Contents
Strategic Conversation
This document accompanies the data sheet sent to you as the person who acted as contact between the organisation and the researcher, or as agreed by special arrangement. The separate Data Sheet reports on the collated data from participants who identified your organisation. The first few pages of this report comprise a brief description of the research and its findings. The following pages then provide more details about SC, how to learn it, how to use it in the organisation, and where to go for more information or help. It is recommended that you make copies of this document available to any member of your organisation who shows interest. Part of SC is about having open and honest communication. If many employees wish to see these documents, perhaps a library copy could be made freely available.
What was known about Strategic Conversation before this research
The personal SC report provided to each email-able participant contains good information about the nature of strategic conversation and some of the known advantages of getting serious about learning the skills. That information is a compilation from material already available plus the new understanding as a result of this research. That personal report is therefore a good document to refer to prior to reading this. Then this report will be of more value to you.
Very little was known about SC before this research. It was known what SC could do, and many people had a good idea of how to use it and improve the effectiveness of using it. But the power of SC was not harnessed because it was poorly understood. It's been a scattergun approach in the past - a complex tool with no idea how to use it properly, no ability to maintain it or improve it. Until now, developing SC in an organisation has required the use of tricks - conversation frames like TQM or BPR etc to provide strategic conversation topics. Some authors have provided questions that prompt strategic conversation (for example about setting and chasing goals), but that's not the same as 'knowing strategic conversation' as a language. With SC as a language, almost any operational or administrative topic can be instantly assessed for its potential value as a strategic topic, and a choice made as to how the topic can be best handled.
Macro view
This previously known view of SC refers to the effectiveness of the conversation and the effectiveness of the organisation. For example, strategic conversation might lead to actions that in turn develop the ability to be the preferred supplier of the exact product or service that is required, where, when and at the right price. SC is about topics that matter, where there's a guarantee that SC decisions will be subsequently acted upon. TQ, Scorecards, Scenario planning do this as part of the processes they enforce. But they are also very limited. TQ only addresses TQ topics. BPR only addresses its topics. But the attraction is their simplicity because they are a formula with steps, and require no special additional personal skills. Yet research and experience show that most organisations do not effectively implement these steps, so even within those frames, wrong decisions are made - the accompanying conversations were guided by a formula rather than being truly strategic. SC is the only organisational development approach that by definition means that each topic is relevant, to be acted upon, and doesn't have any topic boundaries - other than being strategic. Any failure on any one of those points means that the conversation wasn't strategic or was poorly implemented - and there is another strategic topic.
Micro-skill view
This second view, also previously identified but rarely discussed, refers to the conversation skills needed during important communications. This addresses the efficiency and effectiveness of the communication process - because the efficiency of the organisation depends upon the face-to-face transaction skills, negotiation, problem solving, and 'opportunity exploring' facets of conversational activities. These skills have been previously addressed to a lesser extent by communication courses, interpersonal skills, neuro-linguistic programming, and more recently by emotional intelligence. However, once again each 'course' is limited by its own borders, and not automatically integrated with the macro view.
In SC the entire range of communication micro skills become strategically connected - inseparable from the issues of the macro view. For new practitioners it's a bit like rubbing the head and patting the belly - and swapping - automatically while arguing about a difficult topic. As humans we had the very same problem learning to drive a car - juggling the pedals and steering, but now we see folks doing all of that while sending text messages on a mobile phone! Being a skill, SC will be similarly awkward at first, but practice leads to confidence. SC is not a fad - but a skill. And like driving, if you want to do it well, you won't multi-task with a distraction equivalent to the mobile phone at the same time. SC is worth focusing on - doing it well.
Why this research project was needed
Reason 1. SC seemed to be powerful - and under-used
There was considerable evidence from businesses that have taken steps to improve the strategic quality of the conversations held internally and with external stakeholders, and it paid dividends for them. The evidence points to favourable rewards for the effort. Furthermore, the evidence points to a wider range of benefits than just profit. A document 'Why measure SC' is available through Deltapoint. The attraction of SC was also evident in the consultants who are invited into organisations to introduce it, and get invited back to do more. So far, only a few organisations have 'discovered' it, which brings us to the second reason.
