Google Ad #1 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #3 - desktop - 728x90

Google Ad #1 - mobile - 300x200

Google Ad #3 - mobile - 300x200

ATD_Half_Page

Googel Ad #1 - Side Bar - Content pages

ATD Footer Logo

Jack Reith

Presents letters from the readers of the periodical 'Training and Development Journal.' Reaction to the article 'Meetings Cost Money,' by Jack Reith; Request to place the table of contents on the cover of the journal.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR February 1971

Examines ways to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of meetings. Definition of meeting objectives and scope; Importance of planning and preparation for the meeting; Meeting control procedures; Ways in which the emphasis on participation and creativity has contributed to decreasing meeting effectiveness and efficiency.

MEETINGS COST MONEYMAKE THEM PAY OFF

Highlights the 1969 American Society for Management and Training Conference in Miami, Florida. Initiation of the evaluation process; Characteristics of the conference attendees; Willingness and ability of the attendees to differentiate between speaker and the session; Incorporation of the evaluation system into the conference design.

1969 MIAMI CONFERENCE EVALUATION METHODS AND RESULTS

I'm not a great believer in leadership training, even though it's very much the trend. But the fact that such training exists means that there is a problem to be solved. I notice that some of the manuals like to quote the 10 leadership principles of Jack Welch. I've copied below the first five:1. There is only one way - the straight way. It sets the tone of the organisation.2. Be open to the best of what everyone, everywhere, has to offer; transfer learning across your organisation.3. Get the right people in the right jobs - it is more important than developing a strategy.4. An informal atmosphere is a competitive advantage.5. Make sure everybody counts and everybody knows they count.Three of them I find vitally interesting for the rethinking of learning. Forget the first, which is there as a kind of shocker, asserting the authority of the leader (what better way to say "I'm Jack Welch, shut up and listen"?). If I wanted to quibble, I'd say that just as there's no such thing as a free lunch, there's no such thing as a straight way. All viable ways follow the relief of the land and are therefore not straight, but rather as straight as possible or as straight as management can make them which means that professional life doesn't end up looking like a series of right angles.It starts getting interesting with number 2. Learning is as close to the top as you can get (once you get the phantom straight line out of the way). And notice what it says: learning is everywhere. It doesn't come from trainers and SMEs. Everyone's involved. And the need is to transfer, not to teach.Skip to point 4. What do we find? A celebration of informality, not as a method of learning (who in the organization really cares about learning besides Jack Welch?\*) but as a factor of competitive advantage! Put 2 and 4 together and we begin to see how learning organizations may develop.Point 5 is equally important. How do people show they count and know they count for others? I don't think Welch is talking about pay packages and brownie points. It's rather that their voice is heard because they have something to contribute and a forum for making it heard. That forum is the ongoing informal dialogue of an organization where "everyone, everywhere" has something "to offer". Maybe we should be concentrating on giving shape to that forum by encouraging communities where the dialogue is real and authentic, not polluted by too many "learning points".Anyway, it's a great honor to welcome Jack Welch to the exclusive club of promoters of informal learning. He deserves to be one of us!\* To answer my own question, I'd say "nobody except the CEO" because everyone else, including the CLO, has a job to do and they all know the criteria on which they will be judged. And it ain't learning - which is oriented towards the future -- but keeping the machinery going with as few hiccups as possible - which means having one's eye fixed on the present and quarterly results. Having worked closely with a direct disciple of Jack Welch, I know how focused those objectives are.

