Is social media a threat to team loyalty?

This week's news included an improbable link between the Afghan conflict and The World Cup in South Africa. The connecting stories were about the US Military Commander Gen Stanley McCrystal's interview with Rolling Stone magazine and ex-England skipper John Terry's comments at the World Cup daily news conference.
Both were unhappy with the direction coming down from "Top Command" and both sought to tackle it through the media.

In an article in the New York Times http://tinyurl.com/2ueglkd  it describes how General McChrystal and his aides spoke critically of nearly every member of the president’s national security team. In summary they wrote: Over all, the magazine article depicted General McChrystal at the head of a small circle of aides engaged in almost locker-room trash talk as they discussed foreign policy, the French, their allegiance to each other and their own concerns about course of the war.
In reply President Obama was quoted as saying "I think it’s clear that the article in which he and his team appeared showed poor judgment.”
The John Terry "rebellion" similarly appeared to involve an inner group and their dis-satisfaction over team formation and player selection. Inevitably it prompted hyped reporting with quotes like The Sun's  "England's World Cup camp was in meltdown!"  When responding Fabio Capello said ‘My door is open always and if you want to speak with me, you can speak with me. I think he’s more disappointed some players because when you speak you have to speak privately, not with you (the media). This is the big mistake, this is a very big mistake. It is not a revolution, it is one mistake from one player.

I have to admit to a traditionalist view on this issue. Being of an era of large national salesforces with several tiers of line-management...we learned to follow the flag and deal with "dissent." Evaluation of tactics was expected...and feedback was expected back up the line. And the system worked.
But today we live in a world of open comunication...largely because of the internet....and in particular the impact of social media.  The openess that inspired the web pioneers has been carried on by Facebook, Twitter etc. Today we are enabled and encouraged to speak up and influence situations upwards.
Those of us involved in Internal Communications were quick to see social media as the answer to the perenial problem of employee engagement. To me its original attraction was in its "proletarian" ownership. People wanted to opt in to what was their "news channel"  It had similar anarchic attitudes as graffiti and underground radio.
But in using it "the establishment" needs to be wary of a couple of isses.

1. To keep its opt in appeal Social media must retain that "proletarian" attitude. And that doesn't mean seeing the HR Director in a Chey Guevarra tee shirt and saying "innit" every 2 minutes!!
2. Also...we must not forget the importance of line-communication. People work for people.   If top down communication is going the social route then "line-management" communication must as a minimum match it for content and speed. Otherwise disaffected leaders may genuinely feel that open communication means "open season" to say what you like about the boss!

My "old ways" worked because downline communication was flawless and so it was commensurately rewarded with good feedback...and loyalty.

And leaders who instinctively put themselves in the firing line!

 For more thoughts and tips on persuasive communication visit http://www.persuadability.co.uk/ and browse the Resource Centre.  PQG3YRNTY5VA

"Stay away from my Personal Belief System!!!"

I got into a row on a Linkedin discussion group recently!
To be honest I was probably gatecrashing a private party and shouldn't have been there. It was a professional group's discussion on nominations for Internal Communicator of the Year, and I chipped in with:
"I am being serious and I do admit to being a fan. Is there anybody better than Jose Mourinho when it comes to influencing minds and outcomes with just a few words?"

It drew an immediate, curt and damning response from one member. When another member then indicated some support for Jose our friend ramped up his condemnation. I did think that comparison with a certain fascist dictator was extreme...but probably more intended to discredit our opinions rather than Jose's suitability for nomination!

I wanted to go back with a really clever and cutting response...but that would have taken too long. So it was a couple of days later when I finally thought...No, I can't let Jose be hung out like that...so I replied:
"Anonymous– I must respond. Jose’s team wholeheartedly believed in his plan and shared