Reason 2. Existing knowledge didn't understand/explain SC.
SC is being taught, and taught about, yet we don't know what it is! If SC can be identified, described, and become measurable, then we can use it more cleverly. Once we know what it is, and learn about its uses and limitations, we can cut the hype and the waste and put it to work. It's just as important to know what it isn't, and what it can't do, as to know what's good about it.
Much has been written about how to stimulate strategic conversation, and there are consultants engaged by organisations to do just that - and they get invited back so it must be working. However, because we haven't been able to describe it, we haven't been able to measure it, teach it, or use it sensibly. There is no 'strategic conversation' course run in a technical college or university yet, so those who currently consult and teach it use various devices to stimulate SC, using things like TQM and BPR to provide the language. But, once the vehicle or frame to stimulate SC is done, progress in the use of SC dies.
For a comparison between SC and more temporary techniques, see 'why fads fail' in Attachments
Why not develop SC skills to develop a frame that suits your needs - exactly!
First - your people need to be able to speak SC - better than certain other organisations that you can name. It means that if you take it on, it should be with strategic intent to be better at it.
Reason 3. Find out if SC can be learned - and if it makes any difference
This project needed to not only expose the innards of SC for all to see - to demystify it, but also to find out if it can be learned, and if it can be learned then does it make a difference? If SC can be learned, can organisational SC escape the bounds imposed by frameworks? So groups comprising CEO's, branch managers, business owners, consultants and others with similar decision making responsibilities undertook a condensed and intense skills development program to test three things. Can these skills be acquired? What is the best kind of program for acquiring these skills? And how long does it take before there is pay-off and is the pay-off worth the effort?
What the research did - that will interest you.
We still don't know all there is to know about SC, but we have made a big and useful start, and can progress from here. At least we know what it is, how to use it, how to acquire it, and that it works.
Exposed the SC construct - 'what it is'
The 'construct' refers to 'what it is' - the construction of it when you look inside. We can now describe the components of SC.
To be SC we need to look at the purpose and topic of the strategic conversation
The purpose must be ONE of these:
- · clarify strategically relevant ambiguous information
- · set goals
- · plan action ends
- · plan action means
- · plan monitoring/measuring
- · plan review/learn
To be SC the topic must relate to the organisation's purpose, and include 'what if' consideration to generate options and arrive at actionable decisions that drive tomorrow's actions.
The topic must include ALL of these:
- · is related to purpose of organisation
- · and - seeks an advantage
- · and - facilitates action
- · and - includes known information with 'what if' and 'If … then …' thinking to plan future actions
Identified preconditions for SC
We found that there are important organisational preconditions for SC to happen. So much so that if preconditions are absent or diminished, the potency of SC will be reduced - even to zero - or worse! For example, if the 'climate' in an organisation is toxic enough, the value of SC could even be below zero - negative - with people working against the interests of the organisation instead of 'for' it.
The good news is that people are responsible for the condition of the organisation's climate, so it is possible to improve climate - if you really want to (in fact improvement can be quick and big - but it needs sincerity - and change).
Climate is one of several organisational influences that acts on SC like a switch (correctly termed 'mediators') and have the power to support or to totally cut off SC.
want to know more about climate? see Attachments
Identified a set of post conditions or moderators for SC
We also found a bunch of volume controls (officially termed moderators), any one of which can reduce the impact of SC but can't cut it off. For example, what if only the senior two or three people ever do the strategising? The remaining ten or hundred or thousand or ten thousand people in the organisation are effectively brain-dead - strategically. Researchers have already shown that the depth and breadth of SC throughout an organisation is linked to flexibility, adaptability, profit, goal alignment and so on. Now we also know that extending the breadth and depth of penetration of SC and elevating the quality of SC has other good results. In other words, it pays to get more people strategically aware and involved, and it pays to improve the SC skill levels.
Developed and tested an instrument to measure SC
Yes - there is now an instrument that can be used to assess SC within an organisation. There is a separate document available to you, and highly recommended, titled 'Why measure SC', but essentially you would measure for one of three reasons.
