Dealing with Unruly Ducks

In my previous post, I referred to Marcus Buckingham, one of the leading lights of the Strengths Movement. Through his books Now Discover Your Strengths and Go Put Your Strengths to Work, Buckingham has popularized the idea that, in planning their life’s work, people should focus on leveraging their strengths rather than shoring up their weaknesses. An example from my past experience illustrates how improv theory and practice can help the Daily Improviser apply this tenet to her own life.

Some time ago I conducted an Emotional Intelligence workshop that noted how some people tend to be very deliberate and considered in making decisions and taking action. In everyday terms, they like to have their ducks in a row, and frequently fall victim to a syndrome called “Analysis Paralysis.”

By contrast, other people have a bias for doing something – anything! – to make things happen and shake things up. In improv terms, they fully subscribe to the maxim ”Fall first – then, on the way down, figure out what to do next.” However, they’re often susceptible to their own scattershot syndrome called “Ready-Fire-Aim!”

In this particular workshop, a participant (I’ll call him “Ducky”) admitted that he wished he could be less of the former, more of the latter, and asked how he could “learn to be more spontaneous.” Naturally my standing answer to that question is: Take an adult improv workshop.

As I’ve thought about it since, though, I’ve wondered if my advice ran counter to the thinking of the Strengths Movement. What’s wrong with being deliberate in acting and deciding? Why did I enable Ducky to believe that he needed to “fix” himself? If a steady, cautious approach helped him to restrain others who might otherwise rush over a cliff, why not leverage that as a strength?

Well, I’ve since relieved my angst by recalling the words (which I cited in a previous post) of Kouzes and Posner in their book The Leadership Challenge:

“If the only person you listen to is yourself, you’re unlikely to discover your voice or your full potential …. Finding your voice is about engaging with the world. When you engage with the world, and you try on other voices and other styles, you learn what fits you and what does not. Eventually your voice breaks through the noise and becomes recognizably you.”

It occurred to me that, early in his life, Ducky might have pigeonholed himself into a slot labeled “slow decider” without really pushing back on his own assumptions about himself. What better way to test these assumptions and try on a set of “fast actor” behaviors than to take an improv workshop?

I’m not sure what happened to Ducky, but he might have taken an improv workshop and found a previously untapped talent for falling and deciding on the way down. Or maybe he confirmed (and learned to appreciate) his original concept of his natural strengths, while also gaining a better appreciation for others who did have a natural talent for deciding-in-motion. Either way, he wins.

As a Strengths-Based Daily Improviser, you should ask yourself: Am I prematurely deciding what my real strengths are, rather than exploring possible opportunities to “try on” different behaviors and discover what really fits?

The Average Man: Robert Benchley

The writer and actor Robert Benchley, one of the leading lights of the Algonquin Round Table, was known for his dry, self-deprecating humor and his depiction of the trials and tribulations of the Average Man. Benchley was also responsible for one of my all-time favorite quotes:

“It took me fifteen years to discover that I had no talent for writing, but I couldn’t give it up because by then I was too famous.”

In his inimitably droll style, I think Benchley was simply observing that we are often our own toughest critics. At its worst, this feeling of never-good-enough can lead to the Impostor Syndrome. Lately, though, I’ve been reflecting on a deeper level of his statement and how it can serve as a guide for the Daily Improviser.

In her wonderful book, Improv Wisdom, Patricia Ryan Madson devotes an entire chapter to a seemingly heretical concept. The chapter is titled: Be Average.

In other words: Stop forcing. Quit trying to be perfect. Don’t always be wildly casting about for something new, different, and “clever,” but instead look at the seemingly mundane world in front of you for something you’ve previously overlooked. As the improv master Keith Johnstone put it: “Dare to be dull!”

If you find yourself constantly straining to achieve this elusive perfection, then it's probably an indication that you’re trying to go against the grain of your natural gifts and strengths. If, on the other hand, you’ve been able to identify and pursue your own unique course, then you should look forward to your task, feel inquisitive and focused while you’re doing it, and feel fulfilled after you’ve completed it. As Marcus Buckingham writes in his book Go Put Your Strengths to Work:

“[When you’re working to your strengths], you actually want to concentrate. When you do, you lose your regular perspective – your third eye looking down at yourself assessing how long things are taking and what you are doing and what other people are thinking and when it will be over – and you become immersed. You are lost in the activity, for a long moment.”

And this, I think, is the deeper message in the Benchley quote:

Find your passion. Put in your long moments of flow. Turn off that judgmental third eye and quit worrying so much about how you’re doing – just do it.

Then look up and greet your public.