The wisdom of Jack Welch

 ATD developed the Talent Development Framework and the TD Puzzle to help practitioners understand the different components of talent development, and how organizations can build their own frameworks to address their unique needs. This blog series explores each component of the talent development framework, why it’s important to the field, and what resources ATD offers to practitioners who want to learn more.CoachingCoaching as a component of talent development is growing in popularity and acceptance. In the workplace, coaching may be done by a number of people, from a professional coach to a manager or a more experienced colleague. Coaching, when effective, results in improved performance. According to the ATD Competency Study, coaching applies a systematic process to improve others’ ability to set goals, take action, and maximize strengths. According to Annabelle Reitman and Sylvia Ramirez Benatti, coaching is formally focused with somewhat narrow perspectives toward specific goals or results. While managers can certainly develop coaching skills, a professional coach’s job is to equip the person receiving coaching with tools to develop their performance and empower them to achieve specified results. It is a systematic process for continual improvement. The ATD Competency Model identifies 11 coaching skills talent development professionals should possess:• Establish coaching agreement.• Establish trust and intimacy with the client.• Display coaching presence.• Demonstrate active listening.• Ask powerful questions.• Use direct communication.• Create awareness.• Design learning opportunities.• Develop goals and plans.• Manage progress and accountability.• Meet ethical guidelines and professional standards. Coaching can completely revitalize a work environment. Using coaching techniques, measurable improvements can be observed within a company. The measurements—whether steps toward a goal or skills that have been improved on—are mile markers against which to measure upcoming successes. This is critical because the data reflect growth in value and skills. Employees who achieve goals they set and see improvement as a result of coaching stay motivated to continue improving performance. Coaching is a valuable process for talent development that can drive real value in organizations. We’ve assembled some additional coaching resources to explore:• Learn the difference between mentoring and coaching.• Try a new approach using questions as a coaching method.• Take a closer look into performance coaching in the workplace.• Improve your human capital by learning how to train and coach leadership teams.• See how coaching can lead to visible success for your company.• Listening more intently can help coaching efforts.• Coaching Certificate• ASTD Handbook, 2nd Edition. • ATD’s Best On Coaching by ATD Press• Coaching Training by Lisa Haneberg• Coaching Basics, 2nd Edition by Lisa Haneberg• Measuring the Success of Coaching by Jack J. Phillips, Lisa Ann Edwards, and Patti P. Phillips• The Coaching Approach: A Key Tool for Successful Managers by ATD Research

The ATD Talent Development Framework: Coaching

How does a global leader turn challenges into opportunities?In our blog, we have been following Tom Rush, a newly promoted global project team leader. When he accepted the position in May, he thought his experience with U.S.-based remote workers would serve as a resource for this geographically dispersed team. He quickly learned that aligning a team across cultural, linguistic, generational, and gender divides was more than just challenging, it was an opportunity to rethink everything he had learned in management training. This was far more complex than he could have imagined. After six months on a steep learning curve, Tom finally admitted that his manager, Carlos, really meant well when he had suggested Tom get a coach.Tom interviewed three global executive coaches from the list that Lee, the Senior HR Director of Global Talent Management, had given him before choosing the coach he felt the most at ease with. This coach clearly defined the roles and responsibilities of the coaching agreement. She actively listened as Tom explained his background, the past six months, and then, with just two powerful questions, almost got him to laugh out loud.First she asked, “In your new role, what does success look like?”Tom realized that if someone had asked him this question six months ago, his answer would have been entirely different. OK, not entirely different because surpassing sales figures was still the driving force behind the strategic success of his new role, but Tom’s personal vision of what success looked like was very different.The coach then asked, “Knowing what you know today, what would you have done differently and what will you do differently in the next six months?Over the last six months, Tom had learned that the words accountability, empowerment, and ownership didn’t even exist in some of the native languages of his worldwide reports. He couldn’t help thinking that if the word didn’t exist, how could the concept? Many of his new reports had 10 to 15 years of experience in corporate cultures that were totally different from that of ISO, the only company Tom had ever worked for since leaving college.Aligning and motivating people whose experience had been more hierarchal, formal, and status-oriented compared to egalitarian, informal, and achievement-oriented proved to be quite the challenge. There has been a lot said about a flatter world or more global mindsets, especially with the millennial generation, but Tom found out the hard way that culture really does eat strategy for breakfast.In the coach’s non-judgmental presence, Tom reflected on what he could have done differently, his recent past and present expectations, and what he had learned from his reports and colleagues—Jack in Hong Kong, John in Taiwan, Saatar in Qatar, Philippe in France, Manfred in Germany, Julia in the United Kingdom, Sven in Sweden, Pascale in Canada, and Bob in California. At first, Tom had thought he needed to change his own behaviors to culturally fit each of these very different people and nationalities, but that made him come across as indecisive and inconsistent. When he thought back to the conversation he had with John, a seasoned global colleague in Taiwan, he remembered asking if there was a list of dos and don’ts. John had replied with a chuckle: no such thing. No list, no magic wand, not even a drinkable potion. That’s when Tom had felt really lost. What would turn him into a global leader?After the sponsor meeting that the global executive coach organized with Tom, Carlos, and Lee, she sent out a stakeholder survey based on the 4R principles. The various perspectives helped Tom to see how he was perceived and even more so, the feedback gave him insights into what his stakeholders appreciate, expect, and want more of. It is only through constructive, on-going feedback that we can learn what needs to shift in us in order to bring out the best in others. This is an often overlooked or underappreciated process in many organizations.During the coaching process, Tom concluded that to understand other cultures, he needed to first understand his own. He completed an online cultural profile that his coach had set up, which was a good starting point for Tom to see how aligned he was with the U.S. profile. He learned that culture is complex—layered like an onion and as hard to melt as an iceberg. Tom’s innate curiosity and relationship-oriented approach were key qualities to success, while his outgoing personality was both a strength and a weakness. He reflected on how informal, solution-oriented, and efficient characteristics were sometimes seen as arrogant by others. To succeed, he had to let go of his drive to just do it, prove it, and wrap things up quickly and concisely. It wasn’t worth trying to control time in some situations, whereas it needed to be managed closely in others. The challenge was how to find the balance. Having this truly global experience and accepting vulnerability—willing to trip up, admit it, and get back up again—was an opportunity. Simply said, Tom needed to take his work seriously, rather than himself.In addition, Tom’s global executive coach was helping him reflect on his own coaching skills. He was learning to apply the 4R principles of human needs: respect, relationships, recognition, and rewards. Research has shown that people will follow you if they find commonalities in the way you do things or who you are. For global leaders, strategically knowing how to frame the why of corporate decisions; when to extend a trip abroad by a day or two to meet up with people outside the meeting room; and how to set the pace and give people the space to vent as well as to celebrate personal and professional stepping stones, not only milestones, have proven to be especially beneficial. Lingering over lunch or around the water cooler (sometimes disguised as a coffee maker or photocopier) should be used to stay in the loop. Understanding that in many cultures outside the United States, a professional and personal division of time and information is often misunderstood by eager, efficient-minded, low context communicators who feel a need to share anything and everything about their personal lives. Above all, learning to laugh more, together, leads to high performance teams across cultures, languages, generations, and gender. On February 11, Maureen will be signing books and presenting the ASTD T&D Area of Expertise Competency Model with the foundational competency model of global mindset at the South Florida ASTD Chapter. Read more and register here.On February 13, she will be at the Space Chapter in Melbourne, Florida. Register today to learn more about coaching with a global mindset.

