sample leadership communication audit report
TRANSCRIPT
YOUR LEADERSHIP COMMUNICATION AUDIT This report can aid you in developing as a leader. You will increase your self-‐awareness through concrete examples of your own communication behavior with the team you have been leading.
December 5, 2014 Prepared by:
MGT 422 Team This document was created by students in the Culverhouse College of Commerce at the University of Alabama. It is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Additional permissions should be sought from Kim Sydow Campbell: [email protected].
2 |
Table of Contents
3
Before we report our findings, we want to make sure you know that you demonstrated the most important aspect of effective leadership by inviting us to perform this audit. Changing behavior is difficult. But your willingness to invite constructive criticism about communication behaviors is the crucial first step in becoming the best leader you can be.
8 11
14 16
page page page
page page
Background Your strengths Your opportunities
Additional results for relationship quality
Additional results for competing values
24 page
Additional results for rapport management
Background Your leadership development goal
Competing values
Rapport management
Communication strategies & tactics
4 |
Background: Your Leadership Development Goal
We have conducted this assessment specifically to help you reach your stated goal of communicating performance feedback effectively.
Because of your goal, interactions with members about their performance were of primary importance to us in conducting our audit. To provide results that represent the maximum variation among the members for whom you provide reviews, we collected both written and oral interactions involving performance reviews, as well as reviews of both male and female subordinates and workers representing a range in terms of tenure in your organization. In addition, we collected information from several members involved in training because these workers made up the vast majority of your subordinates at the time of this audit.
We obtained tape-recorded performance review meetings with three of your subordinates, as well as written performance review documents for these three as well as five others. We also obtained results regarding your leadership communication style via an online survey, which asked about three areas:
1. Leader-member relationship quality 2. Leader competing values 3. Leader rapport management
behavior
To better understand the results of your leadership communication audit, the following background pages briefly explain competing values, rapport management, and communication strategies for managing rapport.
Although we believe we have enough information to provide you with an evaluation that will help you work toward your goal, you should keep in mind that the results discussed in this report represent a “snapshot” of your leadership communication behavior with particular members in specific circumstances.
This report provides a “snapshot” of your leadership behavior.
5 |
static focus dynamic focus
Background: Competing Values
Valuing
builds organizational commitment
Consulting
helps organizations adapt to change
Source: Quinn et al. (1991) A competing values framework for analyzing presentational communication in management contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 28: 213-232.
Informing
consolidates organizational processes and procedures
Directing
maximizes output
The key for a leader is to choose strategically in each situation but to achieve balance over time.
task
focu
s
peo
ple
focu
s
Four overarching values describe an organization. The most effective managers are influenced by all four. Thus, they communicate for four purposes. This is challenging because the values/purposes compete: it’s difficult to consult with team members at the same time as informing them.
6 |
Background: Rapport Management
Rapport indicates relationship quality. It is influenced by specific communication behaviors and is associated with many positive organizational outcomes, including better team performance and more accurate performance assessments.
To manage rapport—to make interactions more enjoyable for team members and create a sense of personal connection with them—leaders must tend to their needs. And leaders must accurately predict which needs are important to individual members in specific situations.
Tend to ego needs with
praise
Tend to ego needs with
time
Tend to autonomy
needs
Source: Campbell (2015) Thinking and Interacting Like a Leader: The TILL System for Leadership Communication, 2nd edition. Hilton Head: Parlay Press.
7 |
Background: Communication Strategies & Tactics Going on record politely means being
clear but sensitive. There are two strategies: tending to ego needs and tending to autonomy needs. You should use these strategies when your purpose has a potentially negative effect on rapport with a team member, plus your purpose and relationships are important. This is a common management situation.
Going off record means being ambiguous. Although this strategy can be common within highly stratified groups, you should use it only when your organizational purpose is unimportant. That should be a relatively rare management situation.
Going on record plainly means being crystal clear. You should use this strategy only when your organizational purpose is of primary importance. That might be because your intended action has only positive or neutral effects on your rapport with a team member or because your actions are more important than that rapport. These are common management situations.
Tactic 1: Be Explicit and Direct Tactic 2: Be First Tactic 3: Be Brief Tactic 4: Be Organized
Tend EGO Tactic 1: Be Positive Tactic 2: Be Inclusive Tactic 3: Be Present
Tactic 1: Be Cursory Tactic 2: Be Irrelevant Tactic 3: Be Figurative
Tend AUTONOMY Tactic 1: Question or Hedge Tactic 2: Be Impersonal Tactic 3: Minimize Tactic 4: Be Deferential Tactic 5: Be Pessimistic Tactic 6: Apologize Tactic 7: Be Grateful
On Record Plainly
On Record Politely
Off Record
Source: Campbell (2015) Thinking and Interacting Like a Leader: The TILL System for Leadership Communication, 2nd edition. Hilton Head: Parlay Press.
