Scenario: Problematic Problem Presenter
Tags: Action Learning Coach
Trackback from your site.
Comments (13)
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Tags: Action Learning Coach
Trackback from your site.
Larry Voeller
| #
That’s a problem!
Sounds like they are presenting their solution immediately before the first session of the action learning team. This points out the value of pre-meeting with the problem presenter and a clear agreement about the process. While it may not have prevented it from happening, you would have your pre-meeting agreements as a reference point.
Given the circumstances, I would treat the first meeting as another “pre-meeting” preparation with the action learning team present. I would explore the actions of the presenter. In light of the fact that they already have a solution, how would the action learning process be of benefit? If there remains a legitimate role for the action learning team, I would then shift to my typical first meeting agenda with groundrules, etc.
Reply
Valerie Lingeman
| #
I agree with Larry. If the Problem Owner already has a solution, the problem itself is not suited for an action learning team. I would review with the Problem Owner the criteria (we already covered in a previous meeting) for what makes a good action learning problem. I might also use some questions with the PO to help him /her understand what might happen with a team if we were to go ahead and present this problem, e.g. How could it impact the team if you state you want their best thinking, and you take a different course of action? Or we could explore what other expectations the PO had for working with the team: What outcome were you seeking from presenting this problem to the team? Maybe the PO just wants validation of his analysis of the problem, or some smart people with diverse perspectives to “red team” his thinking. This could be useful, and if he/she presents it to the team with that caveat, in that spirit of transparency, and if the team is okay with it, you could hold the meeting.
I think this situation is very different if we are considering an individual leadership challenge (I’d go ahead with the scenario I describe above) or an organizational problem. If it’s an individual challenge and the PO is transparent about his/her motives and desired outcomes up front, I think it’s relatively low risk and could be instructive and helpful to have the team meeting.
If it’s an organizational problem, particularly a multi-meeting engagement, and the PO is not open to the process of inquiry and has his/her mind made up, the consequences of stringing along an AL team are significant, with loss of organizational trust, the sense of time wasted, diminishing respect for the PO, and for the AL process itself.
Reply
Phil Cohen
| #
Valerie has certainly analyzed the problem and speaks to it quite well. If I had explained the AL process to the problem presenter prior to the session and if he/she had agreed to the steps that we would follow and still acted as per the scenario laid out to us, then there would be grounds to walk away from this AL session. If as the coach my authority is being preempted before we even start the session then the probability is that I would have a very difficult time helping the team to achieve the goals that AL hopes to accomplish. I certainly would speak to the problem presenter as Valerie has indicated, but I would be very wary of moving forward with the AL session.
Reply
Catherine Breathnach
| #
It would seem that the problem that was due to be presented is no longer suitable for action learning as it appears that it no longer meets the required criteria – important, urgent, no exiting solution, feasible, familiar. significant, a learning opportunity and a problem over which there is group authority.
I would seek to check my new understanding of the problem and situation with the problem presenter prior to the start of the action learning meeting. By doing this either the presenter will acknowledge that this is the case, and therefore be able to report this to the group, or they may revise their earlier statement on the basis that this is a possible solution that occurs to them which they may present to the action learning group when they describe the problem. As coach, it would be important to ensure that the problem presenter has considered the new situation in the context of the criteria required for problems in action learning, and therefore takes responsibility for the situation in explaining it to the convening action learning group – given the timeframes involved.
Reply
Philipp Werenfels
| #
Since the problem is solved we do not need to meet with the group… 😉 Well, not that fast.
I agree with Larry and others that pre-meetings with the problem presenter are very crucial as the Action Learning Coach sets the expectations. However, I disagree with other comments that the problem owner solved his/her problem. How do we really know?
In fact, I wonder who knows what the real problem is. Thus, instead of having the problem owner present the issue, I would ask each participant to write down the problem they want to solve today. (I would act as if this was our 2nd meeting.)
If I learned, however, that the real issue was completely solved then I would focus my questions more towards structural and developmental issues such as: “How does this group solve problems?” “Who makes decisions in this group?” “How do group members contribute do the problem solving / decision making process?” “What is the quality of the solutions of the solved problems / decisions made?” “How do team members develop their career?” “Why is it important to have other opinions integrated in developing solutions?” “What are the consequences in providing solutions before understanding the problem?” I am sure, there are additional questions to guide the team in a developmental direction.
My goal as an action learning coach is to help the group/team explore new ways of doing business.
Reply
Cleo Wolff
| #
I quite agree with Philipp. I have the same position. Very well explained.
Thanks for being so clear.
Cleo
Reply
Erik Mazziotta
| #
I agree with what I have heard. I like the idea of treating the next meeting as a pre-meeting and exploring what the problem presenter would like to happen next. I would also check the impact on the group of the choice the problem presenter made. This could illuminate leadership learning opportunities for the group and presenter.
Reply
Edwin Sim
| #
Certainly seems like it’s a case of putting the cart before the horse. It would serve the team (and the coach) well to try explain to the PP what the impact of his/her action.
BUT if the meeting has already taken place before the coach could intervene, then the coach can still intervene during the AL process to challenge the team if the solution was really the right one (possibly done by challenging the team to re-look at the problem statement again…).
If I cannot prevent the PP from holding the pre-AL meeting, I would still take the courage to hold the AL set and be very mindful and watchful and intervene at appropriate junctures to challenge the team’s supposed solution.
Edwin
Reply
Donna Christophersen
| #
I agree with Philipp, although in my mind it is not clear who is in attendance at the pre-meeting.
If it is just myself and the problem presenter, I would use it as a learning opportunity, reinforcing the importance of reaching group agreement on the problem prior to developing solutions and reminding him or her of the key components of action learning, especially an orientation to learning and a group.
I would ask questions along the vein of:
“Is it possible for one individual to know everything there is to know about this problem?”
“How might your view of the problem change if the perspectives of others were considered?”
“Is it possible that other solutions to the problem exist?” “How open are you to hearing alternatives?”
“What message will presenting your solution prior to obtaining group agreement on the problem communicate to your team?
If the entire team has been invited to the pre-meeting, I would consider starting the Action Learning session with an early intervention that included, “What is the impact to the team when solutions are presented prior to group exploration of the problem?” Another possible way to handle it would be to ask the team what the situation reveals about their methods of problem solving. This could be followed by what works well and what could we do better in terms of how we approach and develop solutions to problems.
Reply
Claire Milam
| #
If the Problem Owner/Presenter came to me with a solution 30 minutes prior to the first AL meeting to discuss the problem, I would ask the presenter the following questions:
“When you and I first spoke about AL, we discussed the fact that an AL problem must be challenging, urgent, with no existing solution, etc. You identified this particular problem as one that met those criteria. What was it about this problem that made you consider it to be an ideal problem for an Action Learning approach? What has changed between then and now? What gives you confidence that this problem is the underlying problem, not simply the presenting problem?”
If we agree that the PO does indeed have a solution, and there is no merit to the AL team pursuing this particular problem, I would ask “Is there another aspect or next step of the problem that might benefit from an AL approach? If so, would the group that we’ve assembled be the right group to address the revised problem?”
I would use the first AL team meeting as an opportunity to talk about the nature of problems and what we have learned about problems. Given that everyone made themselves available for the meeting, if the PO did not want to go any further with his/her problem, I would ask the team if anyone wanted to volunteer to be the problem presenter, given that we have the time and interest to work on an Action Learning problem. Assuming one of the team members agreed to serve as the PO, the AL experience would also plant the seed for team members to consider problems they may want to address using an AL approach, in the future.
Reply
Robin Ngan
| #
I have several assumptions in managing the current situation:
Firstly, the AL Coach has not been informed of the pre-meeting by PP and learns about it on his arrival that the team has met half an hour ago.
Secondly, “they” seems to imply that the group members contributed solutions to the problem presenter(single team member problem)
To begin, I will resume the AL set and ask the group to re-state the 2 ground rules in confirming their understanding. Next, I will clarify the time frame for today’s sessions and re-set leadership skills for this AL session. Following that, i will ask PP what actions were taken since the last meeting, what outcomes were achieved, what actions were not taken and why not?
Following the above, I will ask the PP where is he/her now and what PP would like team to help for this session. If the PP highlighted that he/she has already met and solve the problems, I will use this situation as a great learning opportunity for the team by asking:
What is happening? If some AL components and ground rules were missing, I will ask “I noticed there was no AL coach, how will the quality of learning for the group be impacted? Following that, i will resume by asking what can we do to improve and what will AL team do to prevent this from happening?
Following that, I will ask PP to define problem again followed by who has next question. Again, it is to allow team members and PP to decide what would be most appropriate action for this AL session even if the team has helped PP with some solutions.
If PP and team highlights that problem has been resolved, I will ask team if there is real agreement to the earlier problem and get them to write down and let them decide if there is real agreement? In the event that there is no agreement, I will intervene by asking the team what is the impact of working on solutions when there is no agreement on the problems and what can the team do better.
If there was agreement, I will ask team who has next question to allow team and PP to take ownership on what to do next.
Reply
DrBea
| #
Great Answers! There’s really nothing I can add.
I’d be sure to work with the PP before the session so they are clear on the requirements.
The learning questions that others have mentioned are outstanding.
Learnings around what the impact is on the team of the solution being presented?
Learnings around what the best use of our time for this session would be? (Could even be to work on a completely different problem).
Reply
nike pas cher
| #
nike pas cher
securing environmentally aware companies simply because the furniture assists in keeping belt webbing outside landfills.
Reply