Just another WordPress site
In autumn 2007, while working as Supply Chain Director with Procter & Gamble, I applied internally for a job, which sounded interesting … and daunting. The role would be to lead the integration of the Wella business in Asia by harmonising all 1,500 employees onto P&G contracts and moving Wella’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system onto the P&G SAP platform. The job was far too big for me at that stage.
You may remember the newsletter about a client of mine who worked through a highly emotional situation with “the dictator.” Only a short while later, I encountered another client with an even trickier situation.
Chris is a calm and friendly 35-year-old manager, who struck me from the beginning as someone who was very kind. In a “fast-track” career, he had risen rapidly through the ranks of a medium-sized Swedish consumer electronics company. Based in the UK, he was now leading its global supply chain operations.
Chris absolutely loved his job. He viewed it “like a hobby” where he enthusiastically “created top-notch service solutions” for his clients. His passion for the job had him working 60-hour weeks for the last eight years. By his own admission, he’d been close to burn out two times and was currently doing double duty… handling two important job assignments within the company.
It presented a massive challenge.
Chris was not getting along well with his interim boss, the Managing Director of UK operations. “He attacked me personally” Chris said. The strained relationship created an unprecedented level of emotional turmoil, anger, and frustration in Chris.
As part of my psychotherapist qualification, I recently worked with a client who struggled with severe anxiety. It was challenging, and it took several sessions for the client to open up about what was going on.
It was about a relationship. A working relationship.
Alice (name & background changed for confidentiality reasons) was leading a small team of consultants in a high-pressure corporate environment. Juggling the demanding requests of her clients and managing her team was tough. But her key struggle was the relationship she suffered through with a senior peer in a supporting function.
Alice described that person as an “aggressive dictator,” who was 10 years older and fighting “tooth and nail” over everything. This made it impossible for Alice to establish a collaborative relationship. She dreaded every encounter with the “dictator.” Several days before their next meeting, she could feel her stomach churn and she would endure sleepless nights.
The meetings were tense. Conversations were difficult… until at one point it came to a head. In front of the whole team, the smouldering conflict between the two leaders exploded. Both started throwing accusations. The “dictator” began to raise her voice and, with cutting, machine-gun like remarks, she systematically dismantled Alice. Feeling embarrassed, incapable, small and stupid, Alice shrank further and further to the point where she could not handle it. Close to tears, she dropped out of the video call. It was a disaster.
[Read more…] about How to manage highly emotional encounters?
‘‘The test you will take today is designed to help us identify people who are exceptionally weak in their problem-solving reasoning abilities. Your performance on this test will not be scored like most normal tests, but rather will be classified as either above or below a predetermined cut-off score. If you score below that cut-off, this suggests that you are exceptionally weak —in other words, well below average in your problem-solving reasoning abilities. Thus, this test and the scoring method used are designed only to separate those who are especially weak from everyone else.”
This is how Dr. Chalabajev and her team introduced the test to participants of group 1 in their study about how people deal with performance anxiety. Group 2 was introduced differently, with the underlined words replaced as follows: weak by strong and below by above. The intention was to trigger fear in group 1 making participants feeling under threat, by being at risk of getting classified as “especially weak”, whereas help group 2 to identify the test as a challenge where they could potentially be identified as “especially strong” problem solvers with not much else to lose. In scientific terms group 1 was targeted to become “goal-avoidant” and group 2 “goal-approaching.”
The study results* are in my point of view mind boggling:
I recently came across the wonderful story of an old woman who was living by herself many many years ago. Every morning, she went to the river to get fresh water. She took a long pole, hung an old bucket from the left side and another bucket from the right side. Always the same buckets on the same sides of the pole.
The walk down the dirt path from her house wasn’t very long. At the river, she would take the pole with the buckets off her shoulders and carefully dip each bucket in the river, filling it with cold, fresh water. Then, just as carefully, she would place each bucket back on the pole, lift the pole up onto her shoulders, and slowly make her way back.
As she walked home, the right-hand bucket held the water perfectly, whereas the left-hand bucket, had a small crack in the bottom leaking out a persistent drip. By the time the woman reached home, the bucket would be half empty, which happened day after day, week after week, year after year.
Nothing changed… until one day, just as they arrived at the river, the left-hand bucket sighed. This surprised the woman. She had never heard a bucket sigh before.
Then the bucket spoke. “I am so sorry. I am so sorry.”
[Read more…] about There is a crack in everything – for a reason!
