KAI Foundation Five - Episode 5 - “Leading Diverse Teams in Uncertain Times.”

Welcome to Part 5 of the KAI Foundation 5 podcast series, our five part introduction to building better teams and great leaders with the Kirton Adaption Innovation Inventory.

KAI is the world's foremost measure for problem solving style. It's used widely to create cohesive and productive teams and effective leaders. It's been in use for over 40 years and is supported by a large body of academic research from around the world.

In these five podcasts we want to provide you with an understanding of why KAI is so effective, so powerful, and indeed life-changing for so many teams and team leaders. As Kirton himself said, “The better I know myself, the more I can help others.”

Today's fifth and final part of the Foundation 5 series is entitled “Leading Diverse Teams in Uncertain Times.” And as the title suggests, it's all about diversity, or more specifically, diversity in problem solving styles - the Problem B in Kirton’s original thesis, which can so often derail teams as colleagues grapple with one another instead of the project that they're supposed to be addressing.

Hosted by Dave Harries, with Anne E Collier (professional certified coach and CEO of Arudia) and Dr Iwan Jenkins (Toronto-based KAI certified coach and ‘practitioner of the practical.’)

KAI FOUNDATION 5 – EPISODE 5

DH: Dave Harries - Facilitator

Guests:

AC: Ann Collier – CEO of Arudia and Certified Coach

IJ: Dr Iwan Jenkins – Certified Coach

DH: [0:00:00.0] Welcome to Part 5 of the KAI Foundation 5 podcast series, our five part introduction to building better teams and great leaders with the Kirton Adaption Innovation Inventory.

My name is Dave Harries, and joining me from the United States and Canada I have two very distinguished guests who are going to help us look at this fundamental issue around teamwork and leadership.

Anne E Collier is professional certified coach and CEO of Arudia, a training and development firm dedicated to improving culture, collaboration and communication, with a particular focus on leadership development and team building. Starting her professional life as a tax lawyer in Washington DC, Anne has spent the last 20 years dedicating herself to improving leadership skills. Anne is a KAI Master Practitioner, and regards KAI as a cornerstone of the Arudia leadership and management coaching approach.

Dr Iwan Jenkins is a Toronto based KAI certified coach, and describes himself as a ‘practitioner of the practical.’ He understands cognitive theory and complex systems science. But more importantly he also knows how to make that theory applicable in today's business world. In his own words, he turns potential into profit.

So welcome Anne, and welcome Iwan to the podcast. I'd like to ask you both to start to summarise what it is we're really discussing today, and why it matters so much. Iwan, could I get you to kick us off with that, please?

IJ: [0:02:40.3] Thank you very much indeed, Dave. I think one of the things that we need to address when we're talking about diversity is that despite what we read on social media and in the mainstream media, humankind are exceptionally good at managing diversity. No one individual knows everything, but as a species we're incredibly good at solving complex problems and working together to solve them.

As an example of that, we just need to look at the way that the human population has doubled from four to eight billion since the late 40s, our our technical prowess now in terms of putting people on the moon and going deep under sea, and in fact that most of the problems that humanity is trying to solve now are spin off problems of historical successes.

So one of the things that we have to do now is address these spin off problems which are coming at us at increasing speed, and increasing complexity and KAI theory about how do we manage problem solving style and collaborate effectively for mutual benefit is the key subject of this podcast today.

DH: [0:03:54.2] And Anne, from your point of view, is diversity this key issue that Iwan has just described?

AC: My focus, as you said in the lovely introduction, Dave, is helping leaders to create cultures which perform well, in which there's wellbeing and they get results. And in order to do that, leaders and teams and whole organisations need to embrace cognitive diversity. They need to see it as great value and not as a threat or a problem to be dealt with.

When I when I look at cognitive diversity, my approach is always to help people to understand it first, and see the great value in it because we all come to problems with our own bias that we do know best, that our approach is the right way. And even though we intellectually know that others solve problems differently, and there are different ways of doing things, we still are very wedded to or in love with our own approach - as a client said very recently in a KAI workshop, addressing change.

