#151 - Build Your Model for Leadership and Leading Change - Marsha Acker

[00:00:59] Episode Introduction

Henry Suryawirawan: Hello, everyone. Welcome to the Tech Lead Journal podcast, the podcast where you can learn about technical leadership and excellence from my conversations with great thought leaders in the tech industry. If this is your first time listening, don’t forget to subscribe on your favorite podcast app to get notified for future episodes. Also subscribe to Tech Lead Journal contents on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. And if you have been enjoying this podcast and its contents, support my work by either buying me a coffee at techleadjournal.dev/tip or becoming a patron at techleadjournal.dev/patron.

My guests for today’s episode is Marsha Acker. Marsha is the author of “Build Your Model for Leading Change” and the host of “Defining Moments of Leadership” podcast. In this episode, we discussed building our own model for leadership and leading change. Marsha first started by sharing the concept of a model and some of the common challenges for organizations in making changes. Then we discussed David Kantor’s theories on structural dynamics and functional awareness for understanding behavioral model, which include the concepts of leadership range and communicative competence. Marsha outlined what makes communication so, so challenging and what we can do to achieve a more effective communication with each other. Towards the end, she shared the three different models that leaders need to think about, which are model for leadership, model for living, and model for leading change.

I hope you enjoy listening to this episode and learn insights on how to understand and adjust your leadership model that eventually will allow you to lead successful change in your organization. And if you enjoy listening to this episode, please share with your colleagues, your friends, and communities, and leave a five-star rating and review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Your small help will help me a lot in getting a lot more people to discover and listen to this podcast. And I really, really appreciate it. Let’s now go to my conversation with Marsha.

[00:03:32] Introduction

Henry Suryawirawan: Hello, guys. Welcome back to another new episode of the Tech Lead Journal podcast. Today, I have Marsha Acker here. So she’s going to be discussing about making change, leading change for leaders. So I’m so excited to have you in the show, Marsha, looking forward for, you know, giving advice for people for leading some changes in their organizations.

Marsha Acker: Thanks, Henry. I’m excited to be here today.

[00:03:54] Career Journey

Henry Suryawirawan: Marsha, I always love to ask my guests to first share about yourself, right? Maybe if you can share some highlights or any turning points in your career so that we all can learn from your experience.

Marsha Acker: Yeah. I would describe my career journey as like part one and part two. So I got my start, uh, so I have two degrees in software engineering. And so the first part of my professional career was really on the ground with developers and end users, really trying to bridge the communication gap between, you know, both of those groups of folks. And so I have, in my training, I think I had a really strong training and process. I had a lot of orientation to creating process, automating process. You know, a belief that efficiency would happen if we could just define the process and then improve the process. So I think I would describe sort of the first half of my career as really passionate about looking at ways to improve how we automate and communicate with one another.

But it was early in that sort of first part of my career that I also was introduced to facilitation skills. So I was working across many groups. I would say they were often politically divided groups of end users and trying to get them to align on requirements or come to some alignment or agreement on what they wanted to put into software. And I stumbled upon facilitation skills. And that really started to shift my… I think that was one of my turning points where I really started to see the value of crafting spaces that people could talk with one another and communicate with one another.

And so, I have a lot of passion around facilitation. I wrote a book about it. But that really set a part of my trajectory. In the late 90s, so around 98-99, I was in a startup organization and we began working with Agile principles. That was before we were calling it Agile in the tech space, but it really started to begin. And I saw things like pair programming and user stories as a way, I saw them as facilitation processes. Like there were ways that we could start to change the focus and not just be about looking at the process, but we could actually begin to shift communication.

So that really set my trajectory to focus a bit more on facilitation. And I left the startup and I went on to work in a consulting firm and I had began to shift over to the process of change. Like really stepping back a bit from my technical focus and really looking at how do we help organizations change? And I ended up working with a large organization on a huge change. We were facilitating mostly the leadership team and it was happening over the course of about a year and a half. It was a very process focused change. I would say, if I were to describe it to you today, I would say my model for change at that time was very process focused. If you define the process as it is today, if you look to create what you want as a new process, then people will get on board, right? So I think that was a little bit of the, the model for change at that moment.

And I noticed, while I think the change was relatively successful–they were able to roll it out–one of what I noticed was happening in the leadership team as they were trying to make decisions, they reached a point where they just got stuck in the conversation of what was going to change. Primarily, what I could tell you today is, primarily, because they were so focused on process. And at a point in that decision making for the leadership team, it wasn’t about the process anymore. So many things were going to change that they were going to make decisions that were going to impact them personally, where their homes were located, where their children were going to school, how connected they were to extended family. That was happening at the leadership level. And it was happening for the people that they were leading.

And so all of a sudden, you know, there was a really, there was a real human element to a decision that needed to be made. But the process that we were using to help them make decisions didn’t really include the human element. It was very process focused. And so that was a moment in time, I remember it very vividly. We were at a retreat. And I was like, we’re just stuck. Like I, I’m all out of facilitation tricks and tools and techniques and I didn’t really know what to do. And so we ended up sort of naming that to the group and asking them how they wanted to work with it.

