Whether you are trying to resolve a conflict, coach an employee, or correct your child’s behavior; you have to wrestle with your real goals. You have to ask yourself, “Do I want compliance or commitment?”

Many people might say, “As long as they do what I asked them to do, I don’t really care whether people are compliant or committed.”

I would say that if you want one-time action and results in a situation where you do not have to continue working or living with the other person, then compliance is fine. After all, in a one-time event, you don’t really care about the long-term impact on the relationship.

If, however, you are in a relationship with someone, either personally or professionally, I would say that compliance is bad goal.

In Why We Do What We Do, Edward Deci argues that compliance is really silent retaliation. I agree.

Deci’s comments remind me of the story of a young boy who insisted on standing up in class. After the teacher spoke with his mother, his mother made it clear that he would experience severely negative consequences if he got in trouble with his teacher again on this issue. The next day, as he sat in his seat, his teacher said something to him about how nicely he was sitting. He replied, “I’m sitting on the outside, but I’m standing on the inside!”

With compliance, we can get apparent cooperation and bare minimum performance while we are with people. With commitment, we get cooperation even when we are not present, and we create the possibility that the other person will work with extra, discretionary effort to get even better results.

The issue of striving for commitment over compliance is one that I sometimes struggle with as I work with others, and I believe that in most cases making the effort to connect and communicate in respectful ways to build commitment is far better than applying strong negative consequences with the hope of gaining compliance.

Related posts:

1. Employee Motivation Tips: The Why Matters
2. Employee Motivation Tips: Their Personal Life
3. Employee Motivation Tips: Their DISC Behavior Style

Have you ever seen or been involved in a conflict conversation where one person said: “I knew that you were going to say that!”

If you have, you probably noticed that the conflict intensity escalated from that point forward.

This type of statement is aggressive. It says that how you anticipate another person will react is a forgone conclusion rather than an expectation. It leaves no room for the other person’s autonomy and self-control. It subtly places you in an intellectually and emotionally “superior” position relative to the other person.

Saying that you “know” what someone else will do or say is like saying that you can unzip his head and know what’s going on even before he does.

If you want to create more conflict and escalate the emotional level of your conversation, tell someone that you “knew” she would react however she did.

If you want to leave room for conflict resolution and effective communication, strike this type of comment from your conflict repertoire and apply these seven ways to improve your communication during a conflict.

Related posts:

1. Be Careful What You Assume
2. Conflict Resolution Tips: The Power of Patience
3. Conflict Resolution Tips: See Others Fairly

Today, I have another lesson drawn from my recent guitar playing endeavor for people of all ages and roles.

First, the story behind the lesson.

As my daughters and a friend of mine patiently teach me scales, chords, chord progressions, hand positions, and strumming patterns; I have learned to struggle through a song or two. I don’t model the ease and beauty of playing that you might see in a true guitar master like Eric Clapton or Jim Croce (yes, I am showing my age), I can manage to, generally, make sounds that resemble music.

I know how to make my left hand create a number of chords. I know them by name, and I know a few simple variations. I have even learned what it means to hammer on and pull off. It’s great fun even though the finger tips of my left hand alternate between painful and numb.

In the process, I have learned that…

The concepts of playing a guitar are relatively simple, but playing a guitar well is not easy.

I quickly learned some fundamentals, and, using those fundamentals, I can fumble through a few songs. I am a looong way from true proficiency with the guitar. Still, I believe that with effort, practice, study, and the willingness to fail in the process; I can achieve some level of mastery.

The same is true for anyone working to apply the communication and conflict resolution principles that I write about and teach. It takes effort, practice, study, and the willingness to fail in the process to master them.

Becoming a great leader, communicator, conflict resolver, parent, or anything else, depends on the work done in the process of becoming proficient. It does not happen without study and focused practice.

The difference between doing something you have heard or seen someone else do and doing it with mastery is in the time and effort invested after you learn the concept.

Related posts:

1. The Secret to Mastery is in the Transitions
2. Beware of Labels
3. Effective Communication Skills: Acknowledge Emotions Before Solving Problems

There are two musical instruments I would like to play. One is the saxophone and the other is the guitar.

When I was in the fifth grade, my parents placed an order to rent a saxophone for the following school year so that I could join the band and learn to play. Over the summer, we moved to a different city where band started in fifth grade. I was out of sequence with the school system, and I wasn’t able to take private lessons.

I didn’t learn to play the saxophone that year.

