How your natural talents affect the way you engage in conflict: The Executing Strengths

By Dries Lombaard; Director: Strategic Engagement - Strengths Institute South Africa

(This article is a follow-up on a previous post which you should read first as an introduction to the topic of "Conflict")


As explained in the previous article, each one of us has a unique approach towards conflict.  When we view this through the lens of your natural Strengths, it provides even more clarity on how you would most naturally engage in conflict.

First of all, an understanding of the alignment between the four Talent Domains and the five Conflict Styles should be observed. 

A simplified understanding of the four Talent Domains:

Executing Domain:  a natural energy and need for tangible results and realities.
Influencing Domain: a natural energy and need for response and reaction from others.
Relational Domain:  a natural energy and need for relationships and reassurance.
Thinking Domain:  a natural energy and need for reasoning and reflection.  

A simplified understanding of the five Conflict Styles:

Avoidance:  a predominant need not to engage in conflict at all.
Competition:  a predominant need to win when engaging in conflict.
Compromise:  a predominant need to let go and follow the trend when engaging in conflict.
Accommodation:  a predominant need to listen and create a solution for others when engaging in conflict.
Collaboration:  a predominant need to work together towards the best outcome possible when engaging in conflict.

Alignment between Executing Talents and the Conflict Styles:

When we study the needs of different talents, we see that not all Talent Themes will directly gravitate towards a single Conflict Style.  There is no exact scientific way to connect this.  The other, even more important factor, to keep in mind is that we have a unique mix of talents within our dominant needs (as translated well in the Top 5 to 10 talent theme sequence of the Clifton StrengthsFinder Report).  To know which combination of talent themes in your dominant mix will direct the need towards a specific Conflict Style can only accurately be determined through a Coaching discussion with someone.  One should never try to predict a persons approach by simply and exclusively using the StrengthsFinder sequence. (Read here for more clarity). 

Based on my own research and Strengths Coaching experience, I do see certain patterns within specific talent themes playing out in conflict engagement - and the observations I make on that is what I explain below.

Within the Executing Domain of talent, we see a need for results and reality which will influence the engagement in conflict. Let us observe the different Executing Themes from this perspective. (It may also be helpful to click on the specific Talent name which will direct you to a page where some specific challenges of managing the energy and need of that theme is explained.)

Achiever:  The theme of Achiever is all about a clinical drivenness towards reaching goals and achieving objectives. Achiever-emotions are directly linked towards the frustration of not being able to reach a goal or objective within a pre-set time frame, or the elation when goals and objectives are met accordingly.
This will give Achievers the tendency to gravitate more towards the Conflict Styles of Competition or Collaboration, simply because it is most hands-on and will lead to the achievement of goals.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compete.

Arranger:  Arrangers need to stay busy, work on many things at once and create results in an organized manner.  Their emotions are linked to the frustration that may come from not having many things on their plate at once, or not having the resources to get things done.  Their fulfillment and joy is also directly linked towards a "well-executed plan" where things are working and progress are made over the total project perspective.  Therefor I have seen Arrangers to gravitate towards Accommodation, Compromise and Collaboration styles of conflict depending on which one will be most productive in the broader scheme of things. 

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compromise.

Belief:  The theme of Belief is a talent that acts and executes from strong conviction.  I like to call it a "conditional" talent as its execution will be conditional according to values, beliefs and conviction.  They can become extremely upset and completely disengage when things are going against their values or beliefs - and will be just as committed if it aligns with what they believe in.
I experience people with this talent to alternate between the Conflict Styles of Competition and Avoidance - depending on their convictions.  Expect strong, emotional push-back when they stand up for their convictions!

How best to approach them in conflict: Accommodate.

Consistency:  A very clinical and clear-cut approach to execution. People with Consistency will tend to follow the rules, the policies, the procedures and the regulations.  Some may see this as a "Black-and-White" approach.  Consistency have a sense for right and wrong that they simply back up with the rules or policies, and can therefor be extremely difficult to persuade to go beyond it.
The Conflict Styles that aligns with Consistency best will also be Competition and Avoidance - very much in the same way as Belief, but much more clinical and backed with rules and regulations.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate.

Deliberative:  As a natural investigator and extremely risk averse, the theme of Deliberative is naturally cautious and skeptical. They are brilliant at asking tough questions and exploring the risks and dangers.  They have a strong need to be heard, rather than to make the final decision.  If they feel they are not being heard, they simply withdraw.  If the engage, expect meticulous criticism.
With this in mind, the Deliberative theme will be most comfortable in the Competition, Avoidance or the Collaboration styles - the latter especially when they feel they are taken seriously and being heard.

