How to avoid relational risk

In the April issue of this blog, Robert Hall, one of the speakers at the rapidly approaching Relational Thinking International Conference, introduced the topic of Relational Leadership, reminding us that if you can get “the right WHO” in a leadership position, the agenda of “WHAT”, (direction, strategy), will emerge in a qualitatively different, and urgently needed, way: a way that is, we believe, much more aligned with a sustainable future for our planet.

At Relational Change, we believe this change in focus from tasks first to people first cannot come quickly enough if we are to genuinely develop our leadership capacity and gain more understanding of what motivates and sustains people. Indeed, our relational approach to coaching and consulting work was prompted by the experience of trying to support organisations where people were floundering due to unrealistic, unsustainable, task-driven leadership practices that viewed staff as a particularly tricky part of the operational chain: unpredictable, emotional and prone to erratic behaviour according to changing cultures and contexts!

For example, in health care, we found numerous examples of staff, particularly senior staff, ignoring ‘evidence-based’ guidelines, not because they didn’t know or understand the guidelines, but because they believed that the “evidence” did not necessarily apply to the specific case or context. By doing this, these staff knowingly put themselves in a risky situation, but nonetheless, they strongly believed this was the ‘right’ thing to do. On closer inquiry, all these staff could cite many important reasons that led them to deviate from the guidelines, with these reasons focussed on the specific relationships, culture and contexts.

Similarly, in his book ‘Adapt’, Tim Harford cites numerous examples of leaders from a wide range of backgrounds, (including government, the American Army, Corporate Business and Education), ‘deviating’ from pre-agreed plans and strategies in favour of responding to the immediate relational context. Vitally he demonstrates that all these leaders needed to deviate, in order to deliver a successful, safe and appropriate outcome.

But, we are not advocating an anarchic anything goes/do what feels right, sloppiness.  Design, plans and pre-agreements give us a sense that we have a clear vision of the way forward, the skills to meet demand and reassuringly, a sense of control and agreement. When problems come in the complex shape and size of climate change, wealth inequity, migration and ever growing demands for health care, (to name a few), some sense of a way through is essential.

So we would want to highlight what is often, and unhelpfully we believe, seen as a tension between the ‘soft/people’ focussed aspects of leadership, and the need for clarity, transparency, focus and task attainment at work. We believe this polarisation is misguided; ‘relational’ in our book implies a contextually sensitive approach that recognises our profound inter-connection and inter-dependence. Not an approach where we are focussed on being ‘nice’ to each other, but one that recognises that our relationship with both the people and environment around us leads directly to the emergence of behaviour in the moment. This is what we saw happening in our health care situations and large global challenges will demand ever more complex collaborations that appreciate why people are behaving in these “unpredictable, deviant and erratic” ways.

Sadly, most leadership trainings do not emphasise the extent of personal development required for a leader to manage the complexity of such a relational approach. Boundaries can become less clear and contemporary leadership requires skills in ‘how to be’, how to respond and how to navigate the range of relational risks that are revealed through the necessary numerous collaborations.

At Relational Change, our theory and experience is that competence in the Relational approach is achieved by attending to three main, interconnected frameworks involving self, other and the situation, (Denham-Vaughan & Chidiac 2013, Clark et. al. 2014). Accordingly we have evolved our “SOS” model, which includes the three domains and also has global recognition as a call for assistance: lone heros’ are unlikely to survive!  Developing insight and skills in each of these three domains develops leaders with genuine Presence; able to use themselves and their relationships to leverage maximum effect in a range of challenging situations.

In our experience of coaching and consulting, we observe that being “relational” as a leader/manager requires tough skills of personal awareness, sensitivity to context and emotional attunement with others. Equally important are skills in recognising the relational risks arising from these closer collaborations and fuzzier boundaries, and being able to dialogue authentically about these in order to support and sustain change.


Clark, M. Denham-Vaughan, S and Chidiac, (2014) M-A. “A relational perspective on public sector leadership and management”, The International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 4-16.

Denham-Vaughan, S. “The Liminal Space and Twelve Action Practices for Gracious Living”, British Gestalt Journal, (2010), 19, (2), 34-45

Denham-Vaughan, S. and Chidiac, M-A. “SOS: A relational orientation towards social inclusion”. (2013), Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 17, (2), 100-107

Harford, T. “Adapt”, (2011), Little, Brown, London UK.

Written by Marie-Anne Chidiac and Sally Denham-Vaughan from Relational Change, an organisation that promotes a relational approach in all walks of life.


Leading the Millennials: Focus on relational outcomes

Robert Hall, author, consultant, and former company co-founder and CEO and one of the speakers at the upcoming Relational Thinking International Conference, published recently an article in the Huffington Post about leadership and working with Millennials (born 1980 – 2000). He argues that understanding the Millennial generation, who as a work force are quite different from their predecessors, will not just help managers to accomplish their goals. “It is an opportunity to become a better leader”, he says.

After setting out some of the characteristics of the Millennium generation, he explains how leaders can tackle the challenge of managing this generation best by changing their own behavior and how, by doing so,  they themselves can become better leaders:

“While leaders might be tempted to ask Millennials to conform to the old ways, the best and most predictable course is for leaders to change their own behavior toward three relational outcomes:

Smartest team: Once upon a time leaders controlled access to information and power which made them uniquely positioned to have the answer. Today the explosion and democratization of information means there is so much relevant information that no single person or place monopolizes it and in this world the younger generation is much more agile. Today’s leader must facilitate getting the right information to the right places that leads to the right answer. Today’s leader does not need to be the smartest person in the room; rather, to lead the smartest, most-informed team.

Energized team: Today’s leader is challenged to produce an energized team from a workforce often running-on-empty. Floggings and firings have historically been the motivator de jour. Fear eventually becomes a leaky, deflating vessel. Today, over 50 percent of adults are single – the pressure of providing for family has changed. Healthcare and more generous unemployment payouts make job-loss less catastrophic and living with parents less stigmatized. Tech has even made unemployment less lonely – people stay connected.

Gallup/Deloitte found three keys to high-performance teams – today’s crown-jewel of organization success: a sense of purpose, commitment to excellence and people doing what they do best — their strengths. Successful leaders must be hyper-attentive communicators of purpose and thoughtful match-makers – finding and inviting excellence-oriented round-pegs into round holes.

Empowered team: Empowerment fuels workforce development. Successful empowerment combines letting go and enabling – focused learning and mentoring that develop those strengths Millennials trust to protect from the vagaries of corporate life. Enablement is the lubricant that then cultivates and humanizes the final piece – accountability. Millennials loathe egotistical “power-taking” leaders but are energized by power-making leadership that multiplies their power by informing, building strengths and redistributing control and successful accountability.

Leading in today’s Millennial age comes down to redistribution of leadership wealth – communication, development and power.”

Read the full article here.  Robert Hall is speaking at the upcoming Relational Thinking International Conference  (Cambridge, UK, 16 – 18 September) about, among other things, Managing Relational Risk in Companies. Visit our website for more information about the program, the speakers and for registration.