Leveraging Mindset to Increase HR Influence

While HR creates, implements and monitors people, processes and culture, HR frequently fails to win support from decision-makers. I know my proposals were often rejected or deferred. I felt stymied since I couldn’t predict what drove the decisions. It spurred me to pivot. I took three steps to improve my influence and my role.

My first step was to accept that logic alone regularly failed to be persuasive. I needed to understand the perspectives and realities of decision-makers. To learn about their priorities, I requested individual interviews with key decision-makers. In a listening mode, I heard their current goals, recent accomplishments, current priorities and decision-making criteria. I ended each meeting by asking what actions HR could take to help them achieve their goals. It opened a constructive dialogue.

The second step was re-defining my role. Instead of identifying myself as an HR leader in a business setting, I adopted the role of a business leader in HR. While this does not seem like a significant move, it broadened my thinking and placed the organization’s health as my top concern. I could do that by using my HR skills.

The final step was to identify current business goals. It was paramount I knew what drove decisions. Only then could I develop proposals that solved pressing business issues that would win support.

Since complexity, uncertainty and change rapidly altered business drivers, I needed a way to analyze fluctuating priorities. I applied a framework of six different goals or mindsets to discern critical objectives. The categories and definitions are:

  • The Inventing mindset targets the development of new ideas, products and creating new internal synergies and innovation.
  • The Catalyzing mindset focuses on meeting customer requirements, keeping existing customers, building the brand and besting the competition.
  • The Developing mindset seeks a robust infrastructure, effective policies, integrated systems and goal alignment.
  • The Performing mindset concentrates on improving process improvement, quality, productivity, cycle time and profit margins.
  • The Protecting mindset prioritizes an agile culture, developing talent, enhancing teaming, improving collaboration and fostering engagement.
  • The Challenging mindset targets sharing best practices, recognizing emerging trends, validating operational assumptions and seeking new alliances to ensure future success.

This goal-oriented framework clarified what drove decision-makers and enabled me to include their goals in my proposals. Combining goals was relatively easy, and the practice developed trust and established me as a valued team member.

However, goals are not static. Consider how quickly the coronavirus has impacted decision making. Therefore, it was essential to check for change. Using the chart below, I stayed in alignment with decision-makers.

Discovering ways to blend business and HR goals requires some creative thinking, but it delivers superior results. Let me illustrate some examples by mindset.

The Inventing mindset 

Instead of the typical wishlist suggestion program, a new approach centered on quarterly presentations to upper management with the caveat that each presenter must provide a full cost and consequences analysis. This had the added advantage of giving immediate feedback on whether the suggestions were accepted, rejected or needed additional information. This approach substantially increased the quality, quantity and approval rate of suggestions.

The Catalyzing mindset 

Call center training was revamped to ensure that key points were obtained and shared during the first call. As a result, customer satisfaction increased. Another program updated the reward and commission structure to align it more closely with existing strategic goals. A new sales training program was developed to foster consultative sales methods.

The Developing priority mindset

New promotional criteria required demonstrating effective coaching and change implementation. An innovative onboarding process incorporated business knowledge to support a cross-functional orientation.

The Performing mindset

An expanded dashboard with additional in-process metrics spotted issues and successes quickly. Exit interview data was shared in an annual report, which successfully identified areas for improvement. Multiple small improvements surfaced when team leaders asked employees to make a two-percent improvement. While the request was small, the results were significant.

The Protecting mindset

A rapidly expanding firm addressed major talent shortages by developing an internal program of training, coaching and shadowing that provided the needed talent. Improving the transfer of training resulted from team-based training. Intact teams attended a training session where they identified a desired change and developed a change execution plan. Team proposals were then presented to management for approval. Resistance to change evaporated since the team ‘owned’ the initiative.

The Challenging mindset

Recommendation for new structures and policies improved the track records for mergers and acquisitions. Also, best practices were identified, shared, and recognized. Team leaders were encouraged to ask, “what should we start doing and what should we stop doing” to discover opportunities.

As these examples illustrate, HR touches the whole organization and frequently is the only function that monitors performance across the entire organization. HR is uniquely positioned to promote both macro and micro contributions. Shifting into a trusted business partner role does not require an advanced degree, it stems from collecting data, recognizing priorities and formulating novel initiatives. It is up to us to pivot into a trusted business partner role and improve organizational outcomes.

