Month: February 2011

The Vulnerable Leader

Posted on by Rachel Collis

I love this TED talk by Brene Brown.

 

In it she describes her research on ‘the whole hearted’.  She found that they demonstrate:

  • the courage to be imperfect
  • compassion – for self and others
  • connection to others as a result of authenticity
  • willingness to fully embrace vulnerability as a necessary part of a life well-lived.

‘In order for connection to happen we have to allow ourselves to be seen….really seen’

This reminds me of the inspirational leaders I have worked for.  There was something about their willingness to be wrong; their compassion for themselves, the team and the clients and their absolute authenticity, that was utterly compelling. I wanted to do a great job for these leaders. It was enlivening to work for them. I knew that if I made a mistake they would show the same compassion for me that they showed to everyone. That openness to vulnerability and compassion seemed to create an atmosphere where I could make wiser decisions in my work.

Why does compassion and openness to vulnerability make a difference? I think it is because then it allows us to:

  1. Be in contact with the present moment – seeing the world as it is, rather than as as our minds tell us it is. We can then take action based on the real situation rather than our internal story about what is happening.
  2. Make space for painful feelings with compassion rather than trying to avoid or control them. This frees up an awful lot of mental energy.
  3. Acknowledge when we aren’t acting according to our values and adjust our behaviour.  It can be very painful to realise that we have let ourselves down and, in some way, not been the person we want to be. Self compassion and acceptance (rather than avoidance) of painful feelings enable us to notice these moments and use them to guide our next steps.

Brain: ‘Do More, Sleep Later!’

Posted on by Dr Rob Archer

Our brains evolved to scan the environment, seek out possible problems and solve them.  Our brains did not evolve to say: ‘tell you what, I’ve done enough analysing / thinking / scanning for today, I’m clocking out’.  And the brains that did do this, were soon weeded out.  Probably by lions.

So, the non-stop brain is highly adaptive for survival situations.

But what happens if, like now, the imperative is not survival but productivity, and where the information we receive is increasingly limitless?

Well, the response is the same.  We naturally keep scanning the environment, seeking out problems and attempting to explain or resolve them.  And of course, this takes time.

So fast forward to today and we are naturally feeling very busy.  We are trying to cram more in.  Not all of the side effects of this are negative of course, but I want to focus on just one that is.

I came across some Australian research recently which simply looked at the number of hours we work vs the number of hours we sleep.  Here is the result:

Now, I don’t know if this is a bad thing for productivity per se, but I suspect overall it is, especially if we are working in a highly distracted, disengaged way.  But I do know about some fairly conclusive research from the University of Warwick, which found that people who slept for less than 6 hours per night were almost 50% more likely to die from heart disease and 15% more likely to die from strokes.

Our minds naturally seek meaning and coherence from the world around us.  But our worlds have expanded and we have become addicted to activity.  As Ian Price argues, today we even get status from being busy.

So in an age of limitless information, our natural responses may no longer be adaptive.  We may need to re-think our thinking in order to thrive.

Self Compassion in Business

Posted on by Dr Rob Archer

A few years ago, I’d have laughed at the idea of using compassion – let alone self compassion – in a business context.  It seems so incongruous.

But now I think it’s indispensable.

I think it could be argued that the main problem with the workplace is lack of compassion. Showing compassion is often equated with weakness, or letting ourselves or others off the hook. In fact Paul Gilbert has shown that we fear that we will become lazy if we are too compassionate, so it is seen often as a bit soft, unbusinesslike.

Yet I would argue the alternative is far less successful. Effective leadership, organisational design, employee engagement, meaning in work, resilience – all of these start with compassion. And the evidence is growing to support this view:

  • Students with most self compassion were least likely to procrastinate (Williams, Stark and Foster, 2008)
  • Self compassion predicts resilience / re-engagement with goals following failure (Neff et al, 2005) *
  • Self acceptance predicts willingness to receive and act on feedback (Chamberlain et al, 2001)

As Kelly McGonigal outlines here, self compassion correlates with lower depression, social anxiety, anger, judgment, close mindedness, less unhealthy perfectionism, greater social connection and empathy. And not only that, but self compassion can be taught. The big question is how.

Many cognitive therapists would start with disputing or changing negative thoughts about ourselves. Yet I would start with context, and acceptance. And for this, no one says it better than Ken Robinson:

“Human beings were born of risen apes, not fallen angels.  And so what shall we wonder at? Our massacres, our missiles, or our symphonies?

The miracle of human kind is not how far we have sunk but how magnificently we have risen.  We will be known among the stars not by our corpses, but by our poems.”

Using Social Network Theory to Build More Effective Teams

Posted on by Rachel Collis

Brian Uzzi, from Kellog School of Management, has done some interesting work on social networks and team performance.

He found that the most effective teams include:

  1. a mixture of both experienced people and individuals who are new to the field
  2. some people who have worked together before and some who haven’t.

This may be because this mixture will create a team who:

  • are starting with some pre-existing relationships of trust which can be built on if handled well
  • are more flexible – there is likely to be an inherent tendency to question and cross fertilize idea’s

In order to get the most out of the team once you have selected the right members:

  1. Have some team values conversations – What do we want the work of this team to stand for?  What do we want to think when we look back on this team?
  2. Develop some behavioural agreements – How will we deal with conflict?  How will we give each other feedback? etc
  3. Have an attitude of acceptance  – working in a group inevitably involves some difficult moments
  4. Be curious – about both the newcomers (What are their strengths and interests? What are the triggers that can cause them problems?) and also those you have worked with before (Try not to assume that you know who they are and what they do best, see if you can see them afresh as you start this project together).