Faster than before

Once a team gets clear about what's important, both culturally and transactionally, they can start to build speed. Clarity brings the possibility of mantras… pieces of language that are packed with shared meaning.  

For example Atlassian, a global company founded and headquartered in Australia, has several mantras. One of them is “Be the change you seek”. For them, it means:

• Take initiative rather than seeking/waiting for permission. 

• If there’s a problem, find a way to get involved in the fix.

• If there’s a gap in the market, fill it.

• If the product is not up to standard, change it. 

Smart leaders build mantras with the people around them. Then they find clear examples to reinforce their meaning. Mantras and clarity go hand in hand. Once you have them, you can remind people of what is important and set direction with a few words dense with shared meaning. It takes effort to get to that place, but on the other side of it is speed.

Do you have any mantras? If not, what might they be?

Refine “Good” and “Done”

If you want to go further and faster with a team, cohesion is critical. Cohesion is driven by clarity. 

A few days ago I was working with an excellent leadership team. They  invest heavily in finding clarity. Even so, there's uncertainty.  One leader said, “We don't have iron clad agreement on what ‘Done’ is or what ‘Good’ is. Great places to start if you want clarity.

When leaders and teams explore this, they refine clarity with each iteration of work. While the answers may seem simple, perhaps even obvious, getting clear creates alignment. Every  team member can orient their effort to team standards. Not just for the task in hand, but for how this particular team does its work.  A void here gets filled by silos. Sub teams focus on getting their work right, rather than looking at the whole picture. If the silos seem strong, but the whole seems weak, ‘Done’ and ‘Good’ is a great place to start.

Get clear - then repeat often. Not using exactly the same words and examples, but shining light on finer and finer detail. Then empower others in your team to do the same. Once a clear baseline is set,  a team can move very rapidly because they know exactly what they are attempting to achieve. There’ll be more and more reinforcement of a job well done both inherently from the task, and from satisfied team leaders. With consistency, it self perpetuates.

How clearly can you answer those questions?  What does good look like? And what does done look like?

Going Potty

A leader was telling me about challenges with their team not producing work to a high enough standard. Everyone's a bit frustrated. This seems to be a trend - expecting great results on the first effort.

There’s a leadership legend passed around about a pottery class where students were given the choice of submitting one perfect piece for assessment, or producing as many pots as they could and submit them all for assessment. The best quality pots came from the quantity group, not the quality group. Turns out this never happened in pots, but it did in a photography class. It was written about in a book called Art and Fear, where there were already too many photography examples, so they changed it to pots. The pottery story has since spread like wildfire, and keeps popping up refreshed. Why? Because the principle makes sense.

For many (maybe most) things, we need reps to get good. This is challenging, especially when there are significant consequences that go with getting something wrong - Pilots, Lawyers, Accountants, Soldiers and Surgeons spring to mind. Note - all these professions create opportunities for practice alongside someone who is already accomplished.

How and where could you/your team benefit from reps? How could you set that up for maximum experience/exposure with minimum risk?

Don’t expect awesome if there’s been no practice.

Can I trust them?

“Can I trust them?” is one of the most asked questions when I am coaching leaders about delegation. When we delegate stuff, often it remains our responsibility - If it doesn’t work out we may be the person who will be held responsible.

In many environments there is a regulatory responsibility too - if something you delegate goes wrong, your ‘licence to operate’ may be on the line. Potentially you’ll face regulatory penalties of some kind. This is true whether you are a board delegating to a CEO, or a frontline nurse manager, delegating to a team of nurses. It applies in many settings and at many levels.

So how can you trust someone to do what you have delegated properly - trust them enough to not be constantly looking over their shoulder to make sure it's OK? Especially if what they are doing is complex and/or complicated.

It takes time. How much time will depend on the person's prior experience, their confidence and their skill. It’s useful to have a system for handing skill sets on (We’ll talk about that next time). It’s also useful to consider what you will need to see from them to be satisfied that they know what they are doing.