Published with permission from  https://blog.hrps.org/

About Author:

DR. MARY LIPPITT  https://www.enterprisemgt.com

Dr. Mary Lippitt is an award-winning author of “Brilliant or Blunder: 6 Ways Leaders Navigate Uncertainty, Opportunity, and Complexity.” She founded Enterprise Management Ltd. in 1984 to provide leaders with practical and effective solutions to navigate the modern business climate using situational mastery. Dr. Lippitt is a thought leader and speaker on executing change, optimal leadership, and situational analysis. She currently teaches in the MBA program at the University of South Florida. Mary is also the author of Situational Mindsets: Targeting What Matters When It Matters.

Perception Traps: Distortions and Deficits

Is seeing believing? It should not be. Our perceptions can be superficial and incomplete. Car accident witnesses describe the same event differently. Architects, security personnel and employees see the same office, but what registers with them varies significantly. We see through our filters without even recognizing that we employ a limited lens. Being conscious of our own perception biases improves teamwork, engagement, and results. It can also improve communication with others.

We must recognize that we register a narrow slice of reality because we rely on what we already “know.”  We like observations that confirm our past experience. And, this means we miss the opportunity to identify what is new and what is possible. These perceptional deficiencies can be overcome in several ways:

1.     We have a perception deficiency that is best addressed by asking others what they see. The picture above illustrated that there are multiple accurate interpretations of the same reality. Some may focus on the white vase, while others concentrate on the profiles of two people. Accepting that there are other valid points of view increases our ability to understand reality as well as ensure that we see all that there is to see.

2.     We conquer perceptual distortions by keeping our minds open and rejecting all stereotypes. Labels gloss over distinctions. They also encourage simplistic thinking and an unwarranted belief that we know all that we need to know. Stereotypes also reduce cooperation and teamwork. Kierkegaard captured this reality when he stated: “Once you label me, you negate me.” When we attach a label to someone, we stop paying attention to them. Labels transform the other person into one of “THEM,” which is an impersonal, and usually less respectful, abstraction.  Stereotypes blind us as certainly as if we were wearing blinders. An every day, and all too common, example is using age to assume competency. Can a person over 40 really know how to handle IT problems? The answer is yes. It depends on their training, continued development and experience not their age.

3.     Distorted and fixed perceptions are dangerous. Our world is becoming more complex, integrated and agile, and that static points of view limit our ability to collect information and recognize patterns. Holding onto a narrow view means we make mistakes because our actions are based on incomplete knowledge. Convinced in our accuracy, we refuse to adjust our views or consider other options. Instead of listening to different points of view, we prefer to have others just agree with us.  When others realize that our mind is made up, they stop sharing information since it becomes a waste of their time.

We get our eyes examined to ensure that we see clearly. We must also test our perceptions. For as Thoreau noted: “It’s not what you look at that matters, it’s what you see.” We must continually test our perceptional mindsets before we accept what we initially see as all that there is to see.

About Author:

Dr. Mary Lippitt,  an award-winning author, consultant, and speaker, founded Enterprise Management Ltd. to help leaders with critical analysis.  Her new book, Situational Mindsets:  Targeting What Matters When It Matters was published last year with a Foreword from Daivd Covey. She can be reached at mlippitt@enterprisemgt.com or https://www.linkedin.com/in/marylippitt/

Bridging Silos

BRIDGING SILOS

When you think of silos, do corn and grain come to mind? Or that self-serving department at work that won’t cooperate with anyone. It’s tempting to create our own silo in response.But that just increases the toxicity.Instead, we must bridge these silos and create common ground.

Let’s take an example. Picture yourself as VP of sales. Operations hasn’t produced or shipped a large order for a new customer. This delay might mean that the customer will be lost.The response from those in Operationsis that they did geta heads up on the big order,they had to order new materials, and they were already working overtime.  They do not want Sales to make promisesthat can’t be kept.

It is easy to see how these attitudes can grow into finger-pointing and stereotypes that can spiral out of control.  How could you bridge these divergent views? There are four ways to tear down silos.

Listening.Understand the facts from the other party’s point of view. Learn“What’s in It for Them (WIIFT)” and then share the facts and goals from your perspective or WIIFM.  Objectivity defuses labels and avoids finger-pointing and starts to build a bridge between viewpoints. It also builds respect and engagement.

Questioning.  Use questions to surface as much factual information on the situation as possible.  This creates a common understanding of the situation and can reveal new solutions.  Consider the following six questions that address six different situational mindsets;

    • What is a creative solution? (Innovation)
    • How can we best serve the customer now? (Customer Focus)
    • What processes or practices could prevent this from happening in the future? (Infrastructure)
    • What is the most efficient way to deliver on time and with quality? (Efficiency)
    • What changes to staffing, workflow, training, or operating practices will increase efficiency and quality? (Talent and Culture)
    • What can we learn from this situation? What should we do in the future? (Strategic Thinking)

Think Win-Win.Searching for mutual advantage forestalls tension,withholding information,and any sense of rivalry.  The process is not difficult, and it requires a question such as What are our alternatives to working this out?  In reality, everyone wants to succeed, and that desire creates new solutions.

