Lemanskills.com

Artykuły

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

Read More »
Leadership

Mastering Tough Conversations: A Tech Leader’s Guide to 1:1s (That Nobody Really Wants to Lead)

As a tech leader, you’re no stranger to challenges—tight deadlines, complex projects, and ever-evolving technology are part of the job. But one of the most delicate challenges you’ll face doesn’t involve code or systems; it involves people. Leading tough conversations with employees is an essential skill that separates good leaders from great ones. Whether it’s addressing underperformance, delivering hard feedback, or navigating team conflicts, these moments can define your leadership. This guide equips you with actionable tools to lead tough conversations effectively, using a structured approach that combines contracting, Communication Intelligence (CQ), including the Process Communication Model (PCM). Let’s dive in.   When Tough Conversations Are Necessary: Scenarios You’ll Encounter   Before we get into the how, let’s identify the when. Here are common situations where a tough conversation might arise: Underperformance: An employee is consistently missing deadlines or delivering work in a quality we agreed on. Behavioral issues: A team member exhibits disruptive behavior, such as frequent conflicts with peers or unprofessional communication. Career Development: You need to inform an employee that they didn’t receive a promotion or that their role is changing. Restructuring: Delivering news about layoffs or departmental changes. Personal Concerns: Addressing sensitive issues like burnout, mental health, or personal struggles impacting performance.   Each of these scenarios requires a thoughtful approach to ensure the conversation is productive and respectful. And none of those are easy: there’s no one-size-fits-all approach so it might sound like a hell to a tech leader. But we have some algorytms that you can use to run the meeting with success.   The Framework: Contracting, CQ, and PCM   To handle these conversations effectively, use three elements to have a success no matter what kind of situation you are facing. Contracting: Establish clear agreements on three levels—administrative, professional, and psychological. You have more about the contracting itself, the levels and what to do to make sure the contract is fully covered in this article. Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle: Flex your communication style to meet the employee where they are emotionally and mentally. Managing reactions that are always emotional (you like it or not) is our job as leaders: we need to know what triggers which behavior and what to do to overcome or address it when it appears. Process Communication Model (PCM) Framework: Tailor your approach to the employee’s personality base for maximum impact. Match the language and way of communication they need, not your favorite ones. That’s crucial for the conversation to be successful: you’re leading it for them, not for yourself.   Part 1: Contracting—Setting the Stage for Success   Contracting involves creating clarity and mutual understanding before diving into the conversation. What are the essentials of 3 levels that are inside? – Administrative Contracting: Define the logistics. Where will the meeting take place? How long will it last? What’s the agenda? Example: “Let’s meet in my office at 2 PM for 30 minutes to discuss your recent project performance.” Take care of this during and after as well. “What is the deadline to implement what we’re talking about?” – Professional Contracting: Clarify roles and expectations. Emphasize that this is a professional discussion and its goal is to find solutions, not to blame anybody for anything. Example: “My role is to provide feedback and support you in improving; I would like for your role to share your perspective and be engaged in the next steps we are going to create together during this meeting.” – Psychological Contracting: Set the emotional tone by creating a space for a person. Acknowledge that the conversation might be difficult but make sure you are focused on the positive outcome. Example: “I know this might be uncomfortable, but I want you to know this is coming from a place of support and wanting to help you succeed.”   Part 2: Flex Your CQ Muscle   Communication Intelligence (CQ) is your ability to adapt your communication style based on the situation and the other person’s needs and preferences. In tough conversations, this means balancing focus with accountability. What are the easiest 3 things that you can do as a leader to make sure you’re using your CQ muscle? – Listen Actively: Truly hear what the employee is saying without interrupting or jumping to conclusions. Make notes. Paraphrase, check if you understand as your employee intended you to. Don’t assume, ask. – Acknowledge Emotions: If the employee feels upset, angry or defensive, name the emotion without judgment. Example: “I can see this feedback is frustrating for you.” or “I understand that situation is infuriating.” Don’t underestimate the state, let it be, check what kind of information is hidden below this emotion. Use it in the solution creation phase. – Stay Calm and Focused: Keep your tone steady and avoid escalating tension, even if emotions run high. I know that’s one of the hardest things to do: most of the time we go angry when the other person is angry. We mirror each other, that’s how our brain is wired. But by being conscious of that, we can stop the automatic pattern and break it by being more mindful and goal-oriented. When you observe something like that, say to yourself: “What is the goal of this conversation? What I want to achieve here?” That kind of reminder is going to take you back to the OK-OK state and continue with more clear view of mind.     Part 3: Tailor Your Approach with PCM—Speak Their Language   The Process Communication Model (PCM) identifies six personality types, each with unique communication preferences and stress patterns. Understanding these types allows you to tailor your message effectively. Here’s a quick breakdown: Thinker: Logical, organized, values data and structure. – Approach: Be clear, factual, and provide detailed explanations. – Stress Behavior: May become overly critical or perfectionistic, attack others for lack of thinking or logical approach.   Persister: Principled, dedicated, values integrity and commitment. – Approach: Appeal to their sense of purpose and principles. – Stress Behavior: May become judgmental or

Read More »
Leadership

What Are Most Common Beliefs That Hold Tech Leaders Back?

As a Tech Leader, you’re tasked with guiding innovation, meeting deadlines, and managing diverse teams—all while navigating the complexities of human dynamics. It’s no small challenge. But what if I told you that some of the beliefs you hold about leadership might actually be holding you back from creating an environment where people want to stay and thrive? Let’s take a closer look at three of the most common beliefs that I encounter when working with Tech Leaders and explore actionable solutions to shift your mindset and approach.   Belief 1: “If I’m not the expert in the room, I’ll lose respect.”   Many Tech Leaders feel immense pressure to always have the answers. After all, you’ve likely climbed the ranks because of your technical expertise. But leadership isn’t about being the smartest person in the room—it’s about enabling others to shine (it hurts, I know). The problem is that when you focus on showcasing your expertise, you risk micromanaging or overshadowing your team’s contributions. This can stifle creativity and lead to disengagement: your people think won’t have enough space to try out new solutions, make mistakes and learn from them to build their own expertise. Solution? Shift from being the “expert” to being the “facilitator.” Ask open-ended questions like, “What do you think we should do here?” or “How can we approach this differently?” Empower your team to take ownership of their ideas and solutions. Remember, respect is earned not by knowing everything but by fostering trust and collaboration.   Belief 2: “Feedback will demotivate my team.”   I often hear leaders say they avoid giving constructive feedback because they fear it will hurt morale. While it’s true that poorly delivered feedback can cause friction, avoiding it altogether is far more damaging in the long run. The problem is that without feedback, your team doesn’t know where they stand or how they can improve. This ambiguity can lead to frustration, disengagement, and even turnover: all those things are not the ideal situation for you, as a leader, and for your team as well. There are very costly: losing one employee is a cost of 8-12 monthly salaries of this person (in average). Solution? Reframe feedback as an opportunity for growth rather than criticism. Use a structured approach, even the most common ones like “Start-Stop-Continue” will be a huge help (and easy to implement): – Start: What new behaviors or actions could help them grow? – Stop: What habits or approaches might be holding them back? – Continue: What are they already doing well that they should keep up?   Deliver feedback with using Communication Intelligence (CQ) muscle, tailor the communication to your employee’s needs, be specific, and always tie it back to their potential and goals.     Belief 3: “People leave because of better opportunities, not because of me.”   It’s easy to blame external factors when someone leaves your team—higher salaries, exciting projects elsewhere, or personal reasons. While those factors do play a role, research consistently shows that people leave managers, not companies. The problem is that assuming turnover is out of your control absolves you of responsibility for creating a supportive environment. This mindset prevents you from addressing underlying issues within your team dynamic. Solution? Conduct regular one-on-one check-ins where you ask questions like: – “What’s one thing I could do to support you better?” – “Do you think that you’re challenged and fulfilled enough in your role? If not, what can we do to move a needle here?” – “What’s your long-term vision, and how can I help you get there?”   By showing genuine interest in your team’s well-being and career aspirations, you’ll build loyalty and reduce turnover. It’s not so obvious to have a leader that actually care and think about their employees’ in more holistic approach.   The bottom line   Leadership is as much about unlearning as it is about learning. By challenging these common beliefs and adopting a more people-centric mindset, you’ll not only become a stronger leader but also create a work environment where people feel valued and inspired to stay. Remember: great leaders don’t just manage tasks—they cultivate trust, growth, and connection. That’s the kind of environment people don’t want to leave. Ready to challenge more leadership beliefs? Go and listen to the latest episode of Leman Tech Leadership Podcast!