Be transparent about how long you will be watching and what you are watching for. Explain the risks/consequences if it goes wrong and the incentives for getting it right. By doing so you are creating an environment where trust can develop and delegation will be successful.

Extreme Rehearsal

Once upon a time I used to run tours into caves. We’d abseil groups into caves via tight vertical holes in the limestone. I don’t believe in monsters, but if I did, those holes are where they would live. We’d explore underground before climbing back out.

The activity was low risk if well managed, but also very unforgiving of mistakes or accidents. We would rehearse rescue scenarios in extreme. The logic was if we could train for almost inconceivable rescue scenarios, then anything we actually encountered would be comparatively easy. It also meant people understood their equipment really well, and could adapt its use under pressure.

We never had to deploy those skills for real, but the practice was worthwhile all the same, even if it just made us very conscious of the challenging environment we were in.

I recently watched an Australian Story’s account of a dramatic rescue on the Franklin river in Tassie. It highlights some of the challenges rescue teams can face, and just how extreme the situation can become.

The rehearsals we did were the practical outworking of forecasting - taking the scenarios we could envisage and then working out how we would actually respond. It’s not as easy to do in a less tangible environment, however the practice is still good.

Whether it's a desktop exercise, a brainstorming session, or a physical rehearsal of some kind - like the annual fire drill, it’s well worth doing. How could you consider and practice for the extremes you might encounter in business or life?

Two forecasting fails

Fail One

Only envisaging one potential outcome. As a realist with an optimistic bias, I catch myself with this one more often than I would like. I only picture the successful outcome. The positivity sometimes serves me well, but it also makes for a bigger/slower adjustment if things don't go as anticipated. ‘Foreseeing’ only a good outcome can be like “she’ll be right” - it works well if it goes well. A better version is to forecast 3 versions. Ideal, Worst Case, Something in between. Considering each version gives a more robust ‘Plan A’ that will handle a broader range of possibilities.

Fail Two

Over-thinking it. Some people go down a rabbit hole of trying to envisage every possible outcome. The endless “what if” leads to second guessing your chosen path of action. There's lots of research highlighting the many negative aspects of too many options - over forecasting has the same effect. Forecasting is about considering what might be possible or at risk. It’s not about trying to accurately catalogue all eventualities.

Bonus Fail

Freaking ourselves out. Some leaders ask me what the most dire forecast is that we should consider. I reckon it depends on what you can handle as an individual or a team. If you can discuss a really dire, worst case scenario, and treat it as just a thought experiment, that’s useful. But if going there will cause sleepless nights and endless tilting at windmills (origins) (epic sounds), don’t go. That’s exactly the opposite of what the exercise intends. Go as far down the rabbit hole as is useful, but don’t get stuck down there with an overdue rabbit.

Cascading Priorities

Clinging to an overturned boat, surrounded by sharks, drifting along a remote piece of coast with 60 minutes to sunset. The timing was fortuitous. If we weren't at that spot and at that time, there's a high probability that the 3 people clinging to the boat would have perished overnight. The only reason we heard their broken mayday call was the radio antenna at the top of our yacht's mast gave better range and clarity. Several other boats nearby could not hear them at all. 

We were not able to rescue them directly, our boat was too slow and constrained by depth. For the next hour we relayed messages between the vessel in distress, rescue services and other boats. In the end it was a successful outcome with all 3 picked up safely. 

But we almost added ourselves to the problem. While I was distracted on the radio, I stopped relaying navigation info to my crew. They took a wrong turn into one of two channels available. Only one was deep and wide enough for our yacht to safely pass. Fortunately we sorted it out before we ran out of room to manoeuvre. 

There's a clear set of priorities in such a situation. 

1. Control the boat

2. Know where you are (navigate)

3. Communicate

They are in that order for a reason. Emergency communications are useless, if while making them you lose control or get lost. Both make the problem worse. I had put communication at the top of the list for a while and it almost led us into danger.