Moving Forward. The word solution is often misassociated with a perfect and permanent resolution.  This misconception blocks progress. It is the equivalent of assuming that only scoring is an acceptable outcome in football, soccer, baseball, or any other sport.  Foreward progress counts too.  In sports and business, moving the ball forward counts as a win. Incremental steps constitute progress.

You don’t have to be a genius or have a degree in engineering to build a bridge. Ask questions, listen, and explore to discover mutually satisfying progress.  It will burst existing silos and prevent the construction of new ones. 

Dr. Mary Lippitt,is the author of Situational Mindsets: Targeting What Matters When It Matters.  She is an award-winning author and speaker, and founder of Enterprise Management Ltd., an international firm helping leaders build engagement and deliver resutls.

 

Situational Mindsets: Targeting What Matters When It Matters

Situational Mindsets expands leadership beyond mastering personal style, skill set, and positive characteristics.  It adds the ability to adjust to dynamic conditions and deliver results.  The importance of situational awareness was cited as early as the 5th century BC in The Art of War by Sun Tze.  Sun Tze described how the terrain, weather, population, sources for food and water, and vegetation were important factors in military strategy.

While the challenges facing our leaders today differ, knowing what has been what is and what is changing enables leaders to accurately assess their current environment to make a smart decision.

Situational Mindsets offer a framework to effectively scan an organization’s environment, weigh alternatives, decipher complexity, and address changing realities. Leaders cannot do everything that they want to do, but they must target what is vital at this moment in time. Using situational mindsets, leaders grasp present realities, foster engagement, circumvent risk and leverage opportunities. Situational mastery flows from asking questions. It does not depend on IQ, advanced degrees or extensive training.  Also, when we exchange information, we promote understanding and alignment.  Leaders do not need to have all the right answers, but they must ask all of the right questions.  No one person can handle the pace of change, the growing complexity and amount of data.  But the task is not overwhelming.  It merely requires a situational mindset checklist to guide data collection and prevent potential blind spots.

Six situational mindsets cover key organizational factors: new products and services, customer focus and competitive position, organizational excellence, productivity and profitability, people and culture, and preparing for the future.  Insights from situational mindsets prioritize actions and prevent blunders.

Another benefit is that mindsets enhance respect for different points of view.  Valuing diverse perspectives builds collaboration and initiative. It also reduces interpersonal conflict. It provides the clues to walk in another’s shoes translates.  It spotlights how to influence their thinking and actions. It is also the greatest honor you can give to another person—to listen to them and help them achieve their goals.  After we understand all perspectives and realities, we can discover common ground.

In the dynamic 21st century the scope of leadership must expand.  Situational mastery, critical thinking, priority setting, and sustainable results play a critical role in a person’s and an organization’s success. Click to order your copy ☛ Situational Mindsets

Join me on October 29th at 1 pm Eastern for a FREE webinar on Situational Mindsets:  How to Boost Critical thinking and Deliver Results ⤵︎  click link below

Situational Mindsets: How to Boost Critical Thinking and Deliver Results – with Mary Lippitt

Published with permission from Bizcatalyst360.

Bridging Executive Team Conflict

One of my clients was entering a strategic planning process with a dysfunctional executive team. The team was stuck over how to plan for the future. The lack of harmony was attributed to perceived personal slights, pressure tactics, and lack of information. In this case, resistance and competition replaced collaboration and the chance for agreement was never established.

Background on the Team

My client, a newly hired president of an international firm, wanted to adopt a new strategy he had crafted by himself. His team of six vice-presidents actively resisted the plan. The client said that the vice-presidents were “just stuck in the past.” He believed they sought to limit his success and tenure since several had applied for his position. He wanted me to interview each team member to start a bridge-building process with a one-day offsite meeting.

The Beginning of the Bridge to Conflict

During interviews, the vice-presidents voiced objections to the president’s “go it alone” style and his lack of industry knowledge since he was new to the industry. The prevailing opinions were that he was grandstanding for the board and was not interested in working collaboratively. The fact that the president did not consult staff in developing the strategic plan was used as an example of his Lone Ranger approach. It was clear that the team was at an impasse. From the interviews, I also discovered, while there were entrenched positions, everyone wanted the organization to succeed. Therefore, I chose to focus on identifying shared organizational outcomes to shift the team’s focus away from personal suppositions to objective analysis. My goal was to engage them in a results-oriented search to discover a mutually acceptable plan for the future. Since the strategic plan was the official cause of the breakdown, it made sense to focus on strategy.