Somewhere in my teen years, I thought about playing the guitar. I eventually got one — I think I was about 18 or 19. It sat in my closet until I was in the Navy and I had a roommate with a guitar.

With my roommate’s coaxing  and help, I learned to play — a very little bit. We were assigned to different submarines, and I put down the guitar. I have no idea where that guitar is or what happened to it.

That was about 25 or 26 years ago.

This past Christmas, my youngest daughter asked for a guitar, and she got one.

She will be leaving home this fall to attend the residential honors high school that her older sister graduated from a few weeks ago. In short, both of my girls will be out of the house starting in August.

As I thought about my youngest daughter leaving home to attend school, it occurred to me that she would only be with me full-time for about eight more months. If I wanted to do something with her to build memories and relationship, the time was short.

When she got her guitar, I also thought about my goal of learning to play the guitar.

Suddenly, the goal that first surfaced over 30 years ago had a new meaning.  It was now about something I could do with my daughter.

The “why” of the goal moved from the sort-of-a-neat-idea category to the I’ve-got-to-do-it-now-because-it’s-very-emotional category.

The guitars in the picture with this post are ours. My daughter’s is on the right. Mine is on the left.

For leaders of any kind — managers, supervisors, business owners, coaches, teachers, or parents — the lesson in this story is key to understanding what might motivate someone to take action.

It’s the “why” not the “what” that gets people moving.

I had a new guitar in my home as quickly as I could make it happen when the emotion behind the goal got big enough. That emotion wasn’t about money, recognition, or any other externally applied consequence.  And buying the guitar was not, ultimately, about the guitar. It was about time with my daughter and memories.

When you find ways to communicate with people about issues bigger and more emotional to them — to them is the key point here — they will move to action to accomplish the goal.

I am not suggesting that external motivators have no impact.

I am suggesting that looking for the personal, emotional hook and clearly communicating the connection between the task or goal and that emotional hook will get you more high-energy, discretionary effort than anything else you can do as a leader.

In a  post about finding what motivates other people, I shared some insights that might help you in the process of finding that emotional hook. It’s not always easy. It can often be done.

By the way, I still don’t own or know how to play a saxophone. I guess the “why” isn’t big enough yet.

Related posts:

1. Employee Motivation Tips: Their Personal Life
2. Employee Motivation Tips: Their DISC Behavior Style
3. Employee Motivation: Compliance or Commitment?

In previous posts, I have written about a model for understanding what motivates behavior and three clues you can use to find what motivates another person.

Today, I’ll share some quick insights about what motivates people based on their DISC behavioral style.

A person who has outgoing and task-oriented (Dominant) traits is often motivated by:

• Solving problems
• Conquering challenging situations
• Getting results

And they will often prefer to work at a fast pace with a focus on quick results and direct action.

A person who has outgoing and people-oriented (Inspiring) traits is often motivated by:

• The opportunity to interact with others
• Public recognition
• Varied activities

And they will often prefer to work at a fast pace with a focus on doing things in a fun way that does not require high attention to detail.

A person who has reserved and people-oriented (Supp0rtive) traits is often motivated by:

• Teamwork
• The opportunity to help others
• Feeling appreciated for their contribution

And they will often prefer to work at a steady pace with a focus on doing the work process in a way that minimizes risk and strengthens relationships.

A person who has reserved and task-oriented (Cautious) traits is often motivated by:

• Structuring or organizing things
• Researching or searching for information
• Finding the “right” solution for a problem

And they will often prefer to work alone with a focus on details and proper structure.

As you work to apply this information in your personal and professional life, remember that people have varying degrees of all of these traits in their behavioral style blends and that you are likely to observe at least two of the four styles to a significant degree in most people.

The information in this post is only intended to give you a basic framework for understanding what might motivate another person. It is not intended as a complete and exhaustive description of how the DISC model might reveal motivational patterns and preferences.

Related posts:

1. Employee Motivation Tips: Their Personal Life
2. Employee Motivation Tips: The Why Matters
3. DISC Model FAQ’s: Could I Have More Than One DISC Behavior Style?

Many leaders struggle with finding ways to motivate people to higher level performance.

I have already written that you cannot motivate another person. So, let’s set aside the idea that the leader provides the motivation and move on to the idea that a leader can learn to identify the things that do motivate the people on his or her team.

