{"id":37930,"date":"2022-03-17T10:41:45","date_gmt":"2022-03-17T09:41:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.tuffledarskapstraning.se\/?p=37930"},"modified":"2022-03-17T12:29:24","modified_gmt":"2022-03-17T11:29:24","slug":"installing-abdicating-and-unleashing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tuffledarskapstraning.hemsida.eu\/en\/installing-abdicating-and-unleashing\/","title":{"rendered":"Installing, abdicating, and unleashing"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Three approaches to exploring new ways of working<\/strong><\/h2>\n

I have conversations with people every week from organisations who are exploring new ways of working; some have just started, others have been experimenting for a few years. Here are some examples of complaints or laments they share with me.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Common complaints or laments I hear from people who are experimenting with self-management or new ways of working<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Do you recognise any? When I asked this at the Teal Around the World 2022<\/a>\u00a0conference, I got a resounding \u201cYES!\u201d from many people in the chat.<\/p>\n

What I also want to offer is: all of these struggles are not signs that self-management doesn\u2019t work. Or that you\u2019re doing it wrong. As Simon Mont writes: \u201cit makes much more sense to interpret them as evidence that self-management is hard.\u201d<\/a> I want to be a stand for normalising these challenges.<\/p>\n

Let me share two common approaches I come across when talking to and working with people who are exploring new ways of working. (I\u2019ve exaggerated them a little to make them clearer.)<\/p>\n

#1: Installing<\/strong><\/h2>\n

In this approach, those of us who are leading or invested in moving towards self-management relate to the process as being similar to installing software or an app. The mindset is: this new system will take care of everything. A lot of energy goes into educating people about the new system, and if they still don\u2019t get it, convincing them that it\u2019s a good idea.<\/p>\n

#2: Abdicating<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The other approach I often see is people conflating (consciously or unconsciously) \u2018bossless\u2019 with \u2018leaderless\u2019. Anyone with power of any kind now feels constrained: \u201cAm I allowed to say or do something if I see something is not working now we\u2019re self-managing?\u201d Anyone who historically hasn\u2019t had power is now hyper-sensitive to anything that resembles leadership or hierarchy: \u201cWe\u2019re self-managing now, everyone is equal!\u201d<\/p>\n

The limits of these approaches<\/strong><\/h2>\n

\"\"
\nThe limits of the \u2018installing\u2019 and \u2018abdicating\u2019 approaches<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

The limits of the installing approach is that, at best, you install an effective system, but people become co-dependent on the system or the people who understand the system. Most people haven\u2019t really co-created anything and therefore haven\u2019t developed the muscles to be fully responsible for the new system. When something isn\u2019t working, the few \u2018system engineers\u2019 put their heads together (or search in the manual) to find a solution, instead of involving the group in addressing the issue.<\/p>\n

In my experience it often also results in an \u2018us versus them\u2019 dynamic brewing between those who like and get self-management, and those who don\u2019t. I\u2019ve spoken to several organisations recently who have been practicing self-management for a few years now and this divide has grown so large that even uttering the word \u2018self-management\u2019 (like Voldemort) is taboo.<\/p>\n

In summary, the installing approach is generally a \u2018power over\u2019 dynamic (to use Mary Parker Follett\u2019s term).<\/p>\n

With the abdicating approach, what ends up being created is a culture of false harmony where people tend to avoid disagreement; they don\u2019t know how to hold each other accountable (without being boss-like); people tend to shun anything that looks like leadership or hierarchy. This looks like: decisions taking a long time, resentment brewing towards those who aren\u2019t \u2018performing\u2019 because we don\u2019t know how to talk to them about it, those with natural leadership feeling frustrated and stuck.<\/p>\n

The abdicating approach is a \u2018power under\u2019 dynamic where nobody wants to or feels able to take responsibility for the whole.<\/p>\n

One possible source of these approaches: a focus on \u2018apps\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n

At the heart of both of these approaches, one interpretation is that both are focused almost entirely on the \u2018apps\u2019 that facilitate this new way of working. In other words, the structures and processes part. To be clear, I\u2019m not saying structures and processes aren\u2019t important: they absolutely are and we need to reinvent them if we want our organisations to shift.<\/p>\n

However, a piece that\u2019s missing is what my colleagues and I at Tuff sometimes talk about as the \u2018Operating System\u2019*. In our version of this metaphor, the Operating System is what we install the apps onto. If we install self-managing teams onto an OS that is a top-down, command-and-control paradigm, it\u2019s going to be full of bugs or maybe not work at all.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\nThe difference between \u2018apps\u2019 and \u2018Operating System\u2019 (Source: Carl Erik Herlitz, Tuff Leadership Training)<\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\u201cThe most common reason why self-managing teams don\u2019t work is the skills and the attitude of the management team. If you see it as a trick of changing the structure, it won\u2019t work. It\u2019s a mindset.\u201d<\/em>\u2013 Jos de Blok, founder of Buurtzorg, at Teal Around the World, 2022<\/p>\n

\n<\/blockquote>\n

A third approach: \u2018unleashing\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n

What I would like to offer is a third approach. It\u2019s not the<\/em> answer, of course, but an alternative that I think could add value. My colleague Karin Tenelius calls it \u2018unleashing\u2019 where the purpose is to try and set free the potential in a group. The potential that is already there and unique to that particular collective of human beings.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

An unleashing approach to new ways of working is bossless, but leaderful<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

In this approach, leadership is a real contribution but not in a parent-child or top-down way. It is leadership in a coaching or facilitative way, inquiring and listening for what wants to happen in a group, what\u2019s in the way, what\u2019s needed to move things forward. It is \u2018power with\u2019 \u2013 anyone at any moment adds value by stepping up and challenging or asking questions about something that isn\u2019t working, perhaps humbly offering a proposal, and listening for if there is energy to try it out.<\/mark><\/p>\n

It is about both psychological safety and<\/em> accountability. This combination creates what Professor Amy Edmondson refers to in her book \u2018Teaming\u2019 as the Learning Zone.<\/p>\n

In summary, it is an adult-adult paradigm, in comparison to the installing approach which has more of a parent-child dynamic, or the abdicating approach which is almost more of a teenager dynamic.<\/p>\n

How to equip ourselves for the \u2018unleashing\u2019 approach<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Here are some tips I can share that I believe help to get us into the \u2018unleashing\u2019 mindset.<\/p>\n

\u2018Me skills\u2019:<\/strong><\/h2>\n