Authentic Gravitas
Page 18
Coaching is more complex than we may think. In addition to the many forms of coaching outside the workplace (e.g., life coaching, sports coaching), there are various interpretations of coaching within the working environment. While executive coach training is largely focused on equipping people with skills in active listening, questioning, facilitation, and goal-setting, usually people who ask for a “coach” at work are looking for someone to give them advice in a specific area. I call this a coach-adviser, who acts as the former and the latter, offering guidance on a particular professional area of which they have expertise, yet grounded within the powerful methodologies of traditional executive coaching. This can be within an internal or external workplace coaching relationship. This is different again from leadership coaching. In today’s workplace we expect leaders to act as a coach, and this is perhaps the most complex form of coaching because leaders simultaneously wear four hats—they are a:
Coach (in the traditional sense of listening, questioning, facilitating, and goal-setting)
Adviser (offering guidance as to how to address challenges and achieve those goals)
Leader (sharing vision and motivation; influencing and facilitating to develop another’s potential and maximize their contribution towards achieving collective team/organizational goals)
Mentor (sharing personal experiences and recommendations based on what did and didn’t work for them on their own professional journey)
This is my CALM Model of Leadership Coaching, which we use to train leaders in moving flexibly, often within a single conversation, between the various components required of one relationship.
Whether the coaching relationship is formal or informal, being others-focused is an important factor in attaining the psychological and physiological benefits of coaching with compassion that ameliorate power stress. A coachee doesn’t need to report to us—coaching is not restricted to hierarchical lines. But coaching does need to include three components to be considered coaching with compassion: noticing another’s need or desire; empathic concern; and supporting another’s desire to grow or develop.29 And that is without an expectation of anything in return from the person being coached. Coaching with compassion is centered on helping the person being coached to be their “ideal self” (that person’s vision of who he or she wants to be, including his or her goals, values, and deepest aspirations for the future), which then guides the change process. Coaching with compassion also involves strengths-based development, with a focus on looking at strengths before weaknesses.30 In the framework of authentic gravitas, we can see that coaching with compassion is a method by which we can facilitate others’ personal vision for how they show up and make their own positive impact and add their own substantive value.
Boyatzis and his colleagues noted that compassion can act like an antidote to stress. Coaching with compassion stimulates “positive emotional attractor” (PEA), not only in the mentee, but also in the mentor. PEA is a state of positive emotional arousal and activation of the parasympathetic nervous system, which slows down the heart rate and triggers the release of hormones such as oxytocin and vasopressin. According to the researchers, that arousal of positive emotions and PEA are conducive to cognitive openness, improved cognitive performance, and openness to behavioral change. They argued that individuals in this state could experience greater physical wellness, a calmer and more elated state, and neurogenesis (the generation of new neural tissue). Importantly, this can be a self-reinforcing, self-perpetuating cycle, as positive emotions lead to positive cognitive bias, creating positive feedback loops.31
While we can, of course, experience compassion through many other activities, coaching is relatively easy to build into our regular working life, enabling us to continue building gravitas and mitigate the effects of power stress. If we can sustain the practice of coaching with compassion, we can offset the potential power stress caused by increased responsibility and continue adding substantial value (i.e., sustain our authentic gravitas).
It’s not always easy in practice. The times when we need these positive psychological and physiological benefits coincide with the times when we feel busiest and under the greatest pressure. Taking time out just to focus on the needs of another can feel like something we would like to do, but in the moment cannot possibly manage. So again, we need to be intentional—deciding in advance that we will engage in this positive activity not only when we find it most convenient but also in the midst of the busyness, and to be disciplined in following through on that decision. Those who build this challenging habit into their regular working lives are better able to sustain their authentic gravitas. In helping others to build their personal authentic gravitas, it seems we may be better able to sustain our own.
PRACTICES FOR GRAVITAS IN THE DARK
Perhaps you’re doing well and feel pretty good in the current moment, as you’re reading this book. In case there are moments further down the line when things become trickier, harder, or just downright disheartening (which, let’s face it, happens to all of us at times), here are a few reminders of how to bring out your best in those darker moments:
Getting down with negative self-talk? Remember that it’s unlikely to be negatively impacting your actual performance (though it certainly is annoying!). Have your comebacks ready for the gremlin you know will pop up on your shoulder at the very moments you don’t want it there. Decide what you believe to be true about yourself, and if there’s any question that some part of the gremlin’s message is true, make a commitment to grow in those areas. Seek out trusted advisers and friends who will challenge you and be honest with you, but who have your best interests at heart, and check your negative self-talk with them.
Practice gratitude (daily or weekly). It can lead to higher positive affect and physical well-being. It’s easy to focus on all the difficult situations that may justifiably take up your attention and energy, but don’t forget the research-proven power of counting your blessings.
