Consultation The Core Competence of Leadership in the 21 st Century

1. ConsultationThe Core Competence of Leadership in the 21st Century Lawrence M. Miller

2. What went wrong at Enron? • Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld writing in the Harvard Business Review said “We need to consider not only how we structure the work of a board but also how we manage the social system a board actually is. We’ll be fighting the wrong war if we simply tighten procedural rules for boards and ignore their more pressing need – to be strong, high-functioning work groups whose members trust and challenge one another and engage directly with senior managers on critical issues facing corporations.” [1]J. A. Sonnenfeld, Harvard Business Review, September, 2002, p.106.

3. Why Consultation? • Andy Grove, The Burning Plant & Drug Policy • Good To Great: Jim Collins – Level 5 Leadership: “Seemingly ordinary men…Level 5 leaders channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the larger goal of building a great company. Its not that Level 5 leaders have no ego or self-interest. Indeed they are incredibly ambitious – but their ambition is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves.” • “The great irony is that the animus and personal ambition that often drive people to positions of power stand at odds with the humility required of Level 5 leadership.” • Beyond the Lone Ranger

4. The Capacity to Consult = Value Whole System Change Model

5. Fundamental To Bahá’i World View “Consultation must have for its object the investigation of truth. He who expresses an opinion should not voice it as correct and right but set it forth as a contribution to the consensus of opinion, for the light of reality becomes apparent when two opinions coincide. A spark is produced when flint and steel come together. Man should weigh his opinions with the utmost serenity, calmness and composure. Before expressing his own views he should carefully consider the views already advanced by others. If he finds that a previously expressed opinion is more true and worthy, he should accept it immediately and not willfully hold to an opinion of his own. By this excellent method he endeavors to arrive at unity and truth. Opposition and division are deplorable…Therefore, true consultation is spiritual conference in the attitude and atmosphere of love. Members must love each other in the spirit of fellowship in order that good results may be forthcoming. Love and fellowship are the foundation”. (Abdu’l Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 72) ”

6. Consultation is…(purpose, intention, not mechanics) • …the process of creating collective wisdom among a group. • …a culture of shared responsibility and ownership for results. • …detaching the ego from the idea, contributing, letting go, and submitting to the group. • …a process of learning, inherent in the process of deciding. • …a process of establishing unity of thought and action. • …reaching a decision through a focus on principles, honest and frank sharing, completely open listening and detachment of self. • …the spiritual quality of humility and unity.

7. Stages of Evolutionfrom King to Consultation Global Society (Maturity) (Inter-dependence) Democratic/Pluralistic (Adolescents) (Independence) Traditional Societies (Parent-Child) (Dependence) Pre-Historic (Embryonic) (Survival Subsistence)

8. Evolution of Governance Global Society Consultative Decision Making Democratic/Pluralistic Representative Democracy Free Expression, Press, etc. Traditional Societies Command Authoritarian Decision-Making and Control Pre-Historic Family, Tribal Authority

9. Stages of CapacitySource of Authority/Order Global Society Divine Democracy Democratic/Pluralistic From God to Man to Government “Natural Rights of Man” Traditional Societies From God to King to Man “Divine Right of Kings” Pre-Historic Patterns and Power Sun, Moon and Might

10. Stages ofHuman Knowledge Global Society Unity of intellect and spiritual Knowledge, global Internet Democratic/Pluralistic Printing press, telephone, television, Dominance of rationalism Traditional Societies Oral then written history, beginning of science And rational thought Pre-Historic Small circle of contact, No writing

11. Shared Purpose Shared Principles Shared Understanding of the Process Mutual Trust – Honesty Ability to Sacrifice for the Group Love and Harmony What are the Prerequisites for Effective Consultation?

12. When Is Consultation Used? • When decision is to be owned by participants. • When members share knowledge. • When full commitment is required. • When members “need” to be heard. • When learning is desired.

13. When Is Consultation Not Used? • When person with power “knows” answer. • When in crisis - “building is burning.” • When it is not worth the cost.

