One of the most important lessons of the last 12 months for me has been the perils of firing before sufficiently aiming. With the Myers Briggs personality preferences as context, its easy to understand why this can be a huge stumbling block for some (like me) while a no-brainer for others.
By aiming, here’s what I mean …
- Taking the time to engage those who will be affected by the ‘fire’ in discussion, debate, persuasion, listening, reconsidering.
- Creating a plan and …
- Creating it WITH the people who have to implement the ‘fire.’
- Taking the time to test, reconfigure, test some more, get a scoreboard of results to show the org. BEFORE flipping the switch to require the change. This is particularly necessary when there are mixed reviews with the current state.
There’s a balancing act here. On the one hand you can aim too long (analysis paralysis) and results may suffer from that inaction. On the other hand (the one that I dealt with most during the last 12 months) to pull the trigger too quickly (even if the decision is logical and the right one) can lead to a botched implementation that prevents the ‘right decision’ from taking root.
Though somewhat against my nature, I’m working at ‘taking the time’ to talk with most involved parties. I’m convinced this doesn’t have to be a slow process. It just has to happen. I’m reminded of what the book 5 Dysfunctions of a Team teaches on this topic … that without conflict/debate/dissent/discussion, real buy-in or commitment cannot take place. But, with that pre-decision conflict, even those who disagree can come around and commit — knowing that their voices were heard AND having had a chance to better understand the rationale/intent of the other side.
Leading Long-Term Care 