Whenever the client and consultant come together, there are two sides to the association. The surface issues, which relate to those things that both are happy to share, and the ‘shadow’ issues, which are the hidden behaviours, thoughts and feelings that they are less comfortable about sharing. The shadow issues are important because they often drive the force and direction of any change. You probably know people who are scared of spiders or have a particular aversion to a type of food. Although these fears are seemingly silly, they can significantly influence the decisions people take and how they manage their lives.
A definition of shadow factors in organisations might be all the important information that does not get identified, discussed and managed in the open. The shadow side deals with the covert, the undiscussed, the undiscussible and the unmentionable.[i] These sit in the shade of the person and only appear when a light is deliberately shone upon them.
Surface Shadow spilt
We might see this with the smile of a clown. The public sees the fool who entertains the children. But the smiley face often conceals a sadder person on the inside. They might see themselves as old and weary and not having achieved the goal of running their own circus. Finally, who are they really? Do they know what is deep inside and are they prepared to share that with others.
Although you might be fortunate enough to know your client well, in the early stage of the engagement you are unlikely to be emotionally connected with them. This can be like the first fumbling teenage date, where both kids are trying to second guess and satisfy the goals of the other person without compromising their personal values and integrity. In the same way, the early meetings with a client can end up as a series of fumbling encounters, where both people are trying to understand the needs and goals of the other. Part of the reason why this dilemma occurs is because we all operate on two levels of interaction, the surface and the shadow. The surface issues are considered on an open and level playing field and the shadow issues are the factors that both sides choose to hide from each other.
In a typical consulting project, you might offer what appears to be a practical and sensible change proposition, which the client may rebuff with arguments and concerns about its feasibility. But are these rebuttals coming from the reasoned head of the client or are shadow concerns forcing unrelated and often irrelevant issues to the surface? For example, let’s suppose a reengineering proposal has been turned down because it involves head office relocation. On the surface the proposal offers a number of financial and operational improvements for the client. However, the unseen shadow implication is that the client’s children’s education will be interrupted and his or her partner’s work and social life hampered. This type of personal prejudice can swing the balance against a rational solution, thus destroying (for an unknown, or at least unstated, reason) your proposal.
Crucially, when developing a relationship with the client, you must listen to what they say and, more importantly, watch what they do. The pained facial expression as your client talks about the business goals or the involuntary eye movement as the topic of relocation emerges are valuable indicators that highlight a shadow problem. They will not automatically tell you about the deeper issues at play but they certainly offer signals that the topic could be explored further to pull out any shadow factors.
Argyris (1992) suggests that there is a fundamental set of behavioural rules that drive shadow behavior and they cross all nations and cultures. People keep these rules in their heads to help them deal with embarrassment or threat:
 |
Bypass embarrassment or threat whenever possible. |
|
Act as if you are not bypassing them. |
|
Do not discuss this bypassing while it is happening. |
|
Do not discuss the undiscussability of the undiscussable. |
In tacitly following these four rules, people will inherently lock themselves into a ‘I know it’s true because I say so’ style of behaviour. The problem surfaces when you attempt to tackle any of these four rules head-on – asking people to clarify what the problem is and trying to discuss some of the deeper issues as part of the diagnosis process. All of these are likely to trigger some form of defensive reaction that in turn drive up the shadows.
Suspicion often surrounds the diagnostic stage. People are likely to ignore anyone who tries to delve deeply into the shadows. You must be able to mentally climb inside the person under investigation, to take on board their beliefs and goals and feel what they are feeling, no matter how alien or bizarre it might seem. In doing this, it becomes possible to understand what their personal needs are and why they are operating from the shadow side of their personality. To do this it helps to map the nature of the shadows that both you and the client have.
The shadow map is a simple tool that allows you to understand what shadows might reside between you and the client (or consumer) and then place how to take remedial action to surface the factors that need to be addressed.