The priorities are there to aid decision making when there's a high workload and high consequence. If you follow them you remain aware of the full picture rather than getting fixated on one part.

The best leaders are able to describe a clear set of priorities for their team regardless of the context. Ideally, they’ll ensure people stay focussed on what's important regardless of circumstances. It's a great way to increase capacity under pressure.

What are your highest priorities? Is there a logical order? What's at risk if you lose sight of them?

Flip the Risk

What do you do when faced with a big decision? Do you consider the risks? How does perceived risk factor into deciding for or against?

During the past week I've worked with people contemplating large and small decisions. Some are strategic, some opportunistic, others reactive. Risk has been a core part of every conversation. Many of us seem to be pretty good at considering what could go wrong and reasons not to act. Sometimes that holds us back from deciding yes to something worthwhile.

Flipping risk is a useful way to level up the thinking. Asking ‘what's at risk if we don't?’ immediately shifts your thinking to the potential downside if you pass something up. This week, flipping risk has led to a company more assertively owning its space, a difficult but necessary HR decision, a bold adventure, creation of a new entity to explore a bold collaboration, a challenging but wise personal decision. In each case, the decision would have been ‘No’ before flipping the risk.

Flipping risk won't change every decision, but it will help you see it more clearly. There are a lot of great opportunities just waiting for a different perspective. What's at risk if you let them pass you by?

What’s the key?

Two leaders from the High Impact Mentor program spoke to me about AHA moments this month. 

Both of them saw something in a new way and it changed everything. Both were frustrated and dissatisfied in their work and were finding their focus with staff getting dragged into more and more unnecessary detail. They felt overwhelmed. They felt they were not getting the best from their staff. They wondered if leadership was for them. 

The key for both of them was shifting their mindset from trying to control the people around them, to getting better at influencing the people around them. The work load hasn’t changed, but both are feeling lighter. One of them looked physically less tired and more relaxed than he had just a few weeks earlier. When I asked him what had changed, he said, “ I just changed how I was looking at everything, and now everything has changed”.

Moments like these are why I do the work I do. When leaders raise their capacity, the capacity of everyone around them also rises..

If you or someone on your team could use a change like that, send me an email. I’d love to help.

Which direction and how?

Direction over detail is well and good if you know where you are going. Alice (in Wonderland) asked that cat which way she should go. She didn't care where she would end up. The cat reckoned in that case, direction didn't matter. Quite right!

I facilitated a conversation recently where big changes are afoot for an organisation with a long, proud and effective history. The conversation was about creating an ideal future within the inevitable changes.

The leaders and team did a great job of looking forward. They:

• Acknowledged and celebrated past success.

• Identified aspects of their organisation/work that they did not want to lose or compromise in the change.

• Articulated the likely limits to their future, including considering what is happening for their stakeholders.

• Laid out a high level plan for their future, which adds value and insulates from irrelevance.

• Framed their propositions thoughtfully, highlighting value to stakeholders rather than just making a wish list.

There’s a lot of detail to be added, but in less than 2 hours they have the bones of a solid future.

The risk in such a conversation is people getting stuck in the past rather than looking forward. They could have lamented the situation, complained, pushed back against inevitable shifts and fought over irrelevant detail. They did not. It was a great working example of Direction over Detail.

Direction over Detail

If you’ve navigated by topographic map in complex terrain, at some point you’ve stopped making forward progress while you try to work out exactly where you are. I’ve done it many times, and almost every group on our survival courses did it at least once. There’s two ways it happens:

1. We feel uncertain about where we are and attempt to regain certainty by pinpointing our exact location.

2. We feel certain about where we are (but are wrong), and bend our reading of the map to suit our perception.

Forward progress either slows or stops entirely, and the focus shifts to ever finer detail. I see the same thing happen to teams and leaders (and yep, I’ve done that version too). We burrow into detail to justify current effort, or make ourselves busy trying to perfect things that will never be perfect. Busyness goes up, progress goes down.

