Recently, I had a wonderful opportunity for reflection when I received some feedback on my Leadership style…but firstly, a little bit of background theory:
In Meta-Coaching, we use the term meta-programs to describe how we tend to think and believe about a situation that we represent in our mind and thus how we tend to respond in what we say and do.
These meta-programs exist on a continuum – neither good nor bad but potentially appropriate or inappropriate depending upon the context. A key to more effectively running your own brain is the ability to recognise habitual or over-use of one end of the spectrum and then to develop more flexibility.
One of these cognitive (thinking style) meta-programs looks at relationship comparison. It describes how we work with, filter and compare information in terms of Matching and Mis-Matching. For example:
- What relationship do you first see between where you live now, and your previous home?
- Do you approach things trying to match what you already know, or search for how it differs?
A person who matches tends to search for commonalities, correlations, sameness between current experience and previous experience. They tend to value security, regularity, stability and take a conservative approach to change. You’ll recognise them when they use terms such as “mutual agreement”, “security”, “what you both want” and respond with “Isn’t this like…….?”
On the other end of the continuum are the mis-matchers. A strong preference for mis-matching will be evident in first noticing things that differ, searching for distinctions, exceptions, differences, problems and things that do not fit. They tend to value change, variety and newness, finding the status quo boring. You’ll recognise then when they start talking about “re-engineering”, “innovation”, “different”, “trouble-shooting”, “adventurous”, “evolving” and “new”. In discussions, they will be the ones to reply “Yes, but……”
Most people will be somewhere between these two polarities.
SO, back to my feedback…I was told that I had a strong tendency to mis-match. I took it as a compliment until I was then told that this was not what was expected of the role (by the person providing the feedback).
“Strange” I thought… (mis-matching as I did it)… “my understanding had always been that one of the roles of a Leader was to challenge, to find the exceptions, to foresee potential pitfalls, making decisions and communicate changes so that problems are avoided”. Then the matching kicked in – empathy with the person in wanting to create a level of mutual understanding, co-operation and finding common ground if possible.
On reflection, it seems to me that as a Leader, you need considerable flexibility in this particular meta-program. There are times when consistency, stability and creating a sense of sameness are important. However, a Leader who does not challenge, provoke, question and explore will be doing both themselves and their organisation a dis-service.
So I’ve decided to take the positives I can from the feedback, carry on mis-matching… BUT adding the texture of appropriateness of context to ensure I remain aware of the potential pitfalls.
Where do you fit?
