As a Leader How do I energize my team members?

This is a query that keeps coming up in our coaching conversation. 

What technique we have which we can share with the leadership team to enable them to be ready for a stronger leader. It pertains to us as a coach as well. 

Let us look into this model and point out this to our leader to pilot with his/her team members. 

The SCARF model of behavior is a comparatively recent theory, having first been published in 2008 by David Rock. The word SCARF is an acronym which stands for:

Status – the relative importance to others.

Certainty – the ability to predict the future.

Autonomy – the sense of control over events.

Relatedness – the sense of safety with others.

Fairness – the perception of fair exchanges.

The primary premise of the SCARF model is the assumption the brain makes us behave in certain ways, which are to reduce threats and maximize rewards.

While the brain receives a threat and reward approach to fundamental needs, such as food and water, the theory argues this same also goes on with social needs.

An anticipated threat to one’s status activates similar brain networks to a threat to one’s existence. In the same way, an anticipated rise in fairness switches on the same reward circuitry as getting a monetary reward. 

The aim of the SCARF model is, therefore, interaction with individuals in a manner that reduces the threats and enlarges the rewards in relation to the five key areas specified above.

In our conversation as a leader with the team members, when we insist on these steps to be maintained, we can observe radical transformations in the way team members behave.

In our interaction with many team members during a coaching conversation, team members do share that, the leave organization or team when they see that their leaders are not fair, leaders are not empowering and micromanaging, team members are creating silos based on languages/place, etc.

We interact with leaders with this model and ask, how do they think they can enable the team set up to eliminate some of the threats and increase rewards.

It takes a conscious effort to practice this in the patterned transaction. While coaching with the leaders, we are working as an observant and noting where the leader has missed exercising above these steps.

In subsequent observation sharing sessions with the leaders, we highlight that for the next time conversation, leaders can alter in a definite section what we have witnessed a room for improvement.

The same applies to us as a coach. We also require to communicate with our fellow team members considering all these factors.

What we are working, as we know from this model an increase in the recognition of autonomy feels rewarding for the team members, so let us minimize micromanagement and empower the team to work out their own steps and explain them with others. Let us get rid of the autonomy threat which comes from the working transaction.

In any opportunity, let us bring transparency and fairness because a threat response from a sense of unfairness can be triggered easily. Let us establish clear ground rules, expectations or objectives.

In this uncertain world, how we as a leader can bring certainty. That is the million-dollar question. We as a leader by applying our wisdom need to ask self and enable the team members with some certainty. A brain is a pattern-recognition machine that is constantly trying to predict the near future. Even a minuscule amount of uncertainty causes an ‘error’ response in the brain. The act of creating a sense of certainty is rewarding. Let us do this more. 

Relatedness allow us to determine whether others are ‘in’ or ‘out’ of our social network. In the absence of safe social synergies, the body generates a threat response, also known as feeling left out. Let us have devoted social space in some constructs. Let us identify paths to enhance safe connections between individuals.

The Gallup organizations’ research on workplace engagement showed that the statement ‘I have a best friend at work’ was significant to engagement in their ‘Q12’ assessment. Perhaps even having one trusting relationship can have a notable impact on relatedness.

I personally always have a few best friends at work wherever I go.

Another important area to work out is how can we as a leader ensure, other’s status does not suffer. A status threat can develop through offering advice or instructions, or simply suggesting someone is slightly ineffective at a task. Have you seen such a circumstance? Personally I felt it for myself. If leaders want to change others’ behavior, more attention must be paid to reducing status threats when offering feedback. One way to do this is by granting individuals to give themselves feedback on their own performance. It is not easy but with practice, we can develop. 

The story is from Control to collaboration, how easily we can move into. I am sure many individuals will argue with “Yes But…” 

Can we experiment and realize the benefit?