How best to approach them in conflict: Collaborate or Compromise.

Discipline:  This is the talent of "structure".  People with this talent will have a calm, orderly, structured and routinized approach towards conflict.  They tend to also think very structured and even possess structured and calm emotions.  With them you know what to expect...they are in a way refreshingly predictable.
This structured approach and even-keeled interaction will tend to make them gravitate towards Collaboration, Compromise and Accommodation styles of conflict - unless it means they have to collaborate with chaos, accommodate unstructured behaviour consistently or compromise towards unplanned change all the time. 

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compromise.

Focus:   When I think of this talent I think of a Sniper:  tenacious, accurate and meticulous in execution. They are single minded, focused and always have a specific outcome in mind. You can see them as Achievers with exact coordinates. 
This may have the effect in conflict of them being focused on very specific details of the argument, addressing it point-by-point before moving on.  They will most probably have a tendency towards the styles of Competition and Collaboration.   

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compete. 

Responsibility: The talent of Responsibility can be seen as Achiever with strong emotion towards taking their work or results personal.  The absolutely need to deliver, and if possible they prefer to deliver to a person - not just complete a task.  This talent often need very strong management of their energy as it could easily hijack the owner with it's sense of ownership and responsibility.  
People with this strong talent may choose the conflict styles of Collaboration, Competition or Accommodation in order for them to deliver.  

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Accommodate.

Restorative:  The fixer or healer.  Restorative people love problems and want to be actively engaged in fixing it or getting a solution.  The essence here is that the need to be actively involved in fixing - it should not be a strategic or analytical process for them only.
This energy may even cause them to see the weakness firts and engage with it.
People with this talent may tend to move towards a style of conflict that will get them to fix the issue, therefor it may most likely be Collaboration, Competition or, if it will fix the issue, even Compromise.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Accommodate or Compromise.


In the next post I will unpack the talents that most probably love conflcit most of all, the Influencing Talent Themes, and their approach towards conflict. 



Dries Lombaard is the co-owner of Strengths Institute South Africa, and has more than 7000 hours of Strengths Coaching experience over the last decade.  He is leading a vibrant and growing network of Strengths Coaches in Southern Africa, and works with corporate and multinational leadership and management teams and C-level leaders as a Strengths Coach and training facilitator. 

Talent is so obvious, it hides in plain sight

by Dries Lombaard; Strategic Leadership Institute

talent

ˈtalənt/

noun

1. 1.

   natural aptitude or skill.

   "he possesses more talent than any other player"

   synonyms:

   flair, aptitude, facility, gift, knack, technique, touch, bent, ability,expertise, capacity, power, faculty; More
2. 2.

   a former weight and unit of currency, used especially by the ancient Romans and Greeks.

   "a mighty steed bought from a Thessalian merchant for thirteen talents"

There are different perspectives of the term "talent".  The most common association of the word will always be to link it to "skill".  And I suppose, within some contexts, this may be accurate.  Generally what we perceive and observe as performance, and then call "talent", is actually skill....(mostly fuelled by talent).

From my perspective, talent is not the same as skill at all.  It is actually very different. (For more on the difference, read this blogpost).

Let me drill through the clutter and make the term "talent" as understandable and practical as possible.  In my experience through coaching people in their natural talent, it can be condensed to two words:

Energy, and Need. 

• Sustainable Energy

However you may define natural talent, it will always be a source of energy to you.  This energy tend to manifest in one or more of three areas:  emotional energy, physical energy and / or intellectual energy. Actually, it is more than mere energy.  It is sustainable energy.  Energy that you cannot ignore, avoid or get away from.  Energy that truly defines you.  (Some people may define this energy with the word "passion", but for me, passion is a broader concept than talent. Passion is your yearning, your desire, your lasting interest.) 

This energy obviously manifest mostly through specific activities.  And it is in the actual doing of the activities that you express your skill (or sometimes, lack of it). 

The ability to define your sustainable energy is crucial, as it gives it identity and you thus get a grasp on it in order to celebrate it for the unique talent that it is.  The moment you give expression in language and understanding to the different talents, something happens.  It is as if you truly own it then, simply because you can accurately name it for what it is. 

