Home - Firebrand Consulting

Our Services

Coach Beth Strathman in blue shirt on bridge with trees in background

Services

I help managers & executives align business & talent strategy to create stakeholder value.

Speaking

Do you need a speaker on building high-performing teams, creating psychological safety, or other leadership skills? Contact me today.

May 20, 2024 bstrathman

As a Supervisor, Are You Leading or Bullying?

(This is an updated version of a post I did in October 2012.) “I feel like you’re intimidating and bullying me.” These are the words of a female employee during a meeting with her male supervisor, who intended to set expectations with her. Taken aback, the supervisor started to question his behavior. With stories of children being bullied at school and with differences between generations at work, it makes you stop and think about bullying in the workplace. As a supervisor, how do you know whether you are leading or bullying? At work, a few employees will attempt to deflect responsibility and attention away from themselves, especially when a supervisor addresses a work issue. One thing an employee may say, whether they really believe it or not, is that you are bullying” them. It seems for some employees, no one – not even their supervisor – has a right to set or clarify expectations for their conduct or performance at work. Also, some employees may use the word “intimidation” when describing what it felt like when they were called into their supervisor’s office to discuss a performance issue. Well, sure, it can be intimidating, especially for those who know deep down they’ve failed in their work commitment. But that doesn’t mean the boss was indeed intimidating, purposefully or not, and it doesn’t mean they are a bully. What it does mean is that the use and misuse of power and authority by supervisors is often at the heart of perceptions of bullying.

Correlations Between Bullying Behavior and Leadership Style and Traits

Your leadership style and other personality traits can make it more likely an employee will perceive they are bullied, even if your manner or behavior doesn’t cross a line (usually set by the organization’s standards of conduct). One study found that bullying correlated with all four leadership styles measured and that:

An autocratic leadership style was the strongest predictor of bullying observed by others;
A laissez-faire leadership style emerged as a predictor of self-reported as well as observed bullying; and
An unpredictable style of leadership, where punishment is meted out or delivered on leaders' own terms, independent of the target employee’s behavior was the strongest predictor of self-perceived bullying.

(Hoel, et al, 2009) In contrast to the autocratic leadership style, a more recent study found that a more democratic and communal leadership orientation may lead to fewer perceptions of bullying in the workplace. (Houghton et al, 2021).

Distinguishing Bullying and Supervisory Behavior

According to the Workplace Bullying Institute, bullying is “repeated, health-harming mistreatment by one or more employees of an employee: abusive conduct that takes the form of verbal abuse; or behaviors perceived as threatening, intimidating, or humiliating; work sabotage” or a combination of these. It is often a “systematic campaign of interpersonal destruction” that causes harm such as health issues, adverse employment actions, (i.e., demotion, termination, reprimand, failure to promote, etc.), or even constructive discharge. Bullying behavior can include ostracizing or isolating, being aggressive or intrusive, minimizing, intimidating, criticizing, or spreading gossip about the target of their bullying. Often, a peer or supervisor will bully another employee due to professional jealousy, being seen as a threat to the bully’s social status to their ability to be in control, or being insecure or having low self-esteem. To check your behavior as a supervisor, use the chart below to clarify bullying versus appropriate supervisory behaviors:

Bullying	Leading as a Supervisor
During a performance review, the supervisor is intentionally biased or gives inaccurate feedback because they don’t like the employee even though the employee is a good performer.	During a performance review, the supervisor shares honest, substantiated feedback with the employee, whether or not they like the employee as a person.
The supervisor deliberately excludes an employee from workplace meetings and activities for no good reason or for a concocted reason while other employees on the same team or in the same job classification are invited to attend.	The supervisor includes an employee in workplace meetings and activities that other employees on the same team or in the same job classification attend, whether or not the supervisor like the employee and even if the employee is not the best performer.
The supervisor instigates, encourages, or fails to stop others from spreading malicious gossip, jokes, or rumors about an employee.	The supervisor refrains from joking about, gossiping or spreading rumors about any employees, and addresses such behavior with other employees who engage in it. Instead of listening to gossip and rumors, the supervisors ignores it, or if warranted, follows up with the employee directly and privately, giving them an opportunity to give their version of the situation.
The supervisor pesters, spies, or stalks the employee with no business reason for doing so.	The supervisor monitors all employees’ whereabouts and productivity if there is a business reason for doing so, and documents and addresses any issues of attendance or productivity privately with an employee, giving them an opportunity to give their version of the situation.
The supervisor criticizes or belittles the employee persistently or allows others to do so without saying anything.	The supervisor speaks privately with the employee if there are documented conduct or performance issues, and gets the employee’s explanation during the conversation.
The supervisor applies undeserved or unwarranted corrective action or discipline to an employee.	The supervisor addresses only work-related issues, supported by relevant information regarding a situation, including the employee’s version of events, before deciding whether or not to discipline an employee for workplace misconduct.
The supervisor consistently gives a good performer assignments that are beneath their position to create a feeling of uselessness.	The supervisor holds all employees accountable to job performance standards and documents/addresses sub-standard performance with interventions such as re-training, job shadowing, or a performance plan.