So what the KAI does, and the understanding of cognitive diversity does, is it helps people to create teams that really like each other, and that get great results. And that's what everybody wants, just like a sports team.

DH: [0:05:14.4] One of the things that's come across to me from what you’ve both said, is the issue of diversity. I guess it can be seen as threatening, can’t it, if you're in a team context, if you're trying to get something done? Iwan, I wonder if perhaps you could elaborate on that for me.

IJ: [0:05:30.3] One of the things that Kirton was very particular about was preciseness in language, and definitions. He was very keen that we should be looking at data where possible and observations rather than ideology.

So for example, in the modern world, particularly in the West, we are told that all diversity is good. Kirton would call that an ideology. In fact, he did call it an ideology, because he would say that if you observe biology, if you observe the natural world, then diversity is broken down into diversity which is immediately useful, neutral, or immediately threatening. And we should be applying that mode of thinking as to the way we collaborate and interact with others to solve problems for mutual benefit.

And if he was looking at the biology, one of the examples he would provide would be the bacteria that are lying in the gut, that every human has about 2.2 pounds, or about a kilo of bacteria in the gut, some of which is immediately useful in terms of digestion, immediately useful in terms of our immune system, some of which is immediately harmful, and the body works to try and save itself from that. And the vast majority of it being neutral, which we carry at very low cost so that if we get an invasion, if we digest something which is not good for us, then all of a sudden that neutral bacteria can help us then digest it safely.

So what would happen in biology where Kirton would say it's either useful, neutral, or threatening, we now apply in terms of sociology. The sociological application of this diversity started very, very early with specialisation. The first Homo sapiens allocated tasks based on the problems that needed to be solved. Those problems were, how do we reproduce successfully so the species continues? And how do we get resources then to be able to actually allow that to occur, which was then the beginning of the hunter gatherers specialisation.

A group would start to go out and look for meat and resources to bring it back so that the gatherers and the nurturers in the tribe and clan could look after the next generation and make sure that they were safe, so that they too could bring up families going forward. This was the beginning then of belonging as a group, which is critical then in terms of diversity, as well as learning a specialisation that's relevant then for the group's overall success.

We have then developed that further in modern society about developing both the desire to collaborate and be part of a group, but also then having skills, and developing skills and specialisations that are relevant to the group, which then allows us to have an even greater sense of belonging.

DH: [0:08:34.5] So Anne, what Iwan has just said, it's almost as if, if we're not careful in the modern world, we've kind of forgotten the importance of that diversity and the fact that it was so essential to our early survival and to being able to flourish as a species - and now the cult of the individual and all that sort of thing which we hear so much about. Is that what you're facing when you're trying to develop teams?

AC: [0:09:01.7] That's definitely my experience, and I'm going to actually share an example and then back into the theory under that.

I work with a team, a new CEO, and her leadership team are all within a narrow band of problem solving styles. In fact, there’s very little diversity. So after about a year she hired somebody who's very, very different, with the express purpose of and I say this in quotes, ‘shaking things up.’

Now, interestingly, part of her mission is to bring to the organisation more of a corporate feel, more routine, bureaucracy in a positive way, systems that support outcomes, but she hired somebody for her leadership team again that would shake things up by being more unstructured, a more innovative problem solver.

And so what that did was that broke patterns of this feeling of being very, very stuck, not having very robust discussions, alliances that didn't work. The team is actually getting along better now with more diversity, and they're more effective.

So just taking a step back now, what's happened here? You had a team on which there was a lot of trust. So trust is absolutely essential, because I hear a lot when I'm doing workshops from especially the people that are high adaptors or high innovators, that they hold back their ideas because they don't want to be perceived as either nitpicky or crazy and out there. But when there’s safety, when they feel valued, they share their ideas readily. The ideas may be embraced or pitched, but it doesn't matter because there's a sense of belonging. You have to have, I think, at least that belonging and that safety before you can really take advantage of the diversity on a team.