But it was that moment that I really can locate as a trajectory change for me. Because my model at that moment was really missing the human element. And the fact that we weren’t creating a space for people to talk about the impact of the change, what they needed to consider or take into account, really then sort of pushed that topic off, what I would say is it pushed it offline and it made it sort of undiscussable. And then it sort of held that leadership team in a spin cycle for quite some time. It was really difficult.

So today, in part two of my career, I am an executive coach and a leadership team coach. And I really focus on the skills of conversation and communication. So why is it important to even make communication, something that we focus on. So I would say today I have a model around leading change that really emphasizes the core crux of our conversations and how really everything that we want to accomplish kind of sit on the, it’s sort of like train tracks. Like conversation is what propels us forward or holds us back and the way we’re engaging with one another. So that would be sort of the highlights, I think, of my career journey.

Henry Suryawirawan: Thank you for sharing your story. I think it’s really interesting. You started from a software engineering background and then went into facilitation by chance and also now working on making changes. And you emphasize a lot about communication and building conversations, right?

[00:10:14] Defining Moments of Leadership Podcast

Henry Suryawirawan: And I think you also have a podcast called Defining Moments of Leadership. So one story that you mentioned just now seems like one defining moment of leadership where, you know, it missed the human elements. So maybe if you can share a little bit more, why did you start with this podcast? What kind of guests that you invite to the show to share with the audience? So maybe a little bit about your podcast.

Marsha Acker: Yeah, thank you. The podcast emerged and I don’t, I never set out to do a podcast . That wasn’t, that was not on my bucket list of things to do. But I realized, so I do individual leadership coaching. And then I also work with leadership teams. But it was during the pandemic, and I started to realize there was this theme or thread across leaders that I was working with.

A couple of things. One is, I would say it’s this moment where we go, oh right, I still have more. I thought I was done with that, but I’m realizing I still have more work to do to grow my leadership. So the moment of thinking, like, thinking we’re done. And then something happens, and we realize, you know, we’ve got more work to do. I think the other part was, there’s something really beautiful in my opinion about, honestly, the honor of being in a one on one coaching engagement with a leader. And I would notice they’d show up in those conversations as real authentic. You know, really genuinely caring, wanted to, you know, had good intentions.

And then oftentimes, not everyone, but some of them go out to their teams and then they get feedback in 360s or some other mechanism that says they’re controlling. And so I just kept thinking why can’t that person that I’m talking to show up also at work. And that was the moment, because I’m like, well, they’re there, but there’s something about the system or the team, um, maybe their own story that they’re telling themselves that has them show up differently with me than they do when they’re leading.

And so I really wanted to start to normalize that leadership is ongoing. The development of leadership is ongoing. Should you choose to accept it? It’s ongoing. And I wanted to normalize the real sort of dips in our life. You know, those moments where it feels like it gets really low, or it’s challenging. Because I think that those are the moments where we actually onboard new insights, new learning, and something shifts or changes for us. And coming out of those dips are new thinking, new ways of leading. We show up slightly differently. And so I just wanted to normalize the messy mucky middle or the dip that happens.

And so on the podcast, I’m really clear about I invite real leaders who are on the front lines leading. They’re dealing with all the challenges that come with leadership. I think leadership in and of itself is a high stakes activity these days. And the ask is when they come on, that they share one of those defining moments. And what it was like for them, what it was like to be in it, what they were thinking at the moment, but also, what’s the learning or the lesson that they took away. So how did that, in a sense, help them define what their model for leadership looks like. So that’s a little bit of how the podcast came to be. And, um, yeah. And, and what I look for on the podcast.

Henry Suryawirawan: Yeah. Sounds like a lot of things we can learn, right? Defining moments of leadership. So I think when you become a leader or even if you are not in the leadership position, sometimes we are forced into a certain moments in our career where you need to step up and make decision, right? It’s to lead from the front. So hopefully, people can also learn from your podcast about some leadership moments.

[00:14:11] Building Our Model

Henry Suryawirawan: So for today, we are going to talk a topic about leading change from your latest book, “Build Your Model for Leading Change”. So the first thing is about the title itself. So maybe my first question, what do you mean by building a model for leading change? What do you define as a model here?

Marsha Acker: So a lot of the work, the research actually comes from a gentleman by the name of David Kantor. He was located in Boston at Harvard. And in the early 70s, actually started to do quite a lot of research around communication. And through that research, he developed a theory called Structural Dynamics. And it’s a theory of face to face communication. Part of his theory is that every one of us are essentially building models and models are the way that we look at the world, make sense of the world, and then take action in the world.

When I encountered David’s work a number of years ago, I was really struck by the idea. So remember my background. I’m deep in process, like I have a real love for process. And there is, you know, I had been at that time introduced to a lot of models. Models for building software, models for trust building, models for how we communicate. And at that time, also models for how to be in a coach, a leadership coach, a systems coach.

So, I was really fascinated by this idea that, you know, it was sort of like, of course, we’re building our own models, but I’d really never looked at it through that lens. And I had met a colleague at the time and I remember saying to her, you know, you said this about team coaching and I’ve really heard this. And so I was like, you know, there’s what you’re saying, and there’s what someone else is saying. And I want to know which one of those is right. And she looked at me and she said, “Well, it’s just a different model.” And she’s like, “Neither are right or wrong. It’s just a different model. And it’s based on different thinking.” And I thought, “Huh, that’s really fascinating.”