Manage anxiety proactively. If it’s anxiety about a particular event, it can be useful to go to the location of the event beforehand to get a sense of the environment. Remember to build in current experience moments to give your brain a break from all that narrative thinking. Reframe “I’m anxious” to “I’m excited”—this isn’t a silly pep talk; you probably do have reason to be excited, because it’s an important opportunity for you.
Identify your own unique strengths. What energizes you? Be proactive about creating conditions and opportunities where you can apply and develop your strengths. Growing them is likely to give you much greater returns than the incremental gains of only addressing weaknesses.
Practice coaching with compassion to mitigate your own power stress and build resilience. Set yourself up for taking long-term responsibility and having a lasting positive impact by remembering to take time out to focus on the needs of others—benefiting both them and you.
SEVEN
ADAPTING MY STYLE
True to Me, Tailored to You
“Rebecca, you’re stubborn,” Chris said to me. I was in Texas, getting feedback on a 360-profile I had undertaken from someone I now consider to be one of the best coaches globally. “No, I’m not.” The words instantly came out of my mouth before I could notice the irony in them. He smiled. “Really, Chris,” I persisted, “I’m just not.”
Absurd as this conversation is on reflection, I fully believed in my position, stating it as a fact. “Okay, how about asking three people who work with you for feedback? Ask them on a scale of one to ten how stubborn they would say you are,” Chris suggested. “Sure,” I replied, happy to have the opportunity to show him I was right. A few weeks later I was in central London with a long-standing colleague and friend. We were putting on our coats in a café, getting ready to go out into the cold and walk over to a client’s office for a meeting. Out of the blue I asked, “Hey Sarah
, on a scale of one to ten, ten being the highest, how would you rate me on stubbornness?” “Ten,” she said, without even a breath between my question and her answer! It was as if she had been waiting for years to tell me and this was her chance.
That feedback and consequent conversation changed my life. Sarah, one of the most incredible professionals I know, felt that I didn’t truly value her, even though I did. She experienced me as someone who didn’t allow her space to have different opinions—mine were always so ready, strong, and loud. I discovered that, unknowingly and unintentionally, I wasn’t giving her space to challenge my ideas. I now recognize this stubbornness as one of my key risk areas, something I need to constantly watch out for and catch myself on—not because it’s “right” or “wrong,” but because it’s not how I want to be, it’s not aligned with my intent. I would not say the experience was pleasant, but it has positively impacted all my relationships since, both personally and professionally.
I saw firsthand that my natural style is not always the best one. Sometimes it’s completely fine. My wonderful dad—a seasoned lawyer who loves a good argument—wouldn’t negatively experience me as “stubborn” because he has a similar style and preferences for interacting. If I follow my natural style, I would talk to Sarah the same way I talk to my dad—some would equate this consistency with authenticity. But my goal is to add value to a situation and to make others feel empowered to make a positive contribution as well. In encounters with my dad, we often debate the “best” way forward, each of us strongly advocating our position. This is the case regardless of what we’re discussing—be it business or investment decisions, the current political climate, or the best way to get to our destination. In these interactions, we both feel that we’re adding value and making a positive contribution to the situation—healthy debate that leads us to better outcomes. But I now know that if I engage with Sarah in this “natural” style, then while I may feel like I am adding value to the situation, I am certainly not making her feel empowered to make a positive contribution, too, so my value is limited. Being authentic is not about being rigid with our natural styles, but about being true to our intention and outworking our values—which often means adapting our natural style to the person with whom we’re interacting. This benefits ourselves (by aligning our action with our intention), others (by creating conditions for them to make their best contribution), and the situation at hand (by adding significant value). The Gravitas Myth would have us believe there is one right way of behaving and interacting that we typically associate with surface gravitas, but adding real value lies in being flexible in how we show up with others. It takes courage to try out new styles of interacting that don’t come naturally to us. Even when it makes sense to adapt, behaving differently makes us feel vulnerable and uncomfortable.
Studies have highlighted the power of being prepared and able to adapt your style. One group of studies suggested that there is a positive relationship between overall effectiveness of leaders (as rated by superiors, peers, and direct reports) and the ability to be versatile (to move freely between different styles, in particular between forceful and enabling leadership styles and between strategic and operational leadership styles).1 For leaders, this ability to be versatile relates to “social intelligence”—the capacity to understand the situation, including the politics and social relationships involved. Leaders who demonstrate social intelligence are intentional in selecting appropriate responses and varying their behavior in the face of changing conditions. Researchers have argued that social intelligence is an important quality that separates leaders from non-leaders.2 This matters regardless of where you’re at in your career journey; to have gravitas, you need to be able to effectively demonstrate leadership, regardless of hierarchical position.
If we are to increase our skill in adapting behavior to the circumstances and social situation around us, we need to develop self-awareness, which includes not only an understanding of our values and goals but also of our effectiveness in influencing others.3 It is something that many studies have shown can be developed—for example, through multisource feedback, assessment, coaching, training, and developmental assignments.4
We might worry that adapting our style means we’re not authentic. Should I really pretend to be someone I’m not? But I would rather adapt my style and be true to my intention for how I want to be with other people than be true to my natural style if it means unintended and undesirable consequences in how I make others feel.