Learning to Develop a Global Mindset: An ASTD Foundational Competency

 Volunteering involves providing your knowledge, skills, and abilities, as well as your time and energy, without establishing an employment relationship and usually without any monetary compensation. Employees who take on volunteer roles are able to build new skills and practice existing skills in a different setting from their day-to-day job.Via volunteering, employees can try something different from their usual work, and bring back new skills to the workplace, thereby adding value to their employer by improving their current job performance. They may even enhance the succession management efforts of their employer, because they become ready to move into positions of greater responsibility faster and more effectively than they would have had they not taken on the volunteer role.The best part about this employee development strategy is that it doesn't cost the organization nearly as much as sending the employee to costly training workshops or hiring a coach. In fact, it often costs the organization nothing.In my ATD Press book, Employee Development on a Shoestring, I describe 11 different methods for developing employees outside the classroom. The chapter on volunteering explains: who should try volunteeringhow volunteer projects benefit learners and the organizationwhat competencies volunteering can develophow to establish volunteer efforts. The chapter concludes with a case study that depicts the success PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) enjoyed as a result of offering this type of development method. PwC’s Project BelizeProject Belize, an initiative that partners PwC employees with schools in Belize City, is primarily focused on financial literacy and environmental sustainability. Specifically, some 200 PwC volunteers—partners, staff, and interns from across the United States—traveled to Belize City, Belize, in the summer of 2011. The PwC team connected with more than 1,200 students in 10 schools in some of Belize’s poorest areas and focused on hosting a youth financial literacy camp, leading a scholar's mentoring program for current and former Belizean students, providing financial and technology training to teachers. According to the project’s website, “since its inception, \[they\] have contributed 30,000 pounds of school supplies, awarded approximately 765 high school equivalent scholarships so these students can continue their education, and delivered our financial literacy curriculum to 6,412 students with the help of 1,609 talented and enthusiastic PwC interns, partners, and staff.” In addition, volunteers built “Learning Landscape” playgrounds using repurposed materials. PwC volunteer Justin Suissa explains that “the experience \[building learning landscape playgrounds\] was valuable on so many levels.” Suissa shares that he was out of his element—construction is not where his expertise lies. What’s more, the team had a tight deadline, as well as many pitfalls and unexpected obstacles to overcome. But clearly defined deliverables—build six playgrounds in five days for the children—helped the team pull together through pouring rain and intense heat and humidity.  Working through these challenges, says Suissa, helped him improve core leadership and teambuilding competencies. He describes how figuring out new technical skills in an unpredictable environment developed his flexibility and agility. “While I did not expect it, it was like a learning playground for us, the volunteers. With high stakes and a tough deadline, my teammates and I had to solve problems creatively and let go of pre-established hierarchies in this new environment.” For another PwC volunteer-employee, Jack Teuber, this experience meant a change in his environment and operational mode. He went from working as a competent managing director who leads a team of experienced adults to a novice middle school teacher in a foreign country, working with children and a brand-new and mixed team of associates and interns. Teuber understood that his challenge was “to get out of people’s way and encourage them to grow, solve problems, and develop their leadership skills.” Doing so helped him develop collaboration and coaching skills. In other words, he and his team cultivated their abilities to support the success of those working around him—building relationships, establishing empathy, communicating, and partnering. These skills are “extremely important back in the PwC environment because they help us serve our clients better and be better leaders and team players to our colleagues,” says Teuber. Finally, he believes that the volunteer experience helped him gain tremendous partnering and networking benefits. According to Teuber, “The team members still keep in touch after returning home and all of us have developed greater access to and understanding of other areas of the business, which serves to break down barriers, especially the hierarchical ones. Belize affected my self-awareness and has caused me to want to do this for my own team \[at home\].” Practical Application While Project Beleize describes a large and generous company taking on a big expenditure, the same principles can be applied to any volunteering effort. Organizations can start volunteering projects in their local communities (no international flights needed) by sending either individual employees or workforce teams to connect with other members of the wider community on volunteer missions. The learning that took place for Project Belize volunteers could happen in your local neighborhood. I hope you give it a try! Employee Development on a Shoestring provides plenty of additional tools, checklists, self-assessments, and other supports to help you implement the various development methods, consider some of the objections you might encounter, and outlines ways to overcome challenges. It’s a comprehensive tutorial for all managers, supervisors, trainers, human resources (HR) personnel, coaches, and other professionals who are involved in developing employee competence efficiently and cost-effectively.

