Advisor (Consultant) Roles

At yesterday's Awayday with the Clinical Trials Unit, I had an interesting conversation with the Director and Deputy Director, about the different roles an organisation like theirs can find itself operating in. It reminded me of the fascinating analysis by Peter Block in his outstanding book 'Flawless Consulting.' 

Here's my notes and reflections on the relevant part of his thinking.

Advisor Roles

“Clients” (who may be individual managers, or whole departments or organisations) tend to prefer us to work either in an expert capacity  or a ‘pair of hands’ role.

Equally we may feel more comfortable in one of these roles, particularly if dealing with senior or powerful Clients.  They are clear and either flattering (on the one hand) or easy (on the other).

While either of these roles may be appropriate on occasion, there are risks to both of them; not the least of which is setting a precedent (and associated habits of thought and behaviour) that will make it harder for us to re-negotiate a collaborative relationship when that is what is truly required.

The Expert Role

‘You go away and come back with the answer - you’re the expert.’

The problem here is that although an ‘expert,’ we may lack some of the Client’s understanding of his or her particular issues or organisation; also it is very much easier for our proposals to be rejected if they are formulated in isolation and then presented back to the Client.  If the Client feels that as experts we are challenging the Client’s understanding, wisdom or experience, we may well provoke a defensive response - and an equal and opposite reaction.

The Pair of Hands Role

‘Here’s what you need to do - go off and do it.’

As a ‘pair of hands’ we may find our expertise undervalued, and find that we are in a position where any suggestions we have to make are ignored, and that a lot of our time is wasted on trivia.  We may be expected to assume that 'the Customer is always right'; but that is a very simplistic stance that implies we have nothing to add to their understanding.  Likewise, we may find it difficult to negotiate for what we need for the successful delivery of a solution, setting ourselves up for failure.

Sometimes, if we are pushed towards a ‘pair of hands’ role and feel under-valued, our instinctive response is to emphasise our expertise - and move to expert role.

However, in both cases, seeking to move more towards a collaborative approach will give us more leverage in the Client’s system.

The Collaborative Role

The assumption here is that both you and your Client have something of value to bring to the situation, in terms of generating appropriate ways of working and developing solutions to whatever issue you are addressing. You have particular skills, knowledge, experience or expertise, which is why you are involved. The Client knows his or her needs, people, system, problems, history, and so on.

So a collaborative relationship is one that enables you to draw on both your understanding and insights, and your client’s, in order to develop the best ways forward - and to build the client's understanding and commitment to those solutions from the start of the process.  However, it is harder work for both you and the client, and takes more time...

Moving Towards a Collaborative Role

As with all movement, the direction depends on where you are starting from...

If you are starting the relationship from scratch, use your initial meeting to negotiate a contract on how to work together: take the opportunity to model a 50:50 collaborative relationship.  Make requests/demands as well as offers of help.  Treat the client as an equal, worthy of respect; and demonstrate that you expect to be treated in the same fashion.

Then use every opportunity thereafter to model a 50:50 approach: invite the client’s ideas and contribute your own, too.

If you are already in a relationship where the client sees you as an expert, seek realistic and relevant opportunities to involve the client.  Seek his or her views or advice on key decisions or options as you work through the project.  That will increase the client’s involvement, and also prepare him or her for the final presentation of your thinking, so that there are no surprises and much less likelihood of rejection.

If you are already in a relationship where the client sees you as a ‘pair of hands’ you may wish to engage with a role re-negotiation about how you can add more value if you are able to get involved with the decision making more directly.  Or you may choose simply to ask to be involved in specific meetings where you know key issues are to be discussed.  Another strategy is simply to start making suggestions in a proactive way, starting with issues which are important to the client and where you have suggestions that are likely to work.

In all cases, the issue is to identify where the client is (implicitly) placing you on the grid, and work out how and how far you will be able to move to a more collaborative working relationship.

Invisible Facilitation

I have been musing on visibility and invisibility of late.  Recently I have presented a number of conference sessions, runs some development workshops, and facilitated awaydays for a number of organisations.

Clearly, when speaking at a conference one is in the spotlight.  Whilst I frequently include quite high levels of participation, there is an expectation that the presenter takes centre stage and delivers some insight.

The same is true when running workshops.  There is more scope for participative and co-created learning, but nonetheless, people expect a certain amount of information to be delivered by the person at the front of the room.