Discovery of Mindsets

In my experience, many strategic discussions revolve around vague aspirational statements which offer encouragement but little direction, definition, or measures. This executive team needed to agree on something specific and measurable. My assumption was that strategic alignment would rupture the personal stereotypes, trigger discussion, and allow the team to critically assess alternatives. Therefore, in preparation for the off-site meeting, I asked all attendees to complete the Leadership Spectrum Profile® and review the generated report. The Profile examines six organizational goals and how they currently drive an individual’s goals and priorities. It also creates a common vocabulary for discussing advantages, constraints, and trade-offs among those goals. In addition, it focuses on existing circumstances and goals rather than past actions, offering an opportunity to explore facts and alternatives. The six situational mindset goals concentrate on:

1. innovation or being seen as state-of-the-art,

2. customer and growth focus,

3. seamless infrastructure and policies,

4. productivity, quality, and ROI,

5. change-ready engaged culture with strong bench strength, and

6. new trends, business models, and niches.

The team was asked to complete the inventory based on their assessment of the best strategic orientation. After completing the inventory, each member received a report on their goal orientation. A composite team profile without names was presented at the off-site and the composite revealed a split with six individuals in agreement and one with a different perspective. Offering the results without attribution enabled participants to identify their positions and kicked off a productive discussion of the strategic priorities. The six vice-presidents shared a common focal point on improving quality and internal processes. This point of view or situational mindset prefers evolutionary change, risk mitigation, and has an internal focus at this time. The president’s mindset targeted expanding the customer base and growing market share. This growth-oriented goal values revolutionary change, external focus and accepts risk for the opportunity for great rewards. After an open discussion, they each discussed the facts, events, observations, and evidence that drove their thinking about their priority or desired path for the future. During that exchange, the president learned that large corporate accounts were being lost and the vice-presidents learned that the board had mandated the president’s growth strategy to improve ROI. These insights defused some of the tension, but a division remained.

The Connection Between Organization Life Cycle Stages and Strategy

The next step was to connect the organization life cycle stages and strategy. While the group was not familiar with the organizational life cycle model (Lippitt, 2014), they recognized it since it mirrored their product and project life cycles. They also knew that different actions were essential at each stage. After defining the six stages of organization life cycles as Birth or Start-up, Growth, Stature, Prime, Mature, and Renewal stage, I asked each person to select their organization’s current stage. This discussion exposed the same split presented by the inventory findings. The president selected the Growth stage since it reflected his board mandate. The vice-presidents split between Stature and Prime. The tone in the room changed when they mapped their differing individual perspectives onto the organization life cycle model and talked about their reality. The group recognized the organization was past the entrepreneurial Growth stage with a respected brand and well-established policies. The firm was moving into the Prime stage where the focus revolves around process improvement, quality, and ROI. The premise that market growth was the only way to improve ROI was debunked.

Bridging Differences

The vice-presidents shared many additional internal issues that were unknown to the president. Problems, including quality issues, information system failures, and staff shortages, were undermining productivity, morale, and quality. As the president absorbed this key information, he understood his staff had rejected his fast growth strategy since the loss of major accounts stemmed from operational flaws rather than competitive factors. While the president had assumed that the vice-presidents were driven by personal motivations, he now realized it was due to current circumstances. His demeanor changed. He listened and learned what was holding the organization back from the success everyone wanted. He also realized that before the organization could grow, they had to halt the hemorrhaging of major accounts. It did not take long before an internal improvement strategy targeting operational flaws was formalized. The team agreed, when this strategy was achieved, they would develop another plan based on newer vital needs.

Conclusion

Once they agreed on their goal priorities, the executive team estimated the financial impact of the lost accounts on their bottom line. They developed a pitch for the Board that showed the importance of addressing quality. They also agreed a new strategy would be presented after quality concerns were addressed, and that the next strategic thrust might be market growth, assuming the situation warranted it. The president’s presentation to the Board highlighted the fact that getting new customers and then having them leave due to operational shortcomings not only wasted marketing efforts but also impacted the brands’ reputation. After all, dissatisfied customers not only stop using the firm but also spread their negative experience with others. The Board accepted a “build it and they will come” approach to meet current challenges and improve ROI. A once dysfunctional team coalesced around a shared reality and the need for results. Personal attributions were superseded by shared common results-oriented goals.

Sources

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Heath & Company.