This is where people experience the research from Gallup so useful in this field, and why the Clifton StrengthsFinder assessment is such a fantastic tool - defining 34 themes of talent.  StrengthsFinder accurately assess your talent energy, and then gives it names, ranked in order of importance according to your unique response to the 178 questions asked in the assessment.  True, some of the words used to describe the talent theme may be a bit confusing at first, but once you understand the true meaning behind the chosen term in context, it is always an empowering and even liberating experience to have a language to express your combination of sustainable energy to yourself and to others.

(If you know StrengthsFinder, think about someone having "Arranger Energy", "Ideation Energy", "Empathy Energy" or "Significance Energy".  Simply connecting the CSF terms with the word "energy" opens up a new understanding - especially if you coach people using StrengthsFinder as a baseline tool.)

• Unrelenting Need

A talent is a need. An unrelenting, lasting need for specific expression and specific stimulation. My experience in this field taught me that understanding talent as a need, even more than an energy, leads to the most important paradigm shifts within peoples discovery of their own brilliance and uniqueness.  In the same way that talents are energy in thought, emotional or behavioural expression, the different energies (talents) are constantly yearning to be fed. Talents have needs. Specific needs, and generic needs. These needs they have in order to function…to survive…to contribute.  If the “needs” are not met, the Talent will go dormant or stagnate.

Talent contribution is directly linked towards specific talent needs, and it is these needs that need to be managed well in order for the energy to flow best - and the talent to become a strength. 

Some needs are generic to all talents themes, like the need for affirmation, for celebration, for permission or opportunities to play or for expression.

Then again, there are needs specific to certain talent themes, like the need for more time, the need for people interaction, the need to connect with individuals, the need for constant comparison, for emotional expression, for action or activity, for accuracy, for routine, and yes, even a need for chaos.

Understanding talent themes as needs are so important because it is the key that unlocks the true development, and releases your talents to thrive and contribute fully. It is also the practical element in managing your talents well. If you know what a talent need, then you can feed it!

Even more, if the unique needs of talents are understood, it bring an element into the understanding of others that seldom get the attention it deserves within partnerships, relationships or teams. If you can view someone else not from the perspective of what they should bring, but from what they naturally need in order to function with  maximum energy, the dynamics change forever. 

Imagine being a manager who knows the exact needs of each of your team members, and providing them with the right opportunities and environment to unleash their natural energy within their talents.

Imagine being a spouse who can read the signs of your partners thoughts, feelings and behaviours when it longs for talent energy to flow.

Imagine being a parent who can guide your teenager according to his or her exact needs when it comes to the abundance of talent energy that flows through them.

Imagine being a person with enough self respect to be attentive to your own needs of talent, managing it well, so that your energy that is so unique to you can play as strengths when it combines with the needed knowledge, skill and experience.

(Referring to the StrengthsFinder tool, think about someone having "Focus Needs", "Maximizer Needs", "Includer Needs" or "Learner Needs".  Unpacking this with people you coach takes them to a new stratosphere of understanding themselves and others.)

• A simplified perspective on Talent

Whenever you hear the term "talent" again, do not think "ability", "skill", "performance" or "contribution".  Think ENERGY and NEED.  Then look at the people around you with the lens that identifies the energy for the beauty that it is (even when misdirected or miss-managed), and see their specific needs that yearns for opportunities.

If you want to experience the impact of this simple yet powerful approach, contact me at dries@strengths.institute . It is my passion to help people and companies thrive within their natural energy, by understanding and meeting the specific needs.

Dries Lombaard is the co-owner of Strategic Leadership Institute and NeuWorx, and has more than 7000 hours of Strengths Coaching experience over the last decade.  He is leading a vibrant and growing network of Strengths Coaches in Southern Africa, and works with corporate and multinational leadership and management teams and C-level leaders as a Strengths Coach and training facilitator.   

Ten phrases good managers always say {Guest Article}

By Rick Conlow - CEO, WCW Partners

Good managers are different from other bosses. If you have had one lately you probably noticed they have high standards, are upbeat, knowledgeable and straight talkers. You will get the feedback you need to succeed. If you are lucky enough to have one you will want to excel, because you believe in yourself a little more when you are around them.

A key attribute about good managers is that they talk differently than their colleagues, and that adds to our sense of empowerment. I have listed ten statements I have heard many of them say regularly, and that would help any manager.

1. “I am glad you are on our team.”
Yes, some leaders actually say that once in a while instead of something like “What have you done for me lately?” I had one that used to say, “How much money have you made me today?” All employees want to be part of something bigger or grander than the every day grind, and it’s nice to know work can be that something. Leadership is influence, and it’s either positive or negative. There is no neutral.