Your Strengths
Delivering negative performance feedback
Directing future behavior
9 |
Results: Your Strengths for Maintenance
Overall, you display effective use of communication strategies when providing negative feedback on performance. You demonstrate a balanced focus on both organizational goals and relationships by impersonalizing and hedging. This means you actively manage rapport with team members.
Of the 25 instances we noted where you provided negative feedback, all but one appropriately used an on record politely tactic.
For instance, in one performance review, you wrote:
You wisely made the focus on “the work” rather than the member. Using the impersonalization tactic means you were polite while also being clear about your negative feedback.
In another performance review, you wrote:
Again, you successfully signaled attention to the team member’s autonomy needs by hedging your negative feedback with “I do not feel.”
In both examples, you appeared to predict your team member’s feelings about your criticism and then chose a communication strategy that allowed you to signal respect for those feelings. Importantly, you also signaled your purpose, to provide feedback, is important by choosing to communicate in a way that put your message on the record.
You communicate negative feedback on performance effectively.
“I do not feel your response to my instructions was handled in an appropriate manner”
“The work is not getting accomplished satisfactorily”
10 |
Results: Your Strengths for Maintenance
You communicate unambiguously when directing members’ future behavior in both written and oral situations, which emphasizes your organizational goals.
In a performance review, you wrote:
Your action of directing the team member to improve performance is crystal clear because you went on record plainly by being explicit and direct and also brief.
In a performance review meeting, you said:
Again, your action of directing the member is absolutely clear because you used the same on record plainly strategy/tactics as in the first example on this page.
We want to be certain you understand that this level of clarity is appropriate only if you mean to emphasize organizational goals despite the potentially negative reaction of the member. (This strategy is also appropriate if you know that the member will not react negatively to your action. But that doesn’t seem likely in both of the examples provided here.)
You communicate clearly when directing members’ future behavior—both orally and in writing.
“You must improve in organizing, scheduling, and completing duties in a timely manner”
“You need to go over the goals and update where we are and completion dates”
Your Opportunities
Eliminate hedges when delivering positive feedback
Avoid the “be inclusive” tactic with members who are not part of your in-‐group
12 |
Results: Your Opportunities for Growth
To manage rapport with team members more effectively in the future, state positive comments on record plainly.
In a performance review, you wrote:
Your use of “seem” in this case (an on record politely tactic) actually undermines the positive spirit of your comment about the member’s performance. Other hedges include any of the following: “might,” “could,” “I think.”
Your praise would have been more effective by going on record plainly and being direct: “You work well with others.”
Based on our sample of interactions, you appear to be most likely to hedge when providing positive feedback to female team members or members not in your in-group. The only instance we noted where you didn’t hedge when providing positive feedback to a female subordinate involved an in-group member.
The need to improve your effectiveness when praising members is corroborated by the results of the member questionnaire: members were satisfied with the frequency with which you praised them but several were less satisfied with your effectiveness in such situations. Several members also rated your support of their ego needs as mediocre.
Eliminate hedges when praising a team member about his or her performance.
“You seem to work well with co-workers”
13 |
Results: Your Opportunities for Growth
To manage rapport with team members more effectively in the future, we urge you to reflect carefully on the quality of your relationship with a member before interacting with him or her. We found some evidence your leadership effectiveness may be hampered by overestimating the quality of your relationships.
During a performance meeting, you said:
Your use of “we” in this case (an on record politely tactic) is likely to be interpreted as insincere by a member who doesn’t feel like one of your in-group.
The member survey also supports the potential need to improve your communication with out-group members. Those individuals noted a greater difference between how frequently you praised and consulted with them and how often they wished you did so. Out-group members also rated your support of their ego needs slightly lower than in-group members.
In-group membership is related to
u how well you understand a team member’s problems
u how clearly you recognize the potential of a team member
u how likely you are to use power to help solve a team member’s problems at work
u how likely a member is to defend and justify your decisions when you are not present
u how strongly a member feels he or she knows how satisfied you are with their performance
Avoid the “be inclusive” tactic with members who are not clearly part of your in-‐group.
“We consistently have a backlog of Form 3s”
Additional Results Relationship Quality
Your and your team members’ perceptions of the in-‐group vs. out-‐group
15 |
Additional Results: Relationship Quality
Two members of your team did not consider themselves part of your in-group. Your ratings for individuals were slightly different. This mismatch is important because it may be hampering your effectiveness as a leader. Choosing the best communication strategy for managing rapport with a member depends on relationship quality.
Like most leaders, you consistently rated the quality of your relationships with members higher than members did.