- To know where to direct organisational improvements that aim to:
- enhance preconditions,
- understand the switches, and
- turn volume controls into boosters (improve the organisation).
- You want to know where to direct any training efforts (improve the people).
- You want to be able to measure progress (improve the monitoring).
The instrument is available for use by organisations where there are appropriately skilled people to conduct a survey, otherwise external help is available from many professional sources (eg. Organisational Psychologists). Scoring of the completed instrument is done by Deltapoint Pty Ltd - the copyright owners of the instrument. The instrument is available as a paper instrument with return-addressed and stamped envelope for data privacy, or arrangements can be made for on-line forms if staff have access to the web.
Things of interest that we found
The complete list of findings will be found in each of the two versions of the research report. One is the academic report that was submitted as a doctoral thesis. It will not be available on the web-site until after the examination process. The other report is a practitioner version of the same report without the academic jargon. The two research reports should be available within 3 months after you receive this document.
Found - The model, the construct, and the instrument
The model of SC shows exactly how the SC is impacted by the preconditions, mediators and moderators. The construct identifies the components of SC and has already been described in this document. The instrument permits an assessment of SC in an organisation. The reason that these things are interesting will depend on the point of view.
For academics: It provides a model to study and an instrument to use in other related studies.
For you: You can use the model (map) and construct to understand the SC mechanism in your organisation. The instrument can be used to show you SC gaps in the organisation. The gaps, in combination with the model, help you plan intelligent organisational development. You can use your increased understanding of SC to help to assess other organisations, be they alliance partners or competitors. As one of the participants to the 6-month program said "nothing is the same"
For Deltapoint: We will be able to use the instrument to help diagnose organisations and discover the things that get in the way of better strategic performance. We can do a better job.
Found - SC skills can be acquired
A 6-month program was planned to begin with an understanding of SC, then the application of SC. There were three objectives:
- Find if SC skills are able to be acquired and used,
- Find the most important SC skills and the best way to acquire them, and
- Once acquired - does it matter - do they make a difference
The program followed what is called 'action research' process that meant that group members became co-researchers and as time went on they had increasing say about how the program was run and what it contained. It meant that they determined what components were important - not some theory, and not the researcher. As it turned out, the program contents didn't change at all, but the way it was run did change quite a bit - several times. For a start, the intensity had to back off, and that meant a loss of intended depth and breadth of coverage, but there is little point in depth and breadth if the intensity is too high for practical learning to follow. General comments upon completion of the program by the survivors were along the lines that they didn't apply themselves seriously enough considering what was being offered in the program. Unfortunately, it was impossible at the beginning of the program to 'sell' the expected value of the program because the actual value of it was unknown. Besides, being a research project it wasn't a product to be sold, but a joint exploration.
'Warts and all' - want to know more about the 6-month research program? - see Attachments
SC training along the lines of the program will inevitably become available to organisations via coaches and courses. The outline of the program is already available on the web-site www.strategic-conversation.com.au to consultants, trainers, HR departments and anyone else interested.
Deltapoint has used the experience from the study to develop, test, and update the contents of the series of programs to facilitate organisational acquisition and practice of SC skills. While the topic outline of the program is freely available on the web-site, the content material per session is copyright (Deltapoint Pty Ltd).
Found - About learning SC
We have learned how 'not to' learn SC, and 'how to' learn SC. The program, outlined on the web-site, has been adjusted according to the feedback from those who participated, and from our own notes. Importantly, SC can be learned, and it is worth the effort.
Want to know 'how to learn SC?' - see Attachments
Found - Important things that SC does
The important relationships are listed and described in the website report " Change - using Strategic Conversation". That report describes how it impacts strategic behaviour and performance both directly and indirectly. However, climate deserves a special mention here. The organisation climate to enable SC is related to the amount of SC, the extent of SC, strategic behaviour, and organisation performance. It was more than just a relationship because without a climate that facilitates SC, it simply won't happen at all. Without a climate that both enables SC and then nurtures the specific actions to encourage it, efforts to develop SC will frustrate.