So when I'm working with a team - whether it's a leadership team, or a horizontal service providing team – I first make a judgement about how safe of an environment is that, and how much do I need to focus on that before we start touting the benefits of the diversity? So as Iwan says, to make the diversity be an advantage or a benefit and not threatening.

So the culture of really embracing the diversity for the benefit that it is, is really what we're striving for.

DH: [0:11:28.1] So, Anne, I think I understand what you're saying there, but I wonder whether modern society again forces us as individuals to believe somehow that we can do it all, have it all, solve it all ourselves. And that again goes directly against our nature, and obviously what Kirton says in his theorem.

AC: [0:11:51.0] Yeah. I've definitely noticed that over the years, the messages that are given to our kids, to our grandchildren, are that they can do everything and be everything. I'm five foot eight, and in my 50s, so I'm probably not going to be a basketball player anytime soon. I don’t have an aptitude for certain kinds of science, so I'm not going to be a doctor or a physicist. I think that the challenge - and I still do a lot of career coaching - is to have people embrace what they're really good at, seek out opportunities to do what they're good at - which by the way is what they find exhilarating, what they find exciting, what they find fulfilling - and to be able to then go to their leadership in their organisation, or if they are leaders, to look for people's special skills and make the most out of those.

I think the challenge now - going back to your point - we feel like we have to be independent. We have our iPhone that does everything for us. It’s in our pocket. It's a fallacy. It's like we're afraid to admit that things are hard for us. I see that when people are in vulnerable situations in organisations where the cultures aren't really supportive, that people are afraid to admit that certain tasks are hard for them to ask for help.

Now, a true team is recognising the individual nature of everybody and what they do well, and how they can actually support each other. In fact, I was coaching a gentleman on a team not that long ago, on a leadership team, who was a bit younger, had less education than his peers. In some cases, a lot less education than his peers, more adaptive, and he felt that he didn't know how to contribute. “Everybody else is working so hard. I don't feel like I have much to offer here.” It wasn't that he wasn't being utilised, but he was concerned he didn't have much to offer here.

And actually seeing his team, what his team members’ KAI scores were and seeing his result, and the differences, he was able to pinpoint what his value was, offer it everybody on his team, and in fact his CEO reported to me at how well he was doing, that the coaching had been just really a brilliant experience for him because it was highlighting his own brilliance and contribution to the team.

DH: [0:14:29.0] So Iwan, I'm not sure if you've accepted yet that you're probably not going to play for the Welsh rugby team, but joking apart, it’s a very important point this, isn't it, accepting our limits and finding where we excel? That's what makes the world go round, isn't it?

IJ: [0:14:46.5] Absolutely, Dave because humans don't have instincts. We have to learn everything. And our success for solving the complex problems, we can’t do everything. We can't do everything. We have to work and collaborate successfully with others for mutual benefit, which means that we have to have both the skills to work with others, but also we have to have skills that are relevant for the problem that group is trying to solve. If we get that right, we will do two things: we will be accepted by the group, but we will also stand out and be valued by the group. And those are two fundamental key drivers for every individual. I’d say it was almost universal. I'm sure there are outliers, but that was universal.

Here's how it can go wrong when an individual believes that their diversity has to be accepted, and they will almost bully the group into taking the diversity. So for example now, if you can imagine a sports team with a self-obsessed star. The team will then accept them as long as that individual is successful. As soon as that person stops being successful, the cost as far as the team is concerned of carrying that person, is too great. So their diversity snaps immediately from being useful to being threatening. They're a pain to deal with.

And as Kirton once said, “Mavericks are only useful and accepted as long as they're being successful.” So the reverse of that though, is if you have diversity in the group where the individual has had it suppressed either by themselves or by others, and then how do you unveil that so that they can also then feel part of the group but also contribute in a way that’s useful to the group for mutual benefit? So this is now where neutral diversity is being carried and not known that it actually can be turned into useful diversity.

DH: [0:16:47.2] Do you think there's a fundamental truism that as human beings we like to be in a group, we want to be appreciated, we want to be loved? That’s something we all have in common, isn't it?

