Lemanskills.com

How To Teach Others Effectively?

Did you ever have a situation when you wanted to teach a person something? You explained everything, you put a lot of time and effort in it, and at the end of the day the person never learned anything? Or you gave somebody feedback because they didn’t do something correctly. And after the conversation it seemed that everything was okay, but after a couple of weeks or months the same mistake was done by the same person?

Did you start getting angry, feeling disappointed or guilty: is it you or is it all about them?

Were you persistent, sit with the person and explain the same thing 10 times? Or have you just decided to not bother anymore: since apparently this person doesn’t understand what you are saying?

How many cases ends like a failure when we think about teaching others effectively? 20%? 50%? More than that? And how many of them don’t say that they don’t understand because they don’t want to look or sound stupid?

What can we do to teach others better, so they can grow thanks to our knowledge and experience? And both sides don’t have the impression that they’ve wasted time on the doubtful effect?

Why doesn’t learning process work so often?

We can have the best intentions to teach others. In fact, most of the time we have those: we want people to be better in what they do, we share our knowledge, experience and what we’ve learned so far in a certain topic. Everything seems good in our head. The readiness to teach and an honest intention to do it is there.

Let’s say we are a buddy to the new employee. We want to onboard this person, take care of them, pass all information about how this organization works. To prepare a new joiner to understand the new environment, how everything gets done, so they don’t waste time and get stressed or frustrated of running around in circles, looking for the right person to answer their questions.

We have a plan, we start the process. We pass our knowledge, we teach the other person how to cover the goals we have as a team as well as possible. We check by asking: “do you have any questions?” or “is everything clear for you?”. And what is the answer on those two questions most of the time? 90% people goes with “no, all good, no questions”, “yes, all clear”. Is it your experience too?

And it’s clear until it isn’t. We explained everything, checked with new employee and this is it: they start to work on their own.

And there is one mistake. And then another one. We give feedback, all is clear again, they go and do the same mistake again. When we ask what they need to do it to have the result that we aim for, they say “nothing, all good”.

Sounds familiar?

Sometimes we teach, then we see that the work is not done with a result that we did contract for, we give feedback with an intention so next time it’s better. And it’s not better at all: sometimes it’s the same, or even worse. What is happening in between of this process, so the results are often so disappointing (for both sides)?

  • We don’t match the way of teaching to the preferred way of learning of the person. Most of the time, we focus more on the process of how to teach, then the process of how other person learns. We take care of the materials, pretty decks, or other sources of knowledge. And we focus on the delivery. It’s great, don’t get me wrong! It’s amazing that we want to teach others, make them better. But knowing if the person learns from reading, visualizing, listening, or experiencing things is a crucial element of a successful teaching process. Don’t get mad that a person that doesn’t want to read things that you give them. It’s not about you, it’s about the medium. Tailor your way of teaching to the way of learning of the person that you teach. It’s a way of improving hugely the whole experience, for both of you.
  • We don’t know the personality structure of the other person. When we don’t know who the person is from PCM’s perspective, we are robbing ourselves from the tools to communicate with them efficiently. When we are aware that we have a Thinker on the other side, we know that they need to meet a recognition of work and time structure psychological needs to be in contact. If the process and the way we teach is chaotic or disorganized, they are not going to learn (even if the slides are pretty). When we are aware that we have a Harmonizer on the other side, we know that we need to use a nourishing channel of communication (meaning, you need to be warm, caring, empathetic to the other person’s emotions). It will be completely different than with a Thinker, who needs a questioning channel of communication: we need to ask about what they think about something, to get in contact. It’s extremely important to know who is on the other side, so you can communicate (and teaching is a way of communication) the most efficient way.
  • We ask wrong questions. Questions are amazing. It is one of the simples and yet, the most powerful tool that the world ever invented. But asking the right questions is a skill. When we ask, “do you have any questions?”, most of the people will answer “no”. Why? Because they don’t want to look stupid, or incapable to understand. It is natural that if we can choose, we prefer to look smart, not the other way around. But we also know that is a short-term strategy: if we don’t ask a question now, we are going to make mistakes and we’ll waste so much more time on finding the right way to do it later. Instead of asking “do you have any questions?”, ask “could you please tell me know did you understand what I’ve just said with your own words?”. Paraphrasing is a tool to check if a person understood what we’ve said, the way we aimed it – but for real, not only declaratively.

Who we need to be to teach others well?

There is a certain set of skills that people who want to be efficient and effective in how they teach others should have.

