Helping Humans Handbook - don’t just support, also push, intervene and leave alone!
/By Duncan Anderson. To see all blogs click here.
One sentence summary: helping != supporting. Helping = Push OR Support OR Intervene OR Leave alone. Which one and when? Well that’s the fun!
Summary:
When wanting to help humans you can:
A: push them to lift
B: support them
C: intervene and take something off their plate
D: leave alone
Comment: helping humans means figuring out which of the above to do and when.
I’ve found that early managers often only ever ‘B: support’ when they are working with direct reports. “Having a default is a fault.”
Overusing support at best stunts the growth of someone (sometimes the optimal amount of support for growing someone is zero support, see Energising Expectations blog)
Overusing support at worst makes someone become dependent
Learning when to “Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone” is a challenge but it is fun… and challenging fun is the best type of fun!
A framework (aka a handbook) for how to think about helping humans:
1. Empathise don’t apologize
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Jingle: support sufficiently, push pertinently, intervene intermittently and leave alone limitedly :)!
++++++++++++++++++
Details:
Theory:
Helping Humans Handbook:
If someone comes to you asking for help, what do you do?
(optional) 1. Empathise don’t apologize
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
If you are trying to help someone, what do you do?
(optional) 1. Empathise don’t apologize
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Comment:
Yes the exact same framework can apply for both proactively and reactively helping.
Clearly this ‘handbook’ isn’t comprehensive, however hopefully it’s helpful!
1. Empathise don’t apologize (honestly, this could be it’s own blog all together):
When someone is unhappy they will have a reason (narrative) for why unhappiness happened.
It is important to empathise (ie recognise unhappiness and say we want to not have unhappiness) BUT to get to the bottom of whether the narrative someone has for the unhappiness is fair and reasonable.
Empathising = recognising unhappiness and that you are here to help BUT not endorsing the narrative someone has until you can get to the bottom of whether you agree with the narrative.
Apologizing = recognising unhappiness and that you are here to help AND endorsing the narrative someone has for being unhappy without consciously agreeing / disagreeing with the narrative.
A typical pitfall I see some first time managers make is that if a direct report is unhappy, the manager takes this as their failing and immediately apologized saying it’s ‘the manager’s fault’ and ‘they’ll fix this’.
“Problems come from when you have an incorrect understanding of the world.”
If one apologizes (ie endorses the narrative) when the narrative a person has for being unhappy is unfair then the unhappy person will feel justified for their narrative and hence feeling the way they do.
This typically means they have cemented an incorrect interpretation of the world and this incorrect interpretation I’ve found will have second order negative consequences for both the person who is unhappy and person who endorsed the unfair narrative. Ie short term gain, long term pain.
‘Empathise don’t apologize’ process =
1. Someone comes to you unhappy.
2. Empathise about how being unhappy isn’t good and you are here to help
3. Ascertain what the narrative is behind someone being unhappy
4. Form your own view on if the narrative is a fair one and why.
5A. If you agree with the narrative then work together on what to do
5B. If you don’t agree with the narrative then explain how you got to your view of the ‘narrative’ and mutually work to get to ‘truth’.
A 2x2 for y’all
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
A proximate cause is not the ultimate ‘real’ reason an event occurred, the root cause is the ultimately reason an event occurred (link to read more).
Treating a proximate cause is like taking a panadol for a headache, it numbs the pain for a short while then it wears off and the headache comes back. Always attempt to find the root cause!
Environment vs Others vs Individual
When looking for root causes I try to always look from these three lenses.
Let’s say someone is stressed, what could the root cause be?
Environment = there is a lot of time pressure because of a looming deadline so this is ‘environmental’.
Others = there is someone who is being particularly difficult to work with and this is causing stress.
Individual = is this person not cut out for the role they are currently in
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
With the synopsis of ‘2. Root cause analysis’ you need to then figure out what to do and how to do it!
Comment:
What I see first time managers doing? The default is ‘always support’.
Support to a fault = dependency.
“Having default answers is a fault.” “To the person with a hammer every problem looks like a nail.” “Good managers manage people how they need to be managed.” Custom pick you response to each situation.
Interactions with others fall into three buckets:
1. Negative sum
2. Zero sum
3. Positive sum
Aim: only have positive sum interactions with others.
Eg it doesn’t matter if you are needing to say someone has had sub-sufficient work quality, you can do it in a positive sum way where they: 1. Know how to improve, 2. Want to improve, 3. Liked the interaction and look forward to interacting with you again
Eg it doesn’t matter if someone is overreacting to a circumstance, done well you can: 1. Help them see this, 2. Help them understand the root drivers (eg see Default vs Designed Expectations), 3. Push vs Support vs Intervene appropriate, 4. Help the person move from ‘overreacting’ to an ‘appropriate reaction’. 5. They liked the interaction and look forward to interacting with you again
Leaving alone
Sometimes someone is in a stressful place and the best strategy is just to get out of their way. They have this and just need to crack on with getting things done.
However other times you check in with someone and see things are fraying at the edges. They say they have got it and would like ‘get on with it’ aka ‘be left alone’. However you can see a better path to the finish line.
Sometimes despite being asked to be left alone the best course of action is not to leave people alone.
Examples:
Example - push & proactive
What has happened?
You review output and believe that work is below sufficiency.
What to do:
1. Empathise don’t apologize.
Analysis: nil
What to say / do: Hi [person name], thanks for the work you have done here. I think I’ve found a way for you to level up.
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
Analysis: the cause is that they do not know better. Ie this isn’t laziness.
