Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Six Lenses (Leary-Joyce & Lines (2018)) - Coggle Diagram
Six Lenses (Leary-Joyce & Lines (2018))
Individual director lens
Biology and personality
Each director can be seen as a biological system
The physical well being aspect of individuals is often neglected in the cognitive-heavy corporate lifestyle
There is a growing recognition of the importance of physical factors such as appropriate nutrion, sleep, exercise and stress management to enable sustainable functioning in our modern working world
Each individual director is also a system of sub-personality types
Unlike expertise and intellect, the emotional intelligence related aspects of directors are often neglected but are ultimately the key attributes for team functioning
Life roles
We can also understand an individual director's behaviour through an appreciation of how their director role fits into or conflicts with their other life roles
This perspective has been the domain of research called 'work-life balance' which includes the key concept of role conflict
Role conflict can be defined in terms of
Time conflict - the extent to which the amount of time spent on one role interferes with significant other roles in one's life
Strain conflict - the extent to which the amount of stress that is created by one role leaks into another role
Values conflict - the extent to which what one is expected to do as a board member misaligns with what one holds true in one's life values
Director roles
How a director thinks about themselves as a board member of the particular company that they are on is also an important contributor to their internal dynamic
Directors often join a business that excites them and this creates an initial honeymoon level of committment, they like being associated with people they respect and this will create a level of cohesion and personal connection
A director will feel that their contribution is valuable if it is unique
Inter-personal board relationships lens
The importance of good relationships to us all as human beings is startlingly significant
The interpersonal board relationships lens looks at the quality of the one-to-one relationships between directors on the board
Building trust
The quality of one to one relationships is largely down he amount of trust that exists between the two people
Maister et al suggests that four characteristics that contribute to trust
Credibility
What you say and how believable you are to others
Can be improved by track record, one's qualifications, the testimonials that one has received from others and how confidently one comes across in one's interactions
Reliability
Ones actions and how dependable you appear
Achieved by consistently and repeatedly allowing the other person to experience the link between one's promises and actions
Intimacy
How safe people feel sharing things with you
Speaks to your ability to connect with other people and requires vulnerability, honesty and openess
May require an investment of time and effort and the appropriate environment within which one can connect
Self orientation
This refers to whose interest is going to be put first within an interaction; to what extent will it be the other persons or will it be your own?
CREDIBILITY + RELIABILITY + INTIMACY / SELF ORIENTATION= TRUST
Levels of Communications model
When we begin conversations, we usually start at the level of ritual and cliche
Once we have fulfilled small talk, we usually move to the level of facts and information - eg agenda, reporting finances
The third level of communication is values and beliefs, where we share our personal values, we are disclosing more information and there is not only inherent risk involved in doing so but also the possibility of greater trust
The final level of communication is that of sharing one's emotions and feelings - this means that one is able to feel comfortable expressing a particular personal emotion about a topic, this obviously ups the risk and vulnerability stakes
Parent, adult child ego states
Berne categorised three different ego states that people can be in when they transact
Parent ego state
Think, behave and feel as someone who is acting like a parent
The parent can be either critical, using language such as 'why haven't you?' or nuturuing, expressing language such as some version of 'take care' or 'I'll help you'
The critical parent ego state is often a characteristic of autocratic leadership whereas the nurturing parent is often the characteristic of more of a benevolent dictator style of leadership
When someone acts from the parent ego state this invites the person in the interaction with them to go into their child ego state so that they think, feel and react as a child - this can lead to a passive/aggressive response from those who are communicated to in a parental way, however being childish also has a more positive side which enables creativity and playfulness which may be useful at times to let off steam
Adult ego state
More neutral and logical and is able to examine data from both the parent and child and often acts as a mediator between the two
This is often the style of interaction required from the chair and company secretary
The adult state is able to to ask questions and seek evidence and also invites those in the parent or child ego states to behave more as adults
Team relationships lens
Team development frameworks
Tuckman's stages of group development
Forming
Where a team meets and agrees on initial goals
The team will be task focused and team members may behave quite independently and may tiptoe on eggshells around any potentially threatening topics to avoid conflict
The aim here is to build initial cohesion around a task
Storming
Where people begin to voice their opinions which may result which may result in task, process and relationship conflict
The assumption of this stage is that any differences in personality clashes must be resolved before the team can move on