How the research findings can be used
A philosophy of learning - skills transfer/acquisition
We have demonstrated that what many 'learning' researchers have been saying is true - that it is best 'to do' than to sit in a classroom. Those group members who took action and practiced and reported back during the program, reported more examples of personal and organisational improvements. The sequence within each session of the program to encourage practical application was:
- Pre-read session information (a CD was supplied with graphics and voice description - on a relevant topic - questions were asked that required that they apply the topic to their organisation).
- Attend session, review topic and discuss the questions in relation to their organisation
- Print out from the CD, additional info and practical applications - the homework.
- Discuss the homework next session - what they tried and what happened.
The 6-month program with weekly sessions and homework was a very heavy load. The intense but necessary nature of it turned out to be too heavy for the majority of participants. In normal application of the program, success of the organisation is the goal rather than research findings. In spite of the dropout rate, many applications did occur, and the gains that were reported have been summarised in a separate report "Initial SC report - both studies".
The subsequent skills-development program that has evolved is scheduled to follow a normal skills transfer pace and monitored to ensure successful milestones.
Aiming for important relationships
The important relationships described in "Initial SC report - both studies" identify some behavioural, learning, and organisation structural targets. Refer to that report for the initial analysis and interpretation of the research.
Thinking about 'change' differently - a new philosophy
For SC to work, the organisation must focus more on being a strategic entity, and break away from any behaviour that belongs to the old model where executives do all the thinking and telling, and the troops do all the work. It means realising that 'change' can't happen simply because it is 'commanded' from the top. And it emphatically means disowning any hope that all the change can occur everywhere else - other than at executive level.
'Change' may ultimately entail a complete overhaul of the internal communication system, styles, and status attitudes that go with 'old' ways of doing things. But SC facilitates change that is gentle, controlled, not only keeping the eye on the real ball but also focusing on that ball.
Not only must 'change' occur at the top, but it was clear from the program that the learning and practice of SC has to begin at the top. The executive layer must become populated with strategic role models so change will percolate throughout the organisation.
Fortunately, all this is fairly simple once you've decided to go down this path. Like any skill, it takes time to learn and practice, but it's not rocket science.
The most important requirement from a CEO is sincerity about the intention to go this way. First, there must be an urgent and identifiable need that the CEO expects to be met by SC. Then - the next important requirement from a CEO is the intention to become the exemplar SC role model. Fortunately, part of SC is recognising human failings - no one is perfect - not even the CEO. Indeed, undertaking SC means adopting 'always be learning' - being a life-long learner in it.
How you can apply these findings
You have choices:
- Go it alone
- Get help on an as-needed basis
- Seek external help to plan, implement and measure (the lot) each choice has merit.
Going it alone is very affordable, and gives you complete control over the process. Getting help when needed may be the best of both worlds for some organisations, because with this option the organisation isn't attempting to 'hand over' responsibility for the effort and success. The success of the third option, getting full help, will depend upon where you get that help. If done well, full help should accelerate organisational progress into SC, and benefit from specialist knowledge about learning, and about SC.
Option 1 - Going it alone
Everything reasonable has been done to provide enough information to help you to 'go it alone' if you wish. One approach is to 'fix' the organisation based on the report you received. To fix from the report, you just address the low-scored items and fix those aspects of organisational performance, structure, or behaviour - depending on what is needed. You could use the report to determine where the SC gaps are by filling out an extra blank questionnaire, but this time you do so with very careful thoughts about how you believe that the people in your organisation 'should' have been able to respond. By comparing the answers of your 'ideal template' against the scores that are actually returned, you have your SC gaps.
The other approach in going it alone is to elevate SC skills overall - and we now know it can work very well. The structure of the SC skills-acquisition program used by Deltapoint is available for you on the web-site. The recommended session topics are identified and explained, and some material that Deltapoint uses as handouts to accompany those topic sessions is also on the web-site. You will need to do the research necessary to put the content into each session topic, but you have the session topics, recommended sequence, and recommended learning processes to start with. Assembling the session contents will take considerable effort by someone on your staff, but once you have done it you will always have that resource and can repeat the program to keep people going through it - even as repeats.