Based on my teaching (others) and learning (from others) perspective, I believe that those are a golden list of competencies that make a person amazing guide to transform work and life of people that are around them. And we do know that you don’t need to be a school or academic teacher to use them. We share knowledge in so many ways every day: we teach our colleagues at work, our kids at home, we share some tips and tricks with our friends or family members, we pass value to the members of our community. What do we need to do it in the best possible way?

  • Communicating properly in terms of personality types. There is no one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to how we talk with others. We need to listen to what kind of wording the person uses, with what speed they talk or on what things they focus on in the conversation. It’s not about mapping everybody with a questionnaire: it’s about being mindful about all those details, so we can make a strong hypothesis and then tailor the way we communicate, so what we want to teach sticks.
  • Listening openly and actively (whatever is needed). Open listening is just being there, all ears about what the other person is saying to us. Active listening is being more engaged with the process: ask questions, paraphrase to understand better, give feedback and recognition to the other person. Without listening there is a very small chance to teach someone effectively: if we only talk, we are becoming a lecturer. How will we know that the process works behaving that way?
  • Adaptability. As mentioned above, there is no one-size-fits-all solution in terms of a way of communication. And there is the same situation with the way of teaching. Each person needs a different approach, and a great teacher understands it. Some of us has the freshest brains in the morning, some of us needs to wait until late evening to use the mind power the best. We have different learning preferences. It may seem super complex at the very beginning, but asking questions will support you to be aware of the most important things, and based on those, you prepare the tailored process of learning for a certain person. It’s worth the effort. And don’t marry your content: if what you’ve prepared is not working, change it. Exchange written sources with video. Exchange video with podcasts. Exchange all of those with a bootcamp where a person will have a chance to learn through experience. And remember: it’s not about you, it’s about the other person’s needs.
  • Explaining clearly, fighting the curse of knowledge. It’s extremely hard to not be carried away by the curse of knowledge bias, especially when we are experts in any area, and we love what we do. But to teach effectively, we need to remember that we are there for the other person, not for ourselves. It might be one of the most important discoveries that people ever make. Explaining what there is to be taught by not using the big words, in a clear, understandable way is one of the most important skills of the person who wants to guide others. If you are not sure how to simplify the message, use AI support (by using the phrase like “explain the theory X to a 7-year-old”): it can help you to rewire your brain that has a certain way of thinking, to the simpler one. Important: simpler doesn’t mean treating people you teach like children (unless this is your target group). It is all about transparency, simplicity of message, using examples or stories to visualize the whole idea.
  • Learning, every day. To be a great educator, we need to focus on our learning in the first place. The life-long learning value is something that is on the list of TOP 5 the most important things for those people who teach others. Being curious, having an open mind, trying things, making mistakes, and learning from them: that’s how we learn AND it’s how we teach others in a consequence of that. If we don’t have a growth mindset, how on Earth are we supposed to be efficient in teaching others?

The bottom line

When we teach others, we are there for them. It can be super hard to stop the need to show that we the smartest persons in the room, but we must do it to be effective at teaching others. Remembering that the process where we teach something is for our audience (even if it is a one person), makes us take a step or two back from time to time and reflect on the way we do it.

Is it for me, or for them? Where is my focus: on the process, or on the person? Do I care more about ticking all the boxes that I passed everything I had on the agenda, or I care about the change that I make in this person’s brain and heart?

These are the questions that I invite all of us to ask ourselves every time we teach something. It will make everything we do better, more effective and efficient, and: we will be satisfied with the job well done.   

Udostępnij

Komentarze

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of


0 komentarzy
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Czytaj także

Leadership

Work Drama Triangle (and How to Escape It)