Read More »
Leadership

Breaking the Code: Myths About Mistakes in Tech World

As Tech Leaders, we often find ourselves navigating a world of constant change, high stakes, and the persistent pressure to deliver. In this fast-paced environment, mistakes are inevitable. Yet, despite their inevitability, mistakes often carry an unnecessary stigma, especially in the technology sector. We’ve all been there: a bug in production, a failed sprint, or a product launch that didn’t hit the mark. These moments can feel like personal failures, but they’re also opportunities for growth—if we allow them to be. Unfortunately, many of us are held back by persistent myths about mistakes that do more harm than good. Let’s unpack these myths and explore how tech leaders can reframe their thinking to foster innovation and resilience within their teams.   Myth 1: Mistakes Are a Sign of Incompetence This is perhaps the most damaging myth of all. In a field as complex as technology, mistakes are not just normal—they’re expected. Yet, many Tech Leaders (and their teams) fear that admitting to errors will make them appear unqualified or incapable. Here’s the truth: mistakes are not a reflection of incompetence but rather a natural byproduct of working on resolving complex problems. In fact, some of the most groundbreaking innovations in tech have come from mistakes. Take the accidental creation of Post-it Notes or the discovery of penicillin—while not directly tech-related, these examples remind us that groundbreaking discovery often follows missteps. As a leader, it’s your job to model curiosity. When you own up to your own mistakes and frame them as learning opportunities, you create a culture where your team feels safe to take risks and innovate.   Myth 2: Perfection Is the Goal Let’s face it: perfection in tech doesn’t exist. There will always be bugs in the code, unforeseen edge cases, or unexpected user behaviors. Yet, many leaders fall into the trap of striving for perfection, believing that flawless execution is the ultimate measure of success. And we do know that’s far from the truth. The pursuit of perfection can paralyze teams, leading to analysis paralysis and delayed decision-making. Worse yet, it can stifle creativity and experimentation—two critical drivers of innovation in technology. Instead of chasing perfection, focus on progress. Encourage your team to adopt an iterative mindset: ship, learn, and improve. Agile methodologies are built on this principle for a reason—they prioritize adaptability over rigid adherence to an idealized end state. Remember, your job as a leader isn’t to eliminate mistakes but to create an environment where mistakes lead to better outcomes.   Myth 3: Mistakes Waste Time and Resources    It’s easy to view mistakes as setbacks that cost time and money. But what if we flipped that perspective? What if we saw mistakes as investments in future success? Consider this: every mistake your team makes is a chance to uncover blind spots, refine processes, and build resilience. A bug in production might reveal gaps in your testing strategy. A failed product launch could highlight misalignment between engineering and marketing teams. These insights are invaluable—they help you course-correct and prevent larger issues down the line. Of course, not all mistakes are created equal. As a leader, it’s important to distinguish between reckless errors (caused by carelessness or lack of preparation) and intelligent (or even necessary) ones (made in the pursuit of innovation). Celebrate the latter and use them as teachable moments for your team.   Myth 4: Leaders Should Have All the Answers    As Tech Leaders, we often feel pressure to be the smartest person in the room—the one with all the answers. But this mindset is not only unrealistic; it’s counterproductive. When you position yourself as infallible, you surprisingly discourage your team from speaking up or challenging assumptions. This can lead to groupthink, missed opportunities for improvement or other limiting biases that rob us from achieving extraordinary results. Instead, embrace a mindset of continuous learning. Ask questions, seek input from your team, and admit when you don’t know something. By doing so, you demonstrate humility and foster a culture of collaboration and shared ownership. Remember, leadership isn’t about having all the answers—it’s about empowering your team to find them together.   Myth 5: Mistakes Are Best Swept Under the Rug    In some organizations, there’s an unspoken rule: don’t talk about mistakes. This culture of silence can be incredibly toxic, leading to fear, blame-shifting, and a lack of accountability. As a leader, it’s your responsibility to break this cycle. Encourage open dialogue about mistakes and frame them as opportunities for growth. Conduct retrospective sessions after incidents or project failures to identify root causes and actionable takeaways. Transparency is key here—not just within your team but across your organization. When leaders openly discuss their own missteps and what they’ve learned from them, it normalizes the idea that mistakes are part of the process.   Reframing Mistakes as the Golden Key   So how can we, as Tech Leaders, shift our perspective on mistakes? Here are a few practical strategies: Lead by example: Share your own experiences with failure and what you learned from them during team meetings or one-on-ones. Celebrate learning moments: Recognize team members who take risks and learn from their mistakes—even if the outcome wasn’t what they hoped for. Create psychological safety: Foster an environment where team members feel safe to admit errors without fear of punishment or being laughed at. Encourage reflection: After a mistake occurs, ask your team reflective questions like “What did we learn?” or “How can we do better in the future?” Focus on systems: Instead of blaming individuals for mistakes, look at the systems and processes that contributed to them and identify areas for improvement.   The bottom line   Mistakes are not the enemy—they’re an essential part of growth in the tech world (and beyond). As leaders, our role is not to eliminate mistakes but to create a culture where they’re seen as opportunities for learning and innovation. By reframing these common myths and our approach to failure, we can build teams that are resilient, creative,

Read More »
Leadership

Communication Intelligence (CQ): A Key to the Effective Leadership

In the ever-evolving landscape of work, where collaboration and innovation are necessary to survive on the demanding market, one skill stands out as a game-changer: Communication Intelligence (CQ). As a tech leadership expert and someone deeply invested in helping leaders and teams create environments where people thrive, I cannot stress enough the importance of mastering CQ. It’s not just about talking or listening; it’s about understanding, tailoring, and connecting. Let’s dive into what CQ is, why it matters, and how we can build this skill: both as leaders and team members.   What Is Communication Intelligence (CQ)?   At its core, Communication Intelligence (CQ) is the ability to adapt your communication style to connect effectively with others. It’s about being aware of your own communication tendencies while recognizing and responding to the diverse preferences of those around you. Think of it as emotional intelligence (EQ) but focused specifically on how we exchange information, ideas, and emotions. CQ involves empathy, adaptability, and clarity. It’s not just about what you say but how you say it—and how it’s received. Mastering CQ means being intentional in your interactions and ensuring that your message resonates with the person or people on the other side.   Why Is CQ Essential for Leaders and Team Members?   In my work with leaders and teams, I often see how miscommunication can ruin even the best intentions. A lack of CQ can lead to misunderstandings, conflict, and disengagement. On the flip side, strong CQ fosters trust, collaboration, and alignment: key ingredients for both thriving teams and great business results. Here’s why CQ is crucial: #1 For Leaders: they set the tone for communication within their teams. If a leader lacks CQ, they risk alienating team members, failing to inspire, or unintentionally creating a culture of fear or confusion. Leaders with high CQ can tailor their messages to motivate diverse individuals, navigate difficult conversations with grace, and build an environment where everyone feels heard and valued.   #2 For Team Members: in a team setting, CQ helps individuals collaborate more effectively. When team members understand each other’s communication styles, they can avoid unnecessary friction and build stronger relationships. High CQ also empowers individuals to voice their ideas in ways that resonate with others, fostering innovation and mutual respect. Understanding what high CQ looks like (and what it doesn’t) is key to developing this skill. Let’s explore some examples and anti-examples.   Examples of High CQ Behaviors: – active listening: truly hearing what someone is saying without interrupting or jumping to conclusions to soon, – tailoring messaging: adapting your tone, language, or delivery based on the audience. For instance, explaining a technical concept in simple terms for a non-technical stakeholder, – understanding in action: acknowledging someone’s emotions and needs before moving to problem-solving. For example, saying, “I can see this situation has been frustrating for you” before diving into solutions, – clarity in feedback: providing constructive feedback that is specific, actionable, and framed positively. And what’s even more: giving people space to take it in and make a decision what they want to do with it (take or discard), – proactive negative conflict resolution: addressing misunderstandings early rather than letting them grow and eat people alive. And remembering that not all conflicts are bad (actually a fear of conflict is one of the 5 Dysfunctions Of The Team by Patrick Lencioni).   Anti-Examples of Low CQ Behaviors: – interrupting or talking over others: this signals a lack of respect and can shut down meaningful dialogue. It also means that you don’t care about the other person, or anything they say or think, – one-size-fits-all communication: using the same approach for everyone without considering individual preferences or needs. There’s only 17% of chances that the person next to you prefers your communication base. That’s why listening and tailoring is so important: to get the stakes higher than that, – ignoring non-verbal cues: overlooking body language or tone that suggests someone is uncomfortable or disengaged. We have 4 things we can observe: mimics, ton of voice, gestures and posture. Ignoring those non-verbal imformation is going to cost us a lot, – defensiveness in feedback: reacting negatively when receiving constructive criticism instead of seeking to understand, ask more questions, be curious about what the other person wants to say to me, – avoiding difficult conversations: failing to address issues directly, leading to confusion or resentment. And the further it goes, the worse it becomes: it’s really difficiult to stop the huge snowball. So what we can do to avoid those anti-examples?   Use PCM to Build it!   One of the most effective tools I use when working with leaders and teams on CQ is the Process Communication Model (PCM). PCM provides a framework for understanding different personality types and their communication preferences. It’s like having a map that helps you navigate the complexities of human interaction. So why PCM is a good idea to support buildling a high CQ level? It gives you bigger self-awareness: start by identifying your own dominant personality type. This helps you understand your natural communication style and potential blind spots. With whom it’s super easy to go with and when it will be a bigger challenge. It equips you with higher ability of observation: pay attention to the verbal and non-verbal cues of others to identify their preferred communication style. For example: – A Thinker might appreciate detailed agendas and logical arguments. – A Harmonizer may respond better to warmth and emotional connection. It gives you a reason to adapt more: tailor your communication to match the other person’s style. If you’re a Promoter speaking with an Imaginer, slow down and give them time to process rather than pushing for immediate action. It shows you how to practice under stress: PCM also teaches us how stress impacts communication. For instance, under stress, a Thinker might become overly critical, while a Rebel might resort to sarcasm and manipulation. Recognizing these patterns helps us respond constructively rather than

