Consulting/ training

Challenging assumptions is a good thing. Keeping leaders engaged in learning and expanding perceptions is more than good…it is critical. Context Consulting has been host to a five star resource for leaders in the twice yearly Remarkable Leadership Series.

This April Mary Stacey and Bill Torbert marry Torbert’s developmental model “The Seven Transformations of Leadership” with inquiry and application to give individuals the key to unlocking change in their organizations.

Mary and Bill have teamed up on previous occasions to deliver this program which is anchored both in research and “hands on” experience in the workplace. The response has been not only positive but people have expressed gratitude for the shift in their perceptions and the approach they were able to implement.

My personal experience with this work is limited to a one day event plus reference to the material in day to day interactions with colleagues at Context Consulting. Even with this brief exposure to the material, I was left with the huge AHHHA of how embedded I am (and how many organizational structures are) in holding the EXPERT stage in reverential regard. This level of development is but one in Torbert’s model, and is often seen as the end point totally missing the limitations of this narrow view of the world. In levels beyond EXPERT the leader is able to see and appreciate where others are in their own developmental path, and and understand how to work with them to encourage development rather than imposing their expert opinion on others. The approach of the expert often shuts down open communication and limits possibilities and real innovation.

If you are seriously interested in your development as a leader, this series offers not only rich content and learning opportunities, but a community of people from across North America who are thought leaders in business.

This is not an ordinary offering. If you are restless and ready, here is something to take you to places you haven’t yet imagined.

Money is tight and time is tighter.

What that means for training is cutting back on both quantity and unfortunately that often impacts the quality as well. Consultants are often willing to dance to the tune of the sponsor. “If you lower the bar and need the limbo we can do that because we want to pay the bills and because we may think that something is better than nothing”. The consultant or type practitioner sees that the client is in need of assistance. Those of us who use type tools know the benefits of understanding type, so we agree to “do what we can” withing the framework that is given.

In a recentTypeLabs webinar Hile Rutledge of Otto Kroeger and Associates provided a bit of a wake-up call around this issue. That was not his intent but what he suggested was that a type practitioner needs to be very clear about knowing the purpose of any type training. In doing MBTI training he suggests that type practitioners need to contract to have the first training designed specifically around helping participants understand MBTI type theory well enough to make an informed decision about their “best-fit” type. That’s it – a single focus.

Then, applying type awareness to improving communication, decision making or conflict resolution for an intact team would be contracted for a second session.In the end trying to crunch introduction and application into a shorter and shorter single session timeframe doesn’t serve the client well.

The bottom line is that the type practitioner or consultant needs to be very clear about the implications of lowering the bar to limbo standards and they need to make sure that the sponsor understands exactly what outcome they can hope to achieve for each level of investment.

It is better to elevate the discussion to focus on results rather than budget alone. Anyone wanting to use type in their organization is well advised to budget for the time required to build a strong foundation and to introduce a mechanism for reinforcement in applying the knowledge.

The waltz has a 1 2 3 count and type practitioners need to take the time to present the case for quality instead of agreeing to shortcuts in a knee-jerk fashion. I understand that what I am suggesting flies in the face of current economic reality however it is important to stop and reflect on what’s required to provide a good outcome.

Without the investment of time in training and integrating into the common language of the team, the MBTI is filed at the bottom of the cabinet under MY WHAT? “Oh that was something we did last year if only I could remember what it said”