The Drama Triangle is a psychological and social model of human interaction that highlights dysfunctional dynamics often seen in relationships, workplaces, and personal lives. Created by Stephen Karpman in 1968, this model identifies three primary roles people unconsciously adopt: the Victim, the Persecutor, and the Rescuer. While these roles may feel familiar and even comforting in the moment, they often lead to unproductive behaviors and strained relationships. By understanding the Drama Triangle and replacing it with healthier patterns like the Winning Triangle, we can transform our interactions and create more positive outcomes. And strengthen our muscle of Communication Intelligence (CQ). Let’s dig deeper into the subject today so you can understand better your behavior patterns with a practical solutions on how to get out of it.     The Story of the Drama Triangle   Stephen Karpman, a student of transactional analysis, developed the Drama Triangle to illustrate how people can become trapped in unhealthy relational patterns. These roles are not fixed, and individuals may shift between them during a single interaction. The triangle often begins with one person adopting a role, which triggers complementary roles in others, creating a cycle of blame, helplessness, and over-involvement. Let’s explore these roles in detail: The Victim The Victim feels powerless, overwhelmed, and unable to take responsibility for their situation. This role is characterized by self-pity and an underlying belief that “I can’t do it” or “Life is unfair.” Behaviors: Avoidance of responsibility, learned helplessness, seeking sympathy. Typical Sentences: – “Why does this always happen to me?” – “I can’t handle this.” – “No one understands how hard this is for me.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Victim operates from an “I’m not OK, you’re OK” position, perceiving themselves as inferior or incapable compared to others.   The Persecutor The Persecutor blames and criticizes others to maintain control or assert dominance. They often feel justified in their actions but lack empathy for others. Behaviors: Aggression, fault-finding, micromanaging. Typical Sentences: – “This is all your fault.” – “You never do anything right.” – “If you had just listened to me, we wouldn’t be in this mess.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Persecutor operates from an “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position, seeing themselves as superior while devaluing others.   The Rescuer The Rescuer intervenes excessively to “save” others, often neglecting their own needs. While their actions may appear helpful, they can enable Victims to remain passive and dependent. Behaviors: Overhelping, unsolicited advice-giving, neglecting self-care. Typical Sentences: – “Let me fix this for you.” – “You can’t do this without me.” – “Don’t worry; I’ll handle everything.” Position in the OK-OK Matrix: The Rescuer operates from an “I’m OK, you’re not OK” position but masks it with seemingly altruistic behavior.   What Is the Cost of the Drama Triangle at Work?   When workplace interactions are led by the Drama Triangle, several negative outcomes emerge: – Decreased Productivity: Time and energy are wasted on blame-shifting or rescuing instead of solving problems collaboratively. – Eroded Trust: Dysfunctional dynamics create resentment and reduce psychological safety among team members. – Stagnation: Victims avoid growth opportunities, Persecutors stifle creativity through criticism, and Rescuers prevent others from developing autonomy. – Burnout: Rescuers often overextend themselves, while Victims feel perpetually overwhelmed and Persecutors experience frustration from unmet expectations. In essence, the Drama Triangle traps individuals in cycles of conflict and inefficiency, undermining both individual well-being and organizational success.   The Winning Triangle: A Healthier Alternative   To break free from the Drama Triangle, Acey Choy introduced the Winning Triangle as a model for healthier interactions. This framework replaces the dysfunctional roles of Victim, Persecutor, and Rescuer with three constructive counterparts: Vulnerable, Assertive, and Caring/Coaching. These roles empower individuals to take responsibility for themselves while keeping respect and collaboration with others. And to operate from OK-OK position that  gives us a chance to use all of our skills and growth mindset. Vulnerable (Replacing the Victim) Vulnerability involves acknowledging one’s feelings and needs without going into the realm of helplessness. It requires self-awareness and a willingness to seek support constructively. What can you do? – Admit when you’re struggling but frame it as an opportunity for growth. – Ask for help without expecting others to solve everything for you. – Use “I” statements to express your needs clearly. How can you say it? – “I’m feeling overwhelmed; can we brainstorm solutions together?” – “I need some support with this task—could you guide me through it?”   Vulnerability fosters authenticity and encourages open communication. It creates an environment where challenges are addressed collaboratively rather than avoided. It’s healthier, creating a space to grow, make mistakes and learn from them, as well as using the experience and wisdom of others’.   Assertive (Replacing the Persecutor) Assertiveness involves expressing one’s thoughts and boundaries respectfully while considering others’ perspectives. It balances confidence with empathy. What can you do? – Provide constructive feedback rather than criticism. – Set boundaries clearly but kindly. – Focus on solutions instead of assigning blame. How can you say it? – “I noticed an issue with this report; let’s discuss how we can improve it.” – “I value your input, but I need some time to focus on my own tasks right now.”   Assertiveness promotes accountability and problem-solving without alienating others. It helps create a culture of respect and mutual understanding, without treating people like worse or stupid. It’s creating a chance for everybody to take their own responsibility for what they do at work.   Caring (Replacing the Rescuer) Caring involves offering support without overstepping boundaries or fostering dependency. It respects others’ autonomy while providing encouragement. What can you do? – Offer help only when it’s needed or requested. – Encourage others to take ownership of their responsibilities. – Practice active listening without immediately jumping in with solutions. How can you say it? – “How can I support you in resolving this issue?” – “You’ve got this—I’m here if you need guidance.”   Caring builds trust and empowers