In the map scenario, direction is often the answer. On one challenging walk in the Pilbara, we spent ages going slow trying to justify our position and getting more exhausted and frustrated by it. If we had just walked East, we would hit a North/South water course that was unambiguous and unmissable. East was the way we were going and we were planning to follow that water course!

In teams and workplaces the answer is the same. Get clear on direction and favour progress in that direction over nailing the detail. The detail becomes clear as you make progress. It feels much more enjoyable too.

P.S. This is not a reason to avoid or gloss over detail when it is important. Listen to your specialist communications, risk, compliance and audit teams. Just be sure to keep moving.

Well Worn Path

This week I have spoken to 3 leaders who are creating something genuinely new. Innovative ways of addressing some of the deepest challenges of their sectors. It’s exciting work and I love spending time with people who are explorers at heart. They want to venture over the nearest hill, motivated by deep curiosity. The conversations reminded me of a piece I wrote in my first book “Thrive and Adapt” exploring situations when breaking a new trail is the best option.For those of us who like to explore (myself included) it’s helpful to avoid unnecessary expenditure of effort or resources. It maximises our exploratory range. Here’s that piece, lightly edited for context.

A decade ago, I was on a cross-country walking trip in the Pilbara with my Dad who was 76 at the time. There were no paths or markers to follow, no guidebook. We were reading a map of the area and taking the country as we found it. It was a great journey!

In situations like that, I’m always on the lookout for game trails –the paths taken by cattle or wildlife between one water hole and another. They are sometimes counter-intuitive. They don’t always follow the shortest route. Sometimes they head into hilly or rocky territory and seem to wander a little aimlessly. Over the years, experience has always shown that the animals know the easiest and best route between points. Their trails are sometimes ancient – even wearing into solid rock surfaces. From a walking point of view, finding a game trail is gold. The going is easier because the animals have smoothed the way. The large rocks and obstacles have been shifted off the track over the years and, at times, it’s as good as walking on a footpath. The alternatives are never as easy. Often, they involve struggling through dense bush or over rough and broken ground. Without a game trail, forward speed is slower and takes more effort. Despite the extra effort, sometimes I choose to walk off the game trails. The walking is harder but if there is something in the landscape worth exploring, the game trails won’t always get you there.

In business, it’s similar – finding and following a well-worn path frequently results in easier and faster forward-progress than ‘reinventing the wheel’. Business systems, mentors and proven systems are all examples of ‘game trails’ in the business world. It’s smart and sustainable to follow them whenever you can. But there’s also times when you may want to blaze a trail yourself, to define a new path, and be a pioneer. I use four filters to determine if trailblazing is the best approach.

1. No one has done this before – I need something in my business that is not currently available.

2. I can offer something new – there is a need in the marketplace which is currently unmet.

3. I can refine something existing – making it better or more applicable than the original.

4. I’m seeking to learn, understand or explore – sometimes the harder road yields great insights and personal progress.

If none of those conditions exist, go for the pre-existing ‘path’ that gives maximum sustainability and minimum effort for the return.

Look Again

Photo by Kaori Yokochi, Roberta Bencini, CC BY 4.0 eativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

“Possums are rare on hilltops and in open forest. They are mostly found in the creeklines.” This was an ‘obvious’ conclusion from a scientifically conducted survey of a vast area of forest to determine possum behaviour and ideal habitat. The multi-year surveys large areas with cameras, on foot and non lethal trapping programs.

For several years, possums were rarely seen outside the creek lines. Then one year, none were seen in the creeks. Researchers wondered if the possum population had been decimated. But then, there they were, on the hill tops. That year, possums were rarely found in creek lines.

One of the researchers described the challenges of ensuring conclusions drawn from evidence are valid. “Correlation is not Causation” is one of the mantras to avoid jumping to conclusions. Almost everything we investigate has some bias built in. How we ask, what we ask, and what we think the answers mean can all add up to assumptions that may not be valid.

