An evening with Prof Eric Zackrison
On Friday, July 28, we had a very engaging session by Prof Eric Zackrison.
About Prof Eric Zackrison
After a 30-year career as a restaurant manager and owner, Eric Zackrison attained an MBA and MA from Missouri State University and a PhD in Organizational Communication from UCSB.
Prof Zackrison currently teaches both undergraduate and graduate students in the Department of Technology Management at UCSB. He also teaches MBA students at the California Lutheran University.
As a consultant, Prof Zackrison works with a wide range of organizations on leadership development, team building, and strategy. He advises small businesses on tackling challenges such as market-validation of a business idea and expansion to multiple locations. He is also a regular presenter on LinkedIn Learning.
Prof Zackrison’s research is focused on team dynamics, leadership, and relationships in the workplace.
Developing people
As managers we should strive to build our direct reports so that they move up and beyond our team. In the process, we may lose some good people. But the benefits are many:
- We will have better employees working for us or for a different organization.
- If they move on, these employees will speak positively about us, the team, and the organization.
- While on our team they will be more positive, engaged, and driven.
- We will be able to attract better people.
- Top leaders will recognize our contribution to developing leaders. We are more likely to get promoted.
A young woman was working with Prof Zackrison in the catering department. He promoted her to catering manager. But soon he realized she was not doing a good job. Through a coaching conversation, Prof Zackrison found out she wanted to do something else. He was happy to let her go. To this day, she speaks positively about Prof Zackrison.
How to start
We need to know ourselves, our goals, how we like to interact and what drives us.
We need to know about others, their strengths, weaknesses.
We need to know about the team. If someone is moving in a direction that is not aligned with that of the team, we must talk openly about it.
We must know the vision and mission of the organization so that we are working within the appropriate boundaries.
Once we are clear about ourselves, others, the team, and the organization, we are ready to start a coaching conversation with an individual.
The GROW Model
Coaching is about building a relationship through a conversation. We need some structure to remain focused and to have meaningful conversations.
The GROW Model can be used for driving coaching conversations.
Goals: Where are we trying to get to? What do we want to accomplish?
Reality: Where are we now? What is the gap we need to fill?
Options: What are the opportunities/obstacles in front of us?
Way Forward (Will): What are the specific steps (actionable items) we can take?
Building a Coaching Environment
Coaching is about building a trustworthy environment. Many people do not appreciate the benefits of coaching.
We must create an environment where people can speak openly about their goals and even more importantly about where they are right now.
As leaders, we must be open and honest but couch that within empathy. That is how we build trust.
As coaches, we must give people voice and not micromanage them. If it is their idea, the coachees will have more ownership. Of course, as coaches, we can guide them towards the right options by asking good questions.
It is ok to make mistakes. When we coach, we must focus on the future and the learning opportunities.
We must focus on the positive. If we focus on the negative, our fight/flight instincts will take over.
We should stay solution oriented. That way we build an environment where we are working together and not against each other.
Follow up for success
We should discuss with the coachee how we are going to measure success. The goals should be SMART, ie Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Timebound.
We should be clear about the frequency of reviews.
We should also understand how the coachee wants to be guided: Are reminders needed or can she be left alone ?
What coaching is not
Coaching is not mentoring. A mentor is an expert who shares her experiences. A coach is focused on the needs of the individual and how to help him grow. Coaching is more formal with goals and the impact is more measurable. Mentoring is more informal and less goal oriented. It is much less regimented and more personal in nature. Mentoring is closely tied to a strong personal relationship between the mentor and mentee. But that is not so for coaching. Of course, it is possible for a coach to become a mentor after the engagement is completed.
Coaching is not therapy. Therapy is more private and used to deal with interpersonal problems. For example, dealing with marital problems does not lie within the scope of coaching. To provide therapy, formal training is needed.
Coaching is not the same as life coaching. Coaching happens within the boundaries of the organization. It is about improving performance. Lifestyle, eating habits, nutrition, wellness, etc. are not part of coaching.
Q&A
One of Prof Zackrison ’s favourite employees, a young woman named Celine started working for him cleaning the tables. She moved up in her career to be a server, then a bartender, then a lead server and finally a manager before she joined another company. When she first became a supervisor, she was giving feedback in a way that made people cry and want to quit. Prof Zackrison worked with Celine to identify the skills she needed to enable her to provide feedback in a meaningful way to team members.