Read More »
Leadership

5 Biggest Leadership Feedback Mistakes

As a leader, giving feedback is an essential part of your role. However, there are some common mistakes that leaders make when delivering feedback that can have huge effects on the individual, the team, and the organization as a whole. As we want to be as efficient as possible and not waste time or effort on insufficient communication, it’s important to be aware of these pitfalls and have ready-to-use ways to avoid them. Here are five things that leaders shouldn’t do while giving others feedback, along with examples of the potential consequences that you can save yourself from. Ready? Let’s dig in. 1. Being overly critical without providing constructive guidance One of the biggest mistakes a leader can make when giving feedback is being overly critical without providing constructive guidance. For example, if a team member presents a project and the leader simply says, “This is terrible,” “A monkey would do it better” without offering any specific feedback or suggestions for improvement, it can be incredibly demoralizing for the person. This kind of feedback can lead to a huge decrease of intrinsic motivation and confidence in the team member, as well as a thud in an overall team morale. In the long run, it can also result in a decrease in productivity and innovation within the organization. This is not a feedback from OK-OK quardant at all. We were talking about it why it is crucial to speak from this space in the article and podcast, but I will say it one more time. If you are not in an OK-OK zone, first thing you need to do is to go back there, by covering your motivational needs and only then move to the conversation with the other person. Without that, the conversation will always be stresful, full of aggresion, manipulation or withdrawal of one or both sides.   2. Failing to tailor feedback to the individual’s communication base Another common mistake is failing to tailor feedback to the individual’s communication preference. For instance, if a leader gives feedback in a direct manner (Promoter) to an employee who prefers a more empathetic and nurturative approach (Harmonizer), it can lead to miscommunication and misunderstandings. This can result in a breakdown of trust and rapport between the leader and the team member, as well as hinder the individual’s ability to fully understand and act on the feedback. Ultimately, this can impact the team’s cohesiveness and collaboration, as well as the organization’s overall communication effectiveness. When we use a one-size-fits-all approach, we are so surpried that the feedback doesn’t land. Or sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t. So we blame people, sometimes by saying: “What is so hard to understand?!” or “Others get it and you can’t!”. Basically: it’s about you, not about me. So it has a huge cost, for us as leaders, and for our team as well. Let’s not be mad on others: we can be mad on an educational system that doesn’t teach us communication at school, but both ways are a waste of time. I would say that we rather invest this time in learning and practicing on how to match the needs of the other person and crafting feedback so it’s custom-made. 3. Using feedback as a means of control or manipulation  Using feedback as a means of control or manipulation is another mistake that leaders should avoid. For example, if a leader gives feedback with the intention of pushing a team member into conforming to their own agenda or way of thinking, it can create a toxic and disempowering work environment. This kind of behavior can lead to resentment and disengagement among team members, as well as a lack of creativity and initiative within the team. Over time, it can also result in high turnover rates and a negative reputation for the organization. We are coming back again here to the OK-OK mode. If we don’t have a positive intention while sitting at the table with an employee, there’s no chance to end the meeting with an agreement. At least, not with the honest one. There’s a 4A Feedback Guidline that was created by Reed Hasting at Netflix. And the first A is an “Aim to assist”. Always have that in mind. You don’t have it? Go find it, and then sit with a person to have a proper conversation. 4. Ignoring the emotional impact of feedback Ignoring the emotional impact of feedback is another critical mistake that leaders often make. Regardless of the personality base of the person, if it’s a Harmonizer or anybody else, it always has an impact on a person. Mostly because we have so bad feedabck experiences from the bast that on each sentence that includes “feedabck” in it, we respond with a higher stress level right away. That kind of lack of awareness and insensivity can result in increased distress (negative stress) and anxiety level for the team member, as well as a decrease in their overall well-being and job satisfaction. Going further, it can lead to the high level of resistance, being close to the suggestions or ideas of the leader. In turn, this can lead to higher levels of absenteeism and decreased productivity within the team, ultimately impacting the organization’s bottom line. So I say: let’s be more mindful, check with people how they are doing before, during and after the conversation. Ask for feedabck for ourselves: what we do really well? And what can we do better when it comes to leading those conversations? Each situation is an opportunity for us to learn and be better next time. It’s like training and strenghtening a muscle. 5. Failing to follow up on feedback Finally, failing to follow up on feedback is a mistake that can hinder an individual’s growth and development. For example, if a leader provides feedback on a specific area for improvement but fails to follow up with ongoing support and guidance, it can lead to stagnation and a lack of progress. This can

Read More »
Leadership

Leading Edge: 7 Things the Best Leaders Do Daily

We talk so much about what leaders do wrong. What kind of mistakes they make, what skills they lack of or why people leave them. And as it’s important to be conscious and honest, it’s also quite depressing. Are we all really that bad in what we do? Of course not! Every day I see a lot of good behaviors, reactions and habits that leaders do, and it makes them great for their people. We tend to focus on the gaps and not seeing the gains: that’s why I think a lot of us fail miserably. Because of the constant feeling or thought of not being enough. What sets the best leaders apart from the rest then? Let’s dig deeper into this one today.   #1 They Lead by Example   The best leaders don’t just talk the talk, they walk the walk. They set an example for others to follow by embodying the values and principles they expect from their team. Whether it’s showing up early, staying late, or going above and beyond in their work, the best leaders lead by example and inspire others to do the same. The same thing applies when it comes to the growth: how on Earth team members should be focused on learning when they don’t see it in their leader? It’s about both, skillset and mindset. Being better version of ourselves every single day. It’s like with children: they model what we do more than listen to what we say. Of course, words have a huge power, but it’s all about action. Where the focus goes, the energy flows.   #2 They Use Communication Intelligence   Communication is key in any relationship, and it’s especially important in a leadership role. The best leaders are able to clearly and effectively communicate their vision, expectations, and feedback to their team. They are also great listeners, open to feedback, and willing to have difficult conversations when necessary. This is all about communication intelligence: to be able to listen or read (depending on the situation), make strong hypothesis who is speaking to us on the other side and tailor the communication accordingly. Then to mindfully observe if it’s landing how we aimed it for. If yes, great! If not, change it: there’s always space to improve, to shape the communication better. It’s like a muscle on the gym: weak at the beginning, but it strengths up every time you train.   #3 They Empower Their Team   The best leaders understand that they can’t do it all on their own. They empower their team by delegating tasks, providing opportunities for growth and development, and trusting their team to make decisions. By empowering their team, the best leaders create a sense of ownership and accountability that drives success. Sometimes I see leaders that are not delegating tasks and then they are surprised by two things. Number 1 is that they are exhausted from doing everything on their own. Number 2 is that the team is not improving their skills, so they can’t trust to give them the more difficult or advanced tasks. No kidding, right? It’s a vicious cycle: if they don’t do it, they’ll never learn. You have a lot of Juniors in your team? Take baby steps. Give small tasks, recognize for what they need and then move to the next level.   #4 They Inspire and Create Motivational Work Environment   Great leaders have the ability to inspire and create that kind of environment that will create high level of intrinsic motivation in their team to achieve greatness. Whether it’s through their passion, enthusiasm, or ability to paint a compelling vision of the future, the best leaders are able to ignite a fire within their team that drives them to go above and beyond. Those leaders understand that we all are individuals, with different needs, hungers, aspirations, values and desires. There’s no one-size-fits-all approach: if we are leaders, we need to tailor the elements of the environment so it’s good for the whole team. It’s like with tailoring communication that we mentioned before. Not easy, but necessary (if we want for our people to thrive and not quit of course).   #5 They Adapt to Change   The best leaders understand that change is inevitable and are able to adapt and thrive in ever-changing environments. They are flexible, open-minded, and able to pivot when necessary. Instead of resisting change, the best leaders embrace it and see it as an opportunity for growth and improvement. The key word here? The Growth Mindset. Without the mind that wants to learn, sees opportunities in every situation (especially those that are uncomfortable, new or challenging) and believes that things are happening FOR us, not TO us. Do you want to have a leader like that? Yeah, me too.   #6 They Foster a Positive Culture   The best leaders understand the importance of creating a positive work culture. We have so much darkness around us, so much pain, war, diseases, troubles, scarcity. If we stay in the work environment that focuses on the same mindset, we’ll attract more of that. As mentioned before: where the focus goes, the energy flows. If we focus on what’s wrong, hard, on all of those bad changes that are happening in the organization, we’ll get more of the dark side of life and work. But, if we focus on what’s right, on the abundance of options, opportunities to learn, meet and growth with new people, use mentorship, create value for others what do you think we’ll get more of? Exactly.   #7 They Lead with Integrity   Integrity is a non-negotiable quality for the best leaders. They lead with honesty, transparency, and a strong moral compass. Even if they don’t have the full knowledge, they share with the team what they know and can give them to cut off the rumors or fear. They hold themselves and others accountable for their actions and always do what is right, even when it’s

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

What Does It Mean to Be OK-OK?

