backstage groups for managers theoretical basis, how-to-do-it and outcome backstage groups for...

Backstage groups for managersBackstage groups for managersTheoretical basis, how-to-do-it and outcomeTheoretical basis, how-to-do-it and outcome

Frontiers in Leadership Research

2008-03-04Christer Sandahl (LGC/MMC/LIME)

18 april 2023Christer Sandahl, MMC/ LIME

What is a Backstage group?

Not supervision Not coaching Not psychotherapy Not reflection group

Goffman, I. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life


Action – reflection – learning(Argyris, Schön, Senge etc)

Backstage Reflection &

metareflection

Reflection &

metareflection

On stage Action Action


Themes of today’s lecture:

Value base Leadership theory Learning theory Group theory How-to-do-it Outcome


To be an authority

- serving the people and the purpose

- or an authoritarian

- building personal power


Leadership behaviour and employee ill health

Over-control and correction (autocratic)

No support or feed-back (non attentiveness)

Manipulation, favouritism, power orientation (malevolent)

No action on obvious injustice (low integrity)

Laissez-faire (self- centered)


Lower risk for Ischemic Heart Disease if…

(Nyberg et al. 2008)

My boss gives me the information I need My boss is good at pushing through and carrying out changes My boss explains goals and sub-goals for our work so that I

understand what they mean for my particular part of the work I have a clear picture of what my boss expects from me My boss shows that he/she cares for me and how I feel I have sufficient power in relation to my responsibilities My boss takes time to become involved in his/her employees’

professional development My boss encourages my participation in the scheduling of my

work I receive praise from my boss if I have done something good I receive criticism from my boss if I have done something that is

not so good


LEADERSHIP COMPETENCIES

DAILY BUSINESS

PERSONNEL

CHANGE

CARE BE A MODEL INSPIRE

SOCIAL COMPETENCEJUDGEMENT

MORAL COMPETENCEMOTIVATION

REPRESENT BE CLEAR

GIVE SUPPORT CONFRONT

CONTAIN INSECURITY & PROJECTIONS

MAKE DECISIONS SOLVE EVERY- DAY

PROBLEMS

BALANCED DEMANDS

FAIR REWARDS

SHOW COURAGE LONG TERM

THINKING

CLEAR GOALSGIVE STRUCTURE

COACH GIVE

RESPONSIBILITY

SENSE MAKING

LEADER

MANAGER

(Sandahl et al., 2004)

”Dependency & inclusion”

”Counter dependency

& fight”

”Structure & trust”


Backstage groups

Groups of 8 first line managers

Three hours, once monthly

10 occasions

Manual based

”Lay persons” as group conductors

Group supervision between sessions

Confidentiality

Real problems or dilemmas

Problem solving at the work place


Structure

Session 1 Introduction Contract (confidentiality, presence etc)

Session 2-9 Taking turns to update, acute problems (30 mins) Case introduction Interview Reflective teams (understanding the problem/dilemma) Defining the problem Generation of hypotheses Testing hypotheses Action plan Reflection on the learning process

Session 10 Summarizing development as leaders and learning about learning


How to deal with an employee who does not function satisfyingly Role ambiguity Role conflicts Non-productive meetings Problems in cooperation How to deal with a development project Stress and worry for ones own work load A sense of not being in control of own work situation.

Examples


Process

1. Personnel

2. The organisation

3. Own boss

4. Conflicts in relation to other roles (e.g. family)

5. Professional issues


The Stockholm Project

Road maintenance, water supply, environmental protection, elderly care, social services, nursery, pre-school and schools

45 000 employees

1 500 managers

70 % women (also among managers)


All managers invited to attend

376 registered (2004-2006)

47 groups

31 group conductors

20% (M=1.6/group) drop-out before session 4

Practical reasons

Lack of time

Illness

Did not meet expectations


4,46

4,394,38

4,454,49

4,45

4,00

4,10

4,20

4,30

4,40

4,50

4,60

TRÄFF 4

TRÄFF 9

SCALE 1-5: 1=”Disagree completely” 5=”Agree completely”