AC: [0:17:01.5] I definitely think so. In David McClellan's research he shows we all have this desire to be affiliated with others. It’s natural. For some it’s very, very strong. For others it's not as strong, but it's there in everybody.

I also want to go back to the point about diversity and the benefits of diversity and being interdependent. Over the last 20 years, when I look at all of the clients that I have coached, and I think about all of the workshops that I've delivered and the sidebar conversations, I would say that upwards of 90% of people are married or partnered with people who are very different from themselves. I think about my own marriage, where my husband is considerably more adaptive, thankfully. And so I handle certain things that rely on my skill set - whether it's problem solving style, or other skills that I've developed - and he does things like our tax return and more of the planning side of things.

It was also interesting, he commented on me as a consultant. He's right in the middle of the adaption innovation continuum, so relates well and has a similar problem solving style to most, and I'm on the more innovative end. He said that lawyers who tend to be a conservative bunch, find me a bit threatening. My ideas are kind of out there. And of course my self-perception of that was that I was not, and in fact before I got KAI certified, I just assumed that I was in the middle of the bell curve, because why wouldn't I be? I didn't give it much thought. And so it was a revelation, and then it explained so much to get my result and see, “Wow, I really am different.” Now I know why I don't feel like I fit in, in all of these different circumstances. And of course, I left the practice of law, so that says something too.

DH: [0:19:10.6] So I think we've established that it's a truism that there are issues around teams, and that human beings work much better in teams when they accept each other's diversity and that sort of thing, but I wonder if we can look at this now more in terms of organisations and how it works or doesn't work within organisations.

Iwan, before we do that, could you remind us of the Problem A vs Problem B that Kirton describes in his theorem, and how that actually applies in the real world?

IJ: [0:19:40.2] Problem A and Problem B is a key concept in terms of the Kirton KAI theory and managing the diversity. If I want to solve a problem, I can do so by myself. Let's call that the core problem, Problem A.

But if I if I don't have the requisite skills or knowledge, the specialty that’s required to solve this key problem, I have to work with somebody else. I know need to collaborate because Anne has the expertise. Now we introduce a new problem to the original Problem A. The new problem is how do Anne and I manage each other? That's called Problem B.

If Anne and I see the world the same way, the Problem B is going to be relatively small. But if we have a diversity of perspectives, diversity of experience, any kind of diversity, that means Problem B can be quite significant. And the more energy we spend on Problem B, the less energy we have to spend on Problem A, but the more diversity we have - the wider range of problems we can solve as well.

So one of the key things that organisations need to do is they have to learn how do we have a wide range of diversity that will allow us to solve a wide range of Problem A's, whilst at the same time having the skills that reduce the amount of energy that is wasted on solving how do we manage each other, Problem B?

DH: [0:21:03.9] So, Anne, I think Iwan has defined Problem A vs Problem B for us very well there, reminded us of what that is. When you are in a new situation with a new team to try and help and that sort of thing, is it obvious? Is there evidence when Problem B is an issue? Can you spot that pretty quickly?

AC: [0:21:23.4] Yeah. So harkening back to my legal days, I can find the bread crumbs and follow the trail to uncover what's really going on. And of course, every legal case has a theory. I always go to there's a misunderstanding of diversity. So in terms of the evidence, like what we see, a lot of complaints, a lot of HR complaints, people are sensitive, they're taking things personally. Lack of trust is a legal conclusion, but what that looks like is people are left off of emails or copied on emails. You hear that actions were intended to throw people under the bus, that kind of language.

So what I always recommend to clients, and especially if things are terribly awry, is let's give people an understanding of different workstyles - because you need to give them an explanation that this person isn't hiding details from them, or intentionally being ambiguous. I have a client who suffered this particular problem - asking so many questions and looking like they're trying to sabotage a project when actually he was trying to make it work out.

So once you have an understanding that people's work styles are different, that the kinds of things that they will focus on are different, the interactions, the communications will be around different areas of concern, then you can transform the thinking that, “Hey, this person was trying to sabotage my project, or take it from me or not give me information or bury me in details,” with, “Okay, I'm going to look at this differently, and I see that this is just this person's problem solving style.”