But with the facilitated awaydays, I often think the best thing is for the facilitator to be invisible.  

Frequently my most important work is done in advance of the day:

• helping define what the issues are that need addressing 
• devising the best process for addressing them, 
• helping position people to engage positively with them; 

and so on. On the day itself, I may take a  much less visible  role.


Quiet roles a facilitator may fulfil (sometimes merely by his or her presence and manner) include:

• creating and sustaining a safe and positive space for the conversation, 
• agreeing and sustaining ground rules, 
• managing the time so participants can focus on the issues, 
• summarising discussions and moving the agenda on; and 
• ensuring clear next steps are agreed.

One of the facilitator’s concerns, of course, may be that if she or he is not seen to be doing very much, people may conclude that the role is unnecessary, or the particular facilitator is incompetent.  But my experience is the reverse. I often hear tales of (and occasionally observe) facilitators who do too much - who need to be in the limelight for whatever reason.  

But the feedback I get from clients when I seem to do very little is almost always very supportive: here is a quotation from one:  Especial thanks to Andrew.   It takes real skill to be so totally unobtrusive, and yet completely in control!  

So I think we should trust our clients (who, after all, want an effective event, not a showboating facilitator) to recognise our contribution, and not worry about being seen to perform.

Telephone coaching

One of the things I have enjoyed over the years of running my consultancy is noticing how the business has evolved and changed over time.  Normally, that has little to do with any strategic intention of mine, and far more to do with being responsive to clients’ good ideas.  My whole coaching practice developed in response to clients' requests.

And so it is with telephone coaching. My instinctive preference was for face-to-face coaching, and that with plenty of time: the Day in the Lakes offering is my ideal.

However, that is not ideal for many of my clients; and by the same token, neither is face-to-face coaching.  Some prefer telephone coaching for a number of reasons, and on reflection I think they are right - and I am valuing (and enjoying)it increasingly.  It has certainly become a larger part of my coaching work, albeit still well under half.

Some of the reasons are the obvious ones: 

Geography means that for some clients, telephone coaching is the only option (if they wish to work with me) as they are based a long way from where I am (some in other countries, or in far-flung corners of this one, like the Home Counties...); and then there are the environmental considerations of minimising unnecessary travel, (not to mention time efficiences) which provide another impetus towards phone coaching

However, there is more to it than that.  I find that some people find the different quality of telephone coaching especially helpful.  The question down the line... the silence... the chance to reflect before answering, without feeling someone’s eyes are on you...  These have their own dynamic, which seem to work very well for some people.

Moreover, by phone it is often easy to have a very brief, laser-like session.  When one or both parties have travelled to a meeting, there sometimes feels to be an obligation to make the meeting last for a certain minimum length of time...

As always, there is a structure in place (in particular the completion and return of the Success Report following up on action commitments prior to each subsequent session) that helps ensure that the sessions are productive in practice.

So why was I somewhat reluctant to go down this route in the first place? My initial concern, as a coach, was that by definition one is getting less information over the phone: none of the clues of body language and eye contact patterns are available.  But in experience, I find that the clues are all there in the words, the tone of voice, the pauses.  Despite my theoretical view of the limitation, in practice i do find that it works extremely well.

However, i am also aware that face-to-face meetings work best for some, and indeed some of those I work with principally by phone also welcome an ocasional face-to-face meeting too.

So what I am working on now is trying to develop some kind of guidelines or questionnaire or checklist (or something) that will help potential coaching clients decide whether phone, face-to-face, or a mix of both is best for them.

But maybe that’s unrealistic: maybe it is a matter of trying and finding out by experience what works best.

I’d be interested in any thoughts any of my readers, clients or colleagues may have on this, whether via the combox or private email.

The Vagaries of Freelance Life...

Occasionally people ask me about the way I run the business. Often, it is because they are vaguely considering cutting loose from organisational life and going freelance. So here are some reflections which may (or may not) be of help.

Running one’s own small  business is an interesting experience, and perhaps requires a certain approach which it is not easy to articulate.  I came across a phrase in C S Lewis some time ago, which seemed to sum it up perfectly: Divine uncertainty.

Things change, and they are hard to predict.

A few years ago, a lot of my work came in at relatively short notice: if the diary was fairly busy about 3 months out, that was good.  

