Forum Replies Created
-
What are the potential strengths in the relationship?
Both are perceived as successful and valuable within their roles. When looking at their profiles, both use the ‘challenge’ voice regularly so this could be built upon as a shared voice to ensure communication uses snappy headlines that grabs each other’s attention. This will be particularly useful for Simon, who sometimes struggles to gain Victor’s attention.
What are the potential areas of tension in the relationship?
Simon tends to want to put time and energy into diagnosing, then articulating his findings and thoughts, whereas Victor puts more of his energy into challenging and directing. This suggests Victor wishes to act more decisively which may lead to difficulties during the decision making processes. Furthermore, both see a fall in their voices when under pressure, which can lead to frustration and poor communication during times of stress. For example, Simon’s use of challenge (the shared voice) drops when under pressure which then means they lose a common ground for conversation, whilst Victor’s articulate falls even further, suggesting more of a mis-match in communication styles during pressurised conversations.
What are your hypotheses?
The relationship has some commonalities which, if used correctly alongside each other’s areas of strength and weaknesses, means that they could utilise most voices effectively as a team. However, currently they are not working as effectively as they could. Victor needs to allow Simon the time to ask questions whilst articulating his own ideas more, whereas Simon needs to develop a way to communicate his ideas in short, snappy headlines that grab Victor’s interest, thus increasing the potential buy-in.What lines of enquiry would you follow?
What voices do you use internally/externally?
How do you feel during pressurised situations with that person and why?
Where are your areas of commonality?
What are your main differences and can we utilise them to your benefit?What development recommendations would you make for Victor and Simon?
Simon – use the challenge voice as a means of communicating in a way Victor can relate to and then build on from there. Avoid over-use of the articulate voice and try using short, snappy headlines to grab Victor’s attention.
Victor – considering increasing use of the articulate voice to communicate thoughts, whilst reducing use of the challenge voice to close the gap – this may help reduce the perception that he is ‘difficult’ or attacks his team during pressurised situations.1.Articulate: Joe thinks that this is the way forward, whilst Lisa thinks there may be another option. We will need to discuss this further and then come to an agreement as this scenario is new to us all.
2.Advocate: I don’t think that’s the best plan, I prefer the alternative option.
3.Advise: I would suggest that we contact them to clarify.
4.Challenge: I foresee a problem with this, let’s explore another option.
5.Direct: It is important that you follow the procedure.
6.Evaluate: On one hand, I can see the potential benefits from doing things this way, but on the other hand, I can see how there are some risks with that approach.
7.Probe: How did you feel when your colleague said that to you?
8.Inquire: What can I do to support you with this?
9.Diagnose: Based on what you’ve outlined so far, which word do you think represents you best out of (x, y, z)?
What do you hypothesise from Yvette’s triangle?
All nine voices showed as low scores and are, consequently, considered ‘occasionals’. However, we can see that advocate and articulate are used most commonly, demonstrating that Yvette usually has a preconceived idea which she will then describe and articulate to others.
This represents the idea that Yvette takes the SLT ideas and then shares them amongst her colleagues etc. She then challenges, diagnoses or inquires according to the response she gets. On the other hand, it could represent the idea that this has been done on request rather than through a true desire to find out about her own voices, therefore she answered cautiously or without real consideration.What does Yvette’s comparative track tell you about her tendencies under pressure?
Yvette did not score at all in direct and probe, which shows us that under pressure she does not dig deeper or give direction to others. This could be as she doesn’t want to come across as dictating or intruding, or it could be because her energy is spent on advocating for her opinion. We do see her voices shrink, suggesting that she is holding back during times of pressure.
What are your hypotheses and lines of enquiry to explore Yvette’s profile?
I would discuss Yvette’s experience of pressurised situations and her interpretation of this, as well as why she may feel she had no ‘dominant’ voices during other situations. I would also like to explore the communication between her team and her feelings on this. I would ask Yvette to consider her internal/external voices too…
What are your hypotheses?
Becca’s role is challenging and requires her to act in an emergency with great care given to what she is ‘advising/instructing’ others to do through her training. Her Controlling voices are strong – with Direct, Challenge and Advise coming out strong. This works well and is expected within her role as she will advise and direct others on what to do and challenge other organisations’ practice. However, in pressurised environments, people may interpret this as dictating, preaching or criticising, which could impact upon their willingness to be influed by Becca’s training/speeches.
Becca’s occasionals appear to include Probe, Inquire, Diagnose, Articulate and Advocate – this would lead me to the hypothesis that Becca is a strong character who isn’t afraid to say it how it is to get the necessary reaction, but could be more articulate in her approaches to ensure her message is welcomed by others.What lines of enquiry would you follow?
I would ask Becca to consider her ‘controlling’ voices in situations that are not of an emergency nature – is there an impact of this dominant voice on her relationships? Does it mean people don’t always want to hear what Becca has to say? Is there a way more energy could be put into articulation?What questions would you like to ask Becca?
Which parts of the profile ring true and in what situations?
If you could tone one voice down and increase another, which would you choose? What impact would you be trying to achieve through this?
What are you hoping for the future? What voices will you need to adopt/adapt to achieve this?What are your hypotheses?
Marcia’s strongest voices are Inquire, Probe and Diagnose – all of which link closely to her training and specialism in Nursing within the NHS. Her mid-range voices are Articulate, Challenge and Advise, which link with the explaining and supporting with next steps that she will have done previously. This explore and then position nature all link closely with her previous roles in nursing and palliative care, thus allowing her to communicate effectively with patients and families. However, the nature of the voices on her pressure profile show that this may, at times, come across as interrogating, intruding or patronising to those she’s supporting. It would now be important to explore how these voices can help Marcia in her new role, but also how they may need to be developed to better suit the nature of her new role.What lines of enquiry would you follow?
I would definitely explore her new role – the changes, the different direction it may take, the difference in the people she is working with. Now, she may need to lead on change (to direct) and to manage people more directly. I would also discuss how those pressure-voices may impact on her communication with others as part of her new role.What might be missing that could be useful?
The 360 information will help us to view what other people hear when Marcia speaks, rather than just her own view.Q1. What catches your attention about the shape of Jack’s profile?
Jack’s profile shows extremely high levels of the advocate voice. Advise and challenge are the next two voices, which suggests that Jack either advises you if you agree with his view or challenges you if you do not. He will then delve deeper into the situation by probing, evaluate his findings and then he reaches the crossroads of whether to articulate, diagnose or inquire further.
Q2. What impressions do you find yourself forming about Jack from his profile?
High levels of the advocate voice suggest that Jack is opinionated and very strong in his pre-determined views.
Q3. Which aspects of the context do you think might be important in this case?
We would need to consider his past roles and why maybe exploration is lower for him than it may be for others.
Q4. What issues might you be looking to explore with Jack?
We might want to explore cultural considerations, his change in direction and also whether anything resonated strongly on his profile or shocked him about his profile.Q1. Which negative voice/s particularly annoy you? Patronise or attack are the two I find most difficult.
Q2. How do you tend to react when you feel you are being spoken to in that way? I can experience quite an emotional response and become upset, which then prevents me from truly listening and processing effectively.
Q3. Is that reaction deliberate or largely instinctive? That is definitely instinctive!
Q4. What effect does your reaction have on the interaction? It prevents it from being frank, honest and productive.I am definitely learning how to regulate my own responses to be able to utilise the voices I want to present in those situations.