What to say / do: nil
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Analysis: done in stage 2
What to say / do:
Are you please able to look at your work and then look at my changes to it and let me know what you think is better and why?
If they agree with your changes are an improvement then say something like ‘wonderful, let’s make sure we incorporate this going forward’.
Notes:
The person was not intentionally doing sub-optimal work
The goal is to provide feedback in a positive sum fashion, that will allow the person to realise 1. What sufficiency is and 2. Give them a push to be at or above sufficiency in the future.
Example - push & reactive
What has happened?
Someone comes to you stressed about delivery of a project on time.
What to do:
1. Empathise don’t apologize.
Analysis: nil
What to say / do: Hi [person name], thanks for coming to me. It’s not good that you are stressing, let’s see what we can do about this. Are you able to please let me know the details...
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
Analysis:
Let’s say that in this case the person can’t see the ‘picture’ and that a GANNT chart needs to be made so one can see all the moving pieces and when they need to be done.
From this it is clear the person doesn’t have actual time pressure.
What to say / do: nil
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Analysis: done in stage 2
What to say / do:
Please have a look at the GANNT chart I’ve made, please let me know if you feel the assumptions are reasonable or not.
If they agree they are then they should not stress.
(push) Then you say, in the future, if you are worried about deadlines please make sure you make a GANNT chart.
Notes:
When someone is stressed, it’s not fun for anyone involved. Whilst it’s important to try to help dampen the situation, we also do not have enough detail to know whether the narrative is correct / warranted
Once the root cause has been understood and we see the stress is unwarranted, the expectations are reset
It is also an opportunity to give positive sum feedback for the future as well
Example - support & push (yeah I’m muddying things, I don’t care)
What has happened?
Someone comes to you saying they are struggling to work with another team member asking your advice.
What to do:
1. Empathise don’t apologize.
Analysis: nil
What to say / do: Hi [person name], thanks for coming to me. It’s not good that you are finding it difficult to communicate clearly with person x, let’s see what we can do about this. Are you able to please let me know the details...
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
Analysis:
“Don’t attribute to malice that which can be attributed to miscommunication.”
It turns out that form a meeting at the end both parties thought they were on the same page but actually had different understandings.
To try and ward off against this I specifically try to rearticulate what has been agreed in a different way to what has been put forward and ask the other party to confirm if my rearticulation is accurate.
You suggest that going forward both parties rearticulate the next steps to each other in an effort to minimise misunderstanding.
The root cause is: others AND the individual (and not the environment)
What to say / do: nil
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Analysis: done in stage 2
What to say / do:
So you push the person who came to you to rearticulate.
And you support the person by suggesting to the other party that they also rearticulate the proposed next steps.
Example - intervene
What has happened?
“When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” But no one is superman and everyone needs help at different points.
The ultimately strength is being able to be vulnerable and asking for help.
Strength != always having it and never asking for help. If you need help and don’t ask for help and you crack, or a key deadline is missed etc, then this helps no one. Not you, not your team, not the company.
Strength = being able to shoulder responsibility but also being able to be vulnerable and know when to ask for help.
Someone needs help but doesn’t see it and is refusing to be offered support.
What to do:
1. Empathise don’t apologize.
Analysis: nil
What to say / do: Hi [person name], I’m just wanting to double check we have an appropriate amount of buffer for delivering this project.
2. Root cause analysis (no proximate cause analysis)
Analysis:
After looking it is clear we are not going to get the project done on time.
The problem here is the ‘individual’ and not asking for help.
What to say / do: nil
3. Push vs Support vs Intervene vs Leave alone
Analysis: done in stage 2
What to say / do:
Show your analysis of how there isn’t enough buffer.
Say we are going to be helping out to make sure we don’t miss the deadline (ie intervene).
++++++++++++++++++++++++
For fun: i wrote this as part of this blog but decided to remove. But I think it’s interesting all the same so have kept it here for people to read if they are keen!
“The meta goal of all businesses as being to help humanity.”
All businesses are ultimately the outcome of human capital.
The chair you are sitting on is the outcome of humans.
The internet is the outcome of humans.
The food you eat is the outcome of humans, etc etc.
So, if you upgrade human capital you are increase the capability of business. As long as the business has nobel mission, increase human capital => improve humanity
Business outcome = 1. Capability of a business’s human capital * 2. How motivated the human capital is
Put another way: Business outcome = 1. Capacity for output (capability of a business’s human capital) * 2. Output utilisation percentage (how motivated the human capital is)
“We are all players, we are all coaches.”
We are here to help each other and to be helped by each other in a mutually positive sum fashion (see Partnership Economics blog).
It is everyone's job to upgrade themselves (or grow themselves). Is it everyone's job to help upgrade those around them.
It is everyone's job to look after their motivation. It is everyone's job to help with the motivation of those around them. It is not just eg a manager's job to grow a direct report. Ideally everyone should be helping everyone (ie direct report growing manager as much as manager growing direct report). Again, we are all coaches, we are all players.
Goals:
Goal 1 = you can grow other people
Goal 2 = you become able to self direct personal growth (ie grow even with zero input from others… but obviously it’s best to be able to 1. Self direct growth AND 2. Get growth from others)
Goal 3 = you help others get to motivation self sufficiency (ie they don’t need external help to be motivated)
Goal 4 = you become motivation self sufficient (ie you don’t need motivation support from others except in extreme circumstances. There are always times we will need help from others, and we should 100% ask for help. But ideally only when circumstances call for it).