So the transformation usually goes from this person is a bad actor and it’s just them, to – and this is where you want to get to is, “Boy, I really do want to work with them.” If you think about lawyers, lawyers keep you out of jail, but lawyers don't have a reputation for being a lot of fun to work with. That's what I see. It's very easy to see those little bits of evidence.

DH: [0:23:40.3] And I suppose, Iwan, what we're talking about here is managing the diversity. It's as simple as that, isn't it, really?

IJ: [0:23:46.1] Absolutely. I'm just going to add one other telltale sign to what Anne was talking about there. I'm not a detective, but if I were, one of the first signs of crime I see of Problem B is what I would call the crash of solutions, or sometimes referred to it as my precious syndrome. This is where people have their view as to how the problem should be solved and are holding on to it very, very tightly. Their view on how to solve the problem really then taps into their diversity, and then we have a clash then at the diversity.

The key reason why we have this waste of energy on Problem B is that there's no shared agreement on the common Problem A. If you have no context, then you have no basis in which to value diversity of approach.

DH: [0:24:40.4] Anne, can you give us a couple of examples of where this stuff has happened and gone wrong, and perhaps examples of where it's gone right as well?

AC: [0:24:49.4] So where it's gone wrong - and I love what Iwan just said, I'll just start out by saying to be a successful leader, team member, to be successful in life, there's a certain amount of humility that you have to embrace, I mean, true humility. I know my own perspective, and I know what I've been trained on, but I don't know what somebody else might think. And for those of us who are married to those who are very different, we get reminded of that all the time.

I had a client who was a new CEO, high innovator, made some sweeping changes without really involving his team. Just did it. Literally and physically moved things around, and it was a disaster. So it was a disaster not just for his leadership team, but for his team overall. He actually left within a year because he felt very uncomfortable. And there was some other issues, but you can see where the diversity, he didn't embrace that there were other needs that needed to be met.

In fact, one of my tips is embracing problem solving - and going back to Iwan’s point about really defining Problem A is actually to pull it apart into pieces. If it's a really complex problem there are going to be a number of aspects of that, some of which are going to require more innovative, some of which more adaptive solutions, some in between, but then to recognise in your own problem solving style what your own biases are. I know that my bias is to change the environment, but maybe that's not the right solution. So there's that piece of it.

I've seen it more often where the high innovators go in and try to change everything too quickly, without the humility of engaging with their more adaptive colleagues to understand what might go wrong. And I see that as a problem. That said, the example that I gave you a little bit earlier, that innovator that was brought into that team to shake things up, she is patient, she asks questions, and she really wants to learn from her colleagues. That's a completely different perspective.

In terms of when it goes right, recognising. I work with a company that is in a highly regulated field. The CEO relies on someone who is a high adapter. If it passes her muster, it's fine. He can completely rest easy. He sleeps well, he knows that he's got the sign off on it. And part of him acknowledging that is then everybody then appreciates this woman's contribution not as being nitpicky, but as being a necessary and valued part of the process. And that's the key.

A lot of my focus is on leadership, and leaders creating a great culture. So it comes from the top. Is the leader humble and curious and asking questions, and showing his team or her team that he or she values the diversity? And that he or she doesn't have all the answers, but boy, the rest of the team does because remember there's pressure. We all feel this pressure to know it all. The question is do we succumb to it.

Another example that I have is of a lawyer who was selling his services to venture capitalists. His problem solving style is very adaptive, very structured. They are very much on the innovative end. He struggled because his questions in the selling phase were seeming to put a damper on their ideas, and they didn't perceive him as being supportive. So this goes to Iwan’s point about you need to sell yourself, you need to make yourself useful.

So through our coaching he learned to hold those ideas back a little bit, ask a lot of questions, sell his services for their benefit, for his benefit. And then when it came down to actually implementing the ideas, he kept them out of the regulatory soup as it were.

DH: [0:29:01.1] Before we finish, I'd really like to get from both of you some tips. If you like, some practical help with how we can manage this stuff on an everyday level. Iwan?