|
|
In the first case the consultant must be able to reflect on what shadow issue that have in relation to the client and the project. At a surface level you might be prepared to talk about the project plan, fees, your skills set and other clients who you have worked with on similar projects. However, shadows for the consultant might be the fact that the project was sold because of pressure from the senior partner to drive up revenue, a concern that the technology is not proven and maybe that you have contracted to deliver another project at the same time and so will need to split your time across two key clients. |
|
|
The client’s surface issues may be the company strategy and business processes, the current budget and the personal goals that are associated with success of the project. The client shadow issues might be the fact that they know the budget will be cut in the near future, that the project has been tried a number of times before and failed and the managing director sees the change as very low on the business priorities list. |
|
|
Once the consultant and client come together then we end up with a combination of four constructs. The things neither wants to discuss, the things the client will discuss and the consultant will not; the things the consultant will discuss and the client will not; and the things that both will happily discuss. The resulting four segments are not fixed element, rather than they change in size depending upon the level of disclosure and willingness to share undiscussible by the client and consultant. As both players flex there degree of discussible’s so the shape of the shadow map will vary |
|
|
When the shadow map has this shape the suggestion is that both client and consultant are open in their interaction. The surface area offers plenty of space for both to share the discussible items and so effect a robust clarification stage. The one risk with this shape is risk of being lulled into a false sense of security. Like the married couple who are proud of their relationship and proclaim their openness to the world, only to find out that one of them has a deep secret, that when surfaced blows the whole relationship apart. Although the bottom left box is only small, it can contain dangerous viral spores that can kill a relationship. |
|
|
With this shape, the client is happy to disclose and share many things but the consultant is closing down and is not happy to share what they are thinking and feeling. This first question is why, what is causing them to be holing back and creating undiscussible in the relationship. Second, what does this large shadow box contain and are their elements in their that can be destructive for the engagement. |
|
|
This is the killer shape. Where both the client and consultant are limiting their level of disclosure. Now, if this is the start of the relationship then it is a shape that might be expected and possible makes sense as both sides might have commercial sensitivities to protect. However, if this shape exists part way through the engagement then this is a dangerous sign as neither party is prepared to open up and share their thoughts and feelings. An example of this shape can be found in large beurecratic companies that are close to shut down as all the players in the internal market fight to protect their patch and cover their backs. It is also a normal style of management that can still be found in certain companies. |
The suggestion is that effective clarification can only really take placed when the (necessary) shadow has been surfaced and you are free to really understand what is going on. The art of shadow dancing comes in your ability to move two key lines within the shadow map shown in Figure 22 .
nancila ad
Shadow Map
Although there will always be a variety of strategies that can be used to open up the surface area and shrink the shadow area, they will be primary dependent upon the ability to move the two line in the direction shown by the arrows. The consultant must be able to move their line from top to bottom to make more things discussible and the client must be helped to move the line from right to left and do the same.
Please note a caution with this model. Your goal is to attain the ‘necessary’ information to facilitate the clarification of the problem or issue being raised by the client. Word ‘necessary’. The danger in surfacing shadows is that all of a sudden you are face with undiscussible that you don’t want to deal with and have little to do with the project you are working on. This is a real danger no matter what the change being managed. In the process of analysing processes in readiness for a new computer system the analysts might uncover deep organisational rifts between departments that leads to the axing of a senior manager; the quality auditor may surface the fact that faulty items are actually being sold on the sly by local managers; and penetrating question the Independent Financial Advisor may uncover deep rifts in a marriage that trigger a divorce.
Very few consultants or coaches are trained to be able to deal with deep cognitive, emotional or behavioural problems that may surface when they try to clarify a client’s needs. It is vital that, if faced with a situation you are not equipped to deal with, that you act responsibly and advise the client to seek the appropriate, professional help. Unless you are trained, however well intentioned your actions, you may well do more harm than good. In some circumstances it can pay to agree this with the client when agreeing a contract for the engagement.
Finally, beware the sabotage factors that have the potential to destroy a relationship and client engagement. The sabotage secrets are those shadow factors that sit deep in the bottom left hand corner of the shadow map.
They problem is that they are buried so deep that neither the client nor consultant really wants them to be surfaced. This might be akin to the morning after the office Christmas party. When people walk into the room the first morning after Christmas a certain number of people probably know that something awful happened and that they were part of the awfulness. However, they choose not to go there and stick with the maxim of let sleeping dogs lie. Now all will be fine so long as the dog stays asleep and does not get woken. The problem comes when the deep shadow issue does finally get surfaced, (maybe by someone inadvertently sharing some photos from the party) that it becomes destructive and sabotages the office relationship that had managed to tick along nicely in blind ignorance.
Although people
often believe that by keeping these potentially destructive acts at a deep
shadow level they can be forgotten, I am not convinced. I believe that when this
happens there will be leakage. This leakage might be nervousness when around
certain people, potential panic when dealing with certain information and the
constant fear of disclosure that leads to sleepless nights. The paradox is that
although they can be destructive when hidden, the process of bringing them to
the surface can also be destructive. There is no right answer; the trick is to
just be aware that they can exist for many people and organisations and be
prepared to deal with them I you believe that a secret is causing a potential
problem.
(c) Mick Cope
