[Jim Brown]

All low scores – and hence, no dominant voices. Could she have played the whole test down the middle – and if so, why? If we take it a representative, then it is at least, very rounded across exploring, positioning, controlling. Is she conflicted in how she approaches her cominciation, or simply super cautious? How much is internal? Indicates a level of introversion…..

Under pressure she may feel she chooses a position, without canvassing buy-in and then goes into overdrive in banging the drum, which may be heard as being preachey. As she’s the HR lead I assume this may involve explaining a policy or line of direction. Her next line of communication will typically be to go over her analysis of what constitutes the challenge or problem, to the point of being seen to overdo this. She has a tendency under pressure to over explain, flipping to over extending the enquiry voice into what can feel (or she may feels co see across as) an interrogation

If met with resistance, or presumably if she’s on a subject she doesn’t see as her area of expertise, she will not push back to enforce her position. She is also very sensitive to prying too much, or being seen to pry – so she won’t dig for more information.

Lines of enquiry would include understanding her definition of pressure. What are the conditions and what examples can she give to help me build a picture? Ask her to describe what happened last time, what she thought, how she felt, how she acted – to what extent did she say what she thought. To what extent did she ultimately achieved what she wanted to, how did others react? How did this effect subsequent issues when she came across them?

Track shows: when she’s clear on her position under pressure she will advocate to the point of being verbose.
How clear can she get though when she shoes away from digging deep in her questioning for fear of intruding?
She feels unable to be directive – to what extent is she expected to be, as part of a 24 strong managment team – and sometimes as the hr lead, would there be value to the organisation and to her if she was? Interrupting to improve rarely happens under pressure. Can she give an example when it might have helped to do this?
How would she describe herself in terms of extraversion and introversion? To what extent does that balance work for or inhibit her work and progress?

[Jim Brown]

Deliberating and assessing requirements is strong – and considering the important nature of her work, this is a crucial component. Likely to be incisive in her evaluation of what’s required – but won’t have used exploring voices to help her audience feels understood or heard. Suspect she’ll make a very fast decision on what’s needed, based on previous experience, then get on with it. With this in mind, to what extent does she need to get buy in or win over the audicne? May be seen to swoop in, seemingly being “heard” to criticise how incumbents have been
Doing things before she arrived, then she impresses a solution (ie a training intervention which tells them precisely what to do! Bulk of her training may be factual and unlikely to be that different each time (ie safely stuff) And she won’t wasted important time on the formalities. So there’s possibly a trade off at play here.
Offers fast solutions, not shy of interrupt8ng to dispute or improve, and calling people’s attention to required standards.

Lines of enquiry would include:
Describe the training you’re implementing and the conditions you need to achieve with your audience in order to ensure they absorb, act on and replicate the training you put in pace.

Describe the different groups of people do you typically deal with? Explain their roles and the relationship you’re looking to strike in order achieve a) results, b) sustain results (eg learning, compliance, c) secure their commitment to change when you’ve moved on. What voices enable or disable this? What’s the impact when enable/disable?
If you were to dial up one voice per group….
If you were to dial down one voice per group….
What would the impact be.

[Jim Brown]

Hypotheses

Q1 What might make her effective?
Strong exploring voices (all three) would support Marcia is uncovering all the detail/context required to make informed evaluation of the problems or challenges facing the organisation (and the individuals involved) This would endorse the experience she had in palliative care where presumably there was a high requirement for patients to be ( and feel) understood. Winning minds in change management would surely be supported by those effected feeling heard and understood – both at the outset in laying the ground to analyse accurately, and at the point of change (to garner and maintain support)
Deployment of the articulate voice would enable precise, neutral summaries to staff as they’re interviewed (to assist in checking understanding ) as well as supporting successful descriptions to decision makers and other stakeholders in the change process.
An stronger ability to challenge would help Marcia to both defend/advance the case for change by interupt8ng wherever she felt it might lead to improvements being suggested or adopted.

Likely to go with the facts by remaining impartial as much as she can

Q2 less prominent use of evaluate voice might currently limit the opportunities Marcia could have to outwardly guide potential changees through her thinking (to support buy in) although indexing in the inquire voices should help them feel listened to. A key activity in change managment involves assessing the problem. Would bosses necessarily see that as having taken place?

Advocating more regularly/readily would help her promote her suggestions for change (or no change) – would we easily know where she stands.

Absence of a more prominent directive voice might hold her back if she is managing (which might lead the change team to missing a trick when she has uncovered so much information which has made her enquiries rich in detail.

she might sit on the fence – meaning I might have to tease out her personal view. Could be a good thing, depending on the policy and how much time we have on our hands to determine then affect change? But will she be clear and assertive on the change route?

When change is implemented can she ensure it is smooth when bumps in the road lead to disagreements and the requirement to push things through?

Q4 conversation?
She might prefer to do more questioning and listening than reporting and suggesting. Might have to chase her for her to understand how she assessed the problem (which is a critical component in change managment). Will she outwardly evaluate the situation? May not be forceful – although she’ll have the facts. May look to others to make the final call, or hold back on pushing her view. Will she champion the adoption of a new patient pathway in the face of reticence/opposition?