Take the research about goal setting. There’s heaps of it, and generally it concludes goal setting (done well) equates to greater success. I often wonder how many people or companies have epically failed despite having well thought through goals. The ‘proof’ given are all highly successful people or businesses and the ‘obvious’ conclusion is goals equate to success.

Here are some of the researched down sides of goals:

• At all costs - the goal is focussed on to the exclusion of all else resulting in missed opportunities, rushed or fudged work, exhaustion.

• Inability to adapt - The goal adds to perceived difficulty of changing direction when circumstances dictate.

• Assumed Control - The goal assumes a far greater level of control over variables than is reality.

• Wrong Target - The wrong things are measured resulting in a different outcome than what was really being aimed for.

• Unmeasurable - some things don’t readily yield to a defined target. E.g. What goal can be set for improving a close relationship? When is it done?

• Uncertain Environments - When variables are unknown/unknowable, setting goals based on them is a folly. For example a farmer may set a goal for a particular crop yield, only to be faced with a drought. Her skill may improve the yield, but a lower yield than the goal does not make her a ‘failure’.

As we enter December and January, a period when we often review and reset goals, consider if they are the most effective methodology for what you are trying to achieve. If you’d like to explore some alternatives, let me know.

Into the unknown…

Image by Tracy Peltier from Pixabay

“So much depends on the outcome of … [insert your process, enquiry, application, etc here]”

I met with three CEO’s last week who echoed a theme. Much of the short to mid term future in their organisations depends on the outcome of things outside of their control. In each case, the outcome/s will require their organisation to change. The outcome/s will also dictate how palatable those changes will be. Whatever happens, there will be change and it will be reactive in nature.

“People are uncertain,” they told me.

Uncertain environments make detail difficult to map. Forecasting various probable outcomes is important work, but can add even more uncertainty.

Maybe you can relate. I know I can.

It's worth remembering that humans have always faced uncertainty. It is uncomfortable and we are pretty good at it. Like those 3 CEO’s you’ve got this.

Here are few things we can do in uncertain times to inject certainty for ourselves and those around us:

• Big picture - Where detail is lacking focus on the big picture. What direction are we heading in? What’s our Why? Is our purpose clear? Are there non-negotiables and principles to bring into focus? When detail is lacking, big picture guidance adds certainty. It gives clarity about what will guide future decisions. Focus on elements that fundamentally won’t change regardless of outcomes and future changes.

• Best Behaviour - Double down on how you treat each other. Focus on and reinforce the best of how people interact with each other in your organisation. When the going gets murky at our house, my partner and I call each other to kindness and integrity. Regardless of what happens, we at least have some certainty about how we will ‘be’ with each other.

• You know how to weave! One CEO, calling on her Maori heritage, likened the situation to being in a place where you don’t know what plants to gather to find the fibres to weave the mat. I reminded her that even if she didn’t know the plant, she could recognise a weavable fibre, and still knows how to weave. Whatever happens next, you know more than you think you do. Bring your deep knowledge and experience with you. The details of execution may be up for change, but you still know how to weave.

Reflections on Perception

I’m foolishly recovering from a fortunately small and easily removed metal fragment in my eye. Reflection number 1 is “all the gear, all the time, no matter how short or quick the job is”.

I work a lot on my own in my shed, and have a pretty high standard on safety gear. And I took a “shortcut” which has taken a lot longer to resolve than slowing down for the couple of minutes to get my safety specs from where I used them last. Working in company, we can keep an eye on the safe practices of others around us. Alone, not so much. If you work alone a self prompted review (preferably without a GP) is well worth it.

The perception of shortcuts and too busy pop up regularly in the coaching work I do with leaders. Themes like:

• It’s faster to do it myself

• I haven’t got time to give people the reasons for what I'm asking, they just need to get on with it.

• I know I should do more about health, exercise, sleep, food, etc, but I don’t have time.

