Dealing with Anxiety

Mon, 9 Jan 2012 08:36:16 +1000

Opera singers have a saying as they are about to go on stage ‘In Bocca al Lupo’ which means ‘into the jaws of the wolf’. They know that they are about to do something that could go badly wrong and so they salute each other as they step into that fear of failure.
Recent research on performance and anxiety tell us that this is smart. Instead of trying to get rid of anxiety, it seems to be more effective to mindfully and compassionately make space for it and then do what matters.
Whenever I present a workshop or a speech, I am always anxious beforehand and often anxious during the session – even though I have been doing it now for 10 years and have presented to thousands of people. I used to long for the day when the anxiety wouldn’t show up. I was sure that at some point my stage fright would go away. It didn’t. However, now I have changed my relationship with my fear.
Now I realise that the anxiety is telling me that I care deeply about my work. I am anxious because I want to present really well. I want to deliver my session in a way that makes it easy for my audience to relate to the content and understand how they could put it into practice. I want to do this because the content is evidence based information that might just make their lives better.
So I step ‘in bocca al lupo’. What do you care so deeply about that you are willing to step into fear?

More on Making the First Offer

Tue, 30 Aug 2011 07:42:18 +1000

In my last newsletter I stated that the person who makes the first offer in a negotiation is more likely to get a better outcome. This is based on negotiation research (1). However, your offer has to be within the bargaining zone if it is to create a better outcome for you (1). The bargaining zone is the overlap area between what you are prepared to accept and what the other person is prepared to offer. You need to have enough information so that you know what a good, bad and ok agreement would look like for you and also so that you can guess what a good, bad and ok agreement would look like for the other person..

Your offer also needs to be supported by sound reasoning which takes into account the perspective of the other person. Considering the other person’s perspective increases the likelihood of getting what you want (1) and decreases the likelihood of you making them angry! This becomes crucial if you have less power than the other person (2).

To give an example, say I think I should be paid more for the work I do. Picking a number that feels right to me and then telling my manager that I want a $10,000 pay rise is likely to either sour our relationship (if it is a lot more than she would ever consider giving me) or leave me with less than I deserve (if she was planning to offer me $15,000 and would have been prepared to agree to $18,000). However, if I have done some preparation by benchmarking my work and pay against others, then I will know that I could get another similar role elsewhere for at least $15,000 more, possibly $18,000, which also means that my manager would have to pay at least $15,000 more to replace me. So I choose a first offer at the top end of the bargaining zone (say $18,000) and the discussion becomes anchored around that figure. Whereas, if I let her make the first offer, we will be discussing figures around $15,000.

My preparation also means I can give my manager a sound case for why I think my work is comparable with those in the more highly paid roles. I will be able to provide specific examples of what I have done and how it has benefitted the organisation. She is more likely to say ‘Yes’ and if she says ‘No’ at least I don’t look like a fool!

1. First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. Galinsky, Adam D.; Mussweiler, Thomas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 81(4), Oct 2001, 657-669.
2. Power, propensity to negotiate, and moving first in competitive interactions. Magee JC, Galinsky AD, Gruenfeld DH. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007 Feb;33(2):200-12

Making the First Offer

Tue, 30 Aug 2011 07:37:10 +1000

Many negotiation books will tell you to always let the other person make the first offer.
This is not good advice. The first offer tends to ‘anchor’ the negotiation i.e. other offers get compared to that first offer, which means that the first offer can be very important in determining the outcome of the negotiation.
Instead – do the research and find out what is a possible but very good deal and make an opening offer based on that. If the other person ‘starts the bidding’ then quickly make your own opening proposal with the aim of of ‘re-anchoring the negotiation around your proposal rather than theirs.

An example:
You are negotiating your salary package. Find out the going rate for other positions like this. Consider what you would value other than money that might be easy for them to give to you. (Flexible working hours, training, a name change of the role so it is positioning you well for the future etc). Then make a high but realistic offer. If they accept your first offer you may have opened too low.

The Benefits of Psychological Flexibility

Wed, 10 Aug 2011 19:12:17 +1000

Psychological flexibility is associated with both improved mental wellbeing and a number of positive workplace outcomes such as: decreased absenteeism; decreased burnout; improved leadership effectiveness; improved ability to handle stress and change and improved performance.

Psychological flexibility consists of a number of factors:
1. Being in contact with the present moment – being able to see the situation as it really is rather than treating judgements and assumptions as facts.
2. Choosing behaviour based on personal values (e.g. what sort of manager I want to be).
3. Skills relating to handing thoughts and feelings. A psychologically flexible person doesn’t let their thoughts and emotions control their behaviour. They are able to do the right thing even in the presence of painful thoughts and feelings. They also understand that sometimes doing what is important (for example having a difficult feedback conversation with an employee) brings up uncomfortable thoughts and feelings. Interestingly, they don’t waste energy trying to control their thoughts and feelings.

Training to increase psychological flexibility is looking promising. One study involving 4 x1hr sessions led to a significant decrease in absenteeism for workers suffering from stress and chronic pain (0.5 days in the study group v 56.1 days in the control group in the six month follow up).

Professor Frank Bond is doing some ground breaking research in this area. For example, in a soon to be published study, he found that adding psychological flexibility training to a leadership course led to significantly increased profit for the organisation (compared to teams who were led by managers who did the usual leadership course).