So what I’d say, you know, about the new book, Building a Model. So for me, it really is about taking a stand. I’m wanting all of us to begin to think about how do we lead change? How do we lead? What’s in our model? You’ve heard me, even today, described years ago, you know, having more of what I would have called a process led model for change, whereas I have a much more behavior led communication model for change now. And that’s not to say that either are right or wrong. But what’s really happened for me over the years, even as I described my career trajectory for you has been an ongoing process of getting really clear for myself about what’s in my model, how I go about doing it, why I go about doing it.

And if you go on to social media, I think social media is a great place to see what I would call model difference or even model clash for that matter. Pick anybody on social media who asserts something. You’re, yeah, you’re laughing. But it’s like they assert something and then here come all the comments. Well, I see it differently or I disagree. And so actually in those conversations, what I would say is if we zoom out of them, there’s likely two or more people in that stream of conversation that actually have different models for how something happens.

And I think the value and the benefit of being really clear about having a model and really knowing what’s in your model is that, you know, Henry, if you and I engage in a conversation, we could talk about, you know, how do you lead change? How do I lead change? And I could tell you, well, here’s my focus and here’s what I’m trying to change. Here’s how I believe that thing changes. For me, it’s communication and behavior. And here’s what I do to help people make that change. And here’s why I do what I do. So, all of a sudden, and then you could, you know, if you’d done some model building work and done some reflection on that, you could also say that.

And then now, we can have a really effective, what I would call a cross model conversation where we can name things, make sense of them, and really engage in a very healthy discourse, even, about what’s that about without needing to sort of beat the other down. So I think there’s an essence or a kind of quality of conversation that comes from being really clear about what’s your model. And it keeps us out of this kind of beating down someone else or making somebody else wrong and us right. In summary, like, I think that’s really what the new book is about, about building your model.

Henry Suryawirawan: Right. I think you are right. So whether we realize it or not, whether we understand what kind of model we have, we all have our own models, right? And we tend to pick it up maybe from childhood, from school, from our past experience, from our managers, right? Whoever that we listen to. I think we all have these models and it could evolve over the time. Sometimes we are not conscious that we do have this so-called model in our head that sometimes cause a bias. And I think in your book you try to advocate people to actually build our own personal models by also maybe understanding other available models out there, right. So I think, I love the idea.

[00:19:48] Challenges for Making Organization Change

Henry Suryawirawan: But in the first thing, uh, I would like to ask you, right. Because your book eventually it talks about leading change. What do you think are some of the common challenges for organizations to lead change? Because I believe all organizations want to change. All organizations want to improve. But what are some of the common challenges you think from organizations making a successful change?

Marsha Acker: I think there are two big ones. Probably, the biggest one that I see is that we do not…. I’m going to make a broad, generalized statement. So it’s not to say that there aren’t, you know, pockets somewhere out there. So if you’re working in an organization that you’ve, you’re like, well, that’s not true here. But I think broad generalization in business today. We don’t spend a great deal of time actually focusing on conversation and creating space to engage in real conversation. And by that, I mean, we are attending to getting below the surface level topic.

So there’s so many organizations I go into, and the larger they are, the more prominent this behavior is, is that we create time boxes for meetings. So there are organizations that’ll tell you, sorry, we only work in 30 minute increments. Or, you know, our meetings are time boxed to 50 minutes so that we can, you know, have five minutes on either end of an hour. So I’m not saying that that’s bad, and I’m not saying that you shouldn’t have time boxes for your meetings, and that you shouldn’t try to condense the amount of time that we’re in meetings. But I also think we’re fatigued of meetings and in the broad generalization. And I think that’s happening because we come to places where we gather together and we do a whole lot of other things, but communicating with one another isn’t really what we’re doing. I think, you know, remember I shared, you know, sometimes, I see a different version of leaders in one on one coaching than I see when they show up with their teams.

I think that’s because we’re just all full of assumptions, biases, the facade that we feel like we have to play or put on. And so we show up to these meetings and we throw a lot of sentences around. We move shells around on the table. We keep it at a very surface level. We move fast. We try to get things done, wrap it up, and then move on. And I think a lot of times, if you find yourself walking away from a meeting going, I don’t think I really agree with that. Or, you know, I really see it differently, but I didn’t feel like I had space to say it, so now I’m saying it to my colleague in a chat channel. Or I’m saying it to someone over lunch where now I’m kind of griping or complaining about it, rather than really having an opportunity to say it in the meeting. I think that is the crux of what I call Groundhog Day conversations.

So it’s a little bit like a signal or a flag if you find yourself having the same conversation over and over again in your team or at work, I think chances are you’re staying on the surface level and you’re not getting to the real conversation. So I really think that one of our greatest challenges in organizations is to have a way and a language for navigating the interpersonal group dynamics that are happening as we are trying to do big things. Like leading change is high stakes, leadership in general is high stakes. And then introducing new ways of work or wanting something to be different, I think is also high stakes. So I think we don’t have a way to talk about how we’re communicating, and I don’t think we create the space to talk about it.

Henry Suryawirawan: Thanks for emphasizing this thing about commnication. And the space to create that great conversation, right? Because, yeah, I believe many organization when tackling changes, they always comes from process. Maybe introducing new people, right, at the top, introducing processes, but rarely also talk about the impact to the people or making conversations so that every parties are listened to. So I think thanks for emphasizing that.