Greiner, L. (1998). Evolution and revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https:// hbr.org/1998/05/evolution-and-revolutionas-organizations-grow

Janis, I. (1991). Victims of group think. Political Psychology, 12(2), 247–278.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Lippitt, G. (1982). Organization renewal: A holistic approach to organization development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lippitt, M. (1999). Leadership Spectrum Profile® Inventory. Retrieved from https://www.leadershipspectrum.com

Lippitt, M. (2014). Brilliant or blunder: Six ways leaders navigate uncertainty, opportunity, and complexity. Palm Harbor, FL: Enterprise Management Limited.

Pink, D. (2005). A whole new mind: Moving from the information age to the conceptual age. New York: Riverhead Books.

Dr. Mary Lippitt,  an award-winning author, consultant, and speaker, founded Enterprise Management Ltd. to help leaders with critical analysis.  Her new book, Situational Mindsets:  Targeting What Matters When It Matters was published last year with a Foreword from Daivd Covey. She can be reached at mlippitt@enterprisemgt.com or https://www.linkedin.com/in/marylippitt/

The Role of Mindsets in Leadership Development

Leadership development historically has two basic approaches:  focusing on personal development and targeting an individual’s job skills. These were enough in a relatively stable environment.  However, in a dynamic and fast changing world, leaders must be adept at dealing with changing environments. This new contextual approach to leadership fills the gap between personal and organizational mastery.

Wise leaders collect, decipher, weigh, and use information from all points of view to capitalize on opportunities and avoid being blindsided by trends due to narrow perspectives. A limited frame of reference creates blinders.  This lens is also called current driving Mindset. If we ignore some data, we open ourselves to unnecessary risk. This current driving Mindset is one of six Mindsets which enable you to assess opportunities, threats, and risks characteristic of your organization. Seeing the big picture ensures that your actions, plans, and decisions target the right outcome and address the critical challenges.    

Mental agility remains a key leadership practice. Leaders who have foresight to see reality will be more proactive. To put this in practical terms, a leader who elects to act when noticing a fire code violation offers more value than one who waits until they see flames. It saves lives, property, and opportunities for the future.

Leaders with ability to make decisions or judgments which balance short-term and long-term priorities play an invaluable role moving an organization forward. It is often the ability to change minds and gain commitment of others to produce results, depends on collecting and evaluating data from six Mindsets:

Inventing

The desire to develop new ideas, products, and services is high in the Inventing Mindset. This Mindset also seeks new internal synergies and cross-functional innovation.

Catalyzing

A focus on fast action to meet customer requirements, keeping existing customers and building the brand and beating the competition drive this Catalyzing Mindset.

Developing

Building infrastructure, creating policies and systems are the focus of the Developing Mindset as are se goals and establishing policies.

Performing

Process improvement, safety, and profit margins are in focus in the Performing Mindset. In this Mindset, quality, improving productivity and performance metric are in the forefront.

Protecting

The Protecting Mindset includes developing talent and building the internal culture of an organization. It also concentrates on succession planning, team collaboration, and engagement.

Challenging

The desire to test assumptions, create strategic options and adjust the business plan is primary in the Challenging Mindset. Discerning and spreading best practices, seeking new alliances and niches are key to sustainability.

Neglecting to comprehensively collect and examine data generates blunders.  Consider the fate of Blackberry, Kodak, and Blockbuster.

The writing was on the wall, but they failed to see it.  Their limited situational awareness blinded them to the need for change.  Situational awareness is the missing link in leadership development.  It provided leaders with the ability to see what is on the wall, around the corner, and within reach.  It is time we help leaders effectively read the realities they are confronting.

About Author:

Dr. Mary Lippitt,  an award-winning author, consultant, and speaker, founded Enterprise Management Ltd. to help leaders with critical analysis.  Her new book, Situational Mindsets:  Targeting What Matters When It Matters was published last year with a Foreword from Daivd Covey. She can be reached at mlippitt@enterprisemgt.com or https://www.linkedin.com/in/marylippitt/

A New Path to Leadership Effectiveness

critical thinking

Business has undergone a sea of change in the past several decades. Competition, supply-chains, technology, and business models have shifted. Yet, many major corporations still rely on leadership theories from the 1950’s, causing leadership effectiveness to suffer.  Certainly the tried and true frameworks remain valuable, but they are insufficient given the new challenges leaders confront today.  Leaders need to know more than just about their leadership style. Read More

Download our brochure

Situational Mindsets

The Brilliant Or Blunder Action Guide

“Reading this brilliant book was both a pleasure and a gift. Situational Mindsets has not only helped me to analyze my own leadership tendencies and skills, but it caused me to take notice of the changes I need to make within my own organization to gain a competitive advantage in today’s world.”

David M.R. Covey, CEO of SMCOV, Coauthor of Trap Tales