2004 2005 2006

Quality of group work (Items representing phase 3 & 4)

SOK


My role as leader (index)

Internal inexperienced group leader (M = 4.43, Sd = 1.2)

P > 0.05 Internal experienced group leader (M = 4.87, Sd = 1.2)

External consultant (M = 4.76, Sd = 1.2)


Experience of demands

Krav

2,7

2,8

2,9

3

3,1

3,2

3,3

Före Efter

Gruppdeltagare Övriga

CHEFSENKÄT

p < .05


Evaluation questionnaire

INDEX 1 – THE BACKSTAGE GROUP

MEAN VALUE: 5,69

INDEX 2 – YOU AND YOUR ROLE AS A LEADER

MEAN VALUE: 4,62

INDEX 3 – THE COOPERATION BETWEEN YOU AND THE MANAGEMENT

MEAN VALUE: 4,57

VARIATION 1-7


Did you participate in all 10 meetings?

25%

75%

YES NO

How many times did you not participate?

Mean Value = 2,13



Would you recommend a colleague to participate in a Backstage group?

YES NO

91,2%

1,3%7,5%

MAYBE



Would you like to participate in a Backstage group again?

YES NO MAYBE

78,6%

9,5% 11,9%



...are you satisfied with the group leader?

To what extent…

4,2% 5,8%

90,0%

"SMALL" (1-3) "NEITHER NOR" (4) "GREAT" (5-7)

M: 6,03INDEX 1



1,2%7,1%

91,7%


...were you able to bring up matters from your place of work that personally concerned you?

To what extent…

M: 5,96INDEX 1



…did you think the other participants brought up interesting matters?

To what extent…

1,7% 5,0%

93,4%


M: 5,94INDEX 1



0,8% 2,5%

96,7%


…did you feel that the other participants were interested in your matters?

To what extent…

M: 6,05INDEX 1



3,1%

18,0%

78,1%


…did you feel that your experience was valuable to the other participants?

To what extent…

M: 5,19INDEX 1



6,3%15,6%

78,1%


…did you get useful advice and help in concrete matters?

To what extent…

M: 5,38INDEX 1



…was there time to discuss matters thoroughly?

To what extent…

5,0% 3,3%

91,7%


M: 5,78INDEX 1



...strengthening your self-confidence?

To what extent has your participation in the Backstage group made a contribution to…

10,0%

29,0%

61,0%


M: 4,68INDEX 2



Why better self confidence?(Interviews with 9 managers)

1. To be able to contribute with ones own knowledge and competence

Competence

Self-confidence Decisions

Behaviour

2. The sense of community and the support from the group

- Internalisation of the developing group? (Foulkes)

3. Instrumental problem solving

- Action – Reflection - Action


Focus groups with managers


Support

“One dared to let go of any prestige that you might have in relation to colleagues”

“We had a very, very good relationship to each other in the group”

“To be able to discuss everyday problems without interruptions - you usually don’t have time for that”

“One is able to grow in a non-competitive group. You understand that you are not the only one having problems”

”Our differences

were a great

source of inspiration”



Learning

”I have learned not to solve a problem immediately, but to analyse it first”

“It creates time to think in peace and quiet. That is something that I really miss. It is such a rush all the time”

“The support group gives a lot more than traditional management programs. It is more personal and a useful process”

“It took a while to learn the methodology”

“It is a little bit more demanding”

“The best thing was

that we made use of everyone’s experience”



Action and mastery

“We focused very much on solving problems with the employees or specific situations”

“One received constructive proposals that could be put to the test”

”I suffered from symptoms of stress but with help from the group I learned how to cope with my work situation and could point out what needed to be changed”

”The others made me see clear, things I had not thought about earlier. It was like waking up, suddenly I knew what to do”

“You did actually solve

problems”



What is your advice to the management of the city of Stockholm?

“Make the groups part of our ordinary organisation!”


backstage groups for managers theoretical basis, how-to-do-it and outcome backstage groups for...

Documents