Silence Is Golden

[OK, I admit it: I’m a music trivia buff (which sounds better than “nut”). So a quick quiz: What UK group had a 1967 hit with a song titled the same as the title of this post? For the answer, see below – preferably after reading the paragraphs in between.]

In my previous post, I described the tendency of many leaders in a Performance Coaching role to talk too much, rather than encouraging the Coachee to talk. Too many Coaches (and too many people in general) seem to define “Listening” as “The time I have to wait before I can talk again.” In improv terms, they’re Scriptwriting in Their Heads rather than staying in the here and now.

As I also mentioned before, one way for a Coach to encourage the Coachee to talk is to use silence strategically. I’ve noticed that Coaches seem to have a particularly difficult time with what I would call the downtime between words. In my Coaching classes, I’ve incorporated a simple yet effective way to raise the topic of silence and how we react to it.

First, offhandedly say to the group: “A lot of people are uncomfortable with silence in conversation.”

Then just keep walking across the front of the room. Shift your eyes from person to person. Smile. Clasp your hands in front of you. Keep it going for 10 … 15 … 20 seconds. Make it a pregnant pause that would do Jack Benny proud.

By now, you’ll see people shifting in their seats, smiling uncomfortably, tapping their feet and hands, maybe even doing that little snorty nervous laugh. On a good day, you’ll even get a participant who can’t stand it anymore and who bursts out, "Yes, they are!"

When it seems as if people are starting to hurt a little bit, finally break the silence by asking: “Why do you think that is?”

With the tension effectively broken, lead a discussion about what the group just experienced – why silence can conjure up such a visceral sense of discomfort, unease, even anxiety. And why befriending silence can pay dividends by providing a space that the Coachee can then verbally fill.

[And to my fellow music trivia fanatics: Thanks for reading silently until now. The answer is: the Tremeloes.]

The Silent Coach

At heart, Performance Coaching in business organizations is simply about helping a person (aka the “Coachee”) develop his ability to solve problems. I’ve been teaching Coaching for several years and have always been struck by how difficult it is for many people in a coaching role to just ……… simply ………. be …………silent.

Maybe this shouldn’t be so surprising. Many if not most leaders attain their positions by being able to sort through confusion and solve problems, so it’s no wonder that their concept of Coaching often translates to: Give the Coachee the answer to the problem!

As a result, many coaches fall prey to a common syndrome: They talk – and give advice – and talk – and tell the Coachee what she should do – and talk – and describe their own “similar” experience and what they did about it – and talk …

… rather than sit back, be quiet, and let the Coachee talk – about her characterization of the situation and her feelings about it … about what she’s tried to do and what she’s considered doing … about her speculation about what she could do … about what she will do.

After all, the goal is not so much to solve the immediate problem as it is to guide the Coachee through the process of solving problems – both the immediate one and future ones.

I think many coaches could learn a few things from a fellow I mentioned earlier – one of my comic heroes, Jack Benny. David Zinger in his website Employee Engagement Zingers makes some great observations about Jack’s strategic use of the “pregnant pause” in his routines. Jack was skilled at (and comfortable with) using silence as an artistic device – and a Performance Coach can regard silence in the same way in performing his “art.”

The Daily Improviser can think of Coaching as an improvised performance, with the Coachee being the “partner,” and with the interaction comprising a series of Offers and Acceptances. In this sense, the improv skill of Listening (aka The Now!) becomes paramount.

Any Coach can benefit from remembering the WAIT principle: Whenever you find yourself tempted to rush in and fill a silent space in the coaching performance, ask yourself “Why Am I Talking?”

The Famous Invisible Improv Genius: Burr Tillstrom

Jim Henson’s Muppets are a household name – Kermit the Frog, Miss Piggy, Cookie Monster, and the rest of the crew. Less remembered, though, are Kukla and Ollie, the clown and dragon puppets that were just as well known in their own time - the 1950s – as the Muppets are today. Along with their on-camera human foil Fran Allison, Kukla and Ollie created a witty, low-key, character-based humor that (again like the Muppets) appealed to adults as much as kids.

And all of it was improvised by a man who was almost never seen on camera – Burr Tillstrom.

For nearly 50 years, Tillstrom provided the hands and voices for Kukla, Ollie, and numerous other characters while staying almost completely behind the scenes. At the height of the show's popularity, the cast received 15,000 letters a day, and its ratings were comparable to shows featuring Milton Berle and Ed Sullivan. By all accounts, Tillstrom was a self-effacing man who channeled his improvisational gifts and his art through the characters who paraded just above his head as he ducked below the puppet stage.

"Kukla could talk to everyone and anyone," Tillstrom once said. "When I was too young or too ignorant to have an answer, Kukla took over. What would have been naive, coming from me, sounded funny coming from Kukla."