IJ: [0:29:11.4] I’ve got three tips. The first of which is that collaboration for mutual benefit is a skill that needs to be learnt and practised. The first thing that needs to happen is the group needs to define and then have a common understanding of the common Problem A it’s trying to solve. Otherwise you won't have context for diversity to be deemed to be useful, threatening, or neutral.

No 2 if you're entering a group, and you think your diversity may be perceived as being threatening, it's up to you - I emphasise this, it's up to you, to present your skills as being immediately useful and gives great mutual benefit. The leader can pave the way, but the individual coming into the group has some responsibility to be deemed as non- threatening.

And No 3, attacking people for not accepting your particular diversity will lead to their backlash because people have to be convinced a particular diversity is not threatening, but potentially useful. Because unlike what we hear in social media, diversity is either useful, neutral, or threatening, and it's our job to present ourselves as being useful to others if we want to be accepted.

DH: [0:30:25.6] And Anne, have you got some tips for us for managing diversity?

AC: [0:30:29.5]:Yes. I'm going to share three of my favourite tips for managing diversity.

First of all, assume that there's always something to be learnt. So part of what I do is I teach leaders how to use coaching skills. So adopt an executive coach persona, and ask your colleagues what's the benefit they’re seeing? What are their concerns? What gives them pause? And that leads to actually my second tip, which is, in particular if you're a leader, to make disagreement normal, to normalise it, invite questions, curiosity and challenges as a necessary component of driving exceptional results.

Coming from the legal field, part of our training is that we argue. Not personalising it, but we argue in order to get to the right results. So working with someone like Iwan, batting back and forth concepts and ideas is how I do my best thinking. So bring that to your team as positive, as part of the collaboration, that it's not conflict.

And then lastly - and I love this technique - and that is in problem solving, adopt a happy hackathon approach. Make it fun, divide your group into teams of four, or five, or however many seems appropriate, of people with similar problem solving styles. Let them chew on the problem and then rotate a disrupter in to ask the hard questions. When we've done this, we get exceptional results because you allow people to have their ideas gel with people who think similarly to them. It’s in that space of I don't quite know how to solve this problem, but you're thinking like I'm thinking, so it becomes more clear. And then you have somebody asked the really hard questions, which then gets the solution to the next level.

DH: [0:32:28.0] And finally, Iwan, I know you've said to me that inclusion is not as important as belonging in a team. I'd love you to explain that as a closing thought for this podcast.

IJ: [0:32:42.5] If you go all the way back to Homo erectus, the first biped that had a large brain, million years ago, there is a link between that individual and the crowds that go and watch the soccer games and rugby games on a Saturday, wearing their team jerseys. A desire to be part of a football team, a desire to be part of a family, a desire to be part of a unit because humans have got no instincts to guide us on survival. Stick an individual in the savanna and they will fail, but stick a hundred individuals in a savanna, and they will then figure out a way of being able to capture food, building shelter and finding water. And they will learn how to collaborate for mutual benefit, and they will exploit the diversity of specialist skills that they will have for individuals and the group to survive.

The driver behind that, that Kirton has noted, is that we want to be part of a group, but we want to stand out and acknowledge in the group for the contribution that we make to the group’s success. And leaders in organisations have got to tap into those drivers so that everybody's successful for mutual benefit.

DH: [0:34:01.2] You've been listening to Part 5 of the KAI Foundation 5 podcast series with our special guests, Anne E Collier and Dr Iwan Jenkins.

You can find Anne at Arudia.com, and Iwan at the Riotpoint.com. If you’ve found the discussion interesting. you can find out more about the KAI system and its first class team development potential at KAICentre.com. In the meantime, if you haven't already, please check out our other Foundation 5 KAI podcasts as well as many other episodes covering aspects of the KAI Approach to Effective Leadership and Teams. Goodbye for now, and thanks for listening.

The KAI Podcast: building better teams and great leaders

KAI Foundation Five - Episode 5 - “Leading Diverse Teams in Uncertain Times.”

Listen to this podcast on