[A]t the end of my last blog on intervention I described how, as work with the team progressed, all manner of structural patterns began to come to the surface. At times there were so many, it was hard to know where to begin or what to choose as the focus for intervention, using which method. So many questions about what to give primacy to. However, in reading the room structurally rather than morally, the priorities for intervention also came sharply into focus. Here’s an example of just one of these:

One of the senior leaders, Bill, presented the Executive Board with a proposal for the strategic direction of his part of the business [Move]

The CEO, Sandra, responded with affirming feedback about it being an overall good direction [Follow]

She also began to say what she noticed about it [Bystand] and offered correction and alternative possibilities [mix of Oppose and Move]

This was followed by sequences of Moves by her and she also invited others in to offer new and different ideas and suggestions [making and inviting in even more Moves from others]

Bill Followed, Followed and Followed again because he wanted to learn from Sandra and his senior colleagues – but what also happened was that he slipped into Courteous Compliance – he became a stuck Follower as his ability to Bystand came under pressure – he began to withdraw and become quiet.

Underneath Bill’s Follows there were also some Opposes to the Moves Sandra and the rest of the Board Members were making but they were all covert – not voiced.

Bill’s ability to Bystand felt ever more constrained until it became almost impossible for him to speak. The best he could do in the moment was to try to let Sandra know that all was not well was to say what he was noticing about the feelings that were arising for him – so eventually he expressed his vulnerability [Bystanding the self in Affect]. There were no overt Opposes at all from Bill.

His clear frustration about what he perceived to be chaotic and destructive random Moves from his colleagues after having put a huge amount of time and effort into formulating his original proposal got stronger and stronger. Courteous Compliance and Covert Opposition were such old and familiar patterns for him. Privately he couldn’t stand the fact that he still got caught out by them. He also couldn’t bear that powerful random Moves by leaders in authority triggered such strong reactions arising out of his childhood story in which, back then, it had been dangerous for him to Oppose because of how domineering and aggressive his father had been with him.

The work to do with Bill was to help him to change this pattern by supporting him to go to work on expanding his behavioural repertoire and range. One immediate way of doing this was to help him by inviting Bystanding and Opposition from him during ‘live’ team and individual coaching interventions particularly where others were making lots of Moves and then to explore the impact of doing so, including linking back to high stakes triggers and themes emanating from his childhood story.

The responsibility however, for changing the nature of the discourse never solely sits with any single individual in a team. By working with the whole team it was also possible to demonstrate the part others were playing in the dynamic where Courteous Compliance and Covert Opposition were able to take such a hold. This of course included Sandra in how she would consistently forsake her own ordinarily expert Bystanding to make a Move whenever there was a gap left by other team members. She was definitely a stuck Mover and this was impacting negatively in many of the team’s interactions with one another.

Importantly, each individual’s analysis of their own part in the dynamic and the way in which they began to roll up their sleeves to attend to this is what held their future as a powerful and productive team in such good stead. Everything that we were seeing in the team could be worked with, I could confidently say, to good end.

Simple? Yes. Easy? No.

It takes determination, strength, courage and resilience to do behavioural work of this kind but individuals and teams that learn the skills to be able to read the room structurally rather than morally and know how to change the nature of their own and others’ discourse become a phenomenal force for good to be reckoned with.