It is a bit like if you were in a boat and have set your course, but the boat springs a leak and you spend your whole time bailing water and have no time to steer.

William Bridges created a model of change and transition that is highly relevant in today’s financial readjustment. When the collapse of Lehman Brothers started the domino effect of the global crisis, many of us would have experienced first shock, then denial, anger and fear. If you lost money or a job you might then experience grief, frustration, confusion, stress and loss of control.

As an executive coach and leadership consultant I have often witnessed this spiraling down into paralysis that Bridges calls the ‘neutral zone’. Symptoms of the neutral zone include ambiguity, anxiety and the absence of motivation. The cure for this paralysis is a new vision of what is possible.

Einstein said that, “A problem cannot be solved with the same level of thinking that created the problem.” When in the neutral zone, we are in a dark place and our ability to think optimistically and see possibilities is severely limited. What is required is a little magic, the magic of imagination. All of human achievement started with imagination, from running a mile in under 4 minutes, to imagining what it would be like on the top of Mount Everest to imagining walking on the surface of the moon.

A vision will inspire, motivate and engender creativity and it starts with using imagination to travel to the future when things will be better. The Executive who asks him/herself, “What is possible?” “What will we be doing when things are better?” To do achieve this we must take time to stop bailing the water in the boat and look to the shore. Most executives find this extremely difficult as they leave themselves little or no time to stop, step back and think strategically.

With a new vision of where you are going, you and your people will become more optimistic, think creatively and start planning actions that will move you towards success.

It was no surprise that Barack Obama beat John McCain; Dr Martin Seligman in his book ‘Learned Optimism’ talks about his analysis of US elections based on the number of positive or optimistic comments made by the candidates. Obama clearly offered a more optimistic view of the future and thus captured the popular vote.

Obama is being called a transformational leader because he:

1. Created a vision that inspired the American voters (and the world) to believe that there were new possibilities.

2. Stimulates people to think, to re-examine their ideas and find creative alternatives. Such an environment breeds imagination and innovation.

3. Treats people as individuals making people feel valued and encouraging them to contribute. He recognizes that people have unique talents, strengths and weakness and allowing for these differences without judgment.

The transformational leader must have what I like to call ‘realistic optimism’ which is a practical and pragmatic approach that is ideally suited to the current climate. Realistic optimism is the mindset that we can make the best of any circumstance; it is the acceptance that bad things do happen but with a healthy self-esteem and the confidence in our abilities we can overcome adversity, learn from the situation and be even better for the experience.

Optimism without right actions and following sound principles will not be enough. Lehman Brothers failed because of over-optimism and the senior management not being in alignment with their own company’s vision and values.

In the current climate it is tempting to focus on immediate need and make tactical rather than strategic decisions; I urge you to step back for a moment, get in touch with your personal or company vision and ask yourself, “Is this decision the right one for the long term?”

Andrew Bryant is the Director of Self Leadership International and is based in Singapore but travels extensively as an executive coach and leadership consultant.

Harvard Business Review (HBR Jan 09) has just published a review of the field of executive coaching and makes some significant points on how to effectively use executive coaching as a self-leadership or business tool.

Coaching used to be used to address toxic behaviours, some of which clearly needed therapy such as narcissism but most of which fall in the category of poor people management. Now coaching is seen as ideal to facilitate the development of high potential employees.

Quoting HBR:

• 48% of coaches surveyed were engaged to coach high potentials or
facilitate a transition.
• 26% to act as a sounding board, and
• 12% to address a derailing behaviour

I was speaking today to a coach in the finance sector who reports that, as organisations have let a large number of older (read more expensive) executives go; the remaining younger managers need help to rapidly upgrade their leadership skills.

Because of the fluid nature of the coaching profession the prevailing question remains, “How to choose the right coach for the right coachee.”

Starting with the coachee – they must really want to be developed and be prepared to take some constructive feedback. Many coachees will pay lip service to the process but are not yet ready to change – a good coach will not take on such a coaching assignment, I know I won’t.

As for the coach, there must be some ‘chemistry’ between the coach and the coachee; after all they are going to spend quite some time together. But this chemistry should be a catalyst for change not a validation of the status quo. As for a buyer guide, according to HBR here are the top reasons for choosing the right coach:

1. Experience coaching in a similar setting 65%
2. Clear methodology 61%
3. Quality of client list 50%
4. Ability to measure ROI 32%

Personally I have experienced numerous ‘interview the coach’ sessions and I agree with HBR’s findings. If you are looking for an experienced executive coach feel free to drop us a line.

At the heart of any change are people, and many people just don’t like change, full stop. A couple of years ago I (Peter Schmedig) was running a change management program for a government department in Australia, and staff were moving from one side of the building to the other, but the anger, frustration and lack of communication created by this seemingly simple move underlines the need to effectively manage people through any change process, not matter how big or small.
Managing change has two aspects to it, and both need to be managed well. Some organisations are very good at one aspect, but fail to understand the need to manage the twin aspects of change.

These twin issues are:

1. Change

Change is really the visible aspect of any change process. It could be moving to new premises, creating a new department, doubling the size of your team, or implementing a new strategic direction. There are many practical concerns with most aspects of change, and organisations often handle things efficiently and rationally in these areas.

2. Transition

Alternatively, imagine you are getting a posting to an overseas location; you would have mixed feelings of excitement and trepidation, you would be nervous about new team you’re joining, but sad to be leaving friends and family behind. This cocktail of emotions that we experience is the key to managing the Transition phase. The stages are predictable, and if handled well will lead to a balanced and highly effective change process, without the resentment, anger and frustration that most experience.

If managers cannot manage the key steps in both the Change and Transition phase the change may be less than successful.

If you are facing a Change Management initiative stay tuned to this blog for more information; or you could contact us at Self Leadership International.