2. “My vision is…”
It seems this is a novel concept, to communicate the overall goal of the work team, department, or company. It gives the big picture to everyone’s job and the why. Good managers do this concisely but with passion, not matter what the work is. It is also important for on-going updates, telling everyone on the team “Here is how we are doing.” With mediocre bosses every day is “same old, same old.”

3. “My expectations for you are…”

Few managers are good at providing clear goals and expectations. Our research shows that 80% of performance problems are because of a lack of clear expectations and goals. The best managers also say, “Let’s talk about your progress,” and not “Let me give you some feedback.” This means LOOK OUT! The excellent managers adhere to this quote by Pat Riley, President of the Miami Heat:“A coach must keep everyone on the team in touch with present-moment realities- -knowing where they stand, knowing where they’re falling short of their potential, and knowing it openly and fairly.”

4. “You can do it, I believe in you.”
We all need someone to believe in us. Good managers give encouragement, and they challenge you to do the better. I had one that would say, “You can do it, let’s keep hustling.” I had another one that used to sing the song, “Sixteen Candles” down the hallway. Then he’d come over and praise me about some goal and head back down the hall singing. It set a light tone to our brief meeting. Poorer managers always seem to be about bad news.

5. “Thank you!”

People want to be appreciated. A simple thank-you often is enough. ‘Great job on…’,’keep up the good work..’ are also others ways they recognize but they do it regularly and sincerely. It’s hard to get a compliment from other managers. It’s documented that genuine praise works, plus it’s the right thing to do.

6. “How’s it going?
They are willing to talk to you. Mr. Jim Low was a master at this. When I first met him his legend preceded him. For over a decade he led his market in profit, sales and employee retention. I asked why he was so good. He replied by laughingly saying, “I didn’t go to college.” He added that every day he’d come to work and first go talk to as many employees as he could by asking, “How’s it going?” He might relate this to something he knew about the person. The employees mostly talked about their lives. He discussed business only if they brought it up. Then, when he had a problem, he would go to employees and get the straight info, no BS, because he already had a positive relationship with them.

7. “What do you think?”
Considering the pressures of our jobs and the need for innovation and improvement, why wouldn’t a manager ask this question of his or her team members often? Here are two reasons to do it. First, you don’t want people bringing all of their problems or concerns to you. There isn’t enough time. You have to train them to problem-solve and become solution focused. Second, they will become more proactive while improving their performance. Most employees are astounded when their managers ask this question and reply, “What????” Sadly, less effective managers are fearful of the answers or don’t care. Famed basketball coach from UCLA John Wooden said, “It’s what you learn after you know it all that counts.”

8. “How do you think we can improve?”

This is the next logical question to ask a team. When you do, you begin to get their buy-in and commitment grows. They want to achieve their goals for their reasons too, not just yours. Each employee has untapped potential for great ideas. Why not ask? The best do this and their employee engagement and productivity soars.

9. “I made a mistake.”
Nobody’s perfect. Good bosses admit it when they screw up and even apologize. Obviously, they aren’t making so many mistakes that they are apologizing all of time. I put this in here because it is so out character by leaders to do this at all.

I was at a conference a few weeks ago where a manager talked to his team about a marketing campaign that failed. The manager owned the failure, and said he was sorry to his team because he really pushed for it. Because he had trust with his employees, they got through it. By learning from this situation and collaborating they created a better plan-that worked. When was the last time you heard a manager say, “I made a mistake”?

10. “My success comes from my team.”
I have heard managers say this to their teams, but something more self-glorifying to their boss or colleagues. That gets around, and their credibility is destroyed. The managers that highlight their teams’ efforts and give credit to them for any victories are golden leaders. A leader’s success is all about the team. In the movie “The Mighty Ducks”, Coach Bombay tells his team,

“A team isn’t a bunch of kids out to win. A team is something you belong to, something you feel, something you have to earn.” With low employee morale and engagement in many companies, this is a valuable lesson that most managers have yet to learn.

Napoleon Hill declared, “Think twice before you speak, because words and influence will plant the seed of either success or failure in the mind of another.”Hopefully these ten phrases give you a lift, and helps you build your team up, not down like so many other managers do. Let’s not forget another quote filled with wisdom, by Emerson:“What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.”

This article was originally published on LinkedIn on 10 March 2015

Research: We're not very Self-Aware, especially at work {Guest Article}

By Erich C. Dierdorff and Robert S. Rubin

If you’ve participated in a training or development program in the past two decades, chances are you took an assessment designed to increase self-awareness. While you may have discovered your “type,” “profile,” or “style,” it probably did little to make you a more effective leader or team member.