[00:23:57] Behavioral Model

Henry Suryawirawan: So let’s go to your model in the book, right. You mentioned there are four models that people should think about when they want to come up with their own personal model for leading change. The four models are the behavioral model, the model for leadership, model for living, and model for leading change itself at the end. So maybe if we can go just a little bit one by one, right? So the behavioral model. So why do you think it’s very important for us to understand about behavioral model? And what exactly is behavioral model? For some people, maybe, they are not aware of this term.

Marsha Acker: Yeah. So behavioral model is what David Kantor would call our way of looking at the way we are behaving with one another. And a lot of what I talk about in the book uses the theory of structural dynamics to do that. So, a way of looking at behavior is to look at the words that we are saying when we are communicating with one another. So, looking at speech acts and the flow of those speech acts and whether there are sort of multiple levels of our communication. So, the direction that we’re setting in communication, how we’re relating to one another, the things or the communication domains that we actually care about.

And then David talks about sort of a fourth level is in our behavior as childhood stories. So what happened to us, as we were growing up, that really influences our behavior. So as you hear me talk about leaders, like they’re different in a one on one than they are in a team. A lot of that, for all of us, myself included, will be, how I grew up. And the stories, the old narrative that gets laid down when I was younger about why I do what I do, and when I encounter someone else, how will I behave. And then writing the new narrative that says actually, you know, hey, Marsha, you’re not on the playground anymore. You are an adult. This is not that same thing, even though your brain might start to think it.

So looking at your behavioral model is having a language for being able to talk about communication, being able to be aware of yourself in that communication, but also being able to make sense of others. And when I’m interacting with others, or even in a system or an organization, how can we name the dynamics, have a morally neutral way of naming the dynamics? So that gets at really thinking about your behavioral model is partly, do you have a language? Do you have a model and a language for being able to look at that in a neutral way?

And then the other part is, David Kantor would call it functional self awareness, but are you aware of how you’re behaving in the moment, the impact that you’re having on others, and the difference between our intent, which I think many of us have good intent, but we can also have a negative impact. And so being able to take responsibility for both our intent and our impact. And so that behavioral model is growing your self awareness to the place where you’re able to really be in command of yourself when you’re interacting with other people.

Henry Suryawirawan: Right. This is part of the book where I find it very, very insightful and interesting. Understanding this model from David Kantor, right? So I think when you mentioned about intent and impact, sometimes we don’t see two different things, right? We tend that we want to have a good intent and creating good impact. But sometimes some people Interpret it differently because of the different models, right?

[00:27:30] Structural Dynamics

Henry Suryawirawan: And you have mentioned a couple of times about structural dynamics, so I think this is also important. Maybe we can’t go through all of them, but maybe high level, what is structural dynamics, and which part is your favorite from this structural dynamics?

Marsha Acker: Yeah, well, it’s based on David’s research of face to face communication. And without kind of all the background of how the theory came to be, you know, he talks about four levels of being able to look at communication. And of all the models around communication that I have been introduced to or even am aware of, my experience with structural dynamics, it is probably the most complete way of looking at the complexity in some sense of the dynamics that are happening in communication. So he talks about there being four levels.

The first is the most visible and those are action modes. The second is operating systems. That’s a bit about how the norms that we use to relate with one another. Communication domains are the language that we use that sort of indicates the things that we care about or value. And the fourth level being childhood story. And of all four of those, I think my most favorite one is the action modes, primarily because I think it’s easily accessible to people. You don’t need to understand, you know, a ton of the theory behind it. And I think it can have an impact just by getting started in that space. So, just as a really brief example, I would say. All communication, like even in our dialogue back and forth today, Henry, every sentence that we’re saying can be coded into one of four actions.

So a move sets direction in the conversation. So you’ve made several moves as you’ve prompted me with questions. You know, where you introduced the topic of the book, that was a move. And then you’ve moved us on to talk about the behavioral model. So each of those are moves, because they’re taking our conversation in a slightly different direction, right? It’s pointing to a different aspect or a different topic to talk about. So moves are the first action. The second is follow. So in many instances, I am following behind, I’m supporting the direction. If I were to make a counter move, I might say, you know, let’s talk about another model, which would actually become the third thing, which is an oppose. And oppose offers correction in the conversation. It pushes back and it says, let’s not talk about the behavioral model. I’d actually like to talk about the model for living next. So that would be an oppose and a new move. And then the fourth action is bystand. And so bystand is a morally neutral comment about what’s happening in the conversation.

So what the theory says is that we need all four of those to be voiced and active in the conversation in order for the conversation to be effective. And yet, because we’re humans and, you know, doing our human dance in between one another, a lot of times in teams or with people that we work with on a regular basis, we can kind of get stuck in certain patterns where we only use a couple of those actions and we use the others less frequently. And so when that happens, the key indicator will be having the same conversation over and over again.

So if you start to notice in your team, you talk about one thing one week and gosh darn, you know, two weeks later it’s you’re back talking about it again and you’re going wait a minute I thought, I thought we settled this two weeks ago but it’s resurfaced. I think those are indicators that there’s maybe something missing in the conversation. And if you’re able to separate the what we’re talking about. So, if you’re able to, you and I are talking about model building for the moment, that’s our subject, that’s our what we’re talking about.