Project Belize: Volunteering as an Employee Development Tool

Years ago, as a young instructional designer, I was asked to evaluate training. I knew most of my clients were happy to get “smile sheets” distributed and didn’t go much beyond that.  One day I had a client that wanted a Level 3 evaluation. Curiosity always gets the best of me and I hate not knowing things. I just HAD to learn more about training evaluation! I thought I was doing well until the day I was asked if I could do an ROE study instead of an ROI study.  A what?! I know I’m not the only one who has been confused by requests to evaluate training. I know that others feel my pain when it comes to understanding training evaluation,so I thought I would attempt to unravel some of the differences between Kirkpatrick’s “Four Levels” and the Phillips 5-level ROI Methodology.Just to be different, let’s start at the beginning…In November 1959, Don Kirkpatrick presented his thoughts about training evaluation in a series of articles published in the Journal of the ASTD.He used the four words that are currently known as the Kirkpatrick Four Level Evaluation Model: Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results He emphasized that all four levels are important to what we mean by evaluating, especially if the purpose of training is to get better results by changing behavior. In his book “Implementing the Four Levels” (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2007) Don and his son Jim talked about the “importance of evaluating the four levels, or as many as you can, in sequence” to “build a compelling chain of evidence as to the value of learning to the bottom line” (p. 123). They emphasized the need to present the value of training in a way that will “maximize the meaningfulness to the hearts and minds of your internal stakeholders” (p. 123). They suggested that presentation of the links between levels will help learning professionals obtain larger training budgets and commitment to carry out the changes needed to achieve organizational objectives. Over time, Don Kirkpatrick’s original work has evolved. Jim and Don’s daughter-in-law Wendy expanded the original work by creating the New World Four Levels and the Kirkpatrick Business Partnership Model, which emphasizes the need to focus on collective efforts to accomplish return on stakeholder expectations. This return on expectations (“ROE”; Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2009) should not be confused with the common use of ROE meaning “return on equity,” which is determined by comparing net income to shareholders’ equity. The Kirkpatricks describe return on expectations as the ultimate indicator of value. It is a holistic measurement of all of the benefits (both qualitative and quantitative) realized from a program or initiative brought about through a package of interventions, with formal training typically being the cornerstone (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2009).To achieve return on expectations, learning professionals must ask questions to clarify and refine the expectations of key business stakeholders as they attempt to satisfy the stakeholders and convert their expectations into observable, measurable business or mission outcomes.  Because a great deal of employee learning occurs on the job, the Kirkpatricks emphasize the need for learning professionals to also partner with supervisors and managers to encourage them to prepare participants for training and to play a key role after training by reinforcing newly learned knowledge and skills through support and accountability.The Kirkpatricks emphasize that formal training events by themselves do not deliver significant bottom-line outcomes (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2009). Using the Kirkpatrick Business Partnership Model, how do you determine the impact of training? The Kirkpatricks proudly claim, “We are not isolationists” (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2007, p. 107).  They put relatively little emphasis on using estimates, assumptions, and empirical financial formulas to try to isolate the effects of training. However, they do acknowledge that the results always come from a variety of factors, and if you do not measure and know which factors aided in the transfer of learning to behavior and subsequent results, you will not be able to take any credit for the success (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2007). So although they do not attempt to isolate outcomes related to training, they do place emphasis on validating that the transfer of learning to on-the-job behavior is related to training.Now let’s understand where Jack Phillips enters the picture…In the early 1980s Jack Phillips wrote his original work on training evaluation. He attempted to stretch the training community to move beyond Level 4 to a financial accounting of program success, return on investment (ROI), which he called Level 5. This level of evaluation was intended to assess the value of expensive, high-profile programs by incorporating the steps of cost-benefit analysis. In addition to adding the fifth level of evaluation to the Kirkpatrick four-level framework, Phillips broadened Levels 3 (Application and Implementation) and 