In an earlier post I commented that leadership is the most studied of the soft skills. That’s largely because the traditional command and control practices of the 20th century, with its emphasis upon compliance, won’t work effectively in a world with flattened hierarchies, cross-disciplinary projects and generations that refuse to be managed on that basis. In my first blog on leadership skills, I pointed out that the ability to handle ambiguity in business situations is a terrifically important skill.
Productive dialog
Productive dialog is just as important for leadership success as the ability to manage ambiguity. Dialog can be thought of as an in-depth, interactional conversation oriented to problem solving or decision making. What goes under the label of dialog is often mere caricature. First, I tell you what I think, then you tell me what you think. That’s followed by alternative positioning-- two separate conversations going on simultaneously with no real interaction or attempt to improve on a decision or a project. It’s often the reason professionals leave a meeting with no decision made or agreed upon.
In stark contrast, dialog invites interaction between people. Its subjects, whether problem solving, decision making, creativity or innovation, are the lifeblood of organizations. Inevitably, therefore, productive dialog requires the ability to advocate your position, but it also assumes the ability to inquire and ask important questions, to use virtuoso listening skills as strategic weapons and to add idea upon idea to come up with still better solutions.
What makes dialog so difficult is that few of us have been trained to challenge and accept challenge in non-defensive ways. Few of us are comfortable accepting the ideas of others as better than our own, and few of us have been trained in the skill to set up dialogs so that we can circumvent the cultural problems I’ve just mentioned.
A few years ago I was asked to work with a marketing director at a major consumer products company. Normally I work at the request of the client, but this assignment came from a respected VP who wanted to help out one of his people. Since we were able to work out mutually acceptable ground rules, I agreed to help her. Over the first hour conversation I was able to ask her two or three questions, and the rest of the time I was—well, the most accurate phrase is “lectured at.” Eventually we got down to the issue. She had been told that she was a fine speaker—and she reiterated that message endlessly.
When she finally took a breath, I asked one question: “Have you been able to get buy-in for your ideas?” Her response came fairly quickly in the negative. With that information, I was able to coach her into an interactive mode of conversation and problem solving over the coming months. It was, however, a profoundly new orientation to business problem solving, and did not come easy to her.
My client had been trained in the skills of advocacy, like 99% of business professionals, but was clueless when it came to the skills of inquiry. Productive dialog, it should be understood, requires inquiry in spades, and the ability to both give and receive in non-defensive fashion.
In the 21st century economy, dialog has become one of the key leadership skills necessary to identify and capture personal and business opportunity. It’s one of those subjects that’s easy to talk about, but seldom used very effectively. For a team to be effective at dialog, usually it takes a hands-on dialog coach who’s willing to muck around with team process. That can assure success, but the rest of the training strategies fail to keep professionals from going back to their fruitless “I-advocate, you-advocate” processes.
I’m very curious to know of your experience with dialog. How has it worked in your organization, and what have you been able to do with it?
Can You Fly Below the Radar and Still Be Successful?