14. Situational Decision Styles • Command: The Military model, in crisis, command produces conformity, and disciplined action. • Shared: Most frequently used, partial involvement of those with knowledge and responsibility. Individual stills “owns” decision. • Consultation: Group decides and owns the decision, maximum involvement.

15. Types of Decision-Making: When, Why and Who?

16. Consultation requires new structures – structure reflect and condition organization culture

17. Consultation requires new role definitions

18. Internal Structure:FacilitatorTime KeeperScribeFormal LeaderSubject Matter ExpertsCoach

19. The Organization Chart Can Reflect Team Relationships and Mechanisms of Control and Knowledge Sharing.

20. Team relationships may be complex, organized into a web system. Subject Matter Experts (SME’s) May Organize Across Team Boundaries as Knowledge Networks.

21. The FourContainerswithin the Meeting:The Skills and Practices

22. The Container ofStructure &Organization • Purpose of the Group • Relationship to Others • Relationships within Team • Roles and Responsibilities • The Agenda • External Direction and • communication

23. The Container of Dialogue:Thinking Together Rather than Thinking Alone • The search for meaning, understanding. • Dialogue seeks to gain the insight of all parties and create collective wisdom, unity, or a new way of looking at an issue.

24. The Container of Decision-Making and Action Planning Creating Decision Criteria Generating Alternatives Deciding on Alternatives Reaching Consensus Action Planning Creating Accountability

25. The Container of Facts & Analysis • External Research & Fact Gathering • Brainstorming Causes of Problems • Organizing Facts Using Cause & Effect Diagrams, Affinity Diagrams, Pareto, Process Maps, Mind Maps, etc.

26. Exercise: • What is the biggest obstacle to consultation? • Solution to #1? • What is open for consultation and what is the “right” of management and owners to decide?

27. TransformingThe Quality of Conversation From Debate to Dialogue Larry Miller International Leadership & Management Landegg International University

28. The Problem • Do we genuinely engage in the creation of collective wisdom? • Do we understand the “story” behind the comments of views of others? • Do we truly gain knowledge and insight available a level down from presenting comments?

29. Types of Conversation • Conversation: all interaction among a group of people in their effort to reach a decision or understanding regardless of the quality or nature of that interaction. • Debate is a conversation in which the parties assume opposing positions and view the goal of the conversation to be the victory of their position over that of their opponent. • Discussion is a conversation in which the goal is to reach a decision that both parties can accept and which may represent a compromise or combination of positions previously held by the parties. • Dialogue is a conversation that explores the meaning and nature of an issue in an effort to create insight and understanding on a deeper level. Dialogue seeks to gain the insight of all parties and create collective wisdom, unity, or a new way of looking at an issue.

30. The Triangle of Conversation

31. Many Conversations are Dances of Power – ThePursuit of Victory or Dominance

33. Dialogue Listening Inquiring Suspending Judgment Many Possibilities Unifying Appreciation Looking at the Whole Uniform Input Reactive Voicing Debate Convincing Acquiescing Speed of Judgment One right way Dismissive Categorizing Fragmenting Diverse Input Authentic Voicing Determining Behavior

35. Exercise: • What are some of the qualities or conditions that cause to remain at the bottom, or rise to the top of the pyramid?

36. Debate The purpose of a debate is not for the parties to engage in learning. Rather it is to convince the audience that one participant has a superior position and most skillfully argued that position. Dialogue Dialogue requires the listening of the writer, the ability hear the voice of the other person, to listen to their story, to enjoy the details that give meaning to each story. Listening to your own voice 1. Listening versus Convincing:

37. Debate Groups in a closed system are likely to be extremely accepting of the views of its members, particularly when those views are expressed by the person in power or expressed framed in the their ideology. This acquiescence avoids the intellectual inquiry, the asking of questions that are the fundamental tool of learning. The Abilene Paradox Dialogue Questioning is the foundation of science. Without questioning there would be no science or human progress. Inquiring minds, questioning minds, seek meaning, significance and underlying truths. The ability to ask questions, to ask the simple question “why?” is the first skill of acquiring wisdom. 2. Inquiring versus Acquiescing:

38. Debate There is an unstated value in our culture that rewards quick decision making. This is a natural remnant of the military culture of command. On the battlefield the officer was required to make judgments quickly in order to win a victory or save the. lives of his men. Culture of the quarterback Dialogue Dialogue is intended to achieve profound understanding... In order to achieve these things it essential that we participate in a period of suspended judgment. We agree to control our thoughts, to determine, like a jury awaiting all the evidence, to withhold judgment. Non-Western cultures. 3. Suspending Judgment versus Speed of Judgment

39. Debate One enters a debate with a position. In debate one defends one’s position and argues one’s position. In the closed-system cycle there is little consideration of alternatives precisely because the more alternatives are considered, the more questioning must occur. “Hubris” Dialogue One enters dialogue with questions. In dialogue you defend nothing and question everything in a search for meaning and importance. A group engaged in open-systems thinking will consider more alternatives because it is precisely from that consideration that learning will occur. Humility and assumption of learning. 4. One “Right Way” versus Open to Alternatives

40. Debate When we hear a comment we do not like, one that differs from our understanding or point of view, we may have a tendency to place that in a category, or place the entire person in a category. Ideological and authoritarian groups tend to quick categorization. Dialogue By acknowledge the truth or value in another’s comment you create a unifying bond, the opposite of alienation. This appreciative comment will make the other person more comfortable and more likely to contribute in the future. 5. Unifying Appreciation versus Dismissive Categorizing

41. Debate Just as we have a tendency to categorize and dismiss comments by individuals, we have a tendency to fragment a problem and deal with only isolated components of the problem. We do this because it is simply easier. Fragmentation facilitates quick and certain decision making and is therefore part of the “whole” of a closed system. Dialogue Insight is often gained by making connections between parts of a whole. It furthers dialogue, understanding and meaning to think about the topic under discussion as a component of a larger system. The “why” question almost always leads to the understanding of causal connections. 6. Looking at the Whole versus Fragmenting

42. Debate In a culture of debate the participants tend to welcome input that reinforces their view and reject or even disparage input that is from a diverse perspective. We value those with like backgrounds and experience and tend to dismiss others. Dialogue For genuine dialogue to occur it is necessary that all voices be heard. And, for all voices to be heard, all voices must be respected. Without demonstrating respect and appreciation for diverse voices they are unlikely to speak. God Bless Marie Brodie 7. Uniform Input versus Diverse Input

43. Debate The purpose of debate is to convince others to your argument. Speaking in the voice you believe will convince is the goal. We adjust our voice, like targeted advertising, to our perception of the listener’s ear. Dialogue To discover meaning through dialogue, we must seek the most honest, authentic and genuine self. Do we even know our own voice? Do we know what are our own personal thoughts or feelings on a matter? Do we have the courage to voice those thoughts, simply because they are our honest thoughts or feelings, our true voice? The ability to first listen to your own voice, to search for your own authentic thoughts and feelings, and then to honestly express them, is often by passed in our rush to get through an agenda. 8. Reactive Voicing versus Authentic Voicing

44. Exercise: • If you had to choose the most common style of conversation in your group, would you describe it as debate, discussion, or dialogue? • How does this style of conversation usually make you feel? • How would you change this style of conversation?

45. Books on Dialogue • Chapter Eight on The Quality of Conversation will be posted on the BBFA web site. • Isaacs, William, Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together. Probably the best book on dialogue by the leading proponent of dialogue. • Ellinor, Linda and Gerard, Glenna, Dialogue – Rediscovering the Transforming Power of Conversation. Also a good overview of dialogue in groups and organizations. • Flick, Deborah L.,From Debate to Dialogue- Using the Understanding Process to Transform Our Conversations. Rather than Dialogue she used the term “understanding process” but it is the same.