But if we felt like we were getting stuck in the conversation, it would be helpful to separate out the topic and actually start to look at how. So mentally, that looks a bit for me like starting to step back and go, okay, so how am I showing up in this conversation? Is it working right now? Or,. you know, I might be following a lot and do I need, is there something that I’m not saying, or is there some way that I might bring another action that might be needed in the conversation? So I think action modes are my most favorite, because they’re easy enough to get started with and I think they are helpful enough to make an impact for both individuals and a team in terms of how you’re noticing the conversation play out.

Henry Suryawirawan: Right. So yeah, I think the most important thing about these action modes, you mentioned for us, we have to try to balance it, I guess, right? Not to be stuck just in one mode, right? Either like following only or it’s just moving only, right? Because we tend to have this dynamics between our interactions with people, right? So I think that’s really, really great.

For me personally, my favorite is the childhood stories, right? So knowing your old narrative and try to build your new narrative. So I think that is very, very interesting, because sometimes our behaviors, even though we are really unconscious about certain behavior, why it was there. So maybe sometimes we could relate it back to our childhood experience or trauma, right? So I think that is really interesting for me. So let’s maybe move on. For people who are interested about this structural dynamics, maybe we can put more resources later on in the show notes.

[00:33:01] Functional Awareness

Henry Suryawirawan: But moving on from this behavioral model, you have this thing called functional awareness. And there are two things that I picked up from this part, which is about leadership range and communicative competence, right. This sounds really interesting. Maybe if we can elaborate a little bit more about these two terms.

Marsha Acker: Yeah, I say all the time, mainly because I think I used to undervalue it myself. So I think this is why I say it all the time. Awareness precedes choice precedes change. So much about model building in general is about building awareness, but particularly in the space of building a behavioral model, the whole point of it is growing your awareness. And that is the work to do, because awareness is the thing that precedes choice. So the more aware I am, the more in the moment I can catch sight of something and then make a different choice than the one I’m making right now. And that is where change comes from. So awareness precedes choice precedes change.

So leadership range is for me about what we were just taught. It has its roots in what we were just talking about. So for some of us, it’ll be really natural for us to step forward in our leadership. So I guess one thing to note is that I see leadership as a way of being and acting that’s actually available to everyone. Everyone from a three year old can demonstrate leadership. So I don’t see it as positional. Although I do absolutely think there are people who hold positional leadership, be it in their role or their title or something, but I think leadership is an act that’s available to all of us.

And there will be some of us who just naturally, I would call it lead from the front. So they set direction. They are energized. They’re just sort of known to be vision setters that comes naturally to them. And so their work to do will be also stepping back and creating space for others, you know, so that they’re leading from behind. And to also consider what it might look like to lead together. So, I think there is leading from the front, I think there is leading with others, and this idea of stepping back in my leadership range and creating space or supporting other ideas or getting behind other ideas. So I don’t see leadership as one dimensional, I think there’s multiple aspects to it.

And you know, if you’re really good at stepping forward, then you’re gonna have to stretch. Like your edge is going to be likely creating space for others. And how do you help rewire your mindset around that? Because a lot of times if we lead from the front, naturally, we will think stories like, well, it’s my job. Or if I wasn’t doing that, then I wouldn’t be contributing or I wouldn’t be helpful to the group. And so that’s some of the work to do in growing your range as a leader.

So that’s the first concept is leadership range is that I think there’s value in all of that. We’ll have one that we do naturally. If you’re someone who actually naturally steps back and creates space for others, you’re very quick to get behind and support other ideas or ask questions or invite other voices. Your work to do is likely going to be, to also be the one that points and makes a move or sets direction in some way. So there’s stretches, I think, for all of us. And there’s this need to bring range so that we’re able to change something in the moment that isn’t working. And I think that takes a great deal of self awareness.

So leadership range is that first component. Communicative competence, which that word really is a tongue-tier for me. I’ve had to really work on it. But communicative competence is really the, you know, I use the framework of structural dynamics. But do I have the muscle to bring the different action mode when I need it, or to operate in a different operating system or communication domain. So am I able to be fluent in the conversation, given where the conversation is at or what’s needed in the conversation.

Henry Suryawirawan: Thanks so much for explaining about this leadership range. I like what you mentioned, right? The range here refers to sometimes you have to lead from the front, sometimes you have to step back and leading from behind, and it could be together as well, right, collaboratively working on a certain direction. So I think for us leaders, you have to think about what kind of range that you want to expand to, not just always up from the front, leading and making decisions, but sometimes you can support other people to grow as leaders as well. So I really love that concept. And communicative competence. I think it’s about coming back to the structural dynamics thing, right? Understanding these four different levels and the variations inside them. And trying to be able to use those concepts and map it to your communication styles or other communication styles, right?

[00:38:12] Communication Challenges

Henry Suryawirawan: So maybe regarding communication, right? And you may have experienced this in your, you know, coaching as well. Why do you think communications are so challenging, especially in this modern world, where I think we all are exposed to different kind of models, different kind of opinions. You mentioned about social media. Why communication is so challenging and what steps we can do to make sure that we can have effective communication with others?

