz company.

A Few Public Speaking Engagements -- Hope to See You There

I'll be speaking at 3 events in the next 2 weeks...I haven’t done any public speaking in awhile so this should be fun. Two of these events are open to the public. Here they are:

1. A meeting for consultants

What: A Certified Management Consultant (CMC®) panel

Where: Institute of Management Consultant - Arizona Chapter

When: Friday, Nov 13th, breakfast meeting

Details: http://www.imcaz.org/meetings/current/index.html"

From program description: "Certification is one of the main reasons why IMC USA and more than 40 other management consulting institutes around the world exist. The Certified Management Consultant (CMC®) mark is awarded by the IMC USA to consultants who have achieved a level of performance that includes professional standards in technical competency and ethics, and global standards in consulting competencies, professional behavior, client and project management, and personal conduct. Less than one percent (1%) of all consultants earn the CMC®."

2. A meeting for those who do change management or diversity work....

Where: Valley of the Sun Human Resource Association (VOSHRA)

Who: Leadership consultant Lisa Koss and Client Cathy Stephen

What: Starting a Diversity and Inclusion Initiative: A Case Study

When: Thu, Nov 19, breakfast

Details: http://www.vshra.org/Event_Details.asp?fair=10008300

Write-up reads: A second invitation from VOSHRA, Lisa Koss, this time with client, Cathy Stephen, former Regional Director of Gilbane Company, will present to an audience of human resource specialists at Valley of the Sun Human Resource Organization. Outcomes include: * Recommendations for organizing and kicking off a D&I (or other) initiative * Techniques to getting a steering committee on the same page * Suggestions for rolling out a D&I initiative to remote locations * Challenges and solutions to a long distance change initiative * Outcomes and client/consultant reflections