[Steve Hearsum]

What are the potential strengths in the relationship?
The real strength lies in their differences, but they re missing eachother. If they developed greater self and other awareness, and learned to flex their styles, and crucially really made space to properly listen to each-other’s perspective, it is a powerful combination.

what are potential areas of tension in the relationship?
Victor may be brilliant but his profile indicates he may well indeed be ‘difficult’. I’d go so far as to say he could be a right royal pain in the arse, with a tendency to think he was right, a willingness to bulldoze others (not necessarily because he knows he is doing it, more his style), and not spend overlong checking out whether or not his version of reality is in fact right.

For Simon, he may come acros as passive aggressive at the best of times, so it would not surprise me if he is feeling under attack around Victor as he probably gets little sense his views are welcome, and that will be compounded by the fact that he is unlikely to probe Victor to find out what exactly he needs.

What are your hypotheses?
They are both so fixed in their dominant voices that it does not surprise me they are missing eachother. Victor may be quite masculine and muscular in his leadership style, which will be challenging for others who are not sure enough in themselves to stand up to him and/or hold the mirror up. I suspect, based on his profile, he would be open for challenge but he won’t go looking for it, assuming rather that it is up to others to step up.

Simon may well have a bit of a victim thing going on here. I can imagine him overanalysing and getting quite self-righteous about how badly he is being treated without actually recognizing how his behaviour is co-creating that experience.

What lines of enquiry would you follow?
I would want to inquire with Victor how comfortable he is with being challenged; I would ask him how he prefers to make decisions; I would want to explore how he sees Simon, what he values and why, based on what assumptions.

For Simon, I would inquire into why he finds it hard to challenge, and which voices he thinks he might usefully dial up or down to create the possibility of a different conversation with Victor (and same question for Victor actually).

What development recommendations would you make for Victor and Simon?
Victor – dial down the challenge voice, and consider replacing with either questions to probe, or simply leaving a bit of space to see whether so much challenge is in fact needed.
Simon – dial up his challenge voice, and also key will be his probe voice. I suspect he is holding onto some assumptions about Victor but not necessarily being open to the possibility that things may not be how he thinks they are. With Simon in particular, I’d like to explore his INNER voices and which dominate.

In a nutshell, I would be supporting them to find ways to explore their perception gaps, in order to become more aligned.

[Steve Hearsum]

Inquire: what do you want to be different as a result of today’s session?

Probe: Why do you think she said that?….

Diagnose: It sounds like you are being really hard on yourself, and that is something you do a lot. Is that fair?

Advocate: I’d like to propose that we move on from sharing our perspectives, and agree a way forward.

Advise: I would encourage you to to have a conversation with someone in HR re getting some support.

Articulate: I notice that as a group we are really good at asking questions but we do not find it easy to make proposals for action.

Challenge: I notice that you are not really allowing Mary to speak, Dave, and

Direct: It doesn’t sound like you are open to anyone else’s views on how things are, and that is going to make it difficult to reach an agreement.

Evaluate: Your facilitation of that session was excellent, in that it was well structured, and you also held the space well by remaining calm and connecting with the group.

[Steve Hearsum]

Q1. What hypotheses do you have about how Marcia’s profile helps her to be effective in her role?
Marcia has a strong preference for the exploring voices, which in her role is actually useful. If she is to be effective in a change role, and to genuinely lead or facilitate it, it is vital that she is strong on inquiry.
She seems to be able to work well under pressure, not being bent out of shape and either going on the attack or withdrawing overly. That would lead me to think she is self-aware and pretty good at managing her internal state.

Q2. What hypotheses do you have about her how profile might cause her difficulties in her role?
However, she is so low on her Controlling voices, particularly invisible on Direct, that it is actually quite unbalanced. It is all very well being strong on on Exploring, but asking questions all day long without taking a position may leave others wondering what she really thinks, plus also lead to situations where, paradoxically, nothing changes because she is not actually saying what needs to happen.
It also leaves me wondering what happens when she is challenged, and how comfortable she is in holding her ground. Being in a change role means you are likely to come up against people who have different opinions to you, and may disagree strongly, or need to be challenged/have the mirror held up. Would she do that?…

Q3. What sort of conversation might you expect to have with Marcia?
I’d start with her strengths, and what she enjoys on her work. Why did she make the move, what attracted her to change work=, what does she find challenging?… I would also want to understand how self-aware she actually is e.g. does she have awareness of he the difficulty with challenging others or taking a stand, what is her relationship with/to authority figures? How is she with conflict and difference in relationships?

Q4. What voice/s do you think it might be helpful for her to develop?
All three Controlling voices need work. Just focusing on Direct would be useful but not sufficient. For example, it is no good being direct if you have not flexed your evaluation muscles. Advocacy also needs some strengthening, as she needs to be better able to articulate the position(s) she holds.

Q5. In what way/s?
There is something here about authority; she may not be experienced as having much (I’d ask her if she had any 360 data as well). Also there is a conversation to be had around what she believes an effective Change Manager needs to know/be/do, and which voices support that.

[Steve Hearsum]

What do you hypothesise from Yvette’s triangle?
Low scores all round – why? Is she reluctant to be truthful, if so why? Or does she genuinely have low scores on all? That would be unlikely given her seniority and cannot be ruled out. So inquiring into how she felt about doing the profile would be key early on. I am not sure this is a well-rounded profile, because I do not buy that someone could be so lacking in a significant or dominant voice of some sort. If she were that neutral, then the other charts would all be flatter, surely?

What does Yvette’s comparative track tell you about her tendencies under pressure?
Anxiety drives her into a form of asserting her views about how things really are. She appears to be imposing her own narrative, without a willingness to find out whether that may actually be true. So the zero score on Probing under pressure leaves me thinking she is so scared to ask challenging questions for fear of the response or what she may learn, she stays fully on guard and defended at all costs. I actually worry for her, and wonder what she is so scared of.

What are your hypotheses and lines of enquiry to explore Yvette’s profile?
I think I have touched on that above. This is someone who is struggling. I wonder how confident she is as a leader, how safe it is to be herself in this team, and how safe she has felt to be herself in other contexts. I am curious as to how self-aware she is of the need to protect herself.
I am also wondering how comfortable she is around people of a higher status/seniority, and the extent to which she is willing to speak truth/state her needs. It screams out a high need to protect and defend, but not through attack. She may come across as highly opinionated, but lacking in confidence, and possibly comes across as overly deferential or needing to please in spite of the preaching.

[Steve Hearsum]

Q1. Criticise and preach probably – it is the superiority in both that bug me.
Q2. I either switch off or push back
Q3. Depends on context. Less instinctive now, more a choice.
Q4. Tends to interrupt the conversation, and either lead to clash, or dialogue and contact.