Effective Action

We were 5 days into a serious desert survival exercise. We had run short of water because we had assumed that the springs we saw in the first few days would continue. Up until that moment, no one had really spoken candidly. As with any team in the early stages of coming together, we were inclined to defer, accommodate and agree. That all changed when someone suggested a 7km backtrack to the last large body of clean water we had seen. Given our 20km daily target, this would have almost doubled our work rate for the day, and added risk. We were standing beside a small flowing stream, but it was smelly and had algae covering the water.

The effort of the suggested backtrack flipped the group into a candid conversation about the effort, reward, risks and other factors involved in the decision. While the conversation was difficult, our decision to filter and boil the lower quality water and keep moving forward was a good one. We all focused on the problem, rather than the people. Suggestions were made and debated vigorously.

In a workplace this is one of the key benefits of psychological safety. Candid conversations get us to better decisions, less unnecessary effort, less do-overs, less frustration. It’s commercially astute.

On top of creating the environment for frank conversations, there also has to be effective action. The two most common reasons people have for not speaking up:

• Fear - looking stupid, ridicule, losing your job, retaliation, retribution or isolation have people weighing whether it’s worth the risk.

• Nothing Changes - If people do speak up, but nothing changes, it feels pointless and people will stop doing it.

Candour in our survival group required action on both fronts. People’s input was welcome and respected (after all, we would all have to live with the consequences of the final decision). Once discussed, a firm decision was made and the group immediately took action.

Which of these 2 reasons for not speaking up is more prevalent in your workplace? Why? What could you do personally and today to move forward?

Everything depends on it…

And over the past two years it has taken a massive beating. 

It’s Psychological Safety. 

Unlike physical safety which can be more readily seen, measured and mitigated - Psychological Safety is more about how safe something feels. As a young outdoors instructor I often saw people deeply concerned about the safety of abseiling down a 50 metre cliff, and yet quite happy to jump in a raft to shoot some rapids.

 If you are using properly rigged and rated gear, the abseil is very low risk. It becomes quite a predictable environment from a physical safety point of view. But we are born with a hard wired fear of falling from height. That’s smart design isn’t it - especially given the consequences! The barriers are almost all psychological and it feels very unsafe and exposed. Rapids on the other hand can be way riskier. And yet it seems easier for most of us to trust the boat and jump in.

In the workplace Psychological Safety impacts many elements contributing to bottom line:

• Dealing with conflict

• Contributing innovative ideas

• Spotting and correcting physical safety issues

• Giving and receiving useful feedback

• Developing new skills

• Pointing out potential flaws in a product or plan

• Taking responsibility/accountability for results

• Giving honest estimates of time required for projects

• Open conversations about budgets, strategy, tactics and opportunities

If people don’t feel safe to do these things and more without experiencing negative kickback, they are likely to find any reason not to do them. What you say, or what the official policy is doesn’t make much difference to this. It’s all about feel. 

How would you rate the Psychological Safety of your workplace, especially after the assaults of the last 2 years? If you’d like a practical 20 point checklist to measure and improve it, send me a message and I’d be happy to send you one.

Stacking the Deck with Jokers

Group Think for Leaders

There's a phenomenon in survival and safety/accident research where people increase their exposure to risk by getting away with inherently risky acts. Getting away with it creates a mental model that doesn't see the risk, or believes the activity to be safe. In some cases, this is compounded by the fact that every time the activity is repeated it builds up more "energy" for a failure.

A good example of this is people texting while driving. The first time someone does it, they feel uncertain and nervous. Nothing bad happens so they do it again, maybe giving even more time to the screen. Gradually they desensitise themselves to the risk, feeling like it does not apply to them.

I call it "Stacking the deck with Jokers". At some point, someone will brake suddenly in front of them. They are unprepared, not alert, and have no plan in mind. They have no "real" cards to play. The research shows people in this state become victims of accidents that were totally obvious and predictable to others. If they survive, they report being completely taken by surprise...

We do this in the business environment as well. It looks like a lack of self leadership - ignoring an intuitive sense that something isn't quite right, following someone else's lead with blind faith, developing a sense of complacency with team members or customers.