When I think about all workshops and mentoring processes that I deliver each week, very rarely I don’t talk about it with people. Sooner or later, this is a part of a conversation: whether we work together around communication, feedback, leadership, change or transformation. Today the story about OK-OK Matrix, which another name is Life Positions Matrix. One of the most important elements of Transactional Analysis framework, a base of building outstanding relationship: professional and private.   What is the Matrix?   The Matrix is a tool that show us four options that consists of set of beliefs, thoughts and feelings we have about ourselves and others. Based on where we are, we have a certain orientation, that becomes a base for our behaviors, ways of reacting on what happens for us: professionally and privately. It doesn’t really matter about which part of our life or work we think, this tool is applicable equally well. You can take a look on how the Matrix looks like on the simple picture below:   The first axis describes what we think and believe is a truth when it comes to ourselves: who we are (as people in general, but also in each role we have in our life: professionally and personally), what we do, what we are worth because of that etc. The second axis describes the same elements, but in the context of the external world: it can be another person, a group of people (the entire family, team etc.) or the whole institution (organization, state, the whole political party etc.). Where we are in the Matrix influences on our mood, mindset, behaviors in different situations, the way we react, how we communicate and make decisions. The first thing is to be aware what kind of dominant tendency we have in going into certain quadrants. Quadrant 1: OK-OK   OK – OK quadrant is the one that we should aim to be as frequently as possible. This is the space where we are fine, and everybody are fine too. I have good intentions and people have good intentions as well. Of course, not everything and everybody is perfect, but we aim to be the best version of ourselves, we support each other, we share knowledge and work as a team. This is a place where we have and develop a growth mindset. Thanks to that set of thoughts, believes, convictions and decisions we make base on all that we are successful, happy and build a good life. We see opportunities, abundance, instead of gaps and things we don’t have or know. We reach for more, instead of giving up.   Quadrant 2: OK-Not-OK   OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you are fine, but others – not so much. Example: ‘I always do everything I can to finish my list of tasks before the day ends, and he never does it. He always works 9-5 and then – regardless of how many things are undone, he just closes his computer and goes home. Ugh, I hate it!’. Or: ‘I’m doing everything I can and this organization? Only requires more and give less and less!’ This place is not healthy for us, since we are going to resent everyone and everything at the end of the day. Even if this is only one person at first, it becomes more and more severe with time. When we are OK and the world not, what we end up with? Hate, resentment, miserable life. I would say that’s not the best place to be, especially in a long run.   Quadrant 3: Not-OK-OK   Not-OK – OK quadrat is a low self-esteem place. We are there when we think that everybody is fine, successful, happy, except for us. A good example can be: ‘Ugh, everybody has somebody, and I’ll die alone with my cats’ or: ‘Everybody can handle their tasklist, and I never have time for anything!’ When we think about ourselves from this position, we are never good enough. Sometimes we choose one work or life role (consciously or not) that we are so bad at that it’s pathetic, sometimes it’s all over the place. It depends on what level of low self-esteem we took with ourselves from our childhood into the adult life. People who are raising us most of the time has good intentions, but the wording and behavior they use is not so good or adequate to those intentions.   Quadrant 4: Not-OK-Not-OK   Not-OK – Not-OK quadrant appears when you think that you suck, but other people too, or you have this belief that the environment / organization / economy / world is bad. Example: ‘My goodness, I am so bad at this, but I cannot learn since I don’t have time for anything in this company. My manager always gives me more to do, the colleagues are not helpful at all, and I need to do everything on my own, even if I have no idea what I’m doing’. This is the ultimate, negative place, that we operate from the fixed mindset. We don’t see any opportunities, we use fatalistic view of the world, ourselves, our relationships, competences, organization we work with etc. Everything and everyone are bad, there’s no hope for the better.   The Bottom Line   The bottom line here is that we fall out of the first quadrant multiple times every single day. It’s impossible to stay there all the time, since we are triggered by different stressors, we have frustrated motivational needs and that’s why we go into distress. Being in another quadrant than the most optimal one is being conditionally OK: I’m (or the world) is OK only if… I fulfill a certain condition. The key thing is to recognize when (in which circumstances) we lose our optimal position and what can we do to faster come back to it. Also, what matters is how we behave in relation to others: our employees, team members, supervisors, stakeholders, colleagues, but also in private

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

PCM: Communication Channels

When I was describing all 6 Process Communication Model (PCM) types, it dawned on me that if I want to find one aspect of it that interests me, I need to go into each article and look for one part. And there are some of those, that are more important to dig deeper into, a good example is the aspect of communication channel. So I’ve decided that I’ll go into this directing to simplify and edit this experience for you: to go into some aspects of PCM, with practical examples. Hope that’ll be useful and will give you all the impulse to start using it in real life.   What Are Communication Channels?   Before we go into the details, let’s start with answering this questions: what a channel actually is? Communication channel is the way we build a sentence we want to push forward the other person (doesn’t matter if it’s a written or verbal communication). Surprisingly it really does matter if we put a question mark or a period at the end of the sentence. It matters so much that most of the time it has a huge influence on if the communication will go through or not (will be efficient or will lead to a misunderstanding). What do I mean by that? Take a look on those examples (purposefully not business-related): What do you think about this painting? Please tell me what you think about this painting. Oh man, what a painting, I’m sure it kills us both just from looking at it!!!!! Thank you for being here with me to marvel this painting, I’m more than happy to hear your impressions on it. Do you see the difference? We all have one dominant preference of getting and using the channel, depends on our personality base. When you look on those sentences: which one is the most comfortable for you? Depending on which one you choose, it’s a strong indicator of your base.   Requestive Channel   The first sentence is a great example of a requestive channel. As you can see, the idea is simple: ask a question (so a sentence with a question mark at the end of it). Using the knowledge that you already have, you can see the difference between the questions that we can ask towards 2 bases that will prefer this channel: Thinker and Persister. Channel is only one part of the puzzle: if we want communication to go through with success we need to combine a preferred channel with a favorite perception. That’s why we’ll ask different question within a conversation with a Thinker and Persister. We’ll ask: Thinker: “What do you think…?” Persister “What is your opinion on…? / What do you believe…?” It is important to ask the right questions. And as much important is to know which channels are not so good to use in communication with certain types. Thinker and Persister will react really badly on others, but the worst thing you can do is to use directive channel. It will trigger them to go straight into distress, reactive aggressively form their attacker mask.   Directive Channel   Directive channel is about creating the sentence with the dot at the end of it. I would love for all of us to demystify being direct and separate it from being aggressive, rude or too pushy. Being directive is just saying what there’s to be done: I’m not asking you or hesitate. I just say it in a straightforward way, taking care of OK-OK perspective. Two PCM types prefer to get it: Promoter and Imaginer. And again, it will differ on how we build a communication to each of them. That’s because their need of getting directive channel is different: Promoter doesn’t want to waste time, so they just want to get a task and move to action. Imaginer wants to be invited to share what’s in their heads, so they need direct communication to do that. So, the way we is this channel matters. We’ll say: Promoter: “Please create this report for tomorrow, not later than 5PM.” Imaginer: “I need this report to be done by tomorrow, not later than 5PM. Please tell me what you see in your head when I ask you to do it.”  Both are tasks we want to delegate for a person but said differently. They are not very good at receiving requestive channel, also Imaginer will react with a drooper mask on Emotive one (too much emotion for them).    Emotive Channel   Emotive channel is about the positive energy and contact. As we can easily guess, the Rebel is our person here: it’s their favorite channel. In this one they can exchange energy, creative ideas, brainstorm and get into positive contact with others. It works even if it’s just for a little bit at the beginning of the conversation. How can it look like? “OH MAAAAN, this weekend was so dope, I need to tell you about it!” “C’mon, let’s do it and then we’ll go into the agenda: it won’t kill us to talk a little bit!” It is about 2-3 exchanges and then you can go to the point of the meeting or a conversation. Sometimes it’s just about the exchange and that’s enough: especially when you are a Rebel in a base yourself, you’ll enjoy the conversation itself if it’s led that way.   Nurturative Channel   Last but not least: Harmonizer and their preferred nurturative channel. Nurturative channel is all about seeing a person, feeding their recognition of person need. Harmonizers needs to be seen, as an important part of a team, community or other relationship. Sometimes it’s enough to say: “Thank you for being here. I know that recently it’s been crazy busy and hard, so I really appreciate you finding time to talk.”  The key thing here is to give a positive, nurturing recognition of a person, making them visible and important. In the world of endless task lists, constant rush and not