In previous posts, I wrote about Three Clues You Can Use to Find What Motivates Another Person and A Simple Model for Understanding What Drives Behavior. In this post, I’m offering a thought to expand the idea that you can look at a person’s hobbies and interests to find clues about what motivates him and then apply that insight as you assign and delegate tasks.

Current motivation research, like the research Daniel Pink shares in Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, indicates that excessive reliance on extrinsic motivators — rewards, praise and prizes — can eventually have a negative impact on overall motivation.

A quick look at the model I shared previously could lead to the conclusion that the consequences referenced in that model refer only to externally applied rewards, prizes, bonuses, recognition, etc.

A deeper look reveals that a consequence is anything a person experiences as a result of her behavior. So, the emotions and personal satisfaction that people experience from their behaviors can be consequences that drive behavior. These emotions fall into the category of intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivators, and it is these emotions that people’s hobbies often reveal.

For example, I like woodworking, writing, building websites, working on my house, landscaping, and cooking. These activities show that part of what motivates me is analyzing and solving problems. When I do things that give me that opportunity, the work itself becomes a motivator because it gives me the emotional satisfaction of analyzing and solving a problem.

These hobbies also reveal that I tend to like working alone. I can (and do) call on customers and socialize with people. However, these activities are work to me.

My hobbies are play to me.

Work tires and play energizes.

A wise leader hoping to “motivate” me to higher performance would, as much as possible within the confines of the business need, give me assignments that maximized my ability to analyze and solve problems.

As you look for what motivates your team members, remember to look at their hobbies and interests for clues you can use to work with them in a way that taps their intrinsic motivation as much as possible.

Side note – Parents can use this idea with their children as well. What activities energize your kids and which ones drain them?

Related posts:

1. Employee Motivation Tips: Their DISC Behavior Style
2. Employee Motivation Tips: The Why Matters
3. The 5 Be’s of Motivation

In a recent post, I presented a simple model for understanding what drives our behavior.

According to the model, punishments (negative or unpleasant consequences) can reduce the likelihood that a behavior will repeat in the future. This observation implies that leaders can hope to eliminate “bad” behaviors by using punishment and discipline strategies.

If you face a situation where you need to eliminate inappropriate workplace (or family) behaviors, then you can apply negative consequences to achieve your goals. And, you might achieve partial success.

Using only negative consequences might eliminate a “bad” behavior. This approach will not guarantee that a “good” behavior will happen in its place.

According to the model I presented previously, we choose our behaviors from among the behaviors we perceive are available to us in a situation.

By making the consequences for one choice painful enough, you might encourage the person you are working with to choose a different behavior.  If you do not explicitly define the behavior that you would like to replace the “bad” behavior in question AND make the consequences for the new behavior positive, you run the risk of encouraging him to choose a third option that is even worse than the behavior you hoped he would change.

As you work to become a more effective leader, parent, teacher, coach, or friend, remember that only positive consequences for desired behaviors will encourage people to repeat those behaviors in the future.

When you  apply the model I wrote about previously, remember to:

• Beware of perception error
• Understand the application of both positive and negative consequences
• Explore all consequences the other person might experience (both tangible and emotional). In other words, think beyond the external consequences that you “apply” to the other person.

Most importantly, remember that…

You cannot punish people into good behavior.

Related posts:

1. A Simple Model for Understanding What Drives Behavior
2. The 5 Be’s of Motivation
3. Praise matters – Give four atta-boys for every one gotcha

The diagram above shows a simplified model for better understanding what drives behavior.

Since people often spend their lives studying and understanding what really drives our behavior, I am pretty confident that I cannot hope to fully cover the topic in this short post.

I can provide a quick overview you can use to diagnose what’s happening in your interactions with other people and how you might be able to modify your approaches to get better results, have more fun, experience more satisfying relationships, and make sense of what you see people do.

Here’s a simplified description of what the model shows:

1. We enter a situation.
2. We anticipate the outcome we want from that situation.
3. We choose the behavior that (we hope) gives us that outcome.

This description leads to the following implication:

We choose our behaviors based on what we expect to happen after we do them.

The consequence is what we expect that we will experience as a result of our behaviors. In this context, a consequence is anything that we experience as a result of our behavior. A consequence might be some external thing we receive or get because of our behavior. A consequence can also be the feelings we get from the behavior.

As you might guess, we tend to avoid negative consequences and to pursue positive consequences.  As a result, negative consequences (like punishments) tend to discourage repeating behaviors and positive consequences (like rewards) tend to encourage behaviors to repeat in the future.

