ATD Footer Logo

Carrie Berg is vice president of L&D for Teladoc Health. She has more than 20 years of healthcare experience in sales, sales training, marketing, strategy, commercial effectiveness, L&D, talent and organization development, and leadership. Before joining Teladoc Health, Berg held various leadership roles in sales training, education, and development and consulted several startup organizations to build dynamic learning programs. She has participated in multiple certificate programs, graduated from the KPMG Women in Executive Leadership program, Leadership California, and is accredited in Insights Discovery and Situational Leadership. Berg is also a member of Chief and the Forbes Human Resources Council. She graduated from Winona State University with an MBA from Anderson University and is a doctoral student in organizational development and leadership.

Carrie Berg

March 2023

Upward influence is an essential competency that leaders must learn.

Making Waves

Got Government Talent Challenges? Get Answers at ATD 2015

“I know you think you understand what you thought you heard me say. But what you think you heard me say isn’t what I really meant.” Have you heard that before?
3-D communication is about first paying attention to what is being said, then interpreting it correctly before responding. 3-D communication style has a beginning and end with the message in the middle, making it more transactional than linear. It’s the middle that matters.
The first 3-D is discovering barriers such as past experiences, assumptions, expectations, knowledge, personal mood and values, and other factors potentially leading to misunderstandings.
The second 3-D is demonstrating listening by paving the way to effective communication either face-to-face or via whatever communication channel best fits the message.
The third 3-D is directing the action to avoid a head-on fight by knowing your purpose, channel, and how to send and receive the message.
Learn how to use this 3-D communication model with family, colleagues, team members, customers, and management.
 

Poor Communications Can Get You in Trouble

Women account for 57 percent of the U.S. workforce, and 60 percent of bachelor’s degrees in Europe and the United States. However, only 4 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs are female, and there are a multitude of barriers that contribute to this global leadership gender gap. In addition, research has identified an individual’s emotional intelligence (EQ) as a key aspect and driver of leadership effectiveness. EQ assessments have found women and men to be equally as intelligent emotionally, but strong in different areas considered gender-specific. Finally, men and women are raised in different “cultures.” It begins at childhood and carries into the workplace. Research shows clear differences in how men and women work within a structure, network, conduct meetings, interpret information, take risks, communicate, work in teams, and how we lead.
Shawn Andrews will discuss findings from her doctoral dissertation research on leadership, emotional intelligence, and gender, and will address the following topics in this webcast:

the leadership gender gap
barriers to leadership
emotional intelligence
gender culture differences
recommendations for individuals and organizations.

After the webcast, participants will be able to:

Examine barriers that contribute to the leadership gender gap.
Identify emotional intelligence attributes and their impact on leadership.
Explore how gender culture differences affect perception and promotion.
Apply global-focused strategies to maximize talent, remove barriers, and increase diversity and inclusion practices.


TD Magazine: Leadership, Emotional Intelligence, and Gender: Global Strategies for Talent Development