Regardless of how you show up, the authority inherent in your position will automatically intimidate some. Still, as a supervisor, everything you do and say will be magnified 1000 times by that authority. That’s why it’s a good idea to become aware your own insecurities and the way you react when stressed. Your insecurity and reactive behavior could be sending unintended messages that employees interpret as bullying. Also, work with your human resources department to know how to address workplace issues with employees with professionalism and respect. Want to plan out a tough conversation you need to have with an employee? Download my Conversation Planner

August 30, 2021 bstrathman

Why You Need to Do More Systems Thinking with Your Team

For over 400 years, western civilization has increased its use of analytical thinking and the scientific method to explain almost everything in the natural world. By using analysis (separating a whole into its component parts), our society has greatly expanded the knowledge of how things work. With this knowledge, humans have invented new technologies that have freed many people from lives focused only on survival. Yet, elevating analysis over other thought processes has led to a loss of appreciation of how human beings and everything else are interdependent elements of an interconnected, complex web of life. You might notice this overuse of analysis in your workplace. For example, I would bet that most (if not all) of the “thinking” done by you and your team is analyzing problems by looking for causes and effects.

Systems Thinking as a Complement to Analysis

I’m not advocating that you quit using analysis. It has its place. But analysis comes up short when working in a complex environment of issues and stakeholders. You know this if you have had the experience of "solving a problem” only to have it repeatedly pop up elsewhere in your organization or system. What I am suggesting is that you and your team use systems thinking, or synthesis, as a counterbalance to analysis. Systems thinking provides an understanding of why the whole system of parts is the way it does and to focus your efforts; your team can then use analysis for determining how parts are working. In contrast to analysis, systems thinking begins by focusing on the broader system. First, define that system and its function (stakeholders). Next, look at the interaction of the its “parts” (team members) of the system (of stakeholders). As Russ Ackoff said, "A system is not the sum of its parts but a product of their interactions." Using systems thinking (or synthesis) with analysis will enhance your team’s ability to more thoughtfully address issues and strategize for the future.

Benefits of Systems Thinking

Here are three benefits of using more systems thinking with your team:

Your work will be more meaningful.

When you approach your work, including processes and people dynamics, with the whole system in mind, your team will work more holistically to make the system work better more effectively. This is because systems thinking emphasizes the relationships and interactions between the people and processes involved in any situation. You’ll go from feeling like “cogs” in a machine to seeing yourselves as intelligent, adaptive participants in an interdependent ecosystem. You'll gain a broader perspective and see the interconnectivity of people and processes across many different areas. This adds to more meaning to your work.

You are more likely to make progress on complex issues over the long-term.

Using systems thinking takes you from using only a cause/effect, linear approach to resolving issues within the system. This means, you’ll move from assuming a problem lies where the symptom occurs. Instead, you'll realize that multiple actions/reactions in other parts of the system can occur to discombobulate the system.

Your team will become a learning machine that adds greater value.