Through a lack of skill or will to resolve potential conflicts, some teams never emerge from this stage. However those that do emerge stronger and more able to work effectively
Norming
Where teams begin to resolve differences and coalesce around a common goal
This is the shift from being a group to being a team such that all members are able to take responsibility and accountability and a sense of joint leadership emerges
Performing
Characterised by establishing mission, vision, roles and norms such that team members can focus completely on achieving their common goal
Adjourning
Also known as the mourning or transforming stage and is characterised by the team completing their task, breaking up and turning the light off as a team
The Five Dysfunctions of a Team
Absence of a leader - unwilling to be vulnerable within the group:
Role of the leader: go first
Fear of conflict - seeking artificial harmony over constructive passionate debate:
Role of the leader: mine for conflict
Lack of commitment: feigning buy-in to group decisions create ambiguity throughout the team
Role of the leader: force clarity and closure
Avoidance of accountability: ducking the responsibility to challenge peers on counter productive behaviour which sets low standards:
Role of the leader: confront difficult issues
Inattention to results: Focusing on personal success, status and ego before team success:
Role of the leader: force on collective outcomes
Team dialogue
Four Player Model (
Kantor
)
Mover
Provides direction
Often the role a chair will need to play at the start of meetings
An effective chair will also quickly and artfully encourage others to step into the mover role
The positive intentions of the move role are not only direction but discipline, commitment, perfection and clarity but these may be misunderstood as omnipotence, impatience, indecisiveness and being dictatorial
Follower
Provides completion
The role played by a director when they support a point, agree with a suggestion or take accountability for a decision
The positive intentions of the follower role include compassion, loyalty, service and continuity
The role can be misinterpreted as one that is placating, indecisive, pliant, wishy-washy and perhaps over accomodating
Opposer
Provides correction
Vital to counter any overly risky proposals by a mover and can be important in preventing groupthink
Positive intentions, courage, protection, integrity and survival
May be misinterpreted as overly critical, competitive, blaming, attaching and contrary
Bystander
Provides perspective
Positive intentions to provide perspective, patience, preservation, moderation and self-reflection
May be misinterpreted as disengaged, judgemental, deserting, withdrawn and silent
Some key takeaways from the Four Player model are that
It is important that all roles are played within a conversation for it to be constructive
Individuals should be aware when they are becoming stuck in one particular role and develop skills in all roles
High performing team dialogue will be highly connected, that is that there will be significant turn taking such that everyone will be given and take the opportunity to speak
A balance of inquiry and advocacy, as well as making one's own points while equally being interested in others is key
There needs to exist a strong positive feeling in the boardroom whereby people build on others points and show encouragement and support, rather than constantly critiquing and negatively nit-picking
Isaacs overlaid a a distinction between inquiry and advocacy onto Kantor's Four Player. He defined advocacy as the dynamic balance between moving and opposing and inquiry as the dynamic balance between by-standing and following
Isaacs proposed four conversational skills that can help each of the four roles to be more effective
Learning to voice effectively is important if we are to be heard by others in the conversation
The better we can listen, the more effective we will be in the role of following
Respect for the other participants is key if we are to oppose in a constructive way, keeping the conversational flow intact
It is essential for the bystander that we are able to suspend our own ideas and opinions in such a way that both we and others can examine them and see their strengths and weaknesses
Board conflict
Conflict in teams can come from three main sources
Relationship conflict: which involves personal issues such as dislike among group members and feelings such as annoyance, frustration and irritation
Task conflict: which is related to differences of opinion on how the team should go about the task; it does not have the negative feelings that can accompany relationship conflict
Process conflict: which is more about using resources, such as who has responsibility for which deliverable
According to research conducted by
Jen and Mannix (2001)
, higher levels of relationship conflict are likely to lead to problems and a team being less effective. However, higher levels of task and process conflict can be beneficial depending on when they occur in the teams evolution. The research suggests that it is beneficial for process conflict to occur at the start of a task when the team if forming however if strong team process norms are not quickly resolved, performance steeply decreases over time. High levels of task conflict can be very beneficial to the quality of decision making and idsucssion
Board role conflcit
Katharina Pick's
research also identified two specific relational tensions on boards due to board members potentially conflicting roles
There is the relational tension that exists between the NEDs and the Eds -how the NEDs and the Eds relate to each other around these conflicting roles will largely be dictated by the role-modelling of the relationship between the Chair and the CEO
The second relaional tension that Pick suggests exists on the board is the tension between the team being comprised of siloed expertise versus the team having a more cohesive voice.