But more recently, far more work is being booked as part of an annual planning process.  So, for example, last year looked as though it was going to be a very good year, both in terms of volume of work and the inherent interest of that work.  

There were lots of forward bookings, and plenty of leads and prospects for other things too.  Then with a change of leadership at one of my client organisations, a major programme was postponed; another project which looked promising got off to a relatively poor start and  much of the potential work never materialised; and moreover, very little work came in at shorter notice: suddenly from being a good year, it was just a year.

At the beginning of this (financial) year, June and July, the diary was relatively empty: so I invested a little time in marketing and re-connecting with the network as one does.  And then, suddenly a lot of work came in at short notice and the year was off to a flying start.  But here’s the funny thing: none of that was a result of the marketing and networking conversations I had had.  

By the same token, I sometimes get involved in tendering for work. More often than not, I fail to win work for which I am (in my humble opinion) really well-suited, but instead win work which is rather tangential to my core skills and experience.  But I have blogged before on the tendering process...

All this is worth mentioning, because it is something of a pattern.  If I neglect that side of the business, eventually things go quiet; if I spend time on it, things pick up - yet the causality is far from obvious. Maybe it’s just confirmation bias: but it really looks as though there is something in it.  

And not only did short term work come in, lots of it, and for the first time in months, but also the forward bookings were starting to come in.  Jane and I sat down for a forecasting meeting yesterday morning, and it was looking quite solid: lots of things in the diary, and quite a few prospective pieces of work, too.  If only some of those would firm up.  I made a list of some people to talk to about that.

But before I could do so, in fact that very day, five of those clients were in touch, confirming, and in one case radically expanding, that prospective work.  So this year (13/14) is looking very good indeed: lots of very interesting work, with a larger range of clients.

And the moral of this story?  I am not quite sure, but suspect it is something about requisites for running a small business including hope, patience and persistence.

Talking to myself

The other day a friend caught me talking to myself.  I am unrepentant.  Apart from Gandalf's observation about talking to the most intelligent person present, there are other good reasons to do so.

I am always particularly interested in notions I initially dismiss as bunkum, but eventually learn have some real value.

Positive self-talk is one of these.  It was my friend and colleague Ann Bowen-Jones who overcame my cynicism.  I was approaching a piano exam, as an adult learner, and confided to her that whilst my scales and pieces were OK, 'I am rubbish at sight reading.'

She picked me up on this, and pointed out that if I repeated that to myself often enough, it might not help...  The neural basis for that is the same as learning, say, times tables by rote.  As a child I said '3 times 4 makes 12' (and so on) so often that now if someone says 3 times 4, the answer 12 comes automatically to mind. Ann's point was that I was teaching myself to respond poorly to the words sight reading, so when the examiner said it was time for the sight reading test, my brain would instantly respond (internally only, if I was lucky!) 'I am rubbish at sight reading.'

So she got me to think of the most positive thing I could think of to say about my sight reading which I could actually believe (she was clear that lying to oneself is pointless), and then repeat that over and over to myself, in groups of 3 ('When relaxed, I am OK at sight reading.')  Three times on getting up , three times on getting into the shower, and so on.  And being a good friend she got me to do this despite my resistance and incredulity.

The result astonished me.  The examiner duly announced that it was time for the sight reading, and my brain told me 'When relaxed, I am OK at sight reading.' - and I played the piece OK; not perfectly, but it was very much better than the previous exam when my fingers had turned to jelly.

So I am a convert to affirmations.

Here's the content of a handout I sometimes give people explaining them:

Affirmations

Affirmations are a powerful psychological tool that we can use to help us to overcome habitual inner dialogue that inhibits or limits us.

For example, approaching a major presentation, you may find that a gremlin voice in your head starts to tell you, repeatedly: “I’m no good at presentations.  This will be a disaster.”

Rationally, you may know this not to be true (or not wholly true..), but nevertheless, the persistent inner voice can be very debilitating, and can cause you anxiety that then sabotages your preparation and delivery.

Affirmations target this inner dialogue directly, by replacing the habitual negative message with a habitual positive one.  (There’s a lot of clever stuff about neurology that underpins this...)

How to use affirmations

1    Identify a future situation that causes you to feel weak in the stomach (eg a forthcoming presentation) or a recurrent and habitual negative thought that inhibits your performance.

