7 Habits - Book Study Session 3
On November 9 we had the third session of the study for The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change by Stephen R. Covey.
In this session we discussed Habits 3 and 4.
Thank you to Dan Irvin and Gordon Brooks for leading the discussion.
Habit 3 – Put First Things First
Covey asserts that Habit 3 is “the fulfillment, the actualization, the natural emergence of Habits 1 and 2” (p. 147). It is very important that this step occurs after self awareness and mental preparation because one could be inclined to skip Habits 1 and 2 and jump right in to acting out the changes they want to see. Habit 3 is all about reaping what you sow, and if you don’t take the time to prepare yourself for a paradigm shift internally, Covey argues that acting out the habits will be a temporary solution, at best. However, he makes the same argument in reverse as well when he asserts that the power of independent will is what gives people the ability “to proactively carry out the program we have developed through the other three endowments” (p. 148). In other words, Habit 3 is the manifestation of the vision that is developed during the first two stages, and without Habit 3 that vision cannot ever be actualized.
Covey describes four generations of time management that essentially show how the most “evolved” notion of time management (the fourth generation) is really not about managing time at all but about managing ourselves and ensuring that our actions align with our core principles. Covey then presents a time management matrix to show the different ways that people spend their time. He argues that people are most inclined to spend time in areas of urgency or business but that people should spend time on matters of importance. People who spend time on the activities in the second Quadrant (prevention, PC activities, relationship building, recognizing new opportunities, planning and recreation) tend to handle genuine crises well while preventing the majority of them, and they are more productive and happy than people who spend their time in the other Quadrants. Effective people spend their time focusing on opportunity, results, and solutions instead of the problems.
In order to make the transition into someone who spends time on important things and becomes an effective self-manager, Covey suggests that we identify and prioritize all our different roles (individual, spouse/parent, employer/employee, volunteer, etc.) and then identify how our goals align with our roles and mission statement. He suggests that on a moment to moment basis we are making decisions that affect our goals and reflect our mission statement and that we should learn when to say no. This is a useful tool to remain aware in each moment of how our decisions either help or hinder our goals and mission.
Finally, Covey discusses how managers can delegate responsibility to help meet goals. He suggests that leaders/managers should identify the desired result for the designee but allow them to choose their method. This is called Stewardship delegation. Controlling their methods is part of the Gofer delegation that Covey argues is most common but the least effective. If “trust is the highest form of human motivation” as Covey argues, then certainly leaders must learn to delegate by sharing the goal and trusting their designee to enact effective methods (p. 178).
Habit 4 – Think Win/Win
Habit 4 explains the six paradigms of human interaction: win/win, win/lose, lose/win, lose/lose, win, and win/win or no deal. Covey’s answer for which paradigm is best is not black and white; in fact, he writes that it depends on the situation. The only paradigm he argues has no place in a functional interaction is lose/lose. If possible, the ideal scenario is win/win, so Covey breaks down this particular paradigm. He illustrates the five dimensions of the win/win paradigm (character, relationships, agreements, supportive systems, and processes) to see how they relate to each other, but perhaps the more overarching illustration is the chart that shows that win/win requires a balance of courage and consideration. Balance is not something we typically gravitate towards since it requires more consistent self evaluation than if we just decide to be always courageous or always considerate. This balance is what Covey calls maturity.
A common pitfall for people when trying to accomplish the win/win paradigm is what Covey calls the “Scarcity Mentality.” The opposite mentality is what supports and promotes a successful win/win paradigm – Abundance Mentality. This is the idea that “there is plenty out there for everybody” (p. 219). This requires trust and consideration, two qualities that Habit 3 emphasizes. One has to trust that their hard work will earn due recognition while simultaneously considering the other person and choosing to promote their success as well.
Since the win/win paradigm is about human interaction and therefore applies to many types of relationships and scenarios, there are many different applications of it, but in all instances the goals, guidelines, resources, accountability and consequences must be clear. The way you present them may be different if you are addressing an employee, co-worker, spouse, child, etc. Covey notes that while we may encourage a win/win mentality, we must be careful to not reward in win/lose situations or our actions will be in conflict with our ideology. This means that as managers or as leaders of the win/win mentality, we have to be very aware of what we are rewarding as not all successes result from a win/win scenario.
Conclusion
Now it is your turn to share:
• Think of a time when you focused on the problem instead of the solution. Now think of a time when you focused on the solution instead of the problem. Think about how focusing on the solution made you a better leader, model and person.
• Think about a way that you could delegate responsibility to someone in your personal or working life to improve your relationship and better meet your goals. How would you implement the Stewardship delegation approach in this scenario?
• What is one way you could reassign the way you spend your time so that you spend more time engaging in Quadrant 2 activities?
• Reflect on a time when you engaged in a paradigm of human interaction that did not work out positively for both you and the other person (or company/department). Could you have turned that situation into a win/win, or would another paradigm have worked better?
The next session will be November 30.