There are many like these, and I can relate to all of them. The short term may show a tempting illusion of being faster, but ultimately all these “shortcuts” involve do-overs or repairs of some kind. A couple of useful questions are:

• How can I build capacity and strengthen relationships as I do this? While doing so may take a little longer, in the long run the trust and capacity built will speed us up.

• What are the negative consequences of this “shortcut”?

• What are the actual risks of rushing this?

Not surprisingly, today I’m feeling more one-eyed about this than I might otherwise…And I’m counting my blessings.

A bit of ‘No’ makes a better ‘Yes’

Saying 'Yes' means we are agreeing to something.

We say 'Yes' many times a day. What are some of the things you say 'Yes' to on a typical day? Note them down.

We say 'Yes' for a variety of reasons:

• It’s part of our job

• We can add value

• Moving towards goals and objectives

• Opportunity to do something we enjoy

• Obligation

• Feeling pressured

• No alternatives

• Repercussions if I say “No”

'Yes' implies a commitment. Each commitment we make occupies time and energetic space. Even if we will never deliver, it occupies time and thought. Sometimes we add guilt or anxiety as well. Consider the cost of that commitment (especially if delivery will be difficult) as well as the cost/benefit of saying 'Yes'. Sometimes ‘No’ would be a better response:

• If we say ‘No’ sometimes, it makes our 'Yes' more valuable.

• It makes it more likely that when we do say 'Yes', we will deliver.

• We avoid commitments that we are not willing to keep

Are there times you said 'Yes', but should have said 'No’? What was the cost/impact? Should you be saying ‘No’ more often? What would it take to do that?

Clarity is often missing in our agreements. The clearer you can be about what you are saying 'Yes' (or no) to, the higher the quality of your 'Yes'. Eg. I’ll get back to you soon is less clear than I’ll get back to you by COB. Clear agreements set clear expectations and are easier to deliver and/or manage.

Clarity = tangible agreements

Have you ever said 'Yes' when timing, quality, scope, responsibility, resources (or other details} were unclear? What impact does lack of clarity have on you, your team and others?

For this week, focus on improving the quality of your ‘'Yes'’. When asking others for a ‘'Yes'’, be clearer about what you are asking.

Expedient?

How much pressure are you under to get things done?

Many leaders are experiencing increasing transactional cadence. The rate that things pop into the “to-do’ list is intense. It has us asking ourselves what the most expedient way to deal with each item is. I reckon it’s the wrong question. The quickest way to a result sometimes creates second or third order consequences that consume more time, energy and resources than a little more initial effort might have.

In my front yard right now there’s a large messy hole. The team that installed soak wells and paving did a great job. It looked awesome. But through winter there’s been issues with drainage. Today they dug part of it up to find the problem. A quick compaction job to finish the original job, rather than return another day, left a hollow air space under a pipe. The pipe slumped into the hole and no longer ran freely. It will be a full day to fix, and a fair bit of mess to clean up afterwards.

Some of the leaders I work with are either doing similar, or people in their teams are.

Sending a text rather than meeting about a critical tweak got things moving immediately, but the team is now redoing a heap of work because it was misunderstood.

Assuming someone had been included in a major project briefing, rather than directly checking now has a team buried in contentious stakeholder management, because residents were not informed of a major project nearby.

A customer issue has escalated to a major complaint and standoff after a rushed approach to finding out what the real issue was.

A colleague's motivation has dropped because she wasn’t included in the celebration of a piece of work she majorly contributed too.

These are all examples of time, energy and resource waste because something was done in what appeared to be the expedient way, only to cause more consequences. Most of them could have been avoided with a bit more though before rushing to the desired end point.

Sometimes we have to slow down to go faster. It’s a lesson I find myself learning more often than I’d like. How about you? Where could you slow down to go faster?