Czytaj dalej
Leadership

Mastering Problem Solving: How to Save Time and Adapt

As a leader, you’re no stranger to problem-solving. It’s the bread and butter of leadership, the skill that keeps the wheels turning and the team moving forward. But here’s the thing: not all problems are created equal, and neither are the people solving them. One-size-fits-all solutions? They’re a myth. To truly master problem-solving, you need to understand your team, their preferences, and how to flex your approach. Let’s dive into how tailoring problem-solving strategies can transform your leadership game and strengthen your Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle.     The PCM Lens: Why Preferences Matter in Problem Solving?   The Process Communication Model (PCM) teaches us that people have different personality base types, and those types influence how they prefer to face challenges. Some thrive in solitude, needing quiet time to think through problems on their own. Others prefer the intimacy of a 1:1 discussion, where they can bounce ideas off one person. Then there are those who light up in group settings, energized by collaboration and collective brainstorming. Add in the variables of virtual versus in-person environments, and you’ve got a spectrum of preferences that can make or break your problem-solving efforts. As a leader, recognizing these differences isn’t just nice-to-have—it’s essential. For example, forcing an Imaginer into a high-energy group brainstorming session might literally kill them, and they remain silenced, while expecting a Rebel to solve a problem alone at their desk could leave them disengaged. Understanding these nuances is part of building your CQ muscle—the ability to adapt your communication style and approach based on the needs of others.   The High Stakes of Ignoring Problems   Before we explore tools and strategies, let’s talk about what happens when leaders don’t address problems effectively—or worse, when they ignore them altogether. Unresolved problems rarely solve themselves; instead, they keep getting bigger and bigger. Small issues snowball into larger ones, creating inefficiencies, damaging trust, and eroding team morale. The costs? Missed deadlines, killed relationships, lost revenue, and even high level of voluntary turnover. No to mention toxic atmosphere, people not talking to each other, not exchanging ideas or sharing knowledge. Sounds like a long list of different cost that’s not going to be easy to rebuild. On the flip side, a proactive and tailored approach to problem-solving not only resolves immediate issues but also builds a culture of trust and collaboration. When your team sees that you’re invested in solving problems in ways that work for them, they’re more likely to engage fully and bring their best selves to the table.   Problem Solving as a CQ Superpower   Problem-solving is more than just a technical skill; it’s a core component of Communication Intelligence (CQ). Leaders with high CQ don’t just focus on what needs to be solved—they think about how to solve it in ways that resonate with their team. This means asking questions like: – Who needs to be involved in this process? – What environment will help us tackle this effectively? Which tools and approaches will be the worst? – How can I adapt my approach to fit the preferences of my team members? What can I do to involve them in the process?   By flexing your CQ muscle, you’re not just solving problems—you’re strengthening relationships, building trust, and create a culture where everyone feels heard.   Tailoring Your Problem-Solving Approach   So how do you put this into practice? Here are some tools and strategies for addressing problems in different setups:   Solo Problem Solving For team members who prefer working alone, give them space and time to process independently. It’s not about them being weirdos, it’s just their preference. Provide clear instructions and context, then let them take ownership of the task. Tools like project management software (i.e. Trello or Asana) can help track progress without micromanaging. You can create an online wall (i.e. on MIRO) so people can work together asynchronously in their own time and space. Set some deadlines and time for check ins.   1:1 Problem Solving Some people thrive in 1:1 settings where they can discuss ideas openly without the pressure of a group. Use this time to ask open-ended questions and actively listen to their perspective. If their preference is for you to be more direct, set the sentences straight, clear and transparent so there’s no time wasted in the middle of the process to guess what you aim here for. You can also use tools like 5 (or 7) Why, Problem Framing, Ishikawa Diagram or any other Lean tools or techniques. Make sure that you’re solving the real problem that is a root cause of your current situation.   Group Problem Solving Group settings work well for those who feed off collaboration and collective energy. Facilitate brainstorming sessions or workshops where everyone can contribute ideas. Tools like whiteboards (physical or digital) or platforms like MIRO can help visualize ideas in real time. You can also use the group problem-solving methods, like Action Learning to be as effective and efficient as possible. Action Learning is a method where the group of 4-8 people sit together (online or onsite) for 1,5-hour session where one person brings a problem to solve. The group is responsible for asking questions, share their insights and create potential solutions for the problem presenter. It’s a very intense yet extremely productive session where the group is completely focused on the process of solving the issue, without distractions or doing something else in the same time. The power of this method is that people are all involved in the process, they are learning on the way and support each other. So the pros and more than just problem solved; there’s also a positive influence on knowledge sharing practices, relationship building, trust, psychological safety, reliability within a group or organization, using the variety of points of views, experiences, perspectives and talents. Action Learning is one of the best group methods to solve problems that I know and practice. Groups that I work with within this method are