There are some simple measures to avoid falling into this state. A friend demonstrated them beautifully as a pilot in a close formation flying display. It was led by a well known and respected pilot of considerable experience. The weather was marginal for flying to the extent that any good flying instructor would caution their students never to fly under those conditions. He described the lead up to take off:

• exhilaration for being part of it
• busy, focused on ensuring his preflight checks were thorough and complete
• a sense of peer pressure (we have a display to put on, everyone else seems happy to go)
• unquestioning faith in the experience, qualification and leadership of the pilot in charge - "if he thinks its safe with all his experience, I will follow him"
• a small niggling feeling of doubt about the weather

At the last moment he aborted his takeoff. The others completed their flight uneventfully, stacking the deck with jokers like "its OK to fly in conditions like that".

What made it possible for my friend to abort? It was all about self leadership:

Intuition - He paid attention to the small but persistent intuitive feeling that he was putting himself and others at risk.
Self Examination - He began to ask questions like "Would I fly in these conditions under normal circumstances?"
Backing himself - He "switched on" his own training, experience, judgment and thinking and assessed the situation himself, rather than just following the group.
Courage - He exercised the courage of the self leader, and took a decision that was possibly unpopular with the leader and his peers

People who apply these principles are of great value to themselves and those around them - they make it possible to "see" risky mental models and make sound choices. They stack the deck in their favour. Those are valuable skills in leadership.

Is there anyone you follow blindly - especially if it is detrimental to yourself, others and the results you are trying to achieve? What would you need to do to exercise more judgement and self leadership in that situation?

What's the situation?

There's three types of situation we can be in.

1. A survival situation - If it is a physical situation life or limb will be at risk. In relationships or business the impact might be measured in loss of business, finances, or relationship breakdown. Survival situations are characterised by immanent and often dynamic threats which need to be dealt with decisively and quickly.
2. Just living - Things are neither extremely good, or extremely risky. These are great times for considered, proactive change or a deliberate, intentional rest.
3. A thriving situation - Life (or business) is going very well. Opportunities abound. Many aspects of the environment are aligning to create positive alliances, growth and possibilities. Make hay while the sun shines.

If we know what situation we are facing, we can intentionally and deliberately respond to it. It's amazing how often people think or react as if they are in a different situation to the one they are actually in. Sometimes people think, feel and act as if they are in a survival situation when they are not. It adds stress, they miss opportunities, and potentially they create a survival situation where there wasn't one.

The reverse can also be true, that we are in a survival situation, but think feel and act as if we are not. Very risky!

One of the clearest examples I see of this is on the road, but it happens in business and relationships as well.

 Every day I see a driver pick up their phone to check or send a message. It’s a clearly established fact that the instant you do so you massively increase the chances of crashing your car. 

Recent research by Professor Dingus in Virginia quantified this. He says, “Taking your eyes off the road to dial a cell phone or look up an address and send a text increases the risk of crashing by 600 to 2,300 per cent.”

If people were genuinely aware of this risk, they would never pick up the phone on the road. It is a genuine, life-at-risk survival situation. To be able to do that, there’s got to be a lack of acknowledgement of the real state. Either a sense that ‘I’m so bloody good at driving, this risk doesn’t apply to me” or “The traffic is cruisey, I’ve got heaps of space and time”.

There’s only three possible outcomes. 

1. A near miss. - This is the best possible outcome. It might shake the driver out of their complacent denial.
2. A sudden, violent reminder that Phone + Driving = Accident - This is at the very least destructive, always traumatic and in the worst case scenario, fatal. Definitely a bad outcome.
3. The driver gets away with it, reinforcing their delusion. - This actually significantly increases the future potential for 1 or 2 to occur. The fact the driver got away with it increases their sense that they are not in a survival situation, making it more likely that they will txt again, perhaps in increasingly busy traffic conditions, and for longer periods of time. 

All survival states are like this. The risk may not be directly to life or limb. It might be measured in financial or relationship terms, but ultimately lack of decisive and timely action will inevitably lead to a confrontation with the risk.

How do you determine what situation you are facing?