Marsha Acker: I think there are two things that make communication challenging. I’ve come to believe that, and this was true for me along the way, but I’ve come to believe that we don’t see communication as something that we need to develop or build. I think we see communication as something we do all the time, every day, and that we’re already pretty good at it. And there’s really, we can tell ourselves all kinds of stories. I get things done, I’m generally liked by others, you know, I get hired, you know, people ask me to come back for more. So I think it starts to form this story that, yeah, I don’t see. I mean, I need some other tools or I need some other processes, but I don’t really know that communication is really where I would focus my personal development space, or even our collective development. So I think that we think we do communication really well.

George Bernard Shaw, uh, he’s an Irish playwright, and he has a quote that is probably my all time favorite quote, and he says, “The biggest challenge in communication is the illusion that it has taken place”. And I think that is what happens a lot, so I think those times where we have Groundhog Day conversations or we keep coming back to something or we’re trying to make something happen and it gets stuck and it’s just not moving forward. And it can feel difficult or vulnerable or scary to actually slow down and surface what might be the real conversation. Or we have a story that that would just take too much time, and we’ve got to keep moving.

So instead of doing that, I think what we do is we resort to processes, tools, and techniques. We go searching for a new model, or we go searching for a new process, or we look for a new facilitation process that would help a group solve this. Or we go looking for how do I navigate conflict? And we get ourselves multiple books on how to navigate conflict. So I think all of those are indicators that there’s something broken in the conversation and the communication piece. But we don’t see that as a place where we should do any sort of development or skill building. And so we go out looking for other things. And, you know, I think that just, it gets us caught in this sort of endless spin loop.

[00:40:55] Model for Leadership

Henry Suryawirawan: Thanks so much for your explanation, Marsha. So maybe let’s move on to the second model of your model for leading change, right, which is the model for leadership. So maybe if you can elaborate what kind of model that we should think about for our leadership here.

Marsha Acker: Yes, so I’ll say just contextually a little bit, as we think about model building, what we’re leading towards is a model for leading change. And if you think about that being kind of your direction, I think about the three models of behavior, leadership, and then model for living as sort of sitting under your feet. It’s kind of your place of grounded confidence about what you’re doing. And so, we’ve talked about model for behavior and really the focus of having a way of reading the dynamics between individuals.

And then I think this next component is, it’s your professional model. It’s how, you know, how will you lead? What does leadership mean to you? What would it look like? And most importantly, how do you grow leadership for yourself and others? And so there isn’t one right way, but I think there absolutely is your way. And in the process of model building, I think it’s really helpful. David Kantor used to talk about this concept of imitation, constraint, and autonomy.

So if you think back for a moment, anytime you’ve been introduced to a new model, so even for some listeners today, it might be, I’m learning about structural dynamics for the first time. There is an aspect or a time when we are truly going to imitate what we see someone else doing. So it might be you’ve been introduced to this new way of leading in a new company that you’ve joined, and it’s different for you. So you really start to go, okay, so how do I fit in, and how do I imitate what I see happening?

And then at some point, you are going to have an oppose to what you are experiencing. That’s the first sign that I think you’ve entered into the phase of building your own model. And so, imitation leads to constraint. Now there are some parts of this that I’m going to push back on and say, that’s not for me, or that’s not how I would lead, or it’s not what I would do. But here is what I would do.

And then here’s a place that I’m going to actually start to invent or create an aspect. Or I’d combine this thinking with these other things that I think about. And that’s the first place where I think you start to build autonomy in how you think about leadership. So I think there’s the question that we’re really after is, how will I lead? And what does leadership look like and mean to me?

Henry Suryawirawan: Right. So I like the way you explain about imitation, the constraint and autonomy. I think in the beginning when we are all like the junior leader, right, we always imitate maybe from our manager or maybe some idols that we look from outside. Maybe, you know, people like Steve Jobs, Satya Nadella, or people like this, right? And also we try to come up with our own style, so to speak, right? And then in the end, when we are more experienced, I guess we can have our own autonomy in deciding how we want to lead and how to change, make a change, right?

[00:44:12] Model for Living

Henry Suryawirawan: And you mentioned, the so called the peer of model for leadership is actually model for living. So maybe when we talk about model for leadership, we are talking more about professional or, you know, worklife.

Marsha Acker: Yes.

Henry Suryawirawan: And model for living, maybe it’s for personal. Okay, maybe you elaborate more.

Marsha Acker: Yeah, well, first, yes, the professional model of leadership. And then, I think one of the biggest aspects that David Kantor was after was, we can’t just focus on our professional world or our professional leadership without also a model for living is; we’d be out of balance. We’d be not aligned with where we wanna be. And so the big question that model for living looks to answer is, what does it mean to live a life worth living? And just let that question sink in. Like I think it’s such a provocative question.

I’ve worked with leaders who actually push back on it. Well, you know, what, what would it mean to live a life not worth living? You know, that could be a little scary to think about. But I think it’s a big open invitation to defining for each of us what is a life worth living? What is my purpose? Why do I roll out of bed in the morning? What’s important to me? What are the values that I really hold to? And what does balance look like between the professional life and the personal life? What does that even mean? And so it’s an invitation to help all of us think through, like, what does that life worth living look like?

