One Is Usually Better, But Not Always

This week we’ll be looking at an idea I’ve touched on in the past, but in a new light, thanks to an interesting exchange I had at a conference I recently attended.

When I crafted the title to this blog, I was convinced that I’d be able to link to a previous post that I’d written specifically on the “Responding Versus Reacting” concept I so often mention when speaking with people, but alas, that blog exists only in my imagination.

I will, however, still be revisiting the idea, because the conversation noted above forced me into a few different reflections: on the subject itself, how universally true I thought it was, and on how I share my thoughts on it.

So far this has been rather vague, I realize, so thanks for indulging my meandering style of setting up these weekly missives.

The Perfect Set-Up for Sharing a Favourite Idea

Allow me to set the context for you. 

It’s the evening before the first day of the conference, so I headed down to the hotel bar to see who else flew in early.

After chatting with some long-time friends and acquaintances at a table, I’m heading back up to my room to get some sleep when I happened to recognize a face from last year at the bar.

Next thing you know I’m offered a drink and I’m suddenly chatting with a small group of mostly strangers here for the same gathering.

One of the men begins relating a story about tension between a father and son, and we start talking about ways the son can learn to avoid similar situations with his own, teenage son.

Next thing I know I’m sharing one of many Zig Ziglar stories I have in my repertoire. 

(Curious readers are invited to type “Ziglar” in the search feature of my website).

Responding Versus Reacting

So I begin sharing the key differences between responding to a situation and reacting to it.

The simplest way to remember it, is to consider a medical situation and how we speak about the interventions that happen at the hospital.

“They gave him medication and he is responding” is always positive, whereas, “He had a reaction to the medicine” is negative.

When we take a step back and compose ourselves and respond to something that happens or what someone says, we have a better chance of things going well, versus immediately reacting without thought, which often escalates a situation.

When taken aback, I sometimes deliberately pause and even say, “I want to take a moment to think about this so I can respond, rather than simply reacting”.

I Thought It Was Clear, Until….

I felt like I’d made my point well and the conversation veered into a few different directions.

But imagine my dismay, when a while later one of the guys was relaying another story, where this time the problem was that someone had become way too complacent with a situation, and the protagonist was not responsive enough.

And as he concluded, he pointed to me and said, “Like you said, he should have reacted!”

Wait, what? 

I felt stumped and was thankful that the number of beverages consumed by all made this fade away as the subject once again got changed.

But I now had some reflecting to do, as my concept had been turned on its head.

Time to Revisit This

I think it was on the plane back home a few days later that it hit me that I needed to circle back and reconsider what happened and how I talk about this important subject.

Did I not explain myself well enough, was there a problem with my metaphor, or is it something else?

I believe I did explain it well enough, but there are limits to every metaphor, this one included.

It is still a good idea, in most cases, to pause and take a moment to provide a considered response to something, rather than simply quickly giving your gut reaction.

And, there are also times when pausing for way too long can be sub-optimal.

Flexibility Is an Asset

We need to recognize the limits of rigidity and the benefits of flexibility in many areas.

How long we take to reflect before we respond is probably one of those areas, but I will continue to err on the side of pausing.

What Happens When You Can’t See?

The virtual meeting world has certainly changed the way people meet, especially in the past half decade since the pandemic changed everything.

You’d think that after this many years, we’d have figured it all out, but alas, it seems like we have not.

Lest you think I’m getting tired of hearing “You’re on mute!” one time too many, that’s not where we’re going this week.

I’ve touched on some of the issues around virtual meetings in the past, notably in Who’s Zooming Who, and “I Can’t Hear” or “I Can’t Listen”?

But this week we’re going to look at what can happen when you purposely shut off a sense to good effect.

It Started with a Tech Glitch

A few months back I got on a call with a colleague and for whatever reason my camera did not work, so she couldn’t see me.

I was surprised to realize after a few minutes that the fact that I knew she couldn’t see me was affecting the way I spoke to her.

I you’ve ever been on a Zoom or Teams call with me, you know that I’m typically rather animated in my gestures and facial expressions.

Likewise, I prefer to be on calls where I see the others, because I also glean lots of information from non-verbal cues.

