GROWing Better Body Language

The scoff. The eye roll. The exasperated sigh. The furrowed brows. The shrug. We’ve all seen examples of disrespectful, dismissive, and outright rude body language in the workplace, and I doubt it’s an exaggeration to say that we all wish this body language was far less frequent among some of our employers and employees!

As leaders, one of our responsibilities is guiding our employees to embody their best, most professional selves in the workplace, and coaching them to improve their body language falls under that umbrella. Today, we’re going to walk through a few key strategies for addressing negative body language in employees, so straighten your shoulders and get ready to dive right in!

Focused Feedback

For starters, I recommend this video by leadership consultant Joe Mull as an introductory point for learning how to manage negative body language in employees, and as such I will walk us through the key points Mull addresses!

First and foremost, the most effective way to improve poor body language in employees is through focused, one-on-one conversations that specify and provide feedback on the negative behavior the employee is (likely unwittingly) embodying. In other words, we must enter these meetings with specific examples and circumstances during which the employee has displayed the negative body language that we want to help them fix.

Step 1: Prepare ourselves to describe the physical details of a person’s negative body language.

What do we mean by this? Let’s look at the following two descriptions:

“Jess, you’ve been holding yourself really negatively during team meetings lately.”

Although there is mention of posture, this description doesn’t offer much specificity about how the employee has been negatively communicating with their body.

“Jess, I’ve noticed that during the last few team meetings, you tend to roll your eyes or furrow your eyebrows and shrug when someone presents a new idea. This behavior reads to me like you aren’t receptive to others’ suggestions, and it tends to stifle inter-group discussion.”

Not only are there specific examples of the employee’s negative body language, we can also see how this body language is having a detrimental impact on the entire team. Again: specificity is everything! Because body language so often occurs unconsciously, our employees will struggle to correct their negative body language if they are not aware of what specifically needs to be improved.

Step 2: Invite continuous engagement.

Once the employee has agreed that they need to address their body language—more on how to get to that point later!—we should ask them, “How should I let you know if I witness this behavior again?” In other words, we want to a) reassure our employees that we don’t expect them to magically improve their body language overnight and b) remind them that they are not undertaking this journey alone—we will be there to support them and guide them through mistakes.

A solid starting point, right? Let’s dive into some ways we can flesh out this approach even further!

GROW Model

While the above advice provides a clear introduction to addressing poor body language in employees, there are few key components missing. For example, how do we get our employees to agree that their body language needs improvement in the first place? How do we ensure our employees are engaged and inspired to present more positive, professional body language?

The GROW Model is a key tool leaders can employ to help fill in some of these gaps, as this model offers us a step-by-step method to successfully coaching employees in any arena! Allow me to direct our thoughts to utilizing the GROW Model specifically as a means to help employees improve negative body language:

G is for Goal, meaning the first step a manager should take when invoking the GROW Model to coach an employee on body language is to ask about and acknowledge the employee’s goals. Importantly, these goals do not have to be literally related to body language—that connection will come later. Where do they see themself in the organization within a year? Two years? Five years? In what direction do they want their career to go? The point of the G in GROW is to develop an understanding of what our employees want, because only then will we be able to truly tailor our feedback in a way that is productive and engaging for them.

R is for (Current) Reality, and in terms of helping an employee improve poor body language, R means laying out for our employee what their body language currently suggests and how those implications might impact their future goals. This step is where the focused feedback from earlier comes in, as leaders must be able to clearly describe the poor body language they have observed and how that body language could be detrimental to the employee’s vision for the future. For example, let’s say we have an employee who is struggling to project confident body language; they tend to keep their shoulders hunched, unconsciously making themself smaller, and they have difficulty maintaining appropriate eye contact. However, this employee’s Goal is to one day be a team leader themselves. As we give feedback on this Reality, we might say:

“I’ve noticed that your body language currently suggests you don’t have a lot of confidence, which could get in your way of achieving your goal to be a team leader. I’ve observed how you hunch your shoulders often, and you tend to fidget with your pencil and look down during our team meetings.”

Once we’ve presented the specifics of our employee’s body language and how that Reality may hinder their Goal, we move onto the O of the GROW Model: Options and/or Obstacles. This step is crucial, as this point is where we invite the employee to share their own ideas about how they might begin the journey of improving their body language. In other words, we ask the employee what Options they think they have as well as what Obstacles might be in their way. To return to the previous example, we might say:

“How do you think you can present yourself more professionally in meetings? What changes might you make in your body language to project more confidence?”

The O of GROW should not be rushed past in a meeting, as this is the opportunity for the employee to develop solutions attuned to their own self-improvement.

Once multiple Options are on the table, we turn to the final step: W, also known as Will—what will they do to move forward? As leaders, our responsibility when walking through the Will step is guiding our employees to narrow down their Options into a practical, solution-oriented plan to improve their body language. We should emphasize the importance of aligning their body language with their goals, and we should also reassure the employee at hand that we will provide observation and support throughout the journey. This step is also where we might schedule a follow-up meeting to provide continuous feedback about their body language—praise if we see improvement, and constructive criticism if we are not yet seeing positive results.

