Handbook for Strategic HR - Section 3

OD Network, John Vogelsang PhD, Maya Townsend, Matt Minahan, David Jamieson, Judy Vogel, Annie Viets, Cathy Royal, Lynne Valek

• Publisher: AMACOM
• Year: 2015
• ISBN:
  9780814436981
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Gestione delle risorse umane
• Index: Business

"Use of self" is what Organizational Development practitioners call the complex set of awareness and behaviors that make it possible to be genuinely helpful to others. Effective use of self is essential for influencing change in an organization. This section will help you understand how your assumptions influence your behavior and your perception of others; how to counter covert dynamics in the workplace that undermine productivity; how to encourage ethical leadership; how to foster inclusion; and how to continually learn about greater self-awareness and better working relationships with colleagues.

SECTION THREE

Use of Self as an
Instrument of Change

Introduction

John Vogelsang and Matt Minahan

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

To be effective I need to understand people’s different value systems, be open to new ideas, stay with what is uncomfortable, and understand the dynamics and consequences of choosing to stay or not stay with what is uncomfortable.

—Michael McGovern

I was influenced less by material and more by people. Having colleagues and mentors to learn from was really important. You can read Flawless Consulting by Peter Block but not know how to do the work unless you see it in action. It is great to see people practicing the models.

—Chuck Mallue

TOPICS COVERED IN THIS SECTION

• How effective use of self is key to influencing change in an organization.

• How effective use of self depends upon understanding how assumptions and other mental constructs influence behavior.

• How to foster a well functioning diverse workplace.

• How to encourage ethical leadership.

• How to counter covert dynamics in the workplace that undermine productivity and collaborative work relationships.

• How to continue learning about effective and appropriate use of self in the workplace.

WHY USE OF SELF AS AN INSTRUMENT OF CHANGE

“Use of self” is the term OD practitioners employ to name the complex set of awareness and behaviors that make it possible to be genuinely helpful to others. Especially for the HR Business Partner, it is critical to recognize that tools and techniques are only part of the work. Many times, the most important influence on whether the situation changes is how HR Business Partners engages with clients. Are they modeling the participative and collaborative principles they espouse and promote? Are they willing to listen to what is uncomfortable to hear? Are they willing to examine their own habitual behaviors and assumptions—those that serve them well and contribute to their success with others and those that do not serve them well and may be hindering their success?

What people bring as a person, how they partner with others, how they see the situation as assumption-free as possible, how they model what they advise, and how they provide a clarity and mindfulness to what is occurring and what is being communicated—all this helps others to take risks to learn and change. When people operate from a clear sense of who they are and from a personal authority and integrity, they invite others to do likewise.

THE CHAPTERS IN THIS SECTION

After defining use of self, this section deals with the mental constructs that influence perception of oneself and others, explores examples of ethical leadership, and finally describes ways to encourage continued learning about use of self. The five parts to this section are:

• Use of Self: The Most Important Instrument of Change

• The Mental Realities People Construct

• Ethical Leadership

• Counteracting Covert Dynamics

Use of Self:The Most Important Instrument of Change

In Managing Use of Self for Masterful Professional Practice, David Jamieson, Matthew Auron, and David Shechtman (2010) offer a way of understanding use of self and making it more actionable for those in professional helping roles. They define the use of self as the conscious use of one’s whole being in the intentional execution of one’s role for effectiveness in whatever the current situation is presenting.

Jamieson, Auron, and Shechtman also describe what using oneself involves—a lifelong process of developing self-awareness and certain core competencies. The competencies include: seeing self, others, and the context; knowing by making sense of what one sees; and doing by having a full range of options and the courage to deliver what is most helpful for a given situation.

Managers and executives are dealing with increasingly complex and fluid environments. More people at different levels of an organization are being encouraged to be more self-managing. Lawrence Gould (1997) explores in Personal and Organizational Authority: Bringing the Self into a System of Work Relationships the personal guiding principles that will govern self-managed initiative and accountability. He defines the nature of personal authority, highlights its links to organizational authority, examines through clinical cases how personal authority shapes organizational authority, and concludes with some key hypotheses about the kind of organizational culture that facilitates effectively taking up and exercising mature organizational authority.

The Mental Realities People Construct

The constructed inner realities people bring to their work are suffused with assumptions about “the way things are and are done” and learned habitual responses. Someone wants to discuss how to proceed with a project. The consultant or HR professional may immediately assume the person wants advice and begins operating from a helping role, taking them through a series of questions and suggestions that they have used many times to develop and execute projects. Only when they take in the strained look on the person’s face do they stop to realize that they do not know what the person really wants, and they are operating out of a comfortable power role of being the expert.

Understanding inner realities or mental maps, as Chris Argyris (1977; Argyris & Schon, 1995)¹ calls them, helps to explain why employees are reluctant to report to top executives that one of their company’s products is a “loser” and why the vice presidents of companies cannot reveal to their president the spectacular lack of success of one of the company’s divisions. Such habits and attitudes, which allow a company to hide its problems, can lead to rigidity and decline.