Somehow I can just picture a clueless career counselor trying to advise a young Burr Tillstrom: “You want to be an improv performer but you don’t want to be onstage? Son, have you thought about what you just said? You can’t have it both ways!”

Fortunately for those who still remember him and his art, Burr Tillstrom proved that you can have it both ways. For the Daily Improviser, Burr Tillstrom’s story illustrates that you can take an And Stance toward your life’s work (e.g., performing and being offstage) by recognizing your strengths, being creative in applying those strengths, and discovering your own special niche - or, as Jim Collins put it in Good to Great, “finding what you can be the best in the world at.”

The Institutional Yes! Amazon's Jeff Bezos

In my previous post, I referred to a Harvard Business Review article "The Institutional Yes" in which Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos described Amazon’s approach to setting strategy: Generate new ideas by asking “Why not?’ and then test those ideas through the least-expensive experiments possible. As Bezos said, “You should be making guesses and then finding out at lowest cost whether or not they are needle movers.”

Or, as I would put it in improv lingo: Leap boldly while aiming for a mattress.

But, as Bezos makes clear, sometimes you have to focus more on the leaping, less on the mattress:

“[Y]ou have to recognize that there are times when you can’t put a toe in the water; you have to leap in with both feet…. You allow that you might take lots of twists and turns on the details, but you really commit yourself to the objective.”

I can’t think of a better description of an improv show. As I described it earlier, improv is all about Exploring, Flexing, and Being Spontaneous on Purpose. It means totally committing to your goal and accepting that many winding roads can take you there.

Bezos then goes on to say:

“And by the way, it’s very fun to have the kind of culture where people are willing to take these leaps – it’s the opposite of the ‘institutional no.’ It’s the institutional yes. People say, ‘We’re going to do this. We’re going to figure out a way.’”

Here Bezos echoes our other improv imperatives: Supporting each other (by saying “Yes And”) and Having Fun (aka “The Wow”). Finding big challenges, treating them as problems to be collectively solved, gaining energy from the power of saying Yes!

Finally, Bezos says:

“It’s important to be stubborn on the vision and flexible on the details.”

If this is all starting to sound like institutional improvisation around a Commander's Intent – you’re right! Shades of Southwest Airlines’ Herb Kelleher saying to employees: “Have fun while keeping fares low!” The Institutional Yes creates a clear purpose and a loose framework within which organizational performers can exercise all of their improvisational skills – and have fun in the process!

The Daily Improviser Strategizes: Lessons from Wile E. Coyote

A well-known improv tenet says: “Fall first – then, on the way down, figure out what you’re going to do next!” In other words, take action – any action – and trust that your native wit and intuition will solve the problem of what to do afterward.

This is probably the one improv tenet that prospective Daily Improvisers have the most trouble accepting. With visions of Wile E. Coyote firmly in mind, they might say: “What?! Throw myself into the void, without a net, no lifelines? Leave myself to the mercy of hope, luck, and the vagaries of the Universe and the Acme Company? You go first!”

Well, to take an And Stance approach here, I think we can respect both sentiments – “fling yourself headlong into an uncertain future” AND “keep your ankle tied to a bungee.” Even performance improvisers don’t expect to splat against a blank Jackson Pollock canvas when they leap. They rely on multiple supporting structures – stuff they’ve used in the past (and, yes, even schtick), aspects of their character, rules of the game being played – as a loose framework within which they can improvise a solution to their onstage predicament.

These thoughts were prompted by an intriguing Harvard Business Review article I’m reading, “The Institutional Yes.” The article comprises an interview with Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos in which he describes many ways in which Amazon keeps its sights on both imperatives: “leap” and “aim for the mattress.”

As to the Leap Imperative, Bezos says:

“One useful habit [in setting strategy] is to ask the question ‘Why Not?’ When something seems like an opportunity … you will always get asked the question ‘Why? Why do that?’ But ‘Why not?’ is an equally valid question.”

But if that sounds like the voice of the thrill-seeking, ready-fire-aim, leap-think-act personality, consider Bezos’s follow-on statement:

“And there may be good reasons why not …. In that case, if somebody asked ‘Why not?’ you would say ‘Here’s why not.’”

And even if you proceed, it’s not with reckless abandon, as Bezos makes clear:

“[S]ince the outcomes of all these things are uncertain, if you can figure out how to conduct an experiment, you can make more bets. So the key, really, is reducing the cost of the experiments.”

Experiments. Prototypes. Parallel processes. As you boldly go forth with your strategy, these are your supporting structures, your lifelines, your Institutional Mattresses. The Daily Improviser must not be afraid to take the leap, but, as Bezos indicates, she also needs to consider how to mitigate the possible dangers of the landing.