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Imaginer

Do you know a person or two who most of the time are staying in silence, observing the world that is around them? During the meetings, a family dinner or other friends gathering they are not the kings or queens of the party, but you can tell that they are processing in their heads what they hear? That’s the Imaginer. The last (but not least) of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE, then we’ve described the other 5: Persister, Thinker, Promoter, Rebel and Harmonizer. Today we’re adding the missing piece to our PCM puzzle, so we understand different people once we meet them, have them as team members or stakeholders in different circumstances (professional and private). For those of us who has little Imaginer energy (like myself), they might be the hardest to communicate with since they don’t say a lot of things out loud and their processes (i.e. decision making) are longer than in the rest of the types. Why is that? Let’s take a look! How do we recognize Imaginer? Imaginer is a person who experience the world through the lens of reflections (or inactions). Most of the time, they use their reflective mode: they have a lot of processes inside of their heads, so they see many different things in their brains. Sometimes it’s called inactions, since they don’t take action on what they reflect on until somebody says them so. How to recognize an Imaginer in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Imaginer it will be: “I imagine…”, “As I reflect on that…”, “In my head I can see…”, “I see it that way…”, “I picture…”. They say all that because they operate the best in their internal world. It doesn’t mean that they are antisocial (in a clinical way). I’m sure that you’ve experienced not once, not twice a person who doesn’t say anything, but you see their eyes moving or looking out through the window in intense internal process. That’s because there is a tough reflective sequence that’s happening in the head of that person. They have a lot of things inside them, a lot of options or scenarios they create in a certain situation. The recognition of Imaginer is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: like in the Thinker’s case, it’s a flat, computer face, with almost no mimics on it. Their voice is linear, monotonous, static. Their body is still, they don’t use movement to not waste the energy that they can invest in more internal reflective process. They don’t say much, but when they do, that’s what we can observe externally. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Imaginer in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person? What does Imaginer need in communication? The Imaginer needs communication process where they have a chance to reflect on things. Once they do it, here’s a time to directly tell them to share what they have in their heads with us. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can be alone to reflect, and then they are ready to talk to us. To be efficient in communication with Imaginer, we need to use directive channel of communication. It’s the same story we had in the Promoter’s description: Imaginer needs to know exactly what to do and say to us. It means that asking them questions is not going to work, since they are not responsive to the requestive channel. How to do it right? Using the same example as before: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be opening the conversation with a direct statement. “Hi Mike, I want you to take a task X. (Now we describe briefly what the task is about). Please tell me what showed in your head when I was describing it to you.” And we give them a moment to reflect. Pushing or rushing them is not going to work well, what can be hard, especially for Promoters and Rebels. They value Autocratic interaction style. It means that they are the most efficient when the other person just tells them what is there to be done and leave them alone, so they can go and focus on the delivery. Straight to the point, sometimes (especially for the people that are not so big fans of a directive communication channel) might look a little harsh or cold. It’s the same situation that we had in Promoter’s case, but the root cause is different. Promoter just needs to get the job done, and Imaginer needs to have direct communication, so they have a one communication and then they are left alone. Also, it helps them so they are not lost in the fog or the infinity of their imagination. Imaginer seeks to answer the existential question: will they come for me? Yes, they prefer to be alone, so they have a space and time to be in their reflective world. But they don’t want to be lonely: they need to have space to say out loud what they imagined. For them this sentence is the truth:   Somebody will come for me = I’m valuable as a person   A motivational need attached to this PCM type is It’s important to know it that sometimes for Imaginer the best way to help them is to leave them alone. It can be extremely difficult for Harmonizers, Rebels and Promoters, since their energy and need of contact is on higher level. They don’t understand how it is possible that a person can be so long on their own, sometimes even not leaving the house. Again: it’s not antisocial, it’s their way to

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Harmonizer

Some people are focused on data, some on exchanging opinions. Some wants to have fun, and some want to stop talking and start doing. And some are speaking emotions and take care of others. Do you know one or two people who are strong in that are? That’s the Harmonizer. The fifth out of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE, then we’ve described Persister, Thinker, Promoter and Rebel. Today we’re adding another piece to our PCM puzzle, so we understand different people once we meet them, have them as team members or stakeholders in different circumstances (professional and private). For those of us who has little Harmonizer energy, this one can appear like an extremely emotional person who can’t think logically. Why? Let’s unpack it today!   How do we recognize Harmonizer?    Harmonizer is a person who experience the world through the lens of emotions. Most of the time, they use their empathetic state: they have a very good and fast access to their emotional states, and they use this skill to map and understand it with others. How to recognize a Harmonizer in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Harmonizer it will be: “I feel”, “In my heart…”, “I love…”, “I am sad”, “I feel frustrated…”. They’ll use the whole spectrum of wording that describes emotional states. They say all that because they want to connect with others, but differently than a Rebel who wants to connect with as many people as possible, to share reactions. Harmonizer wants to have meaningful relations, that are important for them: privately and at work as well. They take care of others, about the atmosphere in the team. When they see a micro conflict or even a symptom that one can appear, they do everything in their power to stop it. They remember about birthdays, taking charge of organizing gifts, birthday cards and all types of evidence that we care about each other. The recognition of Harmonizer is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time their face is warm, with a lot of sighs of emotions on it. Their voice is soft, soothing, comforting. They lean heir body towards the other person while taking with them, using a moderate number of gestures to emphasize the support and care that emanates from their bodies. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Harmonizer in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person?   What does Harmonizer need in communication?   The Harmonizer needs communication process where they have a chance to express their emotions. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can go into contact with others to build meaningful relations and to matter to people. To be efficient in communication with Harmonizer, we need to use nurturative channel of communication. It means that we need to reach to the comforting and caring level of our energy to open a conversation. That means that asking questions or directly saying what’s there to be done won’t work in Harmonizer’s case. How to do it? Using the same example as before: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be opening the conversation with care first. “Hi Kate, thank you for finding out the time for us to talk. I know that lately it’s been hard, so I am grateful that we made it together. I’m going to take some things out of your plate and in exchange, I have a task that I feel will be a good fit for you.” Once they FEEL cared of, we have them on board to discuss the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.). They value Benevolent interaction style. It means that they need care, meaningful relations within they feel that they belong, are needed and important part of a team or community. One of the worst things that we can do while getting in contact with Harmonizer is to be too directive, asking questions, in a high speed won’t work very well too. Yes, they need structure and clear contract on what’s there to be done and for when, but they need to be in comfort to work around it. They value relations over goals, so it’s crucial to remember about it while building an environment for them. Harmonizer seeks to answer the existential question: am I loved? It’s not always about the romantic love. It’s more about the feeling that we are important, needed, valued as people. That we matter for others. For them the following equation is the only truth.   I’m loved by others = I’m valuable as a person   Two motivational needs attached to this PCM type are recognition of person and sensory. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Harmonizer goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Recognition of person means that we are seen as people. Not for what we do, but who we are. It’s different than the recognition of work that we’ve seen in case of a Thinker or Persister. Instead of “good job” we say: “it’s good to have you here”. The sensory means that this person is experiencing the world by using their senses. The environment should be nice, pleasant, they like colorful clothes, comfortable, warm and soft. Listening music or other sounds that have a good impact on their mind and body. Experiencing the nature, having plants in the room. Each Harmonizer can need something a little different, but the key thing is that they feed their senses. That kind of environment will cover what’s the most important for Harmonizer so they can

Read More »
Leadership

Do I Even Want to Be a Leader?

Why people accept being leaders? Is this something we dream about as kids? When we get the question: “Who you would like to be when you grow up?”, do we answer: “A middle manager in the huge, global organization”? Is it a matter of a “natural talent” we have and show as children to lead or maybe a set of skills that every person can learn and then use quite successfully? Why is that some people are great leaders for their teams and the others (statistically bigger representation) are making people miserable and in consequence: quitting? Let’s unpack this subject today.   The Story of One Tech Leader…   I work a lot with First Time Managers. Those are people who are fresh in leadership positions, statistically up to 3 years in the role. Most of the time there were great SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) and a natural move for them to grow was to be offered with a Team Leader role of the team there work in. I remember very well one story that relate to a Tech Leader I worked with in the mentoring process a couple years back. He was a very skilled expert in one of the leading technologies that was used in the core product of the company. He started as a junior, but learned very quickly, constantly participating in trainings, conferences and projects, working on different implementations and most of the time building functionalities from scratch. When he grew to the expert position, he also got the task of teaching others, onboarding new team members and acting as a technical mentor to them. He was doing great. Then, as an obvious offer for the organization he got a proposition to become a Team Lead of the team: the same one that he was an expert within. He took the job: the money wasn’t extremely bigger, but potentially more organizational and strategic impact was an argument that he was sold to. He thought: “I know everything about the scope of the team’s work, what else can there possibly be?” A few weeks later in the role showed him otherwise. He started to be a completely different person: like he had some hidden personality that was there, waiting to be awaken for so long. He started to be mean to team members, getting angry and mad very quickly when he saw any mistakes or imperfections in what the team delivered. He even got constructive feedback, by name on team daily meetings: what was unacceptable and never happened before. The team engagement started to drop; first people made decisions about leaving the area that they loved working within. That was the moment when he was redirected to me, so I support him in this situation.   Why People Accepting Leadership Roles?   This story shows us a few aspects of why we accept those roles connected to People Management when they are on the table. What I see from working with different cases and circumstances, there are 5 reasons that are the most common: I would say they cover 80% of all decision about choosing this career path: 1. The only way to grow. Sometimes people don’t see other options. They think that accepting leadership position is the only way they can be promoted or have possibilities to learn. Either is their strong belief that can have a root even in childhood (if it was a home conviction, being expressed loudly so we picked it up as children and we took it for life) or an experience from different organizations from the past. Sometimes it is true that organizations offer more, i.e. trainings, workshops, mentorship opportunities for leaders. It shouldn’t take place, so if you see if, I would advise to reach out your supervisor or HR person to take a closer look on that. 2. Fancy position name. Team Lead, Manager, Director, Head: the higher in the structure, the fancier it sounds. And the better it looks on LinkedIn or the resume. Potentially of course. The question is: do you want to grow in the leadership space in your current and different organizations on the market in the future? If yes, ok: the name of the positions matters, since recruitment process is marketing process (for both sides). If not: it doesn’t really matter. So, first: go and answer this question. 3. More potential influence / power. Sometimes we take leadership positions because we believe that’s the only way to make a real change. To get a seat at the table, to have opportunities to say things out loud, to be an advocate of what we say as a team. To have more positive influence or power to reshape a work environment, even if it’s just a small piece of it. The question is: is it a really a truth that by changing the role to be a leader, you will have this influence, more than you have as an expert? 4. Better visibility. I hear this one a lot. And it’s connected with the more influence and power element described above, sometimes treated as one thing. “If I’m a leader, I’ll be more visible = I’ll have more credibility to make a real change.” It also comes with the visibility on the market or in the specific part of the industry: when I’m a leader, I will be more reliable, my LinkedIn will blow out and I will have countless invites as an expert / speaker / podcast guest etc. Is it really a truth? Can’t you be all of these as a real expert in your area? 5. More money. Here comes a catch. The money part most of the time comes at the very beginning of the list of reasons on why to accept the leader role. And you know what? It’s not always the case. I saw multiple examples of extremely skilled, well-known experts that earned way more money than their supervisors. Because their skillset was super niched out, and there were

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Rebel

“Wooooooow, it’s soooo aweeeesome!!!”, “I like this idea, and this one sucks.”, “It’s plastic bombastic!” Do you know a person or two who speak that way? And yes, I mean an adult, not a kid or a teenager. The person that reacts really vividly to what’s happening, that says openly whether they like or dislike ideas, clothes or food? That’s the Rebel. The fourth out of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE and then we’ve described Persister, Thinker and Promoter. Today we’re adding another piece to our PCM puzzle, so we understand different people once we meet them, have them as team members or stakeholders in different circumstances (professional and private). For those of us who has little Rebel energy, this one can appear like a crazy person. Why? Let’s unpack it today!   How do we recognize Rebel?   Rebel is a person who experience the world through the lens of reactions. Most of the time, they react right away with a strong “like / dislike” statement. They either go for it or leave it and never start doing something. They have this free child energy that allows them to feel joy, excitement, experience the world with the enthusiasm that we often loose along the way. How to recognize a Rebel in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Rebel it will be: “Wow!”, “Awesome!”, “I like / dislike this!”, “Cool!”, “Amazing!”, “Oh, how disgusting!” They will use slogan words quite often as well. They say all that because they want to invite us to express our own reactions. It’s because they need to be in authentic contact with others, that’s how they feel that they belong and are accepted. They are extremely creative, thanks to their open-minded heads. A Rebel can be a great member of a team (or project team) at the very beginning of the initiative, when we brainstorm. They can figure out a big number of ideas, sometimes super weird or that seem impossible to implement. Those ideas that i.e. Thinkers or Persisters would never come up with. The recognition of Rebel r is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time their face is extremely emotive, with a lot of mimics on it. Their voice is changing, modulating to express the proper emotion and reaction they aim for. They move their body a lot, using a lot of gestures to emphasize what they want to express. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Rebel in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person?   What does Rebel need in communication?   The Rebel needs communication process where they have a chance to express their reactions. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can go into contact with others, by exchanging those reactions. To be efficient in communication with Rebel, we need to use emotive channel of communication. It means that we need to reach to those higher levels of energy we have (for some of us it can be pretty demanding) to get into the positive exchange as a start of a conversation. That means that asking questions or directly saying what’s there to be done won’t work in Rebel’s case. How to do it? Using the same example as before: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be energizing the conversation first. “Hi Bob, it’s dope to see you! Did you see this game on Saturday? OMG it was nuts! (you talk for a while so the Rebel can give their reactions too). And by the way, I have this task, it’s pretty awesome, you up for a mission?” For them it needs to be fun, even if for us it seems ridiculous. Once they are on board, we can talk about the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.). They value Laissez-faire interaction style. It means that they need freedom, autonomy and space to be creative and deliver things. One of the worst things that we can do while getting in contact with Rebel is to be too directive, asking questions, especially a lot of them won’t work very well too. Yes, they need structure and clear contract on what’s there to be done and for when but too much of a control or asking them in detail what they do will bring us the opposite results. Rebel seek to answer the existential question: am I accepted? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Rebel is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth.   I’m accepted by others = I’m valuable as a person   One motivational need attached to this PCM type is contact. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Rebel goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Contact means that we are going actively in positive interaction with other people. We are seen as important part of the conversation, exchange of ideas, and sometimes just a person who can change the temperature in the room for the better. We can feed the need of contact by getting into the conversation or positive exchange, even when we don’t feel like it at the moment or it doesn’t seem logical.   When do we know that Rebel is in distress?   Just a reminder: distress is negative stress, that costs us (and our environment) something. We are in distress when our motivational needs are frustrated and to cover them (in a really bizarre way), we into the distress sequence. How does is look like for a Rebel?

Read More »
Leadership

What a Leader Should Do When People Don’t Listen?

Did you ever had a situation when you’ve delegated a task, asked for something, gave a feedback or recognition and your employee didn’t listen? You thought that you’ve been crystal clear about your intention or what’s there to be done, but it didn’t land? Or maybe a member of your team even nodded their head, but it wasn’t delivered as you’ve asked? What comes to your head in the situations like that? What’s wrong with them? Or maybe it’s about me, I can’t even communicate with my own team? Let’s unpack it today and take a closer look on the root cause and potential solutions.   Is it about them as employees…   What makes a leader efficient and reliable? Once I was working with a leader in 1:1 mentoring process and he asked me this question: “Alex, what can I do so my team is more efficient? I do so many things, I give my people so much autonomy, they can do everything they want, but they don’t deliver things I ask them to. I would kill for so much freedom that I offer them.” Oh, here we go. The problem statement was “my people don’t listen to me, and they don’t deliver”. And the first question that I asked was: “Why do you think it happens?”. This leader looked at me like I was a crazy person, and he said: “It’s obvious: they’re disengaged and lazy”. The first thing that came to his brain. “Is this a fact or your interpretation of the reality?” He started to think. It took him a while, but afterwards he started to analyze. “Well… Sometimes when we are under a lot of time pressure, I’m more directive and distribute work among team members. We don’t have time then for discussions, it’s just a matter of delivering on a short deadline. I can tell that they work super efficiently then: like a pressure is a good thing for them”. Oh, here we go x2. In a lot of stories like that, the first thing of a leader is: it’s about them, not about me. And sometimes it really is about them. Lack of commitment, engagement, intrinsic motivation or skills: it can all happen. And we, as people, have different phases in our life: sometimes we are in an extremely good place, sometimes not so much. In a workplace, it’s our job as leaders to investigate what is the root cause of a certain behavior. Most of us are not psychologists or therapists, and it’s not our job to pretend that we are. But being curious, ask questions or make some statements that we’ll verify with an employee are tools to minimize the risk of the negative influence. In the example above, the time pressure and short deadline wasn’t the “motivator”. It was a directive channel of communication that the leader has used to distribute the work. Evidently his team consists of more Promoters and/or Imaginers than other PCM types. And notice what he said: “I would kill for so much freedom that I offer them”. So, by giving them so much of an autonomy he covers his own frustrated need, not theirs. The intention is good, but he’s not addressing the right need.   … or maybe about me as a leader?   We all have our own stories, experiences from the past, beliefs and convictions from our early childhood that shaped what we think and feel about ourselves and the world that’s around us. That’s perfectly fine: that’s what making us human. The question is: how much those things influence your leadership approach? You say: people don’t listen, I say: “why is that happening?”. Most of the time people don’t listen because you don’t speak their language: you speak your own and you expect for them to understand you. It’s like you speak English to a person who only speaks Spanish. The same part of the brain is responsible for using the foreign language as for using the language of different perceptions. If you talk data and I talk emotions, it’s almost impossible for us to get along. We just don’t understand each other, because we literally speak different languages.  The same thing is with the way we speak, so the communication channels. As in the example of a leader above: he gave people so much autonomy, probably without being more direct and concrete about the specifics that the team was lost in the fog. He didn’t want to be too harsh or pushy (in his head), so he hasn’t decided to use the directive channel that his team actually needed. How we speak does matter: whether it’s about the words that we use or about the way we build the sentences (channels). People listen better when the communication is tailored to their needs, and there’s no one-size-fits-all.   Solutions?   Know your people. If you are not aware what are the personality Bases of your team members, come back to the PCM materials, then make strong hypothesis of it and test them in reality. You can always use the Process Communication Model questionnaire and have a crystal-clear report, but you can also handle this without it. Get a little knowledge and use it, one step at the time. It doesn’t need to be perfect at the very beginning: the key thing is that you start building this muscle of recognizing the Base, so you can more automatically go straight into the better communication. Remember which words and channel use to which type. It’s crucial to tailor your communication. If you are going to speak the language of your people, they will listen and deliver work. Write down on one piece of paper all 6 PCM types with their main key words + preferred communication channel. Have it somewhere close to your laptop, so you can use it any time you’ll have a conversation. We all learn and that’s fine to have a little help at the beginning. What matters at

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Promoter

Can you recall any situation when a person went straight into doing things, sometimes without more in-depth analysis? Maybe too risky in your head? Or maybe it’s a person who is always in the movement, never sits in one place, and you feel like they live 3 lives in 1? That’s The Promoter. The third of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve already covered two of them: Persister and Thinker. Today we go into the next one, filling out the gaps in knowledge so it all makes sense after we cover everything. We’ll have the base on we can stand to start acting on it: not only KNOW from the rational perspective what we should do. Doing and practice: that’s what is the most important for the Promoter in the PCM personality Base. Let’s go into this world today to check what is the whole fuss about. How do we recognize Promoter? Promoter is a person who experience the world through the lens of doing things, acting on them, movement. Their perception is action itself, since they use their delivery part of themselves the most frequently. They always look for excitement and change in what is happening in their life, when they get a task, project or want to decide on something. The things around them need to be different, challenging, new. They don’t want to wait: they want to experience the world here and now. How to recognize a Promoter in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Promoter it will be: “Let’s go!”, “Let’s do things!?”, “Why to wait: let’s go and do it now!”, “doing…”, “walking the walk…”, “no more talking, let’s do things”. They say all of that because for them what’s important is seeing the results of their actions. They hate to wait, overanalyze, focusing on too many details. What’s important for them is to go, do things, see what happens and calibrate if needed. The recognition of Promoter is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time they have the furrows between the eyebrows (lion’s wrinkle), their voice is rather strong, they talk fast since they don’t want to waste time. Moderate gestures and body language, rather adjusted to the aim they have to achieve. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Promoter in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person? What does Promoter need in communication?   The Promoter needs communication process where they have a chance to go straight to the action. Extremely important for them as well is to know what to do, have space to do it and act as soon as possible. To be efficient in communication with Promoter, we need to use directive channel of communication (quite different than we had in Persister’s and Thinker’s story). Directive channel means that we create a sentence with a dot at the end of it. Promoter doesn’t want to waste time, so asking them questions or small talk is a nonsense, will never work. That means that we need to directly tell them whats’ there to be done. Using the same example that we got in the Persister’s and Thinker’s case: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be just telling them about it. “Please go and do a task X, the deadline for it is Y”. Honestly: it’s all they need, nothing fancy. They value Autocratic interaction style. It means that they are the most efficient when the other person just tells them what is there to be done and leave them alone, so they can go and focus on the delivery. Straight to the point, sometimes (especially for the people that are not so big fans of a directive communication channel” might look a little harsh or cold. But for them, it’s perfect. Promoter seek to answer the existential question: am I alive? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Promoter is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth. I’m alive = I can deliver value to the world Motivational needs attached to this PCM type is It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Promoter goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Excitement means that Promoter needs to have stimuli, things to do, new projects, environment, tasks to cover. This need can be covered equally good in private as in professional life. But the important thing is that boredom, monotonous tasks or circumstances is the worst thing that can happen to Promoter. When do we know that Promoter is in distress? Just a reminder: distress is negative stress, that costs us (and our environment) something. We are in distress when our motivational needs are frustrated and to cover them (in a really bizarre way), we into the distress sequence. How does is look like for a Promoter? Driver: you need to be strong for me (meaning: you are OK only if you are strong). On this level, Promoter will expect that people will suck it up, that they do everything on their own, without asking for help (which is weakness). When we see that kind of behavior, we can offer more excitement, changing the environment (going for the walk is sometimes enough), give a new task (even if it’s super small and might look stupid). Blamer Mask. Promoter wears a blamer mask on the second level of distress. It their case it means that they start to manipulate others, set up arguments, sometimes create negative drama. Everything to cover their need of excitement since they are bored. And drama is better than boredom. Cellar: At the

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Thinker

Do you have around yourself people that speak data and facts? That connects the dots all the time, since things need to make sense for them? That kind of people that are concrete, to the point and doesn’t what to waste time on meaningless discussions and rather focus on things that matter? That’s the Thinker. The second out of six personality types in Process Communication Model. We’ve started the story about PCM HERE and then we’ve described Persister, as the first stop on our journey to know them all better. Why is it important to characterize all of them? Because thanks to that you’ll know the whole spectrum of the types, so when you talk to somebody, you can make a strong hypothesis about their personality Base to tailor your communication. And because we communicate with others all the time, it’s crucial to have the maximum number of useful tools and practices so we don’t waste time on insufficient communication. At least that’s what the Thinker will say haha.   How do we recognize Thinker?   Thinker is a person who experience the world through the lens of data, facts and logic. Their perception is thoughts since they use their rational part of themselves the most frequently. They always look for logic in what is happening in their life, when they get a task, project or want to decide on something. The things around them need to have structure, and they want a lot of things to make a structure around them as well. So, things have their own place, they plan their time: privately and professionally. How to recognize a Thinker in the Base of personality? Again, the easiest way to make a strong hypothesis is to look for the key words that the person uses the most. For Thinker it will be: “I think…”, “The data says…”, “The logic says…”, “The logical choice will be…”, “The most accurate solution in this case is…”, “The chart shows that…”, “The data in the report give us…”. They say all of that because for them what’s rational and backed up with data, is valuable. If something has some gaps, there is not enough information, numbers or facts, the Thinker won’t do it. They will look for more evidence, gather more knowledge, examples or cases and then, when they have it all, they are comfortable with making a former decision. The recognition of Thinker is also easier when we look on their non-verbal communication: most of the time their face is “flat”, there’s not a lot of mimics on it. Their voice is rather monotonous, stable, as well as their body. They don’t overspend the energy on moving their bodies or use unnecessary gestures. If you see and hear it, that’s a strong indicator that there’s a Thinker in the Base on the other side of the communication process. How to use it to get along with that kind of person?   What does Thinker need in communication?   The Thinker needs communication process where they have a chance to express their thoughts. Extremely important for them as well is to have a space, where they can think, connect the dots, create logical solutions to the problems that occur. To be efficient in communication with Thinker, we need to use requestive channel of communication (as we did with the Persister). The difference is that we ask Persister “what do you believe…” and we ask Thinker “what do you think…”. That means that we need to ask questions about their thoughts on a certain subject. Using the same example that we got in the Persister’s case: when we want to delegate a task, so a chosen employee covers it, the great approach will be telling them about it and then ask about their thoughts on it. “Okay, here is a task X… What do you think we need to do to complete it efficiently?” Asking that kind of question is something that we can do to get in contact with the Thinker. Once they are on board, we can talk about the details (scope, deadline, support, required learning etc.). They value Democratic interaction style. It means that they are good in exchanging thoughts, ideas, solutions. They want to be asked on what they think. They like discussions, brainstorming sessions, but only when they are concrete and not too long. One of the worst things that we can do while getting in contact with Thinker is to use directive communication channel, but they also don’t really like the emotive (too much energy) and comforting (they don’t need all those emotions). But especially telling them what to do without even asking is something that they hate. When they have an autocratic person on the other side of the conversation, they go into aggressive behaviors. By being in that zone there is a huge possibility that they’re going to attack other people. So democratic interaction style and requestive communication channel is a key to success in getting on the same page with that person. Thinker seek to answer the existential question: am I competent? It’s good to feed that question, especially when we see that Thinker is under some kind of stress or pressure. For them the following equation is the only truth.   I’m competent = I’m valuable as a person   Motivational needs attached to this PCM type are recognition of efficient work and time structure. It’s important to know it, since when those needs are not met, Thinker goes into distress and loses access to their skills, abilities to think clearly. Recognition of efficient work means that we are seen as people for what we deliver at work and this delivery is with an exact (or better) outcome that we agreed on. Time structure means that we need to put things in order: when we plan our day, and something comes up, we don’t take it easily (especially then the thing that came up is an additional task that we get, outside