The View from Here

How clear is the strategic view in your organisation? Most of the leaders I am working with are experiencing 3 factors clouding the view:

• Staff shortages - For many this means time off strategy and on tools to keep up. It means employing people you might not employ in different times. It means pressure on induction and training processes as people try to get staff up and running in the shortest possible time. It often means frustration as the combination also makes for low engagement and lack of clarity = do overs, or new people leaving before they are even up to speed.

• Fatigue - the cadence has been high for ages. To-do lists grow so fast you know some items will die there, never seeing the light of day. People are worn down.

• Short horizons - some have got into a habit of reacting to whatever comes up. It started with COVID when Friday’s plan was torn up on Monday because the rules had changed - reactivity was the only choice then. Combined with staff shortages and fatigue it’s leaving many feeling as if they are perpetually chasing their tail.

It all obscures the view. How do you know that your business is delivering on what it promises? Are you experiencing a greater than usual gap between front line efforts and high level strategy and planning?

If you answered yes to either of the above, sing out. I have some solutions that are working well across a number of sectors.

Mark the Boundaries

Image by StockSnap from Pixabay

One of the reasons sporting games work so well is the crystal clear boundaries. Everyone knows what defines the field of play. What’s in and what’s out. How to score. Even when there is technical complexity, the rules are clear, and create the conditions for clear decision making (notwithstanding the perpetual armchair critic who can always clearly see how the ref got it wrong!). These clear constraints are what make games work. 

Lack of clarity creates ambiguity and often the result is uncertainty and/or stress. As a leader, we can contribute to clarity via regular discussion about the boundaries. Unlike a ‘field of play’ where the boundaries are clearly marked, work often has boundaries marked only in our collective understanding. If the collective understanding is fuzzy, so are the boundaries.

A simple framework for the discussion is:

• IN - what’s clearly ‘in’? Why? What purpose does it serve? How does it help us deliver? When is it important?

• OUT - What’s clearly ‘out’? Why? How does it detract or distract us from our important work? What are the consequences if we are ‘out of bounds’? How can we stop or reset ‘play’ when we are ‘out’?

• DISCUSS - Some areas of our work are open to discussion or judgement and creativity. What constitutes ‘good enough’? What’s our appetite for risk? How do we decide when we disagree, and there are sound reasons for each position? How will we innovate if it hasn’t been done before? What do we do when we are caught by surprise or disrupted? How should we use our judgement? Discussion in the fuzzy territory between clearly in or out results in greater clarity of the boundaries.

This approach can be applied to specific roles, delegation, projects, decision making process, team norms/expectations, delivery against metrics and more.

Where could you clarify boundaries today?

Goals?

“The biggest casualty of COVID will be goals and plans”. So said Jason Clarke, Mindworker when I interviewed him right back at the beginning of the pandemic.

I reckon he hit the nail on the head. Many of my goals and plans got sidelined, and no doubt yours did too. During that period we all experienced this together, but that kind of disruption happens all the time on a smaller scale.

Factors outside our control make a mockery of our plans. Consider some of these scenarios, any of which could leave your plans in a smoking pile. Some of them might be familiar:

• War breaks out in your region

• Interest rates climb, changing your financial reality

• New technology threatens or removes your job

• You or someone close to you becomes seriously injured or ill

• A competitor out-paces you

• Your entire worldly goods are lost in a natural disaster such as a fire or flood

• A funding program changes its costing model destroying the margins for your not for profit

• Your business is unable to source mission critical supplies

• You cannot find enough staff to run your business

I’m sure you know people who have been impacted by such realities. Maybe you are currently directly experiencing them yourself.

In the face of these kinds of disruption a typically constructed SMART goal may not stand up.

On survival courses we taught 5 priorities for survival. The priorities give clear focus to make a flexible plan that you can adapt to the reality you face.

Some of the sectors I work with find “Areas of Focus” a great way to handle uncertainty.

Regardless of how much duress you are currently under, being clear about your top priorities and key areas of focus is part of creating a psychologically safe environment that withstands disruption.

What are you focussing on in 2023?

If you’d like a conversation about planning for/in uncertainty, I’d love to hear from you.