Those who know me a little more know that I am an advocate of performance evaluations, NOT because of its connection with a greater or lesser bonus, NOT because I believe that people like to give or receive feedback within this procedure and NOT because I know of studies that conclude that this process does not normally produce transformations in behaviors that directly impact results. But because I do believe that they are an exercise in Leadership, an opportunity of those in which the managerial competence related to pausing, taking distance, preparing, rethinking behaviors and results of a period is tested - in terms of the person to be evaluated - and imagining some questions that could help for the dialogue to flow in an open and creative way (and anticipating with possible options, why not); in short, a great chance to model, allow, encourage, inspire and challenge, as Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner * would express it. But in this exercise, there are still many who are… out of shape, to put it elegantly. I have seen them mentally disconnected from the moment, presenting fundamentals without logic, taking advantage of the moment to talk about something else, setting blackberries, having the 'result' already defined - without room for discussion - andminimizing, to this process, the importance it has. All of this at best. At worst, postponing or canceling this superb conversational routine until it becomes a habit not to do it.
And what does resonant leadership have to do with this?
Some years ago, Richard Boyatzis (along with Daniel Goleman and Annie Mc Kee) published a book called " RESONANT LEADERSHIP ", where he uses the term ' resonance ' as that which allows to enhance the positive feelings of his teams; thus, a resonant leader would be one who 'moves and others move, without having to talk about it.' As the authors state, emotional leaders become 'limbic (or emotional) attractors' who exert a great influence on the emotional brains of the people they lead.
But don't understand the definition, feel it. I ask you to honestly answer the following question (I count on your years of management experience - and people in charge): if you asked your team members which boss they would like to work with (that is, with whom), would they choose you?
And if you have been working in an organization for a couple of years - and you still have the flame burning - but you are revealed by the question of how much it is worth continuing to commit yourself - tell me honestly: what behaviors inspire you from your boss (s) (s) and what emotions do you feel when you are with that person (s)?
In your answers, you have defined it. That is, or is not, resonance. Is it clear?
And why did I say that this performance evaluation process does not usually produce changes that impact the way things are done? Because we know that significant and important changes do not happen by chance, but rather when people become aware of the need for change and, therefore, commit to promoting personal transformation. This implies a change in habits and perceptions.
You will be a leader, more or less resonant, to the extent that you are able to promote that 'click'. And the best thing about MRI is that it is contagious.
Suppose for a moment it was, did it occur to you to start making that change during your next performance review (or conversation with your people)?
Good intention, but be careful. Because Resonance is the opposite of Dissonance. And cognitive dissonance is also present during performance evaluations. And there is the disconnect.
Cast? According to what the sciences of the mind express, human beings do not register our experiences, we create them. Each of us has our own version of the events that happen (to us). Your boss will tend to see things one way and you another, especially when it comes to performance failures and ways to improve them. In fact, even yourself could simultaneously perceive incompatibility between two cognitions that you feel. I make it simple: during our years of life we build a self-image (and of course, the more positive it is, the more well-being it produces). Any comment (or feedback, in the case of performance evaluations) that conflicts with it will create a situation of discomfort that psychologists call cognitive dissonance. And, as humans that we are,we will tend to want to minimize dissonance, taking the path of least internal resistance. What is that way? Instead of accepting feedback as it comes, we 'transform' it, rationalizing or minimizing it. There we usually blame our low performance on that endless number of variables outside our circle of influence (customers, prices, Marketing, HR, my colleague who took leave, headquarters,…, or tell me yourself..). We are not the problem, but our bosses, who at that moment "are trying to tell us how they should have done things, without knowing what was happening." Let's see two examples:rationalizing it or minimizing it. There we usually blame our low performance on that endless number of variables outside our circle of influence (customers, prices, Marketing, HR, my colleague who took leave, headquarters,…, or tell me yourself..). We are not the problem, but our bosses, who at that moment "are trying to tell us how they should have done things, without knowing what was happening." Let's see two examples:rationalizing it or minimizing it. There we usually blame our low performance on that endless number of variables outside our circle of influence (customers, prices, Marketing, HR, my colleague who took leave, headquarters,…, or tell me yourself..). We are not the problem, but our bosses, who at that moment "are trying to tell us how they should have done things, without knowing what was happening." Let's see two examples:without knowing what was happening ”. Let's see two examples:without really knowing what was happening ”. Let's see two examples:
to. Her boss says: "I want to give you feedback on your latest project and what happened in 2010. I'll wait for you on Tuesday at 9:00 in the office."