More recently, on another call with her, I mentioned this experience to her, it sparked her to mention the “hide self-view” feature in Zoom.

That’s where you can modify your settings on a Zoom call so that you still see everyone else who’s camera is on, but you don’t see yourself.

Try It, You’ll Like It

So we both immediately tried it for the rest of that call, and I’ve gotta admit, it was different, and maybe “more normal”?

Being somewhat slow to change habits, I haven’t incorporated this into my routine, yet!

Then a couple of weeks ago, on a call with my coach, she relayed an interesting experience she’d recently gone through as part of a leadership training exercise.

She and a group of people who’d been in the same cohort for a while were assembled in a group, and then blindfolds were handed out.

They were all instructed to put on the blindfolds, and then prompted to share something with the rest of the group.

Somehow, understandably, the quality of the sharing was deeper, because while blindfolded, there were fewer distractions that might otherwise have inhibited the person sharing.

Eliminating the Dominant Visual Cues

This story about the blindfolds prompted me to share what I just wrote above with her, and so she tried the hide self-view and liked it.

On our next call she told me she’d been using it ever since and loved it, so of course I mentioned that she had something stuck between her teeth and she believed me, for a second.

But this whole topic rang a bell about something she shared with me years ago, that difficult conversations sometimes go better while driving in a car, because the two people talking are not looking at each other.

When I reminded her of that, she mentioned that there’s research that proves that couples who go for walks together have longer relationships, quite possibly because they can have conversations where the dominant visual cues don’t actually harm the flow of ideas.

Tried and True Mediation Methods

Now that the ideas were flowing between the two of us, that roused in me the old mediation rule that you should try to avoid having opposing parties sit across from each other.

If you can get the people sitting beside one another, and put the “problem” on the table for both of them to look at from the same vantage point, your chances of success go up dramatically.

It seems looking at someone eye-to-eye may conjure up feelings of adversity that would be better off minimized.

This seems to be yet another case of “less is more”, where not having all the information or cues helps yield a better result.

Try Something Different for a Change

I’m hoping that this post might inspire readers to try to shake things up and try different ways of communicating, especially in relationships that may be getting stale.

Even that “hide self-view” feature on Zoom is something I think I may implement myself, because it probably feels more natural to talk to others without seeing myself on screen constantly!

Throwing Another Analogy onto the Fire

If the quote in my title sounds familiar, you’re probably a boomer like me, who watched lots of American TV in the 70’s.

Peter Marshall, then host of the original Hollywood Squares TV show would utter that line several times an episode.

And that all has zero to do with my topic this week, i.e. circles and squares, and an analogy shared by a colleague recently, which I immediately embraced.

We’ll take a look at it together, as well as share an article I wrote a couple of years ago that deserves to be revived here too, because many readers probably haven’t seen it.

So we’re going to look at the Ten Domains of Wealth model from the UHNWI, bring in a piece I wrote a while back, and then layer in some circles and squares.

Let’s get started.

Ten Domains, and Ways to Look at Them

When the Ten Domains model came into being just a few short years ago, it resonated with me immediately.

It has evolved and been refined since then, and I like it even better now, because it clearly distinguishes between the four more technical domains across the top of the model and the five more relational domains along the bottom.

“Wealth Creation and Stewardship” is the label for the first four, while “Cultivation of Family Capital” is the moniker for the other five.

A couple of years ago I wrote a piece for CanadianFamilyOffices.com, which they titled “As Clients Demand More, Ten Domains Model Can Help Family Offices Deliver”.

That article was the first time I labeled the domains as “nine slices of a pie with a scoop of ice cream in the middle”.

The ice cream is the tenth domain, (or maybe it’s #1?) and it’s called “Family Advisory Relationships”.

So What About the Squares and Circles?

With that context now in place, we’ll move on to the squares and circles, and for that I need to thank a guy. That guy is actually named Guy, by the way.

As part of my participation in a local French-speaking group called Collectif Oria, I got to spend a whole day with my colleagues, discussing all matters relating to our work with families.