Member Rating
Leader Rating
Member A In In
Member B Mid Mid
Member C In Mid
Member D In In
Member E Mid In
Member F In In
Additional Results Competing Values
Your most and least common values communicated to individuals
Your effectiveness for all four communication values/purposes
Gap between frequency of your actual vs. desired communication values/purposes
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired communication for informing individuals
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired communication for directing individuals
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired communication for consulting individuals
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired communication for valuing individuals
17 |
Additional Results: Value Identification
Your team members perceived you most strongly as a predictable coordinator and not as a competitive producer or flexible innovator. However, their individual perceptions differed.
1
(Q1) Coordinator (Q2) Predictable
(Q1) Producer (Q2) Competitive
(Q1) Innovator (Q2) Flexible
(Q1) Mentor (Q2) Loyal
1 1
1 1
2
2 2
2
3
3 3
3
4
4 4
4
Member A
Member B
Member C Member F
Member E
Member D
18 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Effectiveness
Your team members perceived you as strongest when informing and valuing them. They perceived your ability to direct them as your greatest communication challenge.
1
(Q3) Informing (Q5) Directing
(Q7) Consulting (Q9) Valuing
1 1
1 1
2
2 2
2
3
3 3
3
4
4
4
Member A Member B
Member C Member F
Member E Member D
4
5
5
5
5
19 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Frequency
1
2
3
4
5
Informing Directing Consulting Valuing
Mean Delta
Your team perceived informing as your most frequently communicated value and valuing as the least frequently communicated. The delta or difference between what team members wanted and what you delivered for all four values is low.
The following pages display differences by individual team members because we believe meeting their individual needs is your greatest opportunity for growth as a leader.
always
sometimes
never
20 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Frequency
4
5 5 5
4 4
5
2
5 5
2 2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Informing Desired Informing Actual
Your team recognized the importance of your role in informing them. Three of them wanted you to keep them more informed.
sometimes
always
never
21 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Frequency
4 4
5 5
3
4
5
2
4
5
3
2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Directing Desired Directing Actual
Almost everyone on your team recognized your role in directing them. Half of them wanted you to provide more direction.
always
sometimes
never
22 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Frequency
4 4 4 4 4 4
3
2
4 4
3
2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Consulting Desired Consulting Actual
Everyone on your team recognized your role as a facilitator who consulted with them. Most of them wanted you to consult with them more often.
always
sometimes
never
23 |
Additional Results: Value Communication Frequency
3
4 4
5
4
3
4
2
4
5
3
2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Valuing Desired Valuing Actual
Your team members had different expectations for the frequency with which you should have communicated their value to the team. Three of them wanted more valuing messages from you—one significantly more.
always
sometimes
never
Additional Results Rapport Management
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired ego support through praise
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired ego support through time
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired autonomy support
Your effectiveness for all three rapport management behaviors
Gap in frequency of your actual vs. desired rapport management behaviors
25 |
Additional Results: Rapport Management Effectiveness
3.6
4.3
3.8
Ego/Praise
Ego/Time
Autonomy
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
neutral highly
effective
Your team members perceived you as strongest at managing rapport by attending to their need for your time and attention. As a group, they perceived your ability to manage rapport as satisfactory in all three areas of behavior.
highly ineffective
26 |
Additional Results: Rapport Management Frequency
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Ego/Praise Ego/Time Autonomy
Mean Delta
Your team said you managed rapport by attending to their need for your time most frequently. The difference between what team members wanted and what you delivered for all three rapport management behavior types is moderate.
Again, the following pages display differences by team members because we believe meeting their individual needs is your greatest opportunity for growth as a leader.
always
sometimes
never
27 |
Additional Results: Rapport Management Frequency
3
4 4
5
4
3
4
2
4
5
3
2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Ego/Praise Desired Ego/Praise Actual
Your team members had different expectations for the frequency with which you should have communicated praise. Three of them wanted more messages tending to their ego needs—one significantly more.
sometimes
always
never
28 |
Additional Results: Rapport Management Frequency
4 4
5
4
3
4
2 2
4
3 3
2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Ego/Time Desired Ego/Time Actual
Your team members had somewhat different expectations for the frequency with which you should have supported them with your time and attention. Three of them wanted significantly more time from you. Only one felt his/her need for your attention was fully satisfied.
always
sometimes
never
29 |
Additional Results: Rapport Management Frequency
4 4 4 4 4
3
5
2
4
5
2 2
1
2
3
4
5
Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E Member F
Autonomy Desired Autonomy Actual
Your team members had similar expectations for the frequency with which you should have provided them with autonomy. Two of them wanted less autonomy in performing their work, while three clearly wanted you to provide them with more.
always
sometimes
never