Frank is coming to Brisbane in September 2011 and is running a workshop as part of the ANZACT 2011 conference. I will be in the front row! Hope to see you there.

Managing Change

Wed, 1 Jun 2011 20:16:30 +1000

This month’s tip is provided by my friend and colleague Trisha Kendall of Changecorp (http://www.changecorp.net.au/) who has helped thousands of people to manage and embrace change. Over to Trisha…
Clients often ask me for strategies for managing the people side of change. For me, the ADKAR model (Hiatt, 2005) is simple and highly effective. Next time you’re faced with implementing a change, consider this:
Create AWARENESS– communicate what the change is, why it’s needed, and what it means for your staff.
Build DESIRE to embrace the change – promote the benefits of the change while also recognising that people may be fearful of change. Acknowledging potential losses is essential to overcoming resistance.
Equip staff with the KNOWLEDGE & SKILLS required to do what is needed post-change.
Ensure an ABILITY to implement the change – ensure that systems, processes and procedures support the new way of doing things.
Finally, REINFORCE the change – recognise those embracing the change, while also addressing the behaviours of those who aren’t.

How Social Network Theory Can Help You to Build More Effective Teams

Tue, 8 Feb 2011 21:32:54 +1000

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

He found that the most effective teams include:
1. a mixture of both experienced people and individuals who are new to the field
2. some people who have worked together before and some who haven’t.

I would add to this - once you have selected the right people, the next important step is to spend some time clarifying roles, responsibilities and ground rules. If you would like a free outline of how to develop an effective team agreement contact me and I will happily email it to you.

Developing Team Ground Rules

Tue, 8 Feb 2011 00:18:54 +1000

Research on high performing teams has found that they usually have clear ground rules and agreed consequences for both behaving in line with the ground rules and for not following the ground rules. The ground rules and consequences are agreed in advance and applied consistently.

When groups get into trouble it is often because there has never been a meaningful discussion about the ground rules or about how violations of the rules will be dealt with. This means that each member of the group will apply their own rules and consequences – often with unfortunate results.

So what does a meaningful discussion look like?
1. It is grounded in a shared vision of what group members want this group to be like and what they hope the group will achieve.
2. It is specific – ‘We will treat each other with respect’ is too general, the discussion needs to get into the specifics of what that will look and sound like. For example, for some people, behaving respectfully means starting a meeting on time, for others, it is waiting for others to arrive before starting the meeting.
3. It is curious and non-judgmental – people try to let go of the belief that their way of behaving is the right way and are interested in others perspectives.
4. It is flexible – the rules are not set in stone, they can change and develop as the group tries them out.
5. It is kind and compassionate. It recognizes that humans are fallible. Any consequences for failing to follow the ground rules take this fallibility into account.
6. It recognizes that most people are conflict avoidant, so it has strategies for resolving difficulties that feel safe and supportive for all involved.
7. It results in a written document summarising the agreement that group members can refer back to in the future.

Making Wise Decisions

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 00:07:24 +1000

Here are some strategies to try when you have to make a difficult and important decision.
1. Ask yourself, what would a wise person do? Perhaps think of a specific person who you see as having made wise decisions in that area.
2. Gather information to increase your knowledge about possible options and likely outcomes.
3. Write out the issues and options – this will help to activate the more logical, forward thinking part of your brain.
4. Consider how you will view this decision when you are 80. Acknowledge to yourself that you can’t know the outcome of your decision (if you could the decision wouldn’t be difficult). Look at your options and ask yourself ‘Which decision will I look back on when I am 80, even if this doesn’t turn out the way I want it to, and feel proud of myself?’
5. Imagine yourself committing to each option – notice how your body feels. Is your intuition trying to tell you something?

Don’t Set Stretch Goals

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 00:06:39 +1000

Ray Williams says that stretch goals are a waste of time. We often don’t achieve them and feel overwhelmed and de-motivated by them.
He suggests
• Linking your goals to your values
• Setting small incremental targets
I think he makes a fair point. But I would suggest that personality is everything here – if you like risk and thrive on change, you will love stretch goals. If you prefer a more peaceful existence then smaller, more manageable goals are going to work better for you. When setting goals with others; take their personality into account.

Debunking a Common Myth about Communication.

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 00:02:31 +1000

If you go to enough communication seminars, you will at some point be told something along the lines of ‘only 7% of our understanding of what someone is trying to communicate comes from their words; 38% comes from tone of voice and the remaining 55% comes for body language’. Sound familiar? It isn’t actually true. If you read the original research by Albert Mehrabian you discover that his finding actually only relates to our interpretation of another person’s emotions and his studies were very limited. (People were asked to interpret how someone felt based on hearing a single word e.g. ‘Terrible’ sometimes spoken using non-verbals that were congruent and at others using non-verbals that were incongruent.)
So what is a better take home message?
• Do choose your words with care – they really matter
• People are really good at noticing when your words don’t align with how you are really feeling – so try to avoid being fake
• People are egocentric beings and will tend to assume that your emotions are about them. So if you are upset or angry about something else, acknowledge those emotions “I am really sorry if I am coming across a little short today, the kids were both up several times in the night and I am tired and crabby. You are doing a great job here.”

Newsletter