Read More »
Transactional Analysis

Process Communication Model (PCM): Persister

Do you know at least one person that always has an opinion on a given subject? That has a strong set of values and that is the base of most of the decisions that they make? The person that is trustworthy: when they say that something is going to be done, it will, 100%? That’s Persister. First out of six personality types in Process Communication Model (PCM), the concept created by Taibi Kahleb. You can read shortly about the concept HERE, to have a basic structure around what PCM is really about. Today, I would love for us to have a description of who the Persister is, how we recognize this type is in the other person’s Base. Meaning that it is their first floor of personality structure, where they have most of the resources, competencies, and skills. The Base also stands for what is the most natural way of communication for the other person and through what kind of lenses they observe the world. So today we are going to discover who the Persister is, how to navigate when this person is in front of us and what to do to communicate effectively. How do we recognize Persister? Persister is a person who evaluates the world around them by comparing it to their values and beliefs. Their perception is opinions, and a lot of situations with Persisters relate to comparing one thing to another. How they feel, how they think and how they operate daily against the law, rules, policies, ways of working. While being around people, they’re loyal, and they value trust. They always keep promises: for a Persister it is impossible to even think about not keeping the word. If they say they do something, they are going to do it, no matter what. So, we don’t need to ask them several times a question like: “Are you going to go to do it? What is the progress of it?” because they’ll always do it (in fact, that kind of questions drive Persister crazy). How to recognize this person if that we don’t have their personality structure yet? You can listen to the words they need. For Persister it will be: “I believe…”, “in my opinion…”, “we should do something” or …shouldn’t do something”, “I trust…”, “the important thing for me is…”, “the crucial thing is…”. They say those words because they see the world through the lenses of opinions and values: that’s how Persister is the most visible. Of course, we are talking about being in OK-OK zone. It’s about having an opinion, but also always having a good intention. It’s not about pushing the opinion no matter what or aiming to hurt others. They have an opinion on every single subject and even if they don’t (i.e., they’re not interested in something), they have an opinion on it. Like: “Ok, so I’m not into politics because it really doesn’t interest me: I don’t want to waste my time on that subject”. Based on that example, we can see that there is always an opinion, even if at the first sight there’s none. What is also important that Persister doesn’t have any problem with saying those opinions out loud. And it’s not about being rude: it’s about being persistent, having a voice that matters (in professional and/or private life). Of course, HOW the opinion is communicated is important (it needs to be said from the OK-OK perspective). If it’s not – it’s another part of the story. What do Persister need in communication? I’m trustworthy = I’m valuable as a person When do we know that Persister is in distress? What does to be in distress mean? Being a distress means that we don’t have our motivational needs covered and we go into a sequence that is aligned with certain PCM type. So, if you have a Persister on the other side of the communication process and their needs are frustrated, they go into distress, you will see 3 steps of the sequence. Being in distress means that we don’t think clearly. When it happens, we don’t have access to our skillset, abilities to deal with different (especially stressful and difficult) situations, we can’t act accordingly (even if we rationally know how to do it). That’s why it’s so important firstly to come back to OK-OK, to our Base, and then – once we are there, go and deal with the situation. That kind of approach is always going to work, regardless of the PCM type. It’s worth to remember the sequence, since it is repetitive. By training ourselves in recognizing patterns we train our muscle of reacting accordingly, without going into distress ourselves. The mask invites the mask: meaning that behavior under distress will have influence on us, and even if we are in OK-OK zone, we can go into the dark side. Being aware of what’s happening gives us tools to protect ourselves and support others in getting into better place. The bottom line Persister is a great person to cooperate with. When they say that they’ll do something, we can be sure that will happen, no matter what. We don’t even need to doublecheck: for Persisters it’s impossible to not deliver the things that we agreed on, it’s in their DNA to do it. Their strong principles, values, and a high-level need to be trustworthy make them great partners in crime. Of course, while being in distress, they lose access to those resources and go into not so shiny place. It requires more awareness, being mindful what happens with us (if we are Persisters in Base), and other people (when Persister is on the other side of communication process).    So, I invite us all to observe those behaviors described in the article starting today. It can help us more than we think, regardless of the type of relation, context, or situation that we are in. It’s always worth to develop in this area. PS. As a first exercise after reading this article,

Read More »
Self-Development

Process Communication Model (PCM): Main Psychological Needs

In the first article, I mentioned a few elements about the framework of Process Communication Model (PCM) and I’ve shared how much it changed the way I look at the communication itself, but also at differences (and similarities) that we have as people. It appeared that even if you know a lot of things, you can always learn something that can be a groundbreaking experience for you. And what can change the way you think about yourself and the world that is around you. What stopped me when I’ve started learning about PCM was many different elements of it that create the whole puzzle which describes the while structure of peoples’ personalities. And what’s inside of this: behaviors, the ways of reacting in certain situations (in a reaction for a certain stimuli or trigger), their preferences regarding the way they communicate, but also the way they want to receive communication from others. One of those elements that are extremely important in PCM’s structure are main psychological needs. What are they for each of 6 types of personality? Why we even talk about them? What happens when they are not covered? Let’s dig deeper into that space today. What Are the Main Psychological Needs in PCM? Each of 6 personality types in PCM has their own psychological need or needs. It is one or two the most important things that they seek to cover to feel balanced and to not go into distress. Meaning: if the main psychological need(s) is/are safe, a person is in a good shape and has access to their resources to make good decisions or solve problems in an optimal way. You can find below the structure way of those needs. Recognition of work means that the value that Persister and Thinker bring to the table in a work environment is visible and appreciated by others. Hard work, quality and time they’ve invested into a certain thing is worth the outcome and important for others who recognize that. Recognition of convictions for Persister means that what they value and that kind of beliefs and opinions they have regarding certain thing are meaningful for others. Time structure for Thinker means that there is an order of their structure of day, rituals, tasks they cover during the day (private and/or personal). It can be a structure around work/goals that are on the list for a week or month. The key here is to have everything in place, with a space to adapt it, if needed. Incidence for Promoter exists when things are happening. There is action, excitement brought by successfully delivered tasks, projects, achieved goals or key milestones on a path they follow. Being in contact for Rebel is a key thing since they need other people, space to discuss things, like or dislike them together. They need to have an external source of energy, making them feel that they have connection with the world that is around them. Recognition of person is quite different from recognition of work that was mentioned for Persister and Thinker. Recognition of person means that Harmonizer is seen as a person. That it’s good that they are there, they bring value to others by their existence. They are an important key player in the team. Because Harmonizers are using all their senses to experience the world that is around them, sensory is one of their main needs. It means that they need to have visuals (i.e., colorful spaces or art around them), sounds (may be different in terms of individual preferences), smells (like fresh bread, paint or grass), something they can touch (like nice fabric textures of furniture). It’s about feeding the senses they use to experience the reality. Solitude for Imaginers is a space where they can reflect on all those things that are in their heads. It doesn’t mean that they want to be alone all the time: it means that they need space, time and (most of the time) silence to recuperate and make space for their brains to work properly. What Happens When the Needs Are Not Covered? Once we know who we are and who are people that are around us (our children, significant other, friends, coworkers or direct reports), we have a ready solution to work with them. Your child is a Thinker? Give them recognition sign every time when they do something good in a workspace area (it can be about cleaning up their room or doing their homework). Your employee is a Harmonizer? Sit with them in a nice, colorful, closed room, give them a hot tea in a ribbed cup and say that it’s good to see them and have them in the team. But if you have a partner who is a Persister and you say to them after a great speech that they’ve just delivered that they look pretty, guess what happens? They can start feeling frustrated, since they’ve got not the right recognition (they seek for recognition of work, but they’ve got a recognition of person). Your intention was good, so you can be surprised that the reaction is not like you aimed for. The key thing here is to understand that it’s not about you: it’s about their need that was not fed in a right way. So, what happens when those main psychological needs are not covered properly? The person goes into distress. Meaning: they go and act not from their resources, but from their driver behavior. They might seem irrational, not accepting other peoples’ mistakes or closing themselves and doing everything on their own. Depends on the driver a certain person has and what happens with them in distress zone. The point is: when basic psychological needs are not fed, a person is not in contact with themselves, not making optimal decisions, might feel like they are not the best version of themselves. They might make mistakes, be sloppy, forget things, being mean, acting scared or resist all the time. A behavior depends on a person, but

Read More »