Mental maps guide people’s perceptions and actions, as well as the types of learning that either reinforce people’s maps or lead to their examining and changing assumptions, implicit theories, values, and beliefs. Mental maps include espoused theories—how people describe what they do, why they do it, and what they would like others to think about what they do, and theories in use—the assumptions, beliefs, values, and learned responses that actually govern their actions. Often there is incongruence between espoused theory and theory in use. The process of learning is how to align the two.

However, according Argyris, there are two types of learning—single loop and double loop. When something goes wrong or there is a gap between our espoused theory and the results, people may use single-loop learning and seek to detect and correct the error by looking for another technique that will help them achieve some resolution (often a quick fix). The focus is on finding the right technique to affirm their espoused theory, even if each of their solutions continues to fail over the long run. If they stop to examine the assumptions, the problem-solving methods they use, their theory in use versus their espoused theory, and, in the case of the organization, the underlying norms, policies, and objectives, they are doing double-loop learning. They may find that the “problem” has more to do with their approach and the gap between their espoused theory and their theory in use.

In their research, Argyris and Schon also found that there were two theories in use that influence whether individuals and organizations practice single-loop or double-loop learning. People operating with Model 1 theory in use, which depends upon single-loop learning, make inferences about another person’s behavior without checking whether they are valid. People advocate their own views abstractly without explaining. Their aim is to win and avoid embarrassment. They want unilateral control and unilateral protection of self, which leads to developing defensive routines that impair the potential for growth and learning. They may deliberately leave potentially embarrassing facts unstated in order to save face; and they resist public testing of their ideas and espoused theory.

People operating with Model II, which is fostered by double-loop learning, look to include the views and experiences of others. They want to test their inferences, gather valid and quality information and data about the situation. They are willing to make their own theory in use explicit to test it in dialogue with others. They want to share control and participate in designing and implementing solutions to problems. They are willing to surface conflicting views and engage in open and constructive conversation about those differences.

As Argryis and Schon indicate it is not easy to operate with Model II and double-loop learning and people often retreat to Model I single-loop learning. The transition to Model II often takes willingness of management to invite participation of others in the decision-making process, to demonstrate openness to inquiry and different viewpoints, and to be committed to examining their inferences, assumptions, and theories in use.

Another of Chris Argyris’ helpful tools, the Ladder of Inference, is a simple model of how people process their experiences, create inferences about them, and take action at lightning speed without noticing that they are responding to the inferences and not the situation. Neil Samuels (2003), in Diversity, Inclusion, and the Ladder of Inference, describes how the Ladder of Inference provides a way to understand how people shape, interpret, and create a story about what they experience through the lens of their mental maps, beliefs, values, and assumptions. Based upon the story, people draw conclusions and take actions. It is important to be aware of how people jump quickly to assumption informed conclusions and actions. People need to learn how to slow down to understand how their assumptions, values, and beliefs, mental maps, influence their actions in order to connect with how others see the situation and how they have filtered out data that may lead to different preferable actions. This understanding will also help people to narrow the gap between their espoused theories and theories in use.

Mindfulness is an age-old practice that can also help people to slow down and understand how routinized approaches and mental maps are shaping their experiences. In a world of flux and rapidity, living mindlessly can result in a host of problems including but not limited to: tunnel vision, increased stress, reduced physical health, reduced creativity, and difficulty navigating complex systems. Empirical studies are now finding statistical support for what many have known for two millennia: that practicing mindfulness enhances mental and physical health, creativity, and contextual learning. Bauback Yeganeh and David Kolb (2009) discuss in Mindfulness and Experiential Learning how mindfulness techniques can enhance experiential learning. They also provide tools for practicing mindfulness in organizations.

How can HR business partners help others address their limiting assumptions and beliefs and the gap between their espoused theories and their theories in practice? Robert Marshak (2004) introduces in Generative Conversations a method that coaches can use to help clients address limiting assumptions and create new possibilities. Generative conversations are based on the premise that the way people see and respond to the world is determined by out-of-awareness cognitive structures that may be identified and addressed during everyday conversations. Marshak provides ways to listen for these unspoken but powerful organizing structures and how to intervene to challenge or change them.

While the words “diversity” and “social justice” are familiar, many managers can still be uncomfortable with diversity when it comes up and they may seek ways to address organizational issues without having to directly take on diversity issues. Michael Brazzel (2007) examines in Diversity and Social Justice ten diversity and social justice practices that support addressing diversity and social justice issues and dynamics as an integral part of OD practice.

Judith Katz and Karon Moore (2004), in Racism in the Workplace: OD Practitioner’s Role in Change, encourage people to see the potential role they can play to both identify and address issues of racism in the organization within whi...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Contents
• Section 3 Use of Self as an Instrument of Change