Henry Suryawirawan: Wow, I really love that invitation question, right? What is the life that you think worth to live, right? So live the life that is worth living for us. So I think that’s a very, very big question for sure, right? Because for some of us, we may go through the motions, maybe with the busyness, with all this, you know, work stuff, family stuff, and things like that. And stop thinking about, you know, the kind of worth of life that we want to aspire. So I think that’s really, really great.

[00:46:10] Model for Leading Change

Henry Suryawirawan: So having both of this now with the behavioral model at the foundation, your last part is actually model for leading the change itself. So how can we play with all these different models and come up with our own model for leading change?

Marsha Acker: Yeah. Well, I think clarity about behavior and how it contributes to how we communicate with one another. So the rails that all of our interactions sit on, thinking about how I want to lead, what that looks like, how I want to live, and what the balance of living and leadership look like for me; those are the foundation that I stand on. And then this bigger question about leading change.

So in change, at the very beginning of our conversation today, you would have heard me saying, early on, my model for change was very process led. Like, I had a belief that if I changed the process in an organization, then all we had to do was communicate the process and manage the change and then change would happen. That’s not wrong. It’s just, it’s an older model for me now. It’s evolved, and the way I would describe my model for leading change today is very behavior centric.

So I hold the belief that the thing that I’m trying to help organizations change is how they communicate and behave with one another. And that when all of those, when that action and that communication is fully online and a team is able to navigate complexities and breakdown, and they’re able to build the muscle of making it through a breakdown, not avoiding breakdown, then that is where change starts to happen. And then I hold the belief that it won’t matter what that team or that organization encounters in the daily life, they can navigate change. So that’s just a little bit about my model. I would also say this. Part of my model for leading change today is the belief that change doesn’t happen until people feel heard and understood. And once that comes on board, then things will move forward.

So the model for leading change for all of us, the question to be asking is, what is the thing that I am trying to change? How do I believe change comes about? I think one of our challenges in change in any team or organization or even at home, is we just set about, we see a gap, and we say, this is how it’s working today, and this is how I want it to work tomorrow, or six months from now, or nine months from now. And we set a declaration. We might even paint a big vision and get people to buy into it. And then we just set about expecting it to happen.

And I think that is the crux of where things start to break down. We learn things. Things evolve as we start to try to make something new happen. We encounter resistance, and then we don’t want to work with the resistance, or we don’t know how to work with resistance, so we just minimize it. Or we tell people to just do your job or why can’t you just do what I said to do? And all those things, those phrases that we can use, I think because really good intentions, but I think for many of us, we just don’t know how to work with it. So we default to the “do so because I told you so” kind of thing and let’s just get on with it. You know, we’re up to bigger things here.

I think every time we do something like that, it’s a little bit like sweeping the real topic under the rug. And then, then it just gets to the point where the rug’s so big, we can’t open the door, get in the door. And now we’ve sort of got this backlog of conversation that we haven’t had. Conversational debt that we haven’t had that we need to have and change just becomes really stagnant or stuck. So all that’s my model. And I’m really clear about it. I understand why I do what I do. It helps me be clear about making suggestions for a team. It helps me be clear about I know when I’m going to do something that potentially perturbs or frustrates or angers a team and I’m doing so with really clear intention, because I’m helping them to try to change something.

So I’m just a really big proponent of, for all of us, both individually and collectively. So if we’re trying to lead change, what is the thing that we’re trying to change? How do we believe change happens for that thing? In my case, it’s behavior, but for you, it might be something entirely different. It might be process. So then how do you go about bringing change to that? And what are the steps that you would do? And when you encounter the real world, which will be full of all kinds of different things, how will you adapt? How will you adapt your model to account for some of the real world scenarios that you encounter? So that’s the model for leading change, is what are we trying to change?

The one other thing I’d say about it is, we can all have individual models for change. And if we’re part of a team or we’re leading an organization, we’ve got to take the time to get aligned on what we believe our collective model for changes. Otherwise, we’ll have a leadership team who sees the world differently. Each of them will likely see the world differently, and we’ll be advocating for different things. So if I was part of a leadership team and I’m advocating for conversation and behavior change first and then the other things will flow, that’s my model for change. If I’m working with someone who’s a peer, and their model for change is about process and their belief is that metrics are indicators of organizational change happening.

The two of us, we’ve all been in organizations where we’ve experienced this. The two of us on that leadership team are going to be having a model clash about how change happens. And we are going to be really confusing for everyone else. Because one of us is going to be asking for metrics and proof. The other is going to be asking for behavior. And for those that we are leading and that are working with us, the rest are going to be super confused and frustrated. So now not only do we have a misalignment around what the model for change is, but now we’ve got confusion happening across the organization. And that’ll happen only for so long before people are just going to throw up their hands and be like, “Look, you all sort it out and let me know what you want me to do.” Or “I’m confused. I don’t know how to operate in this.”

So I think we have a way of wanting change to happen. I think all of us can agree that change is constant. It’s ever evolving. I think we’re at a pace with technology, particularly, where it’s constant and fast. And if we don’t find ways to create structures to help us communicate with one another and help us lead change effectively, we’re really going to be left behind. And I think it’s going to get even more difficult than it is today.