The beauty of this option is that SC by its nature is self-levelling. It will, in the course of skills acquisition, challenge itself and seek the most useful ways to develop and practice the skill within the given organisation. There is no other program for change or development that has this property. And once acquired, the skill is always there and always self-examining for effectiveness.
So if you 'fix' based on the report, you will improve the things you address. Then you will need another cycle of measure and fix. Or if you elect to upgrade skills to include SC broadly throughout the organisation, you will have ongoing self-adjustment and higher preparedness for necessary changes.
Either way, with the understanding that you can get about SC from this and the other reports, you will be better placed to use the information available on the web-site. The site includes printable documents and links to other SC sites.
SC is one development program that is likely to remain 'live' in your organisation - if you do it well. It is a rare program that sets out to justify itself with tangible results that are assessable along the way. Results start early.
If you go it alone, and it seems to be failing, you can still call for help - the earlier the better.
Option 2 - Getting some help - as needed
If you wish, you can request help from Deltapoint in interpretation of your report and devising an action plan. That plan can then be run either in-house using your own facilitators and trainers entirely, or combinations of internal and external resources. It's about your choices.
If you elect for in-house facilitation, Deltapoint can assist, upon request, with key sessions or special sessions that you design but you think that we may be able to add value. We are very flexible about how we help.
Deltapoint can't make its own session content material available on a piece-meal basis because each part of the program is linked to other parts - it's a package. Our program needs facilitation by someone with a known fluency in SC and familiarity with our overall program. The Deltapoint content material is therefore only available through the full-help plan. (Once you have your own accredited facilitators, you have open access to the relevant content)
Option 3 - Getting full help
Deltapoint can offer full help in two ways. Firstly, Deltapoint can analyse the report you received and design and design a program to correct the exposed weaknesses. You can then choose to follow that plan yourself, use external consultants, or Deltapoint can implement it with you. If Deltapoint implements it with you, it amounts to a full intervention program with specific improvement targets. Statistics have shown that full intervention programs worldwide have a very high success rate - approaching 100%, while programs left to the organisation to implement, mostly fail. Daily business gets in the way.
With the full program, Deltapoint facilitates the skills acquisition program in your organisation. As part of that program, Deltapoint also conducts parallel training of an in-house facilitator with every module - at no extra fee. The purpose of this added value is so that you gain strategic control over your own strategic control, and protect yourself from depending on external expertise for what will become an important core skill. Once Deltapoint accredits your in-house facilitator (there is no formal body doing this yet), that facilitator will then have access to Deltapoint resources for subsequent group programs covered by that accreditation. In other words, our goal is to facilitate your progress to a success point where you no longer need us.
(But we do, of course, have a follow-up program that starts where SC stops)
For additional information on these programs, contact Ian Johnson (07) 3348-5161
For all the freebies without hitches or sales pitches, visit www.strategic-conversation.com.au
Using your organisation's report
The contents of the report explained
Your personal report is based on your data - your knowledge about your organisation. As such, that report contains considerable information about the pre-conditions, volume controls and switches that determine the effectiveness and extent of SC. Your personal report indicates the quality of SC visible to you in your organisation.
The organisational report uses all the information provided by all the individuals in your organisation who completed the form in a valid way - there are always those who register a protest vote and put all 1's set up a pattern or leave it empty. The people who completed the form provide valuable information about their perceptions of conversation quality, and of performance. There is no way you can know what others think about such things, unless you ask them. The trick is to ask the right questions - in a way that's safe to them.
So their information tells us a whole range of other facts, over and above any individual report. For example, if everyone agrees with you about the status of preconditions for SC in the organisation, then there are two possibilities. First, everyone agrees with you that it is bad, medium, or good etc. The second possibility is that everyone is afraid to tell the truth - a trust issue with the survey. University-run research in industry is less likely to suffer in that way, being a third party, and bounded by strict research rules that guarantee safety.
If there is disagreement so that you think that preconditions for SC are good while everyone else says they're bad, then you have a wake-up call for one of two reasons. They are telling the truth, and that's bad for you (no chance of SC). Or they're telling fibs, and that's bad for you (you are out of touch with what is being 'felt' by people under your leadership).