Prof Zackrison once coached the Vice President (Operations) of a printing company. He did not have very good interpersonal skills. His understanding of the ground realities was different from that of his team. Prof Zackrison did a survey with his team and made the executive understand that the team did not like him. That got the Vice President to realize that he needed to change. Then over time Prof Zackrison worked with the Vice President to develop skills and sent him to a couple of interventions. It took about a year. Even though he has still not got to where he should be ideally, his team is much more engaged. The Vice President has become more careful about his behaviours and is reflecting regularly whether he is being too aggressive. He has become much more effective in managing his team.
Our language should be aligned with the level and the background of the coachee. We should talk about behaviours and measurable things, not about identity or personality. If we get personal, there will be push back. We should always use friendly language.
This can be tricky. It depends on the individual and the situation.
For example, how do we measure motivation?
Satisfaction surveys, productivity and sales can be used for measurement. But they are influenced by many factors and cannot directly measure coaching effectiveness.
If the coaching is effective, it will lead to decreased employee turnover, satisfied employees, and improved productivity. The effectiveness of a single coaching plan is easier to measure compared to the impact on the entire organization.
The general guiding principle is that measurements should be guided by the two key questions: where are we heading and are we getting there?
Coaching is easier in cultures which encourage being open and honest, like in Sweden. In India, the culture is not to bother people. It is more difficult to get people to admit they have a problem. So in India, to gain acceptance for coaching, we should get people to talk about it and position it around growth and moving forward.
By and large, the faculty do not seem to be interested. The egos are big. Tenured faculty do not seem to feel the need for coaching. The emphasis on research as opposed to teaching makes it even more difficult. A shortage of resources is also a contributing factor.
In administrative roles, there is more coaching but still it is not widely prevalent.
In case of students, mentoring is common. Some amount of mentoring goes on among faculty as well.
For a professor handling a large number of students in a course, one on one coaching is difficult. The more viable alternatives are mentoring and peer to peer coaching.
More conversations about coaching, demonstrating the use of coaching and understanding the needs of the organization can all help in gaining acceptance for coaching.
Coaching is expensive. So when is it justified?
If internal coaches are used, there are no cash expenses. But the time spent is the investment. Outside coaches can be expensive, going up to $ 5000 per hour. When evaluating the payoff, we must ask two important questions: How valuable is this person? How much would it cost to replace the person?
Prof Zackrison ’s own experience is that it takes at least 6 months to bring about a change in behaviours. In one coaching assignment he was paid $ 5000. The company got back the investment in about a year.
People know they must keep learning to stay relevant. But still they do not learn enough. Why is this so?
The most common explanation is that people get caught in day-to-day activities. Many organizations are good at keeping afloat. But they are not investing in learning that moves the company forward. It is a matter of prioritizing. Returns on learning are often not immediate. That is why people tend to postpone.
If we are serious about learning, we must talk about the importance of learning, give people more opportunities to learn and reward people for learning. In Google, people can spend up to 20% of their time doing what they like to do.
But even in Google, most people do not utilize the 20% time given to them for doing new things. Their teammates may be expecting them to keep working in the ongoing project. They find it difficult to detach themselves from the regular work. So, we must not underestimate the challenges involved.
According to this principle, a person who is competent in her job will be promoted to a position that requires different skills. If she lacks the skills required for the new role, she will be incompetent at the new level. So, she will not be promoted again.
Prof Zackrison is not a fan of this principle. Peter’s principle is more focused on the faults and negatives of individuals. When someone gets promoted, we must accept that the skills required are different in the new role and it takes time to adjust. For example, being a manager of managers is very different from being a manager of individual contributors. Rather than viewing it as incompetence, we must understand the need to develop new skills through training and coaching. For example, if a programmer is promoted to leader, without any training we are only setting him up for failure.
The coach should align with the organizational needs if he has been appointed by the organization. It is important to understand the needs of the coachee. The coach should keep her own wants and needs out of the equation. It is ok for a mentor to bring her own perspectives but not for a coach.