Put simply, self-awareness is understanding who we are and how we are similar to or different from others. One key facet is self-knowledge – how we see our various personality traits, values, attitudes, and behaviors. But another aspect is being aware of how consistent (or inconsistent) our self-view is compared to an external appraisal – how other people see us or against objective data. The latter is essential for transforming self-knowledge beyond mere personal introspection into accurate self-awareness.

Yet in talent development practice, companies spend millions of dollars and countless hours every year on self-reported assessments that only target self-knowledge. The core problem is that we’re notoriously poor judges of our own capabilities. A 2014 study of 22 meta-analyses (containing over 357,000 people) found an average correlation of .29 between self-evaluations and objective assessments (a correlation of 1.0 would indicate total accuracy). And the correlation was even lower for work-related skills. So my self-reported profile may suggest that I see myself as a persuasive speaker – but tell that to the audience who just fell asleep.

The punch line is that with no external data, the results of self-knowledge assessments are presumed to be accurate, when instead they may reinforce inaccurate perceptions of ourselves. The net result can be harmful to development and performance and, as we observed, the effectiveness of teams.

For teams to perform effectively, each member must possess a combination of technical and interpersonal skills and constantly adjust their contributions to meet the team’s needs. Correctly understanding one’s capabilities relative to others is therefore paramount.

To illustrate, we recently collected data from an executive development program at a Fortune 10 company. With 58 teams and more than 300 leaders performing in a dynamic and competitive business simulation, we tested the extent to which accurate self-awareness was related to team effectiveness, which was evaluated across a number of business metrics like market share, ROA, customer awareness, productivity, and so forth. Levels of team coordination and conflict management were also assessed. And what we found was striking.

First, when individuals were less self-aware (i.e., there was a large gap between the assessments of their own behavioral contributions and the assessments of their team members), the teams substantially suffered. In fact, teams with less self-aware individuals made worse decisions, engaged in less coordination, and showed less conflict management. These findings held even when we controlled for teams’ overall levels of teamwork.

Second, the most damaging situation occurred when teams were comprised of significant over-raters (i.e., individuals who thought they were contributing more than their team members thought they were). Just being surrounded by teammates of low self-awareness (or a bunch of over-raters) cut the chances of team success in half.

It’s clear that talent development interventions need to go beyond self-knowledge to be effective. So what should leaders and talent development professionals do? We see three tactics that can help people build accurate self-awareness.

Use self-awareness tools that are linked to performance. It’s no secret that many of the most popular developmental assessments used for gaining self-knowledge, such as the MBTI, DiSC, The Birkman Method, and The Core Values Index, woefully lack evidence linking their results to actual learning or job performance. Whatever instrument, exercise, or intervention you use must capture and deliver results that truly predict something of value. Use external benchmarks: measure how someone’s self-view compares to others’ views and measure how assessments directly relate to outcomes like increased learning and job performance.

Create a line-of-sight between self-awareness and personal job success. A wealth of research shows that when individuals see learning as valuable to their careers, they’re more motivated to learn and apply new skills to their roles. This means that we must directly communicate why the capabilities on which individuals are receiving feedback are actually relevant. Don’t assume that individuals already recognize the need for accurate self-awareness: substantial research shows that those most in need of improvement are the most unaware.

Teach self-development skills in addition to self-awareness. Acquiring accurate self-awareness is only the beginning – true personal development builds the capacity to take action. Most talent development efforts unfortunately fall short of teaching self-development skills, leaving behind a “knowing-doing gap.”

Research shows that multiple strategies can be brought to bear. For example, self-management training can help people plan, apply, monitor, and adjust their newly learned competencies. And by reinforcing that mistakes are natural to any learning process, error management training encourages deeper learning and the transfer of that learning back to one’s job. At the very least, demonstrate how imperfect self-views block the way to real and lasting behavioral change.

Will Rogers rightly once quipped, “It isn’t what we don’t know that gives us trouble, it’s what we know that ain’t so.” It’s time for talent development professionals to focus their development resources on the forms of self-awareness that matter most.

Erich C. Dierdorff is an associate professor of management in the Driehaus College of Business at DePaul University and co-director of BusinessEducationInsider.com

Robert S. Rubin is an associate professor of management in the Driehaus College of Business at DePaul University and co-director of BusinessEducationInsider.com