What to do about your profile report
You can use your report as a reference, and conduct specific training, or conduct SC training and exploit its self-levelling properties. In using the report, you would first make a reference report, compare organisational profile with the reference template for a gap analysis, set priorities from the gap analysis, plan and implement.
Making a 'Reference' report
To do this you first fill out a copy of the questionnaire for each major group or level of the organisation (typically 3 - max 5). When you respond to each question, you think of the layer or group and consider; If this was a perfect organisation and our SC was running hot, how should this group be able to respond?
It's not going to be all fives everywhere for anyone at any level. 'Optimal' anything is always a balance between relevant interests. Be real.
Submit the completed instruments to Deltapoint for scoring.
Getting the 'Gap Analysis'
The scores show all the important points about SC, and the gap is simply the difference between the organisation's scores and what your template indicates that they should have been. The numbers range from 1 to 5 expressed as one decimal point. If the organisation score on something is 2.5 and your template says it should be 3.5, then that is a 20% gap (1 in 5). That might be a huge number for some things. The same gap is particularly meaningful when it crosses the neutral line, and compares 10% agree versus 10% disagree. It's like 'we are 10% disappointed' which is very bad, against 'we are 10% happy' which is great. So in gap analysis, the size of the gap matters, but crossing the mid-point is serious.
Setting priorities
To prioritise, the construct-item gap scores are given priority values. One value represents your vote on importance. How important is it that this is addressed? This has nothing to do with how big the score is, but how much difference it could make compared to the difference the others could make. It's a strategic question. Give it some figure from 1 (lo) to 3 (hi). Then give each a value for easiness to do where 1 is hard and 3 is easy. It's an operational / process question.
Now multiply each gap score by its importance and by easiness. Sort the construct-items according to their multiplied scores, and the highest scoring items should probably be the ones to start with. A strategic place to start.
Of course, there is room for intuition and gut feel. You are free to choose different priorities entirely. But it would be nice if the priority score agreed with your gut feel. Then you have scientific method backing up your choice. If your choices differ, then you must decide what to do - ignore evidence - or ignore gut feel.
Since this whole technology is about getting strategic in our thinking and conversation, and moving away from careless practice … go for gut feel over evidence with extreme caution.
Attachments
Why fads fail
I'm not knocking fads, because it has been found that talking about topics within any of the strategic frameworks (Fads) can stimulate conversation in a useful way. Unfortunately fads can also stimulate negative conversations and actions. Most attempts at change through Fads - fail.
In fads, the conversation is restricted to the tunnel vision of the frame - it misses out important opportunities - may go down wrong track entirely.
Unfortunately, single focus fads have several failings built in. Firstly, they assume that conversation will be of an appropriate type and quality. But it doesn't matter whether the talk is about TQM, BPR, or any other - it only works when talk leads to action. Secondly, they don't teach anything other than the framework concepts. Finally, they have a narrow strategic & operational focus that misses out on many other important opportunities. What's probably needed is a bit of TQM and a bit of Scorecard and a bit of Alignment and a bit of Process Reengineering etc. How would you know the ratios?
Who decided which Fad to follow? How was it chosen? Was it done intelligently by comparing options - costs and benefits? Hmmm - Doesn't that mean that SC started even before the fad?
Even if you select one framework like Business Process Reengineering - how will you decide? What will be the assessment program you undertake, and the honest comparisons you make that address the assessed needs, before deciding? Have you ever witnessed that rigour prior to following a fad?
When it does, it means that the people who were collecting, collating, conversing and deciding which fad to follow or which mix of fads to pursue, were in fact engaging in strategic conversation! So if you have to engage in SC anyhow to decide which Fad to follow, why not keep going? Why jump into a straight jacket? Why not develop SC skills to develop a frame that suits the needs - exactly!
Changing Climate & Culture
Culture change can be a very slow process, but climate change can be very fast indeed. Really large climate adjustments, such as moving from a toxic or low-trust climate, benefit with professional help from outside the organisation. The people who are in the toxic climate are the least likely to know how to fix it. For the organisation's executives, the first and most difficult hurdle for them - individually - is to admit to the need to create the optimal organisational climate. Sincerity in fixing it begins with acknowledgment of the poor current climate, and the inevitability that behaviours really have to change - starting with behavioural changes at the top.