“Problems” become learning opportunities for your team. Instead of assuming a “problem” needs to be simply eliminated, your team will learn to dive into understanding unwanted situations. You'll stop going for quick fixes or avoiding the issues altogether. System thinking provides new perspectives on why the system is not functioning well. The can then adapt to better serve the system. Unlike analysis, systems thinking is not second nature to most of us at this point. Over the centuries, analysis helped humans to gain new knowledge about phenomena in our world. Unfortunately, it over-emphasized the parts over the whole. Using more systems thinking can re-balance your approach to chronic, long-term issues. As your team uses more systems thinking, you will generate choice, create interconnectivity, and become more aware of possible solutions that improve the whole system. WANT TO USE THIS IN YOUR NEWSLETTER, BLOG OR WEBSITE? You can, as long as you include this information with it: Beth Strathman works with executives and senior leaders to create team environments that optimize ownership, accountability, learning, and results. Learn more at bethstrathman.com.

system, systems thinking, synthesis, team

June 28, 2021 bstrathman

How Double-Loop Learning Will Increase Your Team’s Agility and Effectiveness

The Learning Cycle is a simple framework used by teams to improve products and processes. It’s a cycle that includes Planning, Doing, Reviewing, and Learning from the results of projects and tasks. This basic learning cycle is useful for reviewing events and spotting patterns and to tweak task performance. However, for deeper learning and greater agility, take two passes around this cycle using a different emphasis the second time around.

Single-Loop Learning

Use the first pass around the Learning Cycle to focus on what happened when you performed a task or implemented activity and focus on concrete factors, such as who, when, and how. This is referred to as “single loop learning”. During this initial loop around the cycle, your team seeks to detect and correct errors or undesirable outcomes by looking primarily at events and patterns that occurred. The cycle entails …

Observing and collecting information during and after the fact,
Assessing the results against desired measures and outcomes,
Proposing causes and connections between events, and
Adjusting techniques used in order to correct errors and to make improvements as you modify your original plan and start the cycle again.

Double-Loop Learning Will Take You Deeper

After taking the first loop around the learning cycle, consider going around the framework a second time. However, this time around, go deeper into how the beliefs underlying the original vision, goals, frameworks, and norms. Doing this allows you to reflect on how the beliefs influenced and impacted your original plan, its implementation, and results. This second trip around puts you into double-loop learning. Using only the single loop, you address what is on the surface and is visible and obvious. However, the the second loop around the cycle deepens your review and reflection. During the second time around, look at the underlying thinking that shaped how you framed the task or project in the first place. In other words, double-loop learning moves you from considering only the visible actions, events, and outcomes to also consider the invisible mental models that influenced how you conceptualized the work. While single-loop learning focuses on the technical and practical, double-loop learning encourages you to go deeper. It encourages you to question the basic assumptions and beliefs behind the relevant strategy, policies, norm, etc., used to conceive of and design your task work. Today’s complex, constantly-changing world requires your team to be more aware of the underlying beliefs that drive its work. This is what makes you more agile and able to create greater value. Double-loop learning is a process that can improve your team’s discernment and lead to more meaningful and beneficial learning. Better ability to learn, in turn, will enable your team to adapt to changing conditions more effectively. With that adaptability and agility, your team will be more effective at serving its stakeholders now and into the future. WANT TO USE THIS IN YOUR NEWSLETTER, BLOG OR WEBSITE? You can, as long as you include this information with it: Beth Strathman works with executives and senior leaders to create team environments that optimize ownership, accountability, learning, and results. Learn more at bethstrathman.com.

April 22, 2021 bstrathman

How Well Does Your Team Know Its Stakeholders?

High-performing teams take seriously how well they create value for their stakeholders. The best teams know what their stakeholders need and expect from them. Here are some things to keep in mind as you focus on understanding your critical stakeholders, both inside and outside your department or organization. When you do, you increase your team's effectiveness.

Identify Your Stakeholders

Your stakeholders greatly influence the reason your team exists and vice versa. That's why it’s important to be clear about just who your team’s stakeholders are. To guide this inquiry, research by Clutterbuck and Hirst (2003) identified 3 aspects of influence between teams and their stakeholders: Creating or limiting financial resources - Executive teams or department heads are likely to control financial resources for your team. In non-profits, a particular donor or group of donors are stakeholders when they fund a program or initiative. Impact to or from one another - Customers are an obvious stakeholder for many sales, design, and manufacturing teams because of the direct impact of their work on the end user of a product or service. Also, there are often impacts between your team and other work teams in your organization. These effects can be so routine that you overlook them as stakeholders and vice versa. Having shared purpose and values - A shared purpose with stakeholders means that you both have an interest in each other's success. You know you share values with a stakeholder when the values they live by are similar or support yours. Indeed, research shows that shared values and purpose unifies your team and its stakeholders and helps your team create stakeholder relationships that will advance your team purpose (Freedman, et al, 2004). Thus, your team’s stakeholders are those individuals and groups who feel valued by you and find value in what your team does because they benefit from, are impacted by, and/or influence your team’s decisions and output.