4 (Impact) to include transfer of learning and outcomes to processes other than training (Phillips, 1995). He also developed a process model and guiding principles to support implementation of the evaluation process at each level, and replication of the process across organizations.An important part of what has become known as the Phillips ROI Methodology is the critical step to isolate the effects of the program. Without this step, Phillips believes training cannot take credit for improvements in Level 4 impact measures with accuracy or credibility. A variety of techniques can be used to isolate the effects of a program. While estimates tend to get the most attention because they can be applied in any situation, other commonly used approaches are control groups, trend line analysis, and forecasting models. These techniques have been used for decades to attribute programs and initiatives with outcomes. The fall-back position is to use estimates that have been adjusted for error. But this step in the process gets you to a credible measure of impact. ROI requires additional information which moves the outcome to a different level, Level 5 ROI.ROI is a financial metric describing a return on investment for a program. It compares the monetary benefits of a program to the investment in the program itself. Because benefits and costs are both measured using money, they can be compared using the same metric or scale. Further, the ROI statistic can be compared to other programs either inside or outside of the organization (Phillips, 2012). ROI can be used to forecast benefits, and make investment decisions, but can also be used to measure past performance.  It is typically reported as a percentage and represents the annual net benefits returned beyond the initial investment (Phillips, 2012).Is Phillips saying that all programs need to do a comprehensive ROI study? No. The highest recommended measurement level depends on a variety of factors including the goals, objectives, costs and visibility of the program. Phillips provides guiding principles to make those decisions, and similar to the Kirkpatrick’s “chain of evidence”, he discusses a “chain of impact” and recommends when evaluating at a higher level it’s important to evaluate at lower levels as well.  Doing so will help explain the results at the higher levels, and provide relevant information to stakeholders. Patti Phillips’ book, “The Bottomline on ROI,” contains a table of the suggested percentages of programs to evaluate at each level. The higher you climb up the levels of evaluation, the smaller the percentage of programs she suggests evaluating. She recommends that 90% to 100% of programs should be evaluated at Level 1, but only 5% to 10% should be evaluated at Level 5.In a nutshell…The differences between the Kirkpatrick Business Partnership Model and the Phillips ROI Methodology are important to understand if you’re trying to make a decision between focusing on return on expectations or return on investment.The most obvious difference is the fact that the Kirkpatricks focus on four levels and the Phillipses focus on five levels. ROI is not called out as a separate level in the Kirkpatrick approach, but it is in the Phillipses approach, due to the fact that ROI requires a new set of data not found in the other levels of evaluation. It requires normalizing benefits and costs so the two can be compared on the same scale and the outcome can be compared to other programs. The Phillipses encourage isolating the impact of a program because it ensures credibility of results. They believe senior executives want to see how all factors uniquely influence outcomes.  The Kirkpatricks focus on the Business Partnership approach, emphasize the need to focus on collective efforts to accomplish return on stakeholder expectations, and do not attempt to isolate the effects of training. They factor in, not out, contributions from the efforts of the training graduates and other internal partners; factors that allow learning and performance professionals to be true, strategic business partners. So, do you want to focus on return on expectations or potentially calculate a return on investment? Just like so many things in life, it all depends. In this case, it all depends on the goals of your evaluation, the metrics you intend to use to measure success, and the data needs of your stakeholders.ResourcesKirkpatrick, D. (1998). “Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels” (Second Edition). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.Kirkpatrick, D.L. & Kirkpatrick, J.D. (2007). Implementing the Four Levels: A Practical Guide for Effective Evaluation of Training Programs.  San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.Kirkpatrick, J. & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (April 2009). “The Kirkpatrick Four Levels:  A Fresh Look after 50 Years 1959-2009”. White paper published by Kirkpatrick Partners LLC.Phillips, J. J. (1983). Handbook of training evaluation and measurement methods. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.Phillips, J. J. (1995, Summer). Corporate training: Does it pay off? William & Mary Business Review, pp. 6-10.Phillips, P.P. (2012). Bottomline on ROI (2nd edition). HRDQ Press.