Being someone who adds value means we close the gap between our intention, our action, and our impact. We may have positive intent toward those we work with, but our impact is limited by a lack of self-awareness and flexibility in how we interact with others. People who have the greatest authentic gravitas have been vulnerable in proactively seeking feedback about the gap between their intent and impact, and have the courage to try out different styles and ways of working. Furthermore, if we have authentic gravitas, we recognize that others also have a gap between their intention and their impact on us, which, in turn, impacts how we think, feel, and act toward them. This feedback and recognition goes beyond the context of meetings and presentations; it is relevant to all our daily interactions with those around us.
CATCHING A BALL
“We just clicked.” Camille recalled how she felt about her working relationship with colleagues at her former Paris-based hedge fund. “We were such a tight group and all in sync. The work was hard but the people were easy.” When another European fund approached her, Camille decided it was time to move on, having spent seven years at the Paris-based firm. However, she soon discovered that the dynamics at her new professional home were complicated. She described to me strong personalities, complex relationships, and her sense that after only three months, she had not made the strong first impression she had hoped for. Her new boss, whom I knew well and respected, had asked me to coach her. He felt she lacked the gravitas he’d observed in her when they first met, and echoed her views regarding the first impression she’d made on the wider team. His two partners were questioning his decision to bring her on board.
Camille herself was questioning whether the move had been a bad decision. I asked her to describe the people she worked with at her new fund. Then I asked her to describe the people she’d worked with previously, one by one, and how she’d interacted with each of them. Over the course of our conversations, I challenged her view as to whether her new colleagues were indeed (in her words) “stronger personalities,” and she discerned that the difference lay in her understanding of her colleagues’ preferences for working and interacting, rather than with the people themselves. Her former colleagues were not more similar to her or more easygoing. They were just known. Over her many years of working there, she had picked up habits of how to work well with the various people there. She’d adapted her style with each almost subconsciously. Camille needed to now adapt her style consciously—to generate the same flow and ease in her new working relationships.
In considering how to adapt our style to increase our gravitas when working with others, it is not about trying to become somebody else. Nor is it about pretending to be somebody else. It is about understanding our impact on others and being intentional in adapting our behavior so that our intention and actual impact are aligned. And while personality—our unique combination of preferences, biases, habits, and feelings—is relatively stable over time, we are not fixed beings and can change our behaviors. A simple example is, if I prefer to throw a ball underarm, but my six-year-old son prefers to catch a ball that’s been thrown overarm, I can throw it to him overarm. My preferences for throwing underarm won’t change, but I can adapt for him.
Here’s why authentic gravitas requires us to adapt. Gravitas isn’t just about how we believe ourselves to be adding substantive value; when other people are involved, it’s also in the eye of the beholder. Adverse gravitas—self-serving, loud dominance—is less subject to personal interpreta
tion; people tend to perceive it in the same way. It may vary in strength, depending on how loud and assertive the other voices are, but it is typically clearly seen (or more likely heard). But authentic gravitas, the level to which someone has a positive impact and adds significant value to a situation and the people in it, is subject to personal interpretation by the people in that scenario. And those people are all different. Whether your comments and actions add significant value to them personally and to the situation as a whole is determined, in part, by them. They regard our interaction through the lens of their own personality and preferences, just as we regard them through our own.
Embracing Cognitive Dissonance
When it comes to our professional development, we can spend a great deal of time thinking about our own personality and preferences for interacting, but rarely do we discuss others’ preferences. Perhaps we’re concerned with putting them in a box; perhaps it’s just more interesting to think about ourselves! But following on from “target assessment” (as discussed in chapter 3), adding value requires giving greater consideration to others—including their relatively fixed preferences for interaction. Certainly, we should not fall into the trap of putting people in a box. Many times, I have jumped to conclusions about a colleague or client, only to discover, after spending more time getting to know them, that I was wrong. When it comes to others, we must choose to embrace cognitive dissonance: two contradictory ideas at the same time (as mentally uncomfortable as it may be). This means holding informed beliefs about their personality and preferences for interaction so that we can use those beliefs to guide our behavior, and simultaneously remaining open to being proven wrong and needing to change our understanding of them. Not only do we have to hold these two contradictory ideas about each person, we also need to act on both. We adapt our style in line with our beliefs about their preferences and simultaneously seek novel information to possibly contradict that understanding. However, because cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable, we actively seek to reduce it, often by avoiding or not attending to contradictory information. In other words, our natural tendency is to note signs and actions that reinforce our existing beliefs about people. We need to intentionally choose to be open to cues that we are wrong, which can be both uncomfortable and counterintuitive. We naturally reduce the gap between how we regard others and how they actually are as we get to know them, and we can do this proactively by seeking clarity. In other words, ask them!