Working through the ‘ZOUD’
pharmafile | July 7, 2011 | Feature | Business Services, Research and Development, Sales and Marketing | careers, management, recruitment
Most senior managers find their executive team difficult. ‘Dysfunctional’ is a favourite word.
Testing dynamics, political agendas, big personalities, strong opinions (and voices to match), too much or too little control is the reality for many.
Not surprisingly, they find the real work of the management team – tackling the big strategic and business performance issues – challenging at the best of times.
But times have changed. The business challenges of the recession have tested teams with tough choices and urgent decisions.
Difficult decisions about what, where, how, and how deep to cut for efficiency whilst sustaining capability in a radically changed financial environment.
These issues now give way to even more demanding questions about positioning in the dynamic landscape of new and changing customer preferences, dwindling markets and outdated practices; but at the same time booming opportunities and the high gain, high risk potential of growth strategies.
Business teams need to be able to address the basics, to challenge themselves to identify their business core capability, yet at the same time take swift and decisive action.
It is essential for management teams to be able to work through the Zone of Uncomfortable Debate (ZOUD) – that unspoken process that prevents us from questioning too closely the things that are held dear in business.
Such discussions all too easily dissolve into hostility, power plays, ridicule, escape mechanisms or delay tactics.
Seventy senior managers from fifteen executive teams attending Cranfield’s High Performance Business Team programme shared their experiences of the ZOUD.
What prevents productive discussion on ‘difficult’ issues and how can managers handle vital but tricky business decisions?
Here are some of their collective insights on what gets in the way:
• Insufficient knowledge of others’agendas and views
• Others inability to discuss difficult issues
• Fear of uncontrolled emotions
• Assuming you need the answer to ask the question
• Prejudging the answer
• Fear of surprises
• Lacking confidence in a productive outcome.
Why is it difficult to tackle what we call this ZOUD?
It may be because you don’t want to be taken by surprise, you don’t know what is going to come out once the debate starts.
You might also be concerned about other people losing their temper, or about things ‘getting personal’ and concerned about there being casualties in such a discussion.
However, this has to be overcome – not having the confidence to actually discuss an issue which is critical but sensitive in the business ultimately helps no one.
If this discussion can’t take place, then the team is dysfunctional and won’t be hitting the mark.
For further information, contact the author at c.bailey@cranfield.ac.uk
HOW TO WORK THROUGH THE ZOUD
1. Prepare people, process and place
Give people the opportunity to prepare; rotate the chair; legitimise and spread the responsibility for asking challenging questions by taking turns to be ‘devil’s advocate’; ensure sufficient agenda time; choose a comfortable or different location for ZOUD discussions.
2. Make ZOUD discussions an executive team competence
Be clear why it is important for the team to talk about ZOUD issues; recognise the natural difficulties that everyone experiences; agree ‘rules of engagement’.
3. Find the right starting point and pace for ‘too difficult’ issues by taking a stepwise approach
Is there agreement there is an issue to discuss? What is the issue? What are the decisions to be taken? What needs to be understood better to make those decisions?
What are the decision-making options? What are the pros and cons of each? What factors should guide choice and what weight should they have?
4. Maintain a productive perspective
Keep a business (not personal) focus; and keep a long term and bigger picture perspective.
Focus on issues (not personalities) and ensure everyone gets heard.
5. Act with emotional intelligence and political awareness
Manage your own emotions; don’t leave others to guess your worthy intentions. Strive to understand what is driving others’ views.
Ask questions to gain understanding (rather than trade dogmatic statements); facilitate progress (e.g. how can we move on? What would help us to clarify this? What are we trying to work towards here?).
6. Leave the ZOUD before leaving the room
Put the discussion and its value in perspective: why it was important; the natural difficulty felt; what’s been achieved by all and agree the next steps.
Related Content
Women scientists receive $41,000 less in funding than men, study shows
Women scientists receive $41,000 less in federal funding than men, according to a study of …
FDA recruitment official says Trump’s policies are making hiring difficult
Melanie Keller, Acting Associate Commissioner for Scientific and Clinical Recruitment at the US Food and …
Making careers in medcomms more visible – Synergy Vision launches new recruitment website
“I’d never heard of med comms until I wanted to change career and started exploring …
