Coaching for people excellence (Part 2)

Coaching for people excellence (Part 2)

'As leaders we have an obligation to guide our team members to work according to what we agree upon and expect to be achieved," says Jon Eddy Abdullah, the chief executive officer of DTAC.

"Generally speaking, based on four scenarios for work performance _ excellent, moderate (above standard), below expectations, and poor _ the leader of that particular subordinate may or may not have something to say about that performance."

After graduating from university in Montana in the United States, Mr Abdullah moved to work in Asia in 1995. Almost 20 years later, he is still working outside the US and has had broad geographical assignments covering countries including the Czech Republic, Dubai, Malaysia, Pakistan and Thailand.

"If the performance is excellent, the boss should provide a reward to the person who has made the 'extra mile' effort. Saying nothing about good performance will make the person feel he or she is being ignored, and thus they may not want to deliver that kind of outstanding performance again.

"The same will happen to the people who perform moderately (above standard) but not at the excellent level. What the superior should do is to sit down and talk to them, recognise and provide them feedback on what should be done to be better next time. This way, the subordinate can learn from experience with full willingness to move forward while improving productivity."

Treating people right: By saying nothing, the boss will discourage employees from performing beyond the norm in the future, says Mr Abdullah.

"Therefore, in the first two scenarios, if the superior does not recognise the employees, other employees will start to perform poorly since they can see that the boss does not even care for the good performer. We can label this tendency to do nothing as selfish behaviour which only causes damage to the organisation."

In the case of those whose performance is below expectations, if the boss does not deliver feedback and talk frankly about their performance, they will keep doing things in the same careless way in the future, which certainly is not good for the business. Employees should be reprimanded by the boss. They should sit down together and work out how to improve for the next time.

"The last scenario is the poor performer. In most cases, employees may be malevolent and not really care about what will happen to their jobs, not to mention corporate performance as a whole. In this regard, the boss should send the right signal by talking to them and dealing out punishment and/or an official warning as appropriate."

Authentic leader as a role model: Using the same rationale as in the first two scenarios, the boss cannot be considered a good leader if he says nothing about these poor performances. This is a kind of cowardice. It requires bravery to give direct and honest feedback to a poor performer, but ensuring you are a "giver" is part of what makes a great leader.

'What I have described is called the Care & Growth approach to business management," says Mr Abdullah.

"This model focuses heavily on human beings based on a belief that a subordinate can be improved. Care & Growth relates to continuous learning and a long-term relationship between boss and subordinate.

"Only through honest intent to develop an employee can you provide legitimate leadership power. Before you hold someone accountable they must have the means and the ability to do the job. Development requires sincere generosity and consistent courage _ anything less signals indifference, selfishness or cowardice.

"In this regard, there is no difference between foreigners and Thais. They act the same. Some foreign executive may put too much weight on culture and sometimes also make exceptions because of the culture. That should not be the case.

"When I manage and lead, I have found that culture is not an issue at all. People are people. The things that drive people to perform are the same. I don't care where they come from. As long as we agree and trust, it is a very helping environment. If we say things and people do not trust us, that is when culture gets in the way.

"During our coaching sessions, I will say anything to help improve your performance. Hence, if I miss the coaching session, my coaching subject will immediately reschedule the session again. So, (coaching and mentoring) should work quite well."

Branding at the personal level: Mr Abdullah also believes in the concept of the "personal brand" when it comes to developing people. "In the same manner as a product and service, each of us as a person also has a brand that describes who we are according to our own behaviour.

"Are we approachable or unapproachable, decisive or indecisive, nice or mean, mature or immature, aggressive or passive, and so on? It can be more comfortable to talk about the brand instead of directly telling someone what kind of person they are because it is a sensitive subject."

Therefore, at the beginning, the people being coached have to assess themselves to allow them to be fully aware of themselves first. In this regard, the personal brand and key development goals are considered as the basis of coaching, while both parties review the Means, Ability and Accountability in every session."


Sorayuth Vathanavisuth is Principal Consultant and Executive Coach at the Center for Southeast Asia Leadership and lectures at Mahidol University's College of Management. His areas of interest are Corporate Strategy, Executive Coaching and Leadership Development. He can be reached at sorayuth@sealeadership.com

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT