t hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to

Professional women often come to executive coaches to work on their perceived “weaknesses” in the workplace, with an express wish to change an undesirable behavior or pattern. While we can effectively work from this point to create change - with some clients focusing on what they are doing right offers the best prognosis. I recently worked with a client who felt overwhelmed by all her “bad” habits in the office. She became easily distracted and would often take on the work of colleagues. By turning the topic around and asking her what she was already doing right at work, a shift occurred. We agreed she should focus only on spending more time engaging in the right behaviors; concentrating most of her energy on building relationships with her own clients and keeping her accounts up to date.

She realized that concentrating on her own accounts would naturally take up more time, making it easier for her to say no to colleagues who had routinely come to her for extra support, plus she would submit more accurate reports, a problematic issue that had been raised at a recent appraisal. “Turning up the volume” on the good habits allows the old habits to wither and diminish in time.

Female managers are often criticized for not adhering to a hierarchical structure within organisations and becoming too attached to individual employees. In the eyes of many traditionalists, any form of sentimentality makes poor business sense. I have worked with women clients who felt they were too “soft” and feared they did not convey leadership qualities to their staff. I am delighted to hear of new research that may lay rest to those old assumptions. A 2006 Sunday Times study of over 500 companies found those with over 60% female managers had the happiest workforces. Employees felt these organisations offered good managers, a good record for personal development and strong team relationships. Staff at these companies felt they were well praised by their managers and that senior staff actually cared for them as individuals.

Within the study, it became apparent that this “soft” approach to management hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to C

her what she was already doing right at work, a shift occurred. We agreed she should focus only on spending more time engaging in the right behaviors; concentrating most of her energy on building relationships with her own clients and keeping her accounts up to date.

She realized that concentrating on her own accounts would naturally take up more time, making it easier for her to say no to colleagues who had routinely come to her for extra support, plus she would submit more accurate reports, a problematic issue that had been raised at a recent appraisal. “Turning up the volume” on the good habits allows the old habits to wither and diminish in time.

Female managers are often criticized for not adhering to a hierarchical structure within organisations and becoming too attached to individual employees. In the eyes of many traditionalists, any form of sentimentality makes poor business sense. I have worked with women clients who felt they were too “soft” and feared they did not convey leadership qualities to their staff. I am delighted to hear of new research that may lay rest to those old assumptions. A 2006 Sunday Times study of over 500 companies found those with over 60% female managers had the happiest workforces. Employees felt these organisations offered good managers, a good record for personal development and strong team relationships. Staff at these companies felt they were well praised by their managers and that senior staff actually cared for them as individuals.

Within the study, it became apparent that this “soft” approach to management hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to

ad been raised at a recent appraisal. “Turning up the volume” on the good habits allows the old habits to wither and diminish in time.

Female managers are often criticized for not adhering to a hierarchical structure within organisations and becoming too attached to individual employees. In the eyes of many traditionalists, any form of sentimentality makes poor business sense. I have worked with women clients who felt they were too “soft” and feared they did not convey leadership qualities to their staff. I am delighted to hear of new research that may lay rest to those old assumptions. A 2006 Sunday Times study of over 500 companies found those with over 60% female managers had the happiest workforces. Employees felt these organisations offered good managers, a good record for personal development and strong team relationships. Staff at these companies felt they were well praised by their managers and that senior staff actually cared for them as individuals.

Within the study, it became apparent that this “soft” approach to management hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to

to hear of new research that may lay rest to those old assumptions. A 2006 Sunday Times study of over 500 companies found those with over 60% female managers had the happiest workforces. Employees felt these organisations offered good managers, a good record for personal development and strong team relationships. Staff at these companies felt they were well praised by their managers and that senior staff actually cared for them as individuals.

Within the study, it became apparent that this “soft” approach to management hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to

t hardly seemed a characteristic to change. Instead it was encouraged among those organisations all vying to be considered good employers in this comprehensive study. Rather than worry that they aren’t as aggressive as some male colleagues, female managers can look at what they are doing well--managing staff with a sensitivity, and let those habits shine. It reminded me that it is not always our behavior that needs to be changed but rather our perception of it-perhaps it is really an attribute in disguise!

Questions to Consider for Changing Your “Weaknesses” into “Strengths”

1. What do you feel you do poorly at work?

2. Keeping in mind all behaviors have a pay-off, how does this “weakness” serve you?

3. How could you re-frame this from a weakness to a strength?

4. What do you do well at work?

5. How could you do more of this activity?