It’s a diverse group, and Guy noted that he considered himself and others who have a technical practice (he’s a financial planner) as “des carrés” (squares) while the relational experts (including me) are “des cercles” (circles).

He noted this early in the day, and as we progressed, I couldn’t help notice how many times it resurfaced in my head during a variety of discussions, and I shared those instances with the group at least a handful of times. 

Finding New Shapes, Squaring the Circle

Something that comes up in discussions with professionals who work with families who each arrive at this work from some “profession of origin”, is that many of us come in from one preferred “shape”, square or circle, in this instance.

But we quickly recognize that if we’re to be able to serve families well, we need to learn to appreciate the other shape, and understand them and their legitimate place at the table.

Many work very hard to learn to take on some hybrid shape, sort of a square with rounded corners, or perhaps a circle within a square or vice versa.

As a Canadian, the shape of a hockey rink comes to mind, which is not an ellipse but a “rectangle with rounded corners” as my friend Google just told me.

The article noted above talks about the fact that those who come from the professions who originate in the four domains of Wealth Creation and Stewardship typically know each other and are used to at least cooperating, and the same is true of those who work in the five Cultivation of Family Capital sections.

Can labeling them as squares and circles help make this more understandable?

Soft Versus Hard, Process Versus Content

There are many ways that I’ve written about this subject over the years, about soft skills versus hard, process or content specialists, and STEM versus liberal arts.

Getting back to Hollywood Squares, which is essentially Tic-Tac-Toe, at the end of every game there are both X’s and O’s all over the board, in different places.

In order to play a key role in Family Advisory Relationships, you need to be fluent and comfortable with all shapes.

Well, Hard Work Can Justify It!

A few weeks ago in The Elusive Perfect Cookie-Cutter Solution, I lamented the fact that the work that I do with families seldom allows for a formulaic approach.

Because each family is unique, every business is different, and the people who compose every family are one-of-a-kind individuals, much of this work involves starting fresh and doesn’t allow for a lot of “cut’n’paste” operations.

But there are naturally some aspects of the work that do repeat themselves in many cases, so this week we’re going to take a look at things from that angle.

And, as I’ve done a number of times in the past, I’m going to share a mnemonic way of remembering the sequence I’m sharing.

From my headline, which includes one word in ALL CAPS, you may have already guessed that MEDAL is what we’ll be working with.

(If you’re curious about past mnemonics, see: Start Cleaning Up your M.E.S.S., Is your Continuity PAL in Danger, and Seeking Resources to Get Back on Kilter).

Going for the Gold (Medal, That Is)

The first letter in Medal is M, and in my case, M is for Meet.

Everything starts with a meeting, and new phases of any work almost always necessitate a meeting as well.

A meeting, in many cases, involves me sitting in a room with a number of family members together, or it could be meeting virtually.

It could also be just me and one or two other people, and those situations, while more often virtual these days, can also be in person.

But important phases of most process work involve some sort of coming together to discuss things with others.

E Is for Exchange and Explore

Let’s not to minimize the meeting aspect of this, because for larger groups of people, simply getting everyone together at the same time and in the same place can be a huge obstacle.

Virtual meeting technology has made this easier in recent years, but even with Teams and Zoom, coordinating schedules with busy people is a huge lift in many cases.

Now that you are together, meeting, what are you going to do to maximize the fact that all this brain power is in one place for the next few hours?

This is where the E’s come in, and for me the two biggest ones are Exchange and Explore.

Exchanging is about both giving and receiving, which in the case of information involves talking and listening.

You brought everyone together, now let’s hear from them all.

If you accentuate the Exploration mode, to see what you can discover together, that’s even better.

D Is for Discern and Develop

So you had your Meeting where you Exchanged and Explored, and now you are each back in your own space, for the coming days, weeks, months, etc.

If each person then takes some time and makes some efforts to Discern what was learned and tries to figure out how to Develop something from what was discussed, that could be useful.

Integrating new learnings and reflecting on current realities allows the Explorations and Exchanges that you had at the Meeting take root.

A Is for Act and Advance

Now that something new has taken root as a result of the Meeting, the Exchanges and the Discernment, what’s next?