Part of the challenge with applying this model in practice comes from a common error known as perception error. Perception error happens because not every person sees every consequence the same way. What one person sees as a reward; a different person might see as a punishment.

You can use the  DISC model to gain insights to avoid perception error.

For example, public recognition might be a reward for an outgoing, people-oriented person and it might be a punishment for a reserved, people-oriented person.

You can also apply the 5 Be’s of Motivation as you work with other people to encourage better interactions and results.

Remember, this is a very quick, very simplified description of this model and it’s implications. I’ll offer more insights in future posts.

Related posts:

1. You Cannot Punish People into Good Behavior
2. The DISC Model of Human Behavior – A Quick Overview
3. Employee Motivation Tips: Their DISC Behavior Style

Last week, I saw a report on television about the number of children that have likely been misdiagnosed as ADD/ADHD. As I watched the television piece, I was reminded of a common problem I see when people start to apply the DISC model of human behavior.

Here’s the challenge:

People often use disorder descriptions to speak about normal behavior.

The  most common misdiagnosis I have observed are:

D behaviors described as if they are indicative of Oppositional Defiant Disorder.

I behaviors described as if they are indicative of ADD/ADHD.

S behaviors described as if they are indicative of Social Anxiety Disorder.

C behaviors described as if they are indicative of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD).

While it might seem funny to some people to use the illness descriptions to speak about normal behaviors, I don’t really find it that humorous. In fact, I find it a bit offensive for several reasons:

• Using illness descriptions to speak about normal behaviors minimizes the frustration and struggle of people who do have the psychological condition.
• Using an illness description to speak about someone who does not have the illness implies that their behavior is, in some way, bad or wrong rather than just driven by different perspectives.

If you have read much of my writing yet, you know that I am a strong proponent of using the DISC model as a way to better understand how another person might see a situation and how I might best adapt to connect with them. I hope you also see that I strongly disagree with any attempt to use the model to label or artificially categorize people.

Generally, I have seen illness descriptions used by people to describe other people with the opposite style. For example, people with strong Cautious traits saying that people with strong Influencing traits are ADD/ADHD. Or people with high Inspiring traits saying that people with strong Cautious traits are OCD.

If you want to use the model to communicate more effectively, connect with others faster, and to build better relationships, I encourage you to beware of the temptation to use illness descriptions for any of the four primary behavior styles.

Related posts:

1. The DISC Model of Human Behavior – A Quick Overview

Rules, expectations, and guidelines tell us the limits of our behavior. They help us know what is and is not acceptable in the eyes of the people close to us and within larger groups of people.

And, as the title of this post says, rules without relationship breeds rebellion.

I cannot take credit for this statement. I heard it from a Bud to Boss workshop participant in Indianapolis this past June. And still, I like the clarity and simplicity of what the statement says.

Some people will read this post and respond that relationship and rules have nothing to do with each other. That people should just follow the rules regardless of the relationship they have with the person enforcing them.

I would reply: take a look at the title of this blog and remember that I am a recovering engineer. I am hard-wired to view rules as the things you live by regardless of the circumstances. Actually, I love rules. They give me comfort and security.

And, my observations and experience tell me that rules without relationship create more problems than they solve.

In the context of this blog, I am not addressing the rules, regulations, and laws of our larger society. I’m pointing towards closer personal and professional relationships. I’m thinking in terms of families, business, churches, and civic organizations. I’m talking about situations where you know, live, and work closely with the other person.

For example, in my role as a parent, I have certain rules and expectations of my two daughters. I expect them to follow those rules for the good of the family. And, if I lean only on the rules and ignore building a relationship with them, I will get rebellion rather than willing compliance.

Just as some people who lean heavily on the rules might read the title and challenge it, other people could agree to the point that they say rules don’t really matter at all. They might say that only relationship matters as a leader. Well, I wouldn’t go that far either.

Like so many other issues that surface in the discussion of how to lead a team (business, sports, family, church, etc), the rule-relationship issue is a both-and scenario rather than an either-or scenario. By that I mean that you need both rules and relationship to make it work. (For more on the either-or extremes, check this post on the task-people perspective difference.)

Rules set the context and the expectations of behavior. Relationship paves the way for communication about those expectations.

You can and should set and enforce rules. And, you should develop a relationship before you attempt to enforce them.

Related posts:

1. Beware of Labels
2. Be Careful What You Assume
3. Three Critical Factors to Consider Before You Choose a Communication Technique