I want to emphasize the importance of ensuring the final two steps of the GROW Model—Options/Obstacles and Will—are led by the employee. People are more committed to personal and professional growth when they come up with their own solutions to get there! As such, the GROW Model is particularly apt as a method for coaching employees to improve their body language because it easily allows us to link that improvement with the employee’s aspirations. Rather than unintentionally coming across as a personal attack about how someone holds themself, feedback through the GROW Model is clearly about learning, moving forward, and dismantling obstacles to help ensure our employees can successfully reach their goals!

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization. Reach her at DimaGhawi.com andBreakingVases.com.

What's Adding Fuel to the Fire of Workplace Conflicts?

Have you ever found yourself in the blazes of a heated workplace conflict and wondered, Geez, what keeps adding fuel to this fire?!

I have some great news for you: you aren’t the only one! All of us have been in these stressful shoes, but what we may not have realized is that there are invisible factors at play influencing these fiery conflicts: unconscious bias. From in-group bias to attribution bias, today we will explore eight different biases that often shape our workplace conflicts without us even realizing! Ready to dive in?

Overconfidence Bias

Overconfidence bias is exactly what it sounds like—when individuals are overconfident and in turn overestimate their knowledge, experience, and abilities in a given situation. (It probably goes without saying, but overconfidence bias is not conducive for an environment dedicated to conversation and collaboration!) I’ve found that this bias is highly prevalent nowadays, as many of us enter conflicts truly, truly believing that we are right and the other person is wrong. Both social and traditional media reinforce this divisive bias, making it even easier for us to assume we are “good” while others are “bad” and “untrustworthy.”

A leader experiencing overconfidence bias, for example, might overestimate their ability to manage a conflict within their team, where mishandling this issue may lead to future workplace tension. The existence of this bias does not mean the leader in this example doesn’t know their team members well, but rather that their area of experience is not necessarily in conflict management! Just because we have a title doesn’t mean we’ll always know what’s right in a given situation—sometimes it’s better to seek help from HR or an external mediator.

Attribution Bias

Attribution bias is the tendency to attribute a person’s behavior to their individual character rather than considering any alternative reasons as to why a person may be acting a certain way. If any of us have experienced a customer getting angry at a service-facing employee for not “smiling enough,” perhaps even accusing them of hating their job, that’s a common example of attribution bias! There are infinite reasons a person may not have a perfect smile on at work 24/7, be it because of a health crisis, conflict at home, or even just having a rough day, but attribution bias dismisses that nuance to simply accuse a person’s character.

A more specific example is the all too common struggle faced by employees with disabilities: the fear that attribution bias will negatively impact how their employers and coworkers may perceive their disability. I have a friend who has severe arthritis to the point that she cannot type. She works virtually and has taken great pains to ensure that her manager and her colleagues are not aware of her disability, because she fears that if they knew, they might blame a slow response to an email on her disability. Similarly, one of my employees has a friend with ADHD that experiences executive dysfunction, where at work they have been accused of “not trying hard enough” rather than their manager and fellow employees making an effort to understand their disability.

Fortunately, addressing attribution bias is simple: rather than assuming we know the reason for a person’s behavior, take a step back and consider other possibilities!

Blind Spot Bias

Blind spot bias refers to our failure to recognize our own cognitive biases while readily identifying them in others, such as remembering situations in which others have displayed bias while not recalling conversations in which we ourselves exhibited biases. Before I continue, I want to note that “blind spot”—while not an ableist slur—perpetuates the historical treatment of disability as metaphor, and thus I am all for finding different terminology to refer to this bias! Maybe misidentification bias? Oversight bias?

An all-too-common example of this bias would be a heated debate in the workplace (or, truth be told, at home). As tension increases, more angry sparks fly until this debate becomes a full-on blaze! We’ve all seen and been part of this type of argument before: one person raises their voice as they get more invested. The other person proceeds to raise their voice, too. Then the first person demands, “Why are you raising your voice?!” to which the second person responds, “You raised yours!” And don’t get me started on body language. Metaphorical hackles raised, furrowed brows, a clenched jaw—our bodies often scream our anger long before we do! What we might notice here, though, is how often we don’t even realize we have initiated an act of frustration, e.g. raising our voices, which exemplifies blind spot bias to a T.

In-Group Bias

In-group bias refers to the notion that it’s easier for us to view people we’re similar to favorably, that we’re more likely to forgive missteps and mistakes by people we have connections with. In other words, if there’s disagreement during a cross-departmental project, employees are more likely to side with individuals from their own department—especially their own team—and even outright ignore the perspectives of people in other departments.

For a more specific example, consider a situation relayed to me by a friend: a company is in the middle of negotiating with a supplier. They keep asking for more and more from this supplier, but are refusing to improve their compensation. If the supplier pushes back about this unfair agreement, employees of the original company are more likely to complain about the supplier—because they have created a sense of belonging and group identity as a team—rather than considering the perspective of the supplier. It’s important for anyone to have their friends’ and coworkers’ and company’s best interests at heart, but it’s just as important to consider the perspectives and experiences of others, too!

