By the afternoon When asked, “How do you like your current role?”, they will compare and contrast their current experience with their past roles. Most describe their role as not bad. But to my eye, they seem a bit tired or worn out. Some ooze excitement because of the opportunity they see in front of them. Others seem persecuted at every turn. When this range of differences appears within the same team it really stands out. To explore those differences, I want to borrow from biology. In particular, evolution and the concept of adaptation.

“Nature has made up her mind that what cannot defend itself shall not be defended.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson (1870)^⁠1

Emerson’s observation is right, and it feels harsh. In nature, predators seize opportunities to pick off those individual who are different enough to stand out. The animals we see are the lucky ones. The genes they inherited ensured they adapted to their surroundings. 

If you live in a desert area with light-coloured sand, then the lizards you see will be light coloured. Why? To answer that question you could run an experiment. Go out and buy some dark-coloured lizards, place them in a large open top enclosure and see what happens over time.^⁠2 The answer will be obvious, predation mean we should expect to see more light ones than dark ones.

Work environments are often far from fair. Some individuals or teams use aggression to get what they want. Other teams seem to be the dumping ground for all the bits no one else wants to sort through. 

Humans have an advantage, some of our adaptations come from our genes, but we can also intentionally direct our behaviour. We can shape our surrounds to meet our needs. Or change our behaviour to suit the current setting or ‘local environment’.

Our local environment comprises the physical things around us and anyone else who is present. This environment is constantly changing. We are reading, and there is an email alert. We are now working on a higher priority issue.  Our stomach growls, but there is a 3pm deadline, so eating can wait.

We are hyper vigilant when travelling in a foreign country for the first time. We notice the differences compare to our normal environment. Navigating the transportation system requires learning their way of presenting information. The timing of meals may be very different. The pace of life could be very different, big city hustle compared to a sleepy rural town. Two days into the journey and we relax, we know what to expect. We have adapted to our new surroundings.

The relationship between an individual and their environment is best understood through observion. That data provides clues as to how a person functions in a particular setting. Are they trying to escape the situation? Then they are using avoidance behaviour. Place them on the surviving end of the continuum. Are they engaging with people and their surroundings? These are the signs of curosity and approach behaviours. Place them at the thriving end.

Two people, in the same setting, may engage in the opposite behaviours. One person wants to keep moving. The other wants to explore. Their behaviours align to how they experience that environment. The one who views the environment as hostile or unfamiliar will be more cautious. This reflects survival instincts. The one who feels safe will explore. They seem to thrive in this setting.

If you want to know how a person is feeling about their environment, tune into their language. Listen to the words they use as they describe what is happening. From there, you can gauge where they are on the functioning continuum. The next step is to look for clues in their environment that influence their behaviour. Track someone for a while. As you gather more data, you will gain insights into their nature.

¹ Ralph Waldo Emerson (1870). “Society and Solitude: Twelve Chapters”, p.208, London S. Low, Son & Marston 1870.

https://www.azquotes.com/quote/567167

² Kayla M. Hardwick, et al., (2015). “When Field Experiments Yield Unexpected Results”

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118560

Behaviour is what we say and what we do.

Unfortunately, the term behaviour has been hijacked by the boys in shiny shoes. They are the ones who convince bosses to buy some fancy sounding thing that will fix the problem with people.

Typically, what they sell contains lots of made up acronyms and initialisms. These products use a diagnostic technique that categories the problem. The problem gets a label and a description that seems to match the situation. Next, apply a prescriptive solution and your problems will disappear. Sounds like an ointment you rub on a bite.

Upon first glance it feels like something valuable. But after a few tries, the initial excitement wears off and doubt sets in. Many of the recommendations don’t seem to match up to the actual situation. While a few of their ideas may hang around, but most of the techniques just drop by the wayside.

So my advice, view behaviour as simply what we say or do, then STOP! This is enough. Making it more complicated doesn’t make it useful.

Two examples of behaviour are; Jon saying, ‘Let me tell you why that won’t work here.’; Bob sending Susie the data that morning, as he said he would.

Defining behaviour this way has many advantages. It means behaviour is active, not an outcome or a label. Using a pinpointed behaviour means two or more people can agree that they heard or saw the same thing. This means we can count behaviour. From there we can track changes over time. This answers the question, “Did the attempt to change the behaviour work?”, and establishes a cause-and-effect relationship.

This definition of behaviour will serve as the anchor for all my blog posts.