Transcript
Dave Stahoviak (0:00)
Bonnie is here with me and we are responding to your questions. This is Coaching for Leaders, episode 714.
Bonnie (0:08)
Produced by Innovate, Learning, Maximizing Human Potential.
Dave Stahoviak (0:16)
Greetings to you from Orange County, California. This is Coaching for Leaders and I'm your host, Dave Stahoviak. Leaders aren't born, they're made. And this weekly show helps you discover leadership wisdom through insightful conversations every once in a while. Bonnie joins me here on the show a couple times a year and we respond to your questions that have come in. If you have a question that you would like us to consider for a future Q and A episode, if you go over to coaching4leaders.com feedback that is the very best place to do that. And Bonnie is here with me to respond to a bunch of the questions that have come in in recent months. And Bo, it's so good to see you.
Bonnie (0:58)
It's nice to be here.
Dave Stahoviak (1:00)
Let's start with some of the questions that have come in and we're going to begin today with a question from Josh.
Bonnie (1:05)
Josh writes, I have a question regarding chat groups in the workplace for remote workers. My current workplace uses teams for chatting and we're trying to make it a place of help when people need help and also where they feel heard. Our work environment is structured as a help desk, so we receive all the calls and requests for assistance for equipment and software applications. We have the frontline call takers that will use our chat to ask for assistance, but we also have our chat to stay engaged with each other. This has caused some frustration within our work with conversations being overlooked and not answered or people being seen. My ask is that do you have any suggestions and or resources on how to create effective chat groups or channels to keep everyone engaged and making sure everyone gets the collaboration they need?
Dave Stahoviak (2:00)
Bonnie, I was thinking about this question from Josh and thinking about how much the world has changed in the last 20 or 30 years since I started my career on what technology looks like, on how we all communicate. And while the technology has changed, some of the principles I'm not sure have changed all that much. And I was thinking back to my first role as a professional manager full time. We had in our office a three ring binder. Remember those? And we would the way it would work is at the beginning of every shift everyone there was full time people and there were part time people. Everyone was supposed to open up that three ring binder and read through all of the notes that were in there from the prior shifts and what went in. There were significant interactions with customers or announcements for the entire team. And there was the expectation you read it at the beginning of every shift and anything significant that happened went in there. And it sounds like an antiquated system, as I say it out loud today, of like thinking, if I could still picture where that binder was on the shelf and opened up and sometimes the pages would fall. You remember those little holes you used to put on hole protectors on sheets to like keep them from falling out of binders. And it was constantly an issue with papers falling out because there were many, many people using it. But it worked amazingly well. And I think the reason that it worked is there were two things that were true of that binder system that we had from all those years ago. One is it was very clear on the expectation. The expectation was that at the beginning of everyone's shift, in our case, that you went through and you read it and everyone had to initial that they had read it and that was part of the system. The other thing that was true of that is it was very clear what it was for. Anytime something significant happened with a customer, the expectation was that that went into the log and so that everyone had visibility for that. And this comes back to your question, Josh, which is obviously the technology has changed pretty substantially, but I think that those two principles are still very much true, is deciding what the medium is that you're using and what that medium is for. So in the case of using teams and channels and groups and all those things you're setting up, you know, you mentioned a couple of different use cases for this, right? So people getting support, having collaboration, being connected. So I think, like, if you haven't already as an organization or as a team of having some big picture conversation about what are those different channels for, how do we use them and which channels are used for what. And if it's teams and there is one chat that's set up, you know, what do we put in that chat and what do we not. What are the things that we do live? Or if there are multiple channels or multiple software applications that are used, what do we use for this particular kind of thing? Do we have customer situations go in one place, do we have team conversation, internal stuff go in another place? And the teams that I have seen this do, do this really well are teams that have decided in advance what medium do we use for what kind of thing? What's the things we talk about live, what are the things that go in which channel on teams or whatever Slack or whatever system you're using, and what are the different Applications we're using for different kinds of things. And then it's also having some expectation as to how often people engage or are they checking in once a day, are they checking in once an hour? Like what is the expectation as a team as far as how folks use those? And then I think the other piece of this is having someone that is owning or leading that conversation. So someone who, if it is a team chat, who is owning that conversation, who's checking in, who's maybe asking questions. And I think in particular that's helpful also to have some sort of informal channel. And one of the things that I remember from Sarah Neely's work, who's at Harvard and has done a ton of research on remote work long before many of us were doing remote work, is that she reminds us of the importance of having informal places to connect and to collaborate as well, of having channels where people can do that, whether it's a live informal thing or if it's something that is a system or software or channel. And so having someone that can lead that conversation and go in there and facilitate, I don't know if it, you know, if it's not public, it's not something you need to necessarily moderate. But having someone who's in there asking questions, being curious, it's just not enough to set up a channel and to expect people to engage with it. There needs to be expectations, understanding, a framework about that and someone leading that conversation just a bit.