Projection Bias

Projection bias refers to when individuals assume that other people share the same interests, values, beliefs, etc. as they do, which can lead to interpersonal conflicts and a lack of empathy. Politics, for example, is not a stranger to workplace conversations, I have witnessed many a situation where individuals will speak intensely about their political perspectives to a fellow coworker—without knowing where that coworker falls on any of these issues, because they have simply assumed they share political beliefs.

Another common example of projection bias is the matter of personal boundaries! Some employees, depending on their culture, are very forthcoming about their personal lives, for example, while others are not, which may lead to an awkward shutdown if someone asks, “How are your family doing?” to a coworker who prefers to keep their personal life separate from their professional career. Similar, hugs! I’ve been affectionately dubbed a “hugger,” but I’ve had to challenge my projection bias and recognize that not everyone wants to be hugged, and that I should ask first before launching myself at them with affection!

Projection bias is also deeply relevant in terms of cultural differences in the workplace. In the U.S., it’s normal for everyone to speak up and express their opinions during meetings. When I worked in Japan, I learned that such is not the case there: managers speak on their teams’ behalf, meaning a meeting in Japan will not involve everyone speaking. That doesn’t mean those employees aren’t engaged, just that their cultural expectations are different—it’s up to us not to project our own expectations onto them!

Self-Serving Bias

Self-serving bias is exactly what the name suggests: attributing one’s successes to oneself (e.g. we completed a project through hard work and/or talent) and discrediting one’s failures as a result of external factors/circumstances (e.g. we didn’t get a raise because our boss was having a bad day, nothing to do with us). In other words, we interpret the world through a lens that serves ourselves! Self-serving bias commonly leads to a lack of accountability, where we don’t recognize our own role or culpability in a given problem.

I’ve noticed self-serving bias rears its head often in people who are resistant to the implementation of DEI initiatives. For example, if one of such people receives a promotion at work, self-serving bias would imply that they earned this promotion through hard work, expert qualifications, and dedication to their company. If another team member gets promoted, such as a person who was hired after the company revised their hiring process for greater inclusivity, then self-serving bias would imply that person  undeservedly received this promotion because of favoritism or because of “woke-ness” (even though it’s well-documented that DEI is, plain and simply, a good business practice).

Based on this example, I think we can see how self-serving bias relies on the universal human insecurity that we aren’t good enough, meaning the best way to counter it is to appreciate our strengths and make an intentional effort to understand and work at our flaws!

Status Quo Bias

Status quo bias simply refers to a preference for the current state of affairs. In other words, status quo bias commonly results in resistance to any kind of change—even change for the better! Since change is inevitable, status quo bias is no stranger to any workplace.

When Millennials began joining the corporate workplace en masse in the late 1990s and 2000s, I remember the kerfuffle caused by their preference for open office spaces as a means to increase communication and collaboration throughout the workplace. This change was difficult to process for some employees in senior generations, whose status quo bias meant they preferred traditional spaces and offices with doors, causing them to be resistant to these layout adjustments!

With time and understanding, of course, Millennials and their preferences were gradually welcomed. But allow me to give us all a heads-up: more change is coming! Rumor has it some Gen Z (born ~1997-2012) workers prefer the previous closed office environment. Organizations may need to start dusting off their layout plans AGAIN!

Negativity Bias

Negativity bias refers to how negativity (negative interactions, negative words, etc.) is more likely to stick and ingrain itself in our minds than positivity. For example, people are often more likely to remember negative work experiences they’ve had with individuals rather than successful collaborations!

A more specific scenario would be a manager providing a performance review to an employee. Though unintentional on the part of the manager, negativity bias may cause the employee to perceive the constructive feedback they are given as more hurtful or more significant than it’s meant to be. As a result, the employee may internalize a sense of inferiority or come to believe that they are not valued or appreciated by their employer.

Just because negativity bias exists doesn’t mean critical feedback isn’t important, of course, but to help counter this bias, it can be useful for all of us to make an intentional effort to reflect on positive experiences we’ve had and positive feedback we’ve received to help create a more balanced perception of our experiences.

There we have it: eight of the most common biases that might add fuel to the fire during our workplace conflicts. So, next time we find ourselves in a fiery situation, we must remember to watch—watch our words, watch our thoughts, and watch our biases! If we do so, we will have the upper hand to understand how our biases may be shaping our behavior, giving us an advantage in dousing the flames and resolving conflicts to everyone’s benefit. And who doesn’t love a secret advantage?

---

Dima Ghawi is the founder of a global talent development company with a primary mission for advancing individuals in leadership. Through keynote speeches, training programs and executive coaching, Dima has empowered thousands of professionals across the globe to expand their leadership potential. In addition, she provides guidance to business executives to develop diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies and to implement a multi-year plan for advancing quality leaders from within the organization. Reach her at DimaGhawi.com andBreakingVases.com.