2    Identify any negative inner dialogue that you are using to sustain that feeling (eg “I’m no good at presentations.”)

3    Write out the strongest positive statement, contradicting your negative inner voice, which you can believe to be true (eg “When well prepared, I present with confidence.”)

4    Repeat the affirmation to yourself, 3 times in a row, several times a day over the days leading up to the event.  If you notice your old habitual self criticism cutting in, laugh at it and interrupt it with the affirmation (Eg if you notice that you are beginning to think “I’m no good at presentations,” interrupt with: “Good try... however, when well prepared, I present with confidence!”)

5    Repeat the affirmation immediately before the event or in times of need, as appropriate.

Cardiff Futures Final Day

On Thursday, it was the last day of the first Cardiff Futures programme. The day was designed for reflection, planning and celebration, so there were no guest speakers, nor formal sessions.

Instead the VC opened the day by setting out the themes and purpose of the day, and we watched a video diary of the last 8 months compressed into 6 minutes.

Then it was over to the participants. They worked initially in small groups, then in plenary, and then in their project teams; reflecting, sharing, discussing and looking ahead. I don't want to say too much about the process, as we want future cohorts to approach it fresh...

From the feedback on the day, it seems people have found the whole programme a powerful and valuable process - and largely enjoyable, too.

We will, of course, be undertaking a longer term evaluation; but it is heartening to see that next year's programme is attracting a very high level of interest, from which I conclude that participants are saying good things about the programme behind the VC's back, as well as to his face!

From our point of view it has been good to see that the programme works even when extended beyond the Humanities, to include scientists and other such strange people... We always thought it would, but it is good to have that proved.

In the evening we were joined for a celebratory dinner by many of our guest speakers over the year, as well as by sponsoring managers, and had a very convivial evening, particularly giving them an insight into the projects.

A Different Approach

Yesterday, we had the final day of this year's Unpacking Your Chair programme at Newcastle University.  I have blogged before about this award-winning programme (click on the tag UYC) and also on the Futures programme which has been so successful at Newcastle, Essex and Cardiff Universities (cf various 'Futures' tags).

At the end of yesterday's event, one of the participants was saying that the programme had raised more questions for him than it had provided answers - and he and I both thought that was a good thing.

Which set me thinking about how these programmes differ from some of the more corporate leadership programmes I see increasingly in Higher Education.

The corporate programmes seem to me more prescriptive.  Work has been done to identify Leadership Attributes and articulate the University's strategy, and what is needed now is to get people to act accordingly.  So programmes are put together with clear learning objectives and a somewhat didactive philosophy.  Sometimes, it seems to me, corporate programmes are put in place as a solution to relatively isolated instances of under-performance or misapplied effort: rather than leaders dealing directly with the few people who are not contributing appropriately.

The approach we have developed is rather different, and I think rests on different assumptions.  We do not shy away from the didactic, in terms of sessions that teach about the University's finances, for example, or the University's or Faculty's expectations of the professoriate (on Futures and UYC programmes, respectively).  However, we provide such teaching by way of context: the underlying assumption is that participants will use that context to make their own decisions about how best they may contribute.

Thus a large part of our process is discursive: discussions of different perspectives and perceptions, different aspirations and strengths, and the different ways in which people may valuably pursue their own interests and strengths in ways which are congruent with the context and contribute to the institutional purpose.

There are several implicit assumptions underlying this approach. One is that, by and large, people wish to make a positive contribution to the organisation. A second is that academics will, and indeed should, pursue their particular areas of interest and play to (and build on) their strengths.  A third is that commitment and motivation are generated more by people freely subscribing to the institutional agenda than feeling that they are being expected to submit to it.  A fourth is that the mutual understanding, and indeed friendships, generated by this approach encourage a broader engagement with the institution, as well as being stimulating in a number of other ways.

It is harder, of course, to predict what precisely people will learn, following this approach; but the longer term follow-up we have done at both Essex and Newcastle has highlighted both that it is valued by participants over the longer term, (and credited by them with supporting or stimulating many and various achievements) and also that senior managers recognise the longer term positive impact of these programmes in terms of the increased energy, agency, and contribution of most participants.

This is very much a 'thinking out loud' post: I would be interested to hear from anyone who sees it differently, or has more to add: particularly if they have been involved in any of the programmes I have mentioned.