Fortunately, they can change, and change quite easily and rapidly when done the right way. There's a whole climate-change package approach that is pretty well guaranteed to work - conditional upon the executive members genuinely wanting to change the climate. (Refer Strategic Climate planning and management by Deltapoint)
Climate is one of several organisational influences that acts on SC like a switch (correctly termed 'mediators') and have the power to totally cut off SC. Some switches can even work backwards and damage the organisation. It only takes one switch (E.g. climate) to kill SC entirely. For example, have you ever attended an important (strategically important) meeting where someone piped up and said something like "I don't know why we're discussing this, because nothing is going to happen - no matter what we decide!".
Obviously there is an obstacle between the conversation and action. By definition, SC has to lead to action, even if the action is an intelligent decision to not proceed. It must lead to a strategic action. In other words, the organisation must have, or develop, a process - a religion - a culture - a mechanism - whatever - that guarantees that strategic conversations lead to strategic decisions that in turn lead to actions. For someone to remark "nothing is going to happen", it means that there is a switch in the way. While we have uncovered many switches, there are others awaiting future discovery.
Warts and all - the 6 month program
Almost 80 different businesses had a CEO, senior manager, or similar decision-maker as a member of one of the 'Strategic Conversation' groups. There were from 5 to 11 members per group. The groups met weekly for an hour to discuss strategic topics and strategic conversation and to report back on results of things tried out.
The speed of progress was necessarily fast and many group members were unable to give it the time and attention it needed. Some members, upon glimpsing what the program would cover, believed it did not apply to their situation. As a result of these and other reasons, groups were shutting down throughout the program at the rate of about 1 group every 6 weeks. Two groups completed the 6 months program.
Comments from participants about outcomes from the program tend to correlate with the length of time they were with the program (the longer they were with it, the better their gains and feedback). For some there were no residual benefits at all. Exit comments were sought (but not always received) from members who left.
A final interview was sought with the survivors after completion (from 3 months to 6 months). The delay was to allow members to be less effected by loyalty to the group now disbanded, or to the researcher. Their comments refer to present benefits where there is evidence, and future benefits expected. They were also asked for downsides - there were none.
The difficulty for them was allocating time for the sessions, but once there they enjoyed the time. However, they earn a D minus for homework and preparation. Occasionally guilt would kick in, but usually their world got in their way.
In effect, the major part of their gains came from the interactions during the sessions. Unfortunately, educators have demonstrated that most learning does not take place in the classroom - even if it is interactive. Instead, the best learning happens when you apply it - do it - try it out and reflect on the outcomes.
The gains for participants could have been more intense had it been possible for them to apply and test along the way. That assessment comes from their feedback - not from me.
Any formal program to develop SC skills must therefore ensure that comprehensive application, testing, and reflection occurs along the way.
How to learn SC
The longitudinal study helped expose poor ways to learn SC and good ways. Here are the most important things we found:
- ¨ The CEO or equivalent person must be on the first group, and be the champion for the cause. The CEO is to set the example in applying SC, explaining to others the role of SC in decisions, and insisting on its application progressively into organisational practices. The singularly most important predictor of success of SC in the organisation, will be the status in which others see the CEO holds and uses SC.
- ¨ Learning must be based on group discussions and practice. The groups will be referred here as 'SC groups'. They talk about conversation, and about a wide range of strategic topics. This is regardless of whether SC group members are from executive, management, or operational activities.
- ¨ We were surprised to find that there was no difference in 'strategic awareness' and 'performance awareness' by operational people compared to the executive. This phenomenon has been reported in other research as well. We were more surprised to discover that education level had no connection with awareness or conduct of SC. The ability for any given person to engage in strategic conversation has nothing to do with his or her job or role in the organisation, or education level (we tested them all)
- ¨ Group members must 'want' to learn SC before joining the group. Anyone who is present because they 'should' (a career move), or 'felt' pushed into it (whether they were or not), or is there for any reason other than for genuine and personal interest - will become a negative influence on the group and may even cause group failure. (This happened with two groups). In other words, membership to the program needs to be 'sold' in the right way to its members. It must address 'what's in it for me?' as well as what's in it for the organisation.