What's the Difference Between Return on Expectations and Return on Investment?

The world needs three types of leaders: artistic, scientific, and interpersonal. And the world needs them to work together to change feelings, knowledge, and behaviors as a team. Their initial joining up or onboarding is one of the crucibles of leadership. Doing it poorly produces lots of pain; doing it well will accelerate success. Artistic leaders work with different media, care about perceptions, create new approaches, and connect with others’ souls to impact feelings. These leaders, like Apple’s Steve Jobs, lead with a combination of thinking and intuition.Scientific leaders work on different problems, care about solutions, develop better thinking, and connect with others’ minds to impact knowledge. These leaders, like Microsoft’s Bill Gates, lead with a combination of thinking and logic.Interpersonal leaders work in different contexts, care about their cause, rally the team, and connect with others’ hearts to impact behaviors. These leaders, like GE’s Jack Welch, lead with a bias to action. Pull them together by helping leaders agree on context, purpose, core choices, how to connect, and the impact they will have. Context. Begin by choosing where to play. This gets at the context, problems and media in which leaders choose to engage. These are not necessarily different. Taking others’ points of view into consideration broadens each individual’s perspective and frame of reference. Purpose. Purpose is about what matters and why. There’s no inherent conflict between perceptions, solutions and causes. Indeed, when artistic, scientific, and interpersonal leaders align around a common purpose they will spark new perceptions that lead to better solutions in service to a cause more people care about more deeply. Choices. The strongest leaders make the clearest choices around how to win. Whether the focus is on new approaches, better thinking, or rallying the team, the chances of winning are increased by paying attention to all of them. Choose a strategic focus. Then align your posture and culture around that choice. Connecting. There are multiple approaches to how to connect with others. Whether you’re focused on their minds, hearts or souls these are just different doors into the same houses. Either way, you can’t lead anyone if you can’t connect with him or her. Impact. Feeling, knowledge, and behavior are inextricably linked on the way to what impact will be made. Where some artists are content with influencing feelings, it’s better if they move someone to action. Where some scientists are content with influencing knowledge, it’s better if people can turn that new knowledge into tangible benefits. Interpersonal leaders are all about influencing behavior. For them, everything else is a tool along the way. HATCHing a Better TeamStart deploying these ideas now. The immediate next step for each of you is to change your attitude. Be aware of the differences in your team members. Work to understand those differences. Believe in the ability of those differences to create value. Whether you use a Hermann Whole Brain, Myers-Briggs, DISC, or other interpersonal styles framework to conceptualize differences, pay attention to them, seek out, celebrate and leverage the inherent value of diversity of approach.Help us create a new toolkit. I’ll be leading a session at HATCH15 to flesh out a toolkit for “HATCHing Better Teams.” In its 12th year, HATCH is a network and a series of experiences designed to activate, connect, mentor, and cross-pollinate creativity and innovation. Sessions like this are more effective if attendees have a chance to think about things in advance. It seems silly to build a toolkit to optimize the diversity of teams without leveraging as much diversity as possible along the way. So, please email your ideas to me at gbradt@primegenesis.com.

Search Results For "Jack Reith"

Compare Courses