Workplace

By John Bourke

Previously in this series on crucial confrontations, we approached Clyde, your facility’s kitchen manager, about his failure to meet one of his key performance measures around using new POS software in managing operational costs. You admire Clyde and have no reason to assume purposeful insubordination. You describe the gap between what you both agreed versus what has actually transpired. Clyde responded: “What’s the big fuss? It doesn’t make sense to constantly interrupt my work to document every transaction into some lame POS system!”

In our opening encounter with Clyde you managed the hazardous half-minute well, remembering to avoid the pitfall of holding the wrong confrontation or not managing it well. You were on the lookout for the following signs:

• Déjà vu dialogue. Re-discussing the same issue
• Wallowing in emotions. Getting increasingly upset
• Self sabotage. Consistently not getting what you really want

The “Six Source Model” captures the essence of
motivational theory by focusing on the three
domains of influence: self (“personal”), others
(“social”) and things (“structural”).

You were coached to ask yourself: “Am I acting out my frustrations? Is my conscience bothering me? Am I choosing the certainty of silence over the risks of speaking up? Am I telling myself that I am helpless? Am I living with costly consequences that sap performance or motivation?”

You answered “yes” to these prompts, and hence began preparing well to conduct the crucial confrontation. Before approaching Clyde you began your self-preparation by privately diagnosing the potential motivation issues that might be standing in the way of Clyde’s accountability and performance.

You avoided the natural tendency to jump to a single source diagnosis of the problem. Beginning with the left side of the Crucial Confrontations Six Source Model (Motivation — Cells 1, 3 and 5), you focused attention on the three domains of motivational influence: Self, Others and Things. We concluded that when attempting to make it motivating for others to perform we partner with them in dialogue to help to make the invisible visible by:

     1. connecting decisions and consequences to their most deeply held core values
     (Cell 1);
     2. connecting short-term benefits with long-term pain (Cells 1 and 5);
     3. placing focus on the long-term benefits (Cells 1, 3 and 5);
     4. introducing hidden-victims (Cell 3); and
     5. holding up a mirror to reveal what their actions look like to others (Cell 1 and 3).

Make It Easy: Ability Issues

Now that you’ve examined the motivational sources of influence that may contribute to the gap in performance, it’s time to focus on the potential ability issues that influence your desired outcome. If we identify any ability challenges, our strategy will be to jointly develop these gaps to insure that nothing stands in the way of desired results. In our Six Cell model we pop over to Cells 2, 4 and 6.

Crucial Confrontation Defined

The Crucial Confrontation model offers a linear process for holding someone accountable for a high stakes accountability in which there is a failed expectation, broken promise or bad behavior.

Cell 2: Personal – Have skills and knowledge?

Is it a possibility that Clyde is not living up to expectations because he is unfamiliar with the technology? An even more common ability issue is the struggle to assimilate new technology in a way that does not unduly compromise the individual’s ability to perform other parts of their job. You imagine asking Clyde:

“Clyde, I am curious. I clearly hear your willingness to use our new POS system, and I don’t doubt your commitment to working smarter. That leaves me wondering if you are having a problem figuring out a practical way to build this new system into your daily routine. Has that been a struggle or is something else going on?”

Diagnosing the right problem. Remember at this stage in our Crucial Confrontation we are looking to diagnose all sources of the performance gap. This ensures that the chosen solution gets the result we want and builds relationships of accountability and respect. We are, in essence, mastering our own stories and biases that might have us reactively selecting a single source solution — one that not only fails to close the performance gap but also weakens vital relationships of trust throughout the organization.

Cell 4: Social – Do others help? Anecdotal research in the area of performance management reveals that many performance gaps are not due to an individual’s lack of motivation (Cell 1), their personal inability (Cell 2), ignorance of repercussions on others or hindrance via lack of cooperation from others (Cell 3). Instead the problem may lie with the ability gaps of those that we rely upon for support or assistance (Cell 4).

Is it conceivable that Clyde wants to cooperate with the POS rollout, understands how to incorporate the new technology into his routine and has the cooperation and support of others — yet the software vendor is not competent in working out the bugs for this particular application? We might unearth such issues if we explore the following:

“Clyde, when you said that the POS system is lame, I am wondering if you’re not getting real-time solutions and support from our vendor team. Are you waiting on others to do their part so you can ramp-up? Is something else going on to keep you from … ?”

Cell 6: Structural – What things enable? Finally, when exploring ability problems we need to assess the possible impact of bureaucracy, red tape, infrastructure, physical factors (location, ease of access etc.) and other things that impede performance. In one facility the POS system required a cumbersome security access code that was case-sensitive and prevented easy access in a timely fashion. We prepare to ask Clyde:

“Clyde, is there something about the way that you are being asked to use this system that makes it less than ‘user friendly’ or downright impossible to use?”

With our pre-work done and our early diagnosis complete we are now ready to open our mouths and begin our performance coaching session with Clyde. Tune in next issue to learn skills to staying focused and flexible in our crucial confrontation. Is Clyde merely an unmotivated (Cell 1), inept (Cell 2), tortured (Cell 3), victim (Cell 4), tormented by systemic disincentives (Cell 5) and crippling red tape (Cell 6)? Until next time …

John Bourke is founder and president of Bourke & Associates, a Dallas-based consulting and training company. In the past decade, Bourke & Associates has helped hundreds of organizations, including many of the Fortune 500; realize quick, hardhitting results and sustainable competitive advantage.

John is adviser and strategist to such influential figures as Bono (named a 2006 'Person of the Year' by Time Magazine) focusing his work on the Millennium Challenge to eradicate poverty and AIDS in Africa. He also designed and facilitated the country’s first community forum for Colin Powell’s America's Promise from the Presidents' Summit for America's Future.

John has designed and delivered major organizational improvement and strategic planning initiatives for IAAM World headquarters, Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex, Allen County War Memorial Coliseum and corporations wanting to distinguish themselves as “best-in-class”. He has authored numerous articles in the areas of personal, executive, and organizational effectiveness, and is a Master Trainer for Crucial Conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high and Crucial Confrontations: Tools for resolving broken promises, violated expectations and bad behavior. john@bourkeassociates.com.