Does Jeff Bezos have something to say about initiatives that do require leaping in with both feet? Will Wile E. Coyote survive his latest precipitous cliff dive?

To find out, tune in again next time!

Opening Up!

Some days I can really relate to the words of the legendary sportswriter Red Smith: “There’s nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at the typewriter and open a vein.”

Well, this has been one of those days when inspiration hides in the shadows, but rather than interrupt my local rescue squad’s lunch, I thought I’d take the improv path instead. In the name of Exploring and The Wow! (aka Having Fun), I grabbed the nearest book (The Leadership Challenge, by Kouzes and Posner) and opened to a random page to see what wisdom the Universe might send my way. Here’s what I encountered (on page 55):

“If the only person you listen to is yourself, you’re unlikely to discover your voice or your full potential…. Finding your voice is about engaging with the world. When you engage with the world, and you try on other voices and other styles, you learn what fits you and what does not. Eventually your voice breaks through the noise and becomes recognizably you.”

Perfect! And just what I needed to remember while sitting here in solitary rumination. Improv is all about engaging – with the things and people in your immediate environment and in the wider world beyond. As one of the main tenets of improv goes, “Don’t just talk about it – do it!” For the Daily Improviser, that means taking action, reaching out, flinging yourself headlong into your life!

So I think I’ll put the keyboard aside and follow through on making lunch plans with that old friend I haven’t seen in two years.

Thanks, Universe!

FAMOUS DAILY IMPROVISERS: Jack Benny

Jack Benny may not have been the funniest man in the world, but he was definitely in the top two (along with Groucho Marx). A classic Benny routine illustrates an important point about being a Daily Improviser.

One time in the late 1930s, Jack appeared as a guest on the Fred Allen radio show. Allen, a notorious ad libber, began skewering Jack with a series of improvised comic put-downs as part of their (completely staged) “feud.” (Choice example: "Jack, you couldn't improvise a belch after a plate of goulash!") Finally, Jack gave Allen one of his trademark “Hmmms” and brought down the house by responding: “You wouldn’t dare say that if my writers were here.”

So why do I point to Benny – a deliberate, measured performer who really did rely heavily on his writers - as an example of a Daily Improviser and not Allen?

Because Jack Benny was probably the most team-oriented, supportive boss of any of the legendary comics. He paid his writers the top salaries in the business and kept his writing team together for decades. He was well known for saying “I don’t care who gets the laughs on my show, as long as the show is funny.” And he knew his strengths – a straight man with a finely tuned sense of timing – and made sure his wisecracking cohorts were able to shine with their own comic strengths. To borrow a term from Kouzes and Posner’s The Leadership Challenge, he truly “Enabled Others to Act.”

Like Jack Benny, you don’t have to be a quick-witted, off-the-cuff “performer” in order to be a Daily Improviser. You just need the improv attitudes – listen, appreciate others’ strengths, support your team, have fun – and let your team explore and flex their way to success for everyone!

The Cosmos and Dunkin' Donuts - Part Two

In my previous post, I described the improv concepts of Offer and Acceptance. One time while I was conducting a Leadership class, I saw a powerful example of the importance of balancing these two ways of “acting.”

At one point in the class, the participants played the Earthquake game, in which subteams had to rank-prioritize a list of actions they would take if trapped inside a building after a strong quake. The activity isn’t so much about getting the correct answer as it is about seeing how the team members interact while discussing and deciding upon their rankings.

As I watched one subteam conduct a go-round for final agreement on its rankings, I noticed one team member hesitate, look down, and then say, “Yeah, I agree – I guess.”

In most meetings I’ve ever observed, this usually passes for consensus (usually driven by a strong Offeror rattling off a rapid-fire “OK, everyone good? Ya good? Great, let’s move on!”). But to his credit, this subteam’s leader instantly seized on the speaker’s hesitation and said, “You don’t sound like you agree.”

And to the other’s credit, he didn’t just take the typical Acceptor course (“No, I’m - fine”) but began restating his rationale for disagreeing with the subteam’s rankings.

And then, amazingly, like something out of Twelve Angry Men (and these were all males), the other subteam members were persuaded to change their minds one-by-one.

This struck me as a perfect example of the give-and-take Offer-and-Acceptance needed for effective team performance, whether onstage or in the meeting room. Team members (and particularly the leader) must provide space for team interaction and be ready to accept what others can contribute, but each team member in turn must take the accountability to offer those contributions. Team members must meet each other halfway, somewhere in the middle (and I'll resist the urge to draw any more parallels with Dunkin’ Donuts!).