Czytaj dalej
Leadership

3 Leadership Lessons I Learned from Bad Recruitment Processes

Recruitment is often described as both an art and a science—a delicate balance of intuition, data, and strategy. But sometimes, even with the best intentions, things can go awry. I’ve learned this the hard way. Over the years, my experience in leadership have taught me that recruitment mistakes are not just costly in terms of money but also in terms of time, energy, and efficiency. Today, I want to share with you three of my biggest lessons from bad recruitment decisions that I hope will help you to not repeat those in your leadership practice.   #1 The Rush: When Speed Wins With Strategy   There was a time when I was desperate to fill a position on my team. Aren’t we really in constant situations like that? I remember that we had a critical project coming up, I was drowning under the amount of tasks I had on my list and I convinced myself that having “someone”—anyone—on board quickly was better than waiting for the better fit. I rushed through the process, skipping some of the deeper evaluations and settling for a candidate who seemed “good enough.” The result? It ended up costing me more than I ever anticipated. The person lacked the skills and mindset needed for the role, and within six months, we had to part ways. Not only did this mean starting the recruitment process all over again, but it also disrupted my work, again.     According to research by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), the average cost per hire is around $4,700. However, if you make a bad hire, the costs skyrocket. Studies estimate that replacing an employee can cost anywhere from 8 to 12 months of their salary. For example, if you hire someone with an annual salary of $50,000, replacing them could cost you between $33,000 and $50,000. And that’s just the financial side—what about the lost productivity and influence on yourself? On the team? This experience taught me a crucial lesson: rushing to fill a position is like building a house on quicksand. It may seem like you’re saving time in the short term, but in reality, you’re setting yourself up for long-term instability.   #2 The Bias Trap: Judging by Brands, Not Skills   Another mistake I’ve made is being overly impressed by the organizations listed on a candidate’s CV. When someone came from a big-name company or a well-known brand, I found myself assuming they must be ready to do the job. After all, if they worked at such prestigious places, they must be highly capable, right? Wrong.  One candidate I hired had an impressive resume filled with experience at top-tier organizations. I was so dazzled by their background that I overlooked some red flags during the interview process—things like their lack of enthusiasm for the role or their vague answers about past achievements. It turned out that their success in previous roles was largely due to the systems and teams already in place at those organizations. In my smaller, more dynamic team, they struggled to adapt and contribute effectively. This mistake taught me to focus on the specific person, not just their past affiliations. A brand name on a CV doesn’t guarantee a cultural, personality-based or skill set fit for your organization. Now, I dig deeper during interviews, asking specific questions about their contributions and how they handle challenges in different environments.   #3 Ignoring the Personality Match   As someone deeply invested in Communication Intelligence (CQ) and the Process Communication Model (PCM), I know how critical personality dynamics are in any working relationship. Yet, there have been times when I ignored this knowledge during recruitment—and paid the price for it. I once hired someone who looked perfect on paper: they had the right skills, experience, and even glowing references. But what I failed to assess was how well we would work together on a personal level. Our communication styles clashed almost immediately. Where I value directness and proactive problem-solving, they preferred a more passive approach and avoided conflict at all costs. Data vs emotions. Logic vs relationship care. Nothing wrong about that, don’t get me wrong! But it comes with a cost, especially when you work in a small setup. This mismatch didn’t just affect our one-on-one interactions; it also impacted the overall efficiency. When there isn’t alignment between a leader and their team members, it creates friction that slows down decision-making and execution. According to Gallup research, disengaged employees can cost organizations up to 18% of their annual salary in lost productivity. Imagine what happens when that disengagement spreads across an entire team! Now, I make personality assessments a non-negotiable part of my recruitment process. Tools like PCM are there to use: I’m not saying that you do a questionnaire for every single candidate since it’ll cost a lot (if you can afford it, go for it!). It’s about using the framework in practice. Listen, observe, connect the dots. Everything is there, you just need to know what you’re looking for.   Moving Forward: How to Avoid These Pitfalls    Here’s what I’ve learned to do differently: Prioritize Fit Over Speed: Take the time to find someone who aligns with your team’s needs and culture—even if it means extending your search timeline. Remember that fast recruitment can cost you so much more time in the future. Dig Deeper Into Experience: Don’t be swayed by big names on a CV; focus on understanding what the candidate actually contributed in their previous roles. Assess Personality Compatibility: Use tools like PCM or other personality assessments or knowledge from the framework to ensure alignment between you and your potential hire. Recruitment is never going to be an exact science, but by learning from past mistakes and implementing more thoughtful strategies, you can significantly improve your chances of finding the right person for your team—and avoiding costly missteps along the way.   Final Thoughts    As leaders, we often feel immense pressure to make quick decisions and keep

Czytaj dalej
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x