Procrastination is probably on most managers’ “Seven Deadly Sins” lists. But don’t be too quick to assign the moniker of “procrastinator.” According to personality type theory, as described by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) instrument, certain work style and cognitive preferences, which look an awful lot like procrastination on the surface, indicate anything but laziness.The MBTI instrument categorizes personality type along four categories, including Judging/Perceiving, which describes how people make decisions. Those with preferences for Judging (J)—whose work style dominates the corporate world currently—tend to make decisions quickly, and work more efficiently and are more energized at the beginning of a project. Conversely, those who prefer Perceiving (P) tend to make decisions later, and work more efficiently and are more energized toward the end of a project. It’s easy to see how an outsider, who can’t see what’s going on “under the hood,” might easily dismiss this tendency as procrastination, which usually entails delaying something because you simply don’t want to deal with it. However, for someone with a preference for Perceiving, quite the opposite is occurring. Instead, these workers are likely taking more time to gather all the information possible in order to make the most-informed decision. While those preferring J feel unsettled waiting to commit to a course of action and like to do it early on, those preferring P feel unsettled if they close off options before they’ve fully vetted them. Both approaches are valid and offer unique benefits. But it doesn’t take much vision to understand why—in a business climate riddled with the consequences of rushed decisions—the P approach might provide balance to an “I need it yesterday” culture. Yet, this particular cognitive and behavioral orientation, while common in the population at large, is marginalized in business, education, and society—often from childhood. **You’re a Slacker, and So Was Your Old Man!(No McFly Will Amount to Anything!)** From early in life, those with a preference for P receive messages that negate the value of their natural approach—and praise when they make more immediate decisions. This carries on into college, where you’re expected to choose a major before you even crack open a textbook (never mind that many of tomorrow’s most critical jobs probably don’t even exist yet). In fact, you could say that P preferences are programmed to self-identify as procrastinators and, as a result, learn to fake the J approach to school and work. How many times have you heard someone joke about the fact that they procrastinate, but can’t help it because they work better at the last minute? If that person is successful, chances are low that they truly procrastinate. More likely, they prefer P but have stereotyped themselves, because of a negative perception of what a preference for Perceiving really entails. In organizations, we don’t like when people delay making decisions. It’s unnerving because the merits of this work style are not understood in our J-biased corporate work culture—and we can’t necessarily discern what’s going on inside a person’s head. We can’t see that they’re actually gathering facts and weighing options; we don’t know that this process is so important to them that they’re willing to take all of the time that they possibly can before committing to a course of action. Efficiency Kicks in at the Project’s End As the deadline approaches, however, P preferences will quickly commit to a course of action and become efficiency machines, operating just as efficiently as those that prefer J tend to at the beginning of a project. This isn’t necessarily because they perform any better under pressure than anyone else, but rather that they work more effectively if they’ve had time to assemble the puzzle pieces in their head. On the other hand, if they’re required to operate in a Judging-oriented manner, focusing on the production end at the beginning of a project, they tend to work less efficiently. To put it in laymen’s terms, they may “doddle” a bit. This has nothing to do with their work ethic—they simply haven’t had sufficient time to formulate what they want to produce. And they’ll often change courses midstream, because along the way they’ve discovered a better approach. The Pot of Gold at the End of the Rainbow Admittedly, for someone with a Judging-oriented outlook, the idea of allowing someone who prefers P to follow their natural work style within a modern business setting probably sounds like following a rainbow to its end in search of a pot of gold. However, in this case, there is a substantial pot of gold in terms of value to the organization. First, this approach provides a critical counter-balance to the J-driven propensity to make decisions and act on them quickly. To be sure, the Judging-oriented approach offers tremendous value, particularly in projects that require milestones. But sometimes decisions are made too soon—and organizations are locked into a course of action that turns out to be less desirable than one that materializes later. If both Judging and Perceiving perspectives are respected, however, teams can achieve ongoing, yet tempered momentum. Second, understand that those that prefer P really aren’t at their best when they have to conform to J-driven processes. If they’re allowed to operate within their natural work style, they produce higher quality work. To put it simply, you’re getting more value out of them by giving them the flexibility to do things their own way, and positioning them for greater career success by allowing them to make best use of their talents. Finding Common Ground We’ve established that P frequently conforms to a J world. But should it be the other way around? The reality is that it’s probably unrealistic—and perhaps equally unbeneficial—for either side to completely flex its behavior to the expectations of the other side. Those preferring Perceiving have to understand what things look like to a manager or co-worker with a J preference, and provide assurances that things are indeed progressing toward a desirable outcome. This may involve agreeing on certain markers that indicate progress. A Word to the Wise… If you prefer P, understand that when your J-preferring colleagues flex their own work preferences to your style, you’ve got to deliver the goods. If you don’t, you may not get another chance to prove the value of your approach. The good news: As you consistently deliver quality results, your J colleagues will become increasingly supportive of your work style.

Why You Might Want to Give Procrastinators a Chance

Russ Spaulding is a Learning Strategist with the Defense Intelligence Agency’s (DIA) Office of Learning and Career Development. He has over 28 years of learning and development experience within the Department of Defense. He began his career as a naval intelligence officer supporting an electronic warfare squadron aboard the USS Enterprise aircraft carrier for two nine-month deployments to the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean. After performing as a current intelligence analyst for the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff, he has spearheaded reserve training efforts as Officer-in-Charge for Reserve Intelligence Training Programs at NAS South Weymouth Massachusetts, implemented the Post Graduate Intelligence Programs for Reserves at the National Defense Intelligence College while serving on the teaching faculty; coordinated reserve training for the Naval Criminal Investigative Service; and served as the focal point for the talent management of over 400 reserve intelligence personnel supporting DIA's 2 Directorate for Analysis as a Reserve Liaison Officer. Numerous military awards include three Defense Meritorious Service medals. In a civilian capacity, he has performed as a senior program manager in DIA's Office of the Chief Financial Executive focusing on the assessment and evaluation of performance-based budgeting before taking positions as a senior instructor and learning development specialist in DIA's Office for Learning and Career Development. In these roles, he has received numerous special act awards. He holds a masters degree in National Security Studies from Georgetown University along with facilitator certificates from the Goldratt Institute, the Pacific Institute and FranklinCovey. He has a passion for co-designing innovative and practical research-based learning and evaluation strategies leading to peak performance and mission accomplishment. About

Russ Spaulding

Andy Maus oversees all Compass One Healthcare human resource departments. This includes the overall people strategy carried out by the field HR, talent management, talent acquisition, and learning & development teams. Andy joined Compass Group in August 2019, and reports to Bobby Kutteh, Compass One Healthcare’s CEO, and Cindy Noble, Compass Group’s chief people officer. He is a member of the Compass One Healthcare executive management team. Before joining Compass Group, Andy worked across several industries and functions within HR.Most recently, he spent time at US Foods, where he held a variety of leadership roles across corporate and field HR, and mergers and acquisitions. Andy also spent time at Discover Financial Services and Sears Holdings where he led corporate HR, supply chain HR, and learning & development.Andy currently serves on a board for Cure PSP, an organization focused on curing various forms of Parkinson’s. Andy holds a Bachelor of Science in psychology, a Master of Arts in industrial/organizational psychology from Western Michigan University, and a Master of Business Administration from Northwestern University, Kellogg School of Management.

Search results for 'Carrie Berg'

Categories

Refine By

Search results for 'Carrie Berg'

Categories

Refine By

Topic