So I’m a huge advocate for defining your own model but also collectively as a leadership system. How do we want to bring about change? And so if we’ve got different models, let’s sort that out first and let’s come to alignment on how we’re going to lead change here in this organization. Let’s have that model building conversation, and now, we can be an aligned leadership team asking for things, setting direction, and inviting others into that process. And it’s going to work a lot better. So, yeah.

Henry Suryawirawan: Well, really a great reminder for us leaders, right? So not only the leader’s model, but also with the peers, also with the people within the team, right? The collective model that we want to adopt together. And when there’s a model clash, actually, yeah, sometimes they may create like silos or maybe duality, right? So you follow a certain style for certain leaders, but different leaders is a different thing. So I think that’s a very, very good reminder for all of us.

And I like the book. It’s actually a workbook, right? It’s not really just theories and, you know, just telling you stuff. But actually you go through reflection, looking what kind of models that resonate with you, maybe from your past as well, past experience. So I think this book is really not just a theory book, but it’s a workbook that you can use to actually look and build into your perfect model for the time being, right? Until you evolve and get another model.

[00:54:44] 3 Tech Lead Wisdom

Henry Suryawirawan: So thank you so much for sharing, Marsha. As we reach the end of our conversation, I only have one last question, which I normally ask for all my guests here in Tech Lead Journal podcast. The question is called the three technical leadership wisdom. So you can think of it just like an advice that you want to give to us listeners to learn from you. So maybe if you can share your version of three technical leadership wisdom.

Marsha Acker: Yeah, well, I think that the first place I’d point all of us is to focus on how we’re communicating with one another. So the idea would be when things get tough or difficult, can you separate the ‘what’ from the ‘how’? So the ‘what’ is the topic that we’re talking about. ‘How’ will be how we’re engaging in the conversation. So I think there’s just a reflective piece to that is, you know, even if you take the four player model - move, follow, oppose, and bystand - are all four of those actions coming online? Or is there one action that I’m getting stuck in? Am I stuck in ‘oppose’? And I really could use ‘bystand’ in the conversation. Or am I stuck in ‘move’, and I really need to step back and create space for others?

So, I think the biggest piece is understand the role that communication plays in everything that we’re doing, and whether it’s moving forward or not, and resist the temptation to go find new things. And to actually bring it back to how we’re communicating and to be able to separate your ‘how’ from your ‘what’, will be the first place to be able to catch sight of that. So that would be my first tip.

I think my second one would be carving out time to slow the conversation down. It’s this idea that, yes, we need pace in our organizations. We need those 30 minute meetings. They serve us a purpose. And there also is real value in slowing things down, building relationships, bringing the real conversation in the room. So even in my company, Team Catapult, over the last several years, we have taken to following our own advice. We’ve found it really helpful and once a month, the first Thursday of every month, for a half day is our dialogue space.

So it’s agenda-less. Anybody can bring any topic, and the goal is really to talk about how we’re working with one another. So we resist the temptation to talk about all the other things. And that’s probably some of the richest dialogue I have. And it’s become so valuable for me because there are times where we can just get caught up in moving things forward. I’m, I’m, can be just as guilty of that. And I know that we’ve got the space to slow down, so it’s really helpful to have it carved out on the calendar. So I would just encourage everyone to be thinking about how you carve out that time for you. That sort of pace and cadence works for us.

I just had someone on my podcast, Theron. He works in two week sprints with a one week retrospective. So it’s a three week kind of time box. So, you know, for them they move at such a pace and they’re covering so much that the one week retrospective where they actually create time to reflect. So I think that’s another example of how you might carve out time.

I think the third thing I’d say is growing your leadership range is work to do for all of us. So just noticing where your tendencies are. And looking for ways to change the range that you have, your ability to bring something different in the moment when it’s needed. And not to be so stuck or believe that one version of that is the only version that adds value. So I think it’s ongoing work. I don’t think we’re ever done with it. And I think there’s such a gift in being able to have range in your leadership. So, those would be my three.

Henry Suryawirawan: Right. I think that’s really lovely. I love all of them actually. The first is like focus on how we communicate, right? I think sometimes, yeah, we tend to, you know, maybe embody a certain style all the way from childhood up until now. But knowing this structural dynamics, right, knowing the different options, different modes that people have, I think is really, really key. And I love the last one. You know, as leaders, it is our responsibility to find the range, right? Don’t get stuck into a certain mode only.

So Marsha, if people love this conversation and they want to follow up with you or find your resources, is there a place where they can reach out online?

Marsha Acker: Yes, a couple places. The best way to connect with me is through LinkedIn, so you can find me at Marsha Acker on LinkedIn. And if you’re interested in the Build Your Model book, you can go to buildyourmodel.com. And you can download a free resource from there that’ll give you kind of a preview of both the book and what some of the journaling prompts look like in it. And then if you’re interested in coaching for a leader or leadership team, you can find me at teamcatapult.com. So those are a couple of places.

Henry Suryawirawan: Thank you. I’ll make sure to put it in the show notes. Thank you so much. I hope the listeners here today are inspired about building their own model for leading change. You know, becoming the leaders that they want, instead of just stuck from the situation. So thank you again for your sharing, Marsha.

Marsha Acker: Henry, thanks for having me, it was great.

– End –