Well, hopefully you can find ways to Act and Advance ideas, projects, journeys, or whatever you are trying to accomplish together.

Too often there’s inertia that needs to be overcome, so this is a reminder to put things into motion with Action and Advancement.

New ideas were conceived and now new ways forward have emerged, which need to be Acted upon in order to Advance.

Some of these items can be done individually, others will involve additional folks who were part of the initial Meeting.

L Is for Loop Back and Meet Again

Eventually the progress that you have been making on your own or with a small group will come to a natural arc where it will become time to repeat the process again.

This is where you need to Loop back and Meet with the group again and enter into the next iteration of the process.

Coming together again in a Meeting, to once again Exchange and Explore, will begin the next cycle of the work that needs to be done.

After the next meeting, you will once again retreat into solitude or a smaller group, to Discern where you now stand, and Develop next steps.

You’ll figure out the next Acts and Advancements, and Loop back again.

Providing Clarity Can Bring Change of All Kinds

One of the aspects that I love about my practice serving enterprising families is the variety of situations I get exposed to.

And sometimes the way things flow from one day to the next brings up interesting juxtapositions that kind of make me shake my head.

This happened again recently, and it made me realize that I wanted to share something about that here, but I needed a way to tie the cases together in a semi-coherent fashion.

So I landed on providing clarity, and we’ll see if I can turn this recent set of circumstances into something useful and entertaining.

Good and Ugly Versions (Also Sometimes Bad)

With apologies to Clint Eastwood and the movie title from back in the ‘60’s, we’re only looking at two scenarios I’m currently dealing with, so there is no “bad” version, just “good” and “ugly”.

Working with family members who own a business or assets together can bring me into situations with lots of promise for helping them achieve even greater things, and these are always fun to get involved with.

Other times, I get called in when things are going off the rails a bit (or a lot), which sometimes has me trying to help them avoid the worst outcomes. 

As you might imagine, these types of clients are not as much fun to work with.

As a self-confessed “life-long-learner”, I look at such cases as a learning laboratory for me, and a chance to work on different skills, like mediation.

The Swiss-Army Knife Approach

When I think about why some client situations seem attractive to me, part of what sometimes gets me interested is that chance to try to add value in cases where the outcome may not be rosy.

Such cases cause me to stretch and learn, and add more tools to my tool chest, or more prongs to the Swiss-Army knife that I sometimes like to think of myself as.

So let’s get into some of the details of my recent schedule, which saw me with the “Sanders” family on Thursday, followed by the “Fletcher” brothers case Friday.

The situations are about as far apart as they can be for people in my line of work, and I pride myself on being comfortable in either scenario.

Optimizing the Post-Liquidity Family Office

“Rob Sanders” contacted me last fall, after hearing about me from someone he trusted.  

Their family had begun some work on their “Family Office project” a while back, but the firm they used wasn’t able to continue to guide them on their journey.

After speaking with him and learning about the situation, I realized that this was a case where my partners at Blackwood Family Enterprise Services would be able to create a more detailed and durable solution in line with what the client was looking for.

We entered into a full “discovery project” with all family members, culminating in an all-day, in-person family meeting, which took place on a recent Thursday at an airport hotel of a large Canadian city.

By the end of the day, every family member had a great deal more clarity of what the family was trying to do, and how each family member could play a part.

We set the stage for some follow-on guidance that we can continue to provide the family going forward.

Keeping Things On the Rails a Bit Longer

After a fun and productive day with the Sanders family, I drove less than an hour and spent the night in another hotel, wondering how different the following day with members of the Fletcher family would be.

A month or so back in The “Plan A” FamBiz Transition Mirage, we looked at how so many families wrongly assume that passing down equal ownership and management responsibility to the next gen will work out well.

The Fletchers are a textbook case, and when two siblings can’t even speak to each other, it makes it difficult to run a company together.

When you layer in other complex family dynamics, things can go south in a hurry.

The clarity that I’m trying to help bring to them is that what they’ve attempted to do isn’t working.

I’m also trying to help them clarify what options they have ahead of them to minimize the damage that they may be doing to their family and their business.

Unfortunately, sometimes avoiding the ugly is about the best we can do.