b. You think: "I hope I can tell you everything I would have liked you to do for me and the project, if you had been a good coach."
to. You say: “Miguel, you met your goals 70%.
b. Miguel thinks: “you knew that it was impossible to achieve what you wanted and still you decided to leave that goal. Who understands you? "
And so on. There is a distortion in communication that often prevents your best leadership attempts. The bad news is that dissonance is also contagious, so we often fall into the trap, stop listening and express our 'truths' without filters, turning into toxic conversations that should be generative.
What to do then?
Since resonance and dissonance are contagious, you should do more and more of the first and reduce the frequency of the second. My job is to help him do it. Here are 4 suggestions that will make this task easier for you:
1. Be present: don't get distracted, don't miss an opportunity to reach out to your people, don't turn a potentially memorable meeting (don't you remember most of your performance reviews?) Into something to forget. Channel the anxieties and expectations your team brings to that meeting into creative energy. How? Listen to them, give them their opinion, explore their ideas, acknowledge, thank, take time to understand, adopt and adapt their best initiatives. But above all, be there, in the moment, with your body (attitude), mind (openness), heart (relationship), and spirit (purpose).
2. Recognize emotionality: Are they excited about a project? Expecting a result? Eager for a launch? Nervous about a close decision? Angry about a sense of inequity? Disoriented by seemingly contradictory decisions? Lost, looking for clarification on your tasks? Sad about the departure of a colleague? All of them?
When you stop to recognize emotions, do it as I am doing now with you, not by appealing to your intelligence to 'understand what you read' (there it would only work the neocortesal region of your brain) but by appealing and intervening in your limbic system, which is where all emotionally charged information is stored. Act as a voltage regulator: do not let them go above the upper limit (over excitement) or let them pass the minimum thresholds (apathy).
3. Do not add to (or promote) dissonance: if, as we said, dissonance is a phenomenon that will naturally arise, the important thing is that you are emotionally stable, enough not to enhance it. Instead, ask questions to make sure the 'left column' (what people don't say and keep, for personal reasons) is not fraught with double messages, misperceptions, or misunderstandings. Ask questions that allow you to clarify and express to your people why they think what they think, how they see their own reality, what stories are told about it. If you do, you will take a criterion map of the members of your team, essential to understand, in the near future, your decision-making process. I might ask,for example, how do you come to that conclusion? How would you get out of this situation? How do you usually evaluate the appropriateness of one course of action or another?
4. And offer a perspective and a plan: people, when they want to solve a problem or make a decision (about their goals for the next year, in our case) most of the time go in circles within their own mental model, so it does not find options to 'oxygenate' its map of alternatives. In other cases, she talks to people who are 100% in tune with that map, thereby reinforcing their beliefs, shortcomings or possibilities, without this contributing much to the problem. Your job there is to offer perspective, which is what many people need.Perspective. Someone who has already explored new lands, taken risks, and found new trails is someone of high value, to you or to me. He is someone worth listening to. That is what you are to your interlocutor, be it boss or employee. If you are already a manager, share that experience, but without giving advice. Therein lies the value of perspective. Talented people smell talent, and they taste it. And then be sure to say, confidently and solidly, what needs to be done in the coming months or years, what your plan is, what you expect of them (place responsibility where it really goes: on the employee), and on what measure they can count on you. Also ask them for suggestions on how they would do it. But above all tell them why they will be pursuing this or that goal.It will make that performance review memorable. In a good way.
In short, 'resonating' with your teams will have to do with re-creating the meaning of something in something else, and then sharing it with your team. And performance reviews are a great time to do it. Take advantage of this opportunity to continue developing and retaining your talents!