How to challenge well in the boardroom
Bvalco summarised a number of recommendations for challenging well in the boardroom
The Chair should never start of finish a discussion with their opinion as this will stifle ownership and collective authority
The chair's ability to listen to others, effectively summarise views around the table and encourage equal participation is vital
The chair's role is to encourage evidence based rather than person centred challenge
notice and raise an overly aggressive approach with the board. Understand whether this is a style of confidence issue and offer support
Get to know other directors individually and at a personal level to enable one to adapt one's style and approach to ensure challenge is heard
Verbally praise differences and the thorough consideration of options
Use empathy and information search in equal doses. If people feel listened to, they will listen more attentively to others views
Encourage directors to agree the single most important thing the board must do
Expect input to the agenda, so that directors arrive at board meetings engaged
Instil a sense of team authority not just a board with a collective agenda
Thinking and deciding require different types of brain processes and stimulate different behavioural responses so don't let them become intertwied
Consciously apportioning time between informing, thinking and decision making helps to frame expectation and promote effective behaviours
Use the 3:1 ratio rule of appreciation versus criticism to promote resource for thinking and engagement rather than justification and rejection
In the annual review of board performance, explicit analyse the quality of constructive challenge using content and behavioural analysis
Team tasks lens
Dulewicz and Herbert (2004)
define 16 tasks of the board which cluster into four areas: supervision of management, accountability to shareholders and other stakeholders, strategy and structure and longer term vision, mission, values and policy formation
External stakeholder lens
We can see that all interactions with external stakeholders can become internalised into the board dynamic
A useful took to understand the external source stakeholder dynamic is through mapping them on the extent of their influence, or power and interest
Those stakeholders with lower interest and lower power or influence are seen as the least important and therefore merit the least consideration in decision making
The recognition of the need to understand and engage more fully with key stakeholders is growing within organisations. This is reflected by the extensive section on relations with stakeholders in the FRC's 2018 guidance on board effectiveness
FRC guidance 'An effective board will appreciate the importantance of dialoguer with shareholders, the workforce and other key stakeholders, be proactive in ensuring that such dialgoure takes place and that the feedbacks taken into account in the board's decision making. How the board approaches this will provide useful insight into the company's culture'
FRC guidance provides 12 pointers on relations with shareholders and other key stakeholders and concludes with the following six checklist questions for boards
Can we describe how stakeholders are prioritised and why?
What are the key concerns of our workforce, our suppliers and our customers and how are we addressing them?
Does the workforce consider that customers and suppliers re treated fairly and that the company cares about its impact on the environment and community?
Have we sought input from enough stakeholders to be comfortable that we have a rounded view?
Have we listened properly to the stakeholder voice and what impact has this had on our decision?
Have we considered how environmental and social issues might impact on the business or link our strategy to a recognised international framework?
ICSA produced a report entitled the stakeholder voice in board decision making: stregnthening the business promoting long term success' Ten core principles are outlined in the report
Boards should identify and keep under regular review, who they consider their key stakeholders to be and why
Boards should determine which stakeholders they need to engage with directly as opposed to relying solely on information from management
When evaluating their composition and effectiveness, boards should identify what stakeholder expertise is needed in the boardroom and decide whether they have or would benefit from directors with directly relevant experience or understanding
When recruiting any director, the nomination committee should take the stakeholder perspective into account when deciding on the recruitment processs and the selection critieria
The chair supported by the company secretary should keep under review the adequacy of the training received by all directors on stakeholder related matters and the induction received by new directors, particularly those without previous board experience
The chair, supported by the board, management and the company secretary should determine how best to ensure that the board's decision making processes give sufficient consideration to key stakeholders
Boards should ensure that appropriate engagement with key stakeholders is taking place and that this is kept under regular review
In designing engagement mechanisms, companies should consider what would be the most effective and convenient for the stakeholders not just the company
The board should report to its shareholders on how it has taken the impact on key stakeholders into account when making decisions
The board should provide feedback to those stakeholders with whom it has engaged, which should be tailored to the different stakeholder groups
Wider systemic influences
Political
What is changing in the poltical landscape that may have an effect on your sector, industry and organisation?
Economic
What are the economic patterns that may be influencing your wider environment?
Social
What are the societal trends in terms of demographics, consumer expectations etc?
Technology
What are the cutting edge industry innovations and technological advances that may have an impact?
Legal
What legal statuses, case law, directives and/or regulations exist and/or are being introduced that may have an impact on your organisation?
Environmental
What are the local and global energy, waste, pollution and wildlife impacts on and relationships with your organisation?