Week 9 Coaching Assignment - Engaging our conversational leadership skills

By Muriel Guillod 

For this week assignment I decided to practice the Kantor’s model. As I am not working here in Canada, I didn’t apply this framework to a business context, but to another situation, the closest possible to a real working environment. Here at the University Laval, I have a very practical course, where we are working on our business idea, and developing a new concept, product, or business. This course is build around creative workshops and we are developing our business plan really practically, as we have to contact potential suppliers, clients, etc. in order to come up at the end of the semester with a project that could be realised and defend it in front of a panel of jury. I chose this model, as I thought it really fitted this kind of group project, and I decided to apply the model in one of our meeting, where we were discussing our business plan and trying to find the right direction to give to our project.

Probably the role that I am more used to do in general is the mover. Indeed, I am often taking initiatives, and don’t fear to take leadership in a group when needed. However, I am also someone able to listen to others and follow – follower’s role – if a strong leader comes up, but again, I usually won’t be afraid of saying when I don’t agree with what is being said and defend my point of view and present my counter arguments – opposer’s role. Therefore, I would say my weakest role is probably the bystander, which is the reason why I decided to take this role in our meeting. Another important thing to say is that, in this particular group, I don’t really hold the role of the leader, as there is a strong personality in our group. I really don’t mind this, as I have a very good relationship with all team members and that we all get along well together. Everyone is contributing into the project and adding value to our group. With that in mind, I thought the bystander also was a role which would help the group take the best of everyone, see the different perspectives and take the best one to move forward in the right direction.

So how did the conversation go? As I said, in this group, there is quite a strong leader. So she started to state her point of view as what the core of our business should be, and which focus we should take. Another team member, although the one at the very roots of this project, would be more a follower, at least in my point of view. He has good ideas and insights, but generally agrees on going in the direction given by the leader. So he added details on what the mover said, completing her ideas, but without deviating too far from it. Finally, the third team member could be considered as the opposer. While she didn’t necessarily contradict what the mover said, she brought new, different, and to some extent quite opposing ideas to the meeting. Generally, i.e. in this meeting as well as in others, she very often makes us pay attention not to narrow our ideas too early and focus only on one point of view, in order to stay open to other ideas and broaden our perspectives. As a bystander, I started by listening to what everyone was saying without intervening much, writing down the best of what each person said. I also took notes of the dynamics taking place in the group, and noticed that having a strong leader had both advantages as well as drawbacks. The main advantage is that it keeps the group moving, avoiding the lethargy that some teams are experiencing when they are lacking a strong leader. It gives direction and adds dynamism to the project. However, I also acknowledged that too much of a strong leader could have devastating consequences in the absence of some opposition, especially when the mover takes initiatives mainly based on its instincts and leaves behind his rationality. In this case, the leader could be blind to dangers and bring his team into a true chaos. Fortunately, this is not the case in our group, and each role is quite well balanced. As the bystander, I took care of summarizing the main ideas which were expressed – a bit the same as during the coaching sessions – and pointed out which ones were, in my point of view, the most pertinent and why. However, I also paid attention to add my own ideas and state when I thought neither directions discussed were complete enough or suitable for our project.

All in all, what I took from this exercise is that, as discussed by Kantor, each role has its importance and must be balanced well. In our group, this balance came quite naturally, but in some others it requires a bit more work to be found. It was really interesting for me to take the role of a bystander, as I was not really accustomed to it before. It helped me improve both my listening skills, my ability to synthesize, and also find ways to bring new creative ideas, building on what has been discussed. This role is actually quite demanding, but is eventually really interesting. One reason why this role has been weak for me before is that I usually have my ideas and know quite early the direction I want to take. For this reason, it can sometimes be hard to change route afterwards, as first ideas work as anchors. One way to strengthen these skills is to continue practicing the four roles in different contexts, and try to go out of the mover role to fill other roles. It is really a way to become more creative and it helps take into account everyone’s idea, as you then understand better each role.