Rapport is the ability of buolding a n immediate relationship by showing your prospect that you share the same values.
For instance when I learned that my business coach was a fan of Stephen Covey and of the Blue Ocean startegy,I realized that we were very much on the same wave length both when it comes to sharng a belief in effevctiveness and in values.
The benefit of rapport is taht it builds trust very early in a relationship an dsaves much inquiry. It makes the achieving of mutual goals musch easier.
How is it that coaches succeed with some teams and fail with others? Why do players succeed with a team after failing with previous teams? Why do successful executives fail at their next position?
There are obviously many models that endeavour to explain why this happens, but I particularly like the notion that the style adopted by a supervisor must match the competence of the employees supervised.
For instance, managers used to delegating responsibilities to their reports will do well with a well trained and competent team. These managers will provide the necessary resources to the team, come to an agreement as to what it means to succeed, and stay out of the team’s way.
The same style will fail dismally if the team is composed of newcomers with a low skill set who need to be taught the fundamentals. The team will require a supervisor with a very controlling and directing style. Allowing the team independence is allowing the team and the manger to fail. Similarly, a directing style will fail with a team composed of competent and self motivated professionals capable of directing themselves.
Far too frequently managers rely on their default style and make no adjustment for the staff they are supervising. When things turn bad, these managers may resort to criticism, temper tantrums or threats in an effort to achieve different results.
Consider adjusting your style to the capabilities of the people you are supervising. Sometimes different people on the team will require a different style until their competence level changes.
What is the difference between a CEO that operates a one man show, vs. a CEO that leads a real team?
Too many of us create a business consisting only of ourselves and two to three workers, and there it stays. In too many cases there is a lack of a business plan and sense of mission for the enterprise, and other more personal challenges such as limiting mind sets. We can refer to this type of business as a “one man show”.
What are the other attributes of a one man show?
First, the CEO owns the whole company. The owner’s view rules. The owner makes the decisions and the workers are only there to carry them out. Because of the small structure, the owner doesn’t do much planning, and may not even be aware of the importance and value of a business plan.
These owners compete on price and have a small number of customers. They care about their product but often don’t consider their staff worthy of further development. They have difficulty raising money and managing cash flow; work long hours, and at best make a living.
CEOS that break out from this level have a product that has taken off. New lines are being developed and new customers are flocking to their doorstep. They have a steady customer base, so instead of competing on low prices, value that is important to their customers is being added to their product. At this point the expansion creates complexity and demands a new management structure. The CEO begins to delegate and searches for staff that can bring value and further growth.
We all start small. However, those businesses that move from a one man show to a growing business usually do so within five years. Within five years their billings can reach one million dollars. The right CEOS will make it happen. They will create the right team as well as the right value proposition for their customers.