- ¨ Rewards for participation must not be based on the possibility of elevated status or privileges, for it stimulates membership based on the wrong drivers. Not everyone will want to sign up at first - not from any level. That's great, because you couldn't handle it. But once it starts getting into the organisation at different levels, it will spread by osmosis - if watered and fertilised from above.
- ¨ It must be practical. The sessions must include homework where learning will be applied - and reported back for group review.
- ¨ The learning and execution of the learning must have a high priority. After all - it is a strategic process to improve the strategic processes.
- ¨ Members must start explaining SC to others, role modelling it through demonstration and explanation.
- ¨ Group members should take turns at being session facilitator. The 'real' facilitator is always present and helps. The 'real' facilitator guides the facilitating member through preparation, learning how to facilitate, practicing facilitation skills, and reviewing the session performance. This is an important part of SC in action.
The most gifted facilitator of the group, if motivated by the opportunity, could be trained for accreditation in SC facilitation. Refer Deltapoint skills acquisition program for details
What your organisation might want from improving Strategic Conversation
Let's consider a serious wish-list.
- ¨ Become the preferred employer. There's a waiting list of talented people wanting to join. Folks look forward to turning up for work each day.
- ¨ Become the preferred investment. Your returns are consistent, high, and ethical / environmentally friendly.
- ¨ Become the preferred supplier. You are timely, cost effective, with superior quality, and wonderful to deal with
- ¨ Become the preferred customer/client of your suppliers. Your relationship is not only pleasant, but productive. It is a win/win relationship that stands out for them. Because of their relationship with you, they grow.
- ¨ Become the preferred alliance partner. You demonstrate genuine concern for win/win projects, without deceit, and are wonderful to deal with.
- ¨ Find that you have to encourage employee turnover because you understand the value of fresh minds, and don't fret about having to train new people. Those who leave become ambassadors and may return with additional valued experience.
- ¨ The CEO can relax - sitting in a bull-shit-free zone. Replace fire-fighting exhaustion with strategic excitement.
- ¨ Stimulation levels have replaced organisation stress levels.
What you can reasonably expect from SC up-skilling
What's reasonable in that list? Some organisations are already doing those things. And when you look inside those organisations, it's not special structures or tricks - it's only that they truly believe that 'our people are the difference - so we help them make that difference'.
As you can imagine, conversation within the walls of extraordinary organisations sounds quite different to what you hear inside average ones.
Think about what do you want? Once you know what you want, that 'vision' can become a target of SC - a strategic objective. Without SC there is no hope of reaching such goals. With SC there is a much better chance.
The updated skills acquisition program
The format of the learning program used during the research phase of the project has been updated to fit with known practices about learning, and feedback from the participants. The structure of the program is available to you as a 'thankyou' for your participation in the project. Simply ask us. Refer the paragraph about 'Going it alone' for ideas about how you can use this structure as a template within which you can develop your own program for skills acquisition.
Deltapoint will use that same format (structure) when it is engaged to conduct SC skills acquisition in an organisation.
A topic that was found missing from the longitudinal study, and would have made an important contribution, was 'conversation strategies'. This is quite different to SC, and refers instead to the strategies of conversation that you may use in order to have a better chance of achieving the outcomes you want from any given conversation. It also helps manage the conversations of others. It's a pre-cursor to learning about managing meetings, and also 'negotiation'. Deltapoint has assembled 5 sessions that work through many aspects of using conversation strategies for your own benefit, and detecting and managing conversation strategies being used against you or against others. This material is now part of the skills acquisition programs conducted by Deltapoint.
The skills acquisition program also addresses the need to develop people within the organisation who can run SC programs on an as-needed basis. It happens automatically during the standard SC acquisition program. This means that organisations then have their own SC training expert(s), and access to Deltapoint development material. The objective is to speed up the spread of SC within and between organisations.
|