Not All Stakeholders are Obvious

It’s easy to overlook some stakeholders. For example, many executive and management teams often overlook their direct reports as stakeholders. They overlook that their team decisions and work products almost always directly affect those who report to them. It’s easy to focus only on the loudest or most powerful voices. Using a stakeholder map can help you identify your team's key stakeholders, including those "unusual voices" who benefit from or influence your team's work while having less influence in the decision-making process. Additionally, high-performing teams have large networks of both strong and weak ties to networks of stakeholders that provide expertise that can support the team. Weak ties tend to be with others with whom the team has ad hoc interactions. Strong ties are with those with more critical cooperation and expertise. Teams can nurture both types of stakeholder relationships accordingly.

Stay Engaged with Stakeholders

One way to say in touch with your stakeholders is to identify members of your team who can act as team representatives to engage stakeholders: • Ambassadors: market the team to the those with power both inside and outside the organization; • Scouts: gather information from people outside the organization who have different knowledge/expertise; • Coordinators: manage the connections to the team across functions inside the organization. The better relationship you have with your stakeholders, the higher competitive advantage your business has (Jones 1995). Therefore, to become a more effective team, it’s important to identify and continually engage your key stakeholders. When you do, your team will gain the information necessary to continually adapt to changing conditions in its stakeholder system. WANT TO USE THIS IN YOUR NEWSLETTER, BLOG OR WEBSITE? You can, as long as you include this information with it: Beth Strathman works with executives and senior leaders to create team environments that optimize ownership, accountability, learning, and results. Learn more at bethstrathman.com.

March 29, 2021 bstrathman

What the Best Teams Do to Optimize Their Decision Making

Making decisions for yourself difficult. For teams, multiply the difficulty of decision-making even more! Not only do decision-making biases and pitfalls abound, but chances decrease of reaching a solid decision when the process used is found lacking. There are, however, some aspects of decision-making that will lead to better decisions if you include them in your process. Consider making your decision-making more conscious, intentional, and systemic by taking into account these decision-making factors to make better team decisions:

Team Identity & Aspirations

What in the world does “team identity” have to do with decision-making? Well, it turns out, a lot. How your team sees itself is the foundation of a good decision. A solid decision ultimately is based upon your team’s purpose, vision, values, and goals. A good decision reflects why your team exists (purpose), how they envision themselves being successful (vision), and how the decision reflects core team values. Additionally, your team must be clear about what they are trying to achieve with the decision they will make. That is, how will the decision further current team goals or more general aspirations? When all is said and done, a good final decision will meet the needs of team stakeholders, inside and outside the organization.

Decision Implications

Not every decision is life and death. However, the decisions your team makes are probably important; otherwise, you wouldn’t be spending team time on them. So, to help the team gauge the level of importance, consider the potential cost of making the wrong decision. As a team, estimate how much time, money, energy, etc. is hanging in the balance to put the decision in perspective, including the potential costs in terms of time, money, and energy.

Criteria for Viable Options

How will your team know which decision is best? It’s key to create decision criteria. Key criteria are those attributes that enable the team to discern options that are “better” or more desirable and feasible than others. To begin your attributes list, start with the components of team identity & aspiration and the implications of making the right or wrong decision above. For example, the “decision has to further our overall goal of X; serve stakeholder A, B, C; not jeopardize our relationship with stakeholder D; and allow us to meet our deadline of May 31st.” From these basic building blocks. The team can suggest or brainstorm additional criteria as necessary throughout the decision-making process as new information comes to light.

External Data & Its Interpretation

Another consideration is the use of additional data to aid in making a decision. Indeed, gathering and interpreting qualitative and quantitative data is where much decision-making time is usually spent.

Default decision

Before your team formally starts collecting statistics and opinions, take the small but important step of taking a straw poll to see what the team would do if they had to make the decision without further input. Why? The “default decision” is like a starting point that the team can use to determine additional data it wants or needs to convince team members that its seemingly obvious “default” option is appropriate or not. “Based on what we know today and our preliminary criteria, we’d decide to do X. What added information might allow us to see if that option holds up?”

Additional data

With the default option in mind, the team can use common sense, analysis, and curiosity to decide on, collect and use additional data to test their initial “default” option. Also, after reflecting on the additional data desired to make the decision, your team may have a better sense of additional key criteria to consider when making the decision. Using the additional data and the team’s criteria for a good decision, it can generate and evaluate options that warrant further consideration before making the final decision.

Confidence in the Decision

Once the team has settled on its decision, it’s wise to do a final gut check regarding the team’s level of confidence in the final decision. If the team indicates low confidence in the final decision, the team can determine what it needs to do to increase its confidence to an acceptable level. Good decision-making can have a large impact on team performance. Decisions don’t happen on their own. The best teams make better decisions because they intentionally consider their team purpose, aspirations, implications, data, criteria, and confidence in the final decision. WANT TO USE THIS IN YOUR NEWSLETTER, BLOG OR WEBSITE? You can, as long as you include this information with it: Beth Strathman works with executives and senior leaders to create team environments that optimize ownership, accountability, learning, and results. Learn more at bethstrathman.com.

February 22, 2021 bstrathman

Dialogue: Moving Through Conflict To Creativity and Innovation

Do you congratulate yourself on the fact that your team never argues or even disagrees with each other? Hold on. That might not be a good thing. Results from a study of 55 executives teams by consulting firm RHR International found that while internal cohesion and psychological safety are important to executive team performance, they are not the most critical at the enterprise level. Rather, it is the team’s ability to manage conflicting tensions—as opposed to seeking agreement—that predicts top-team performance. Even if you don’t lead an executive team, you know that conflict happens on most teams at all levels of your company. Indeed, with the emphasis on creating diverse teams, it’s likely that the different backgrounds, experiences, and expertise will lead to more wide-ranging points of view. The trick is not to avoid conflict, but to understand that disagreement is often a step in the conversation process on the way toward understanding the larger system you within which your team operates.

Field #1: Politeness

In this field, team members are minding their p’s and q’s, making sure not to be seen as negative. In this stage, people do not necessarily say what they think in order to keep the peace and the appearance of playing “nice”. At this point, team members work to maintain the appearance of being a cohesive team by not “rocking the boat”. Nothing new happens in the field of politeness, so it’s likely that team members leave a conversation that stayed in this field with their expectations met. Same ol’ meeting, different day.

Field #2: Breakdown

During a team meeting or discussion, it’s probably not uncommon from your team to move to the field of breakdown. You know you’re in breakdown when individual team members begin to assert their individual points of view (POV). In this field, tension in the group begins to rise as group cohesion dissipates and individuals debate, defend, and argue about the merits of their assertions, credentials, experiences, and facts known to them. When team conversations end in this field of breakdown, team members leave the conversation with awareness or new information from other POVs that challenge assumptions and information they knew coming in. When team members begin to realize that there is a different way to look at the issue or their own part in the issue/situation that they hadn’t thought of or realized before.

Field #3: Inquiry

In inquiry, team members begin to reflect on their own perspectives as parts of the whole, rather than the only or the “right” perspective. In fact, in this field team members gain a new perspective. They begin to ask questions out of curiosity about what they truly don’t understand, instead of asking leading or charged questions to convince others to see their points of view.

Field 4: Flow

The team enters level four feeling like a cohesive group again co-creating new ideas that move within the group. The team sees the bigger picture or system because of its awareness of multiple POVs. You’re in this field when energy and inspiration is high in anticipation of something new being created. Team members leave the conversation feeling like they have become different people who are more connected to who they are meant to be. As a bonus, fill in the form below to download a graphic detailing the four fields of conversation. This tool is useful in teaching your team how think and work together for break-through results. You and your team will learn to move from conflict to creativity and innovation more effectively. [wpforms id="2105"]

Firebrand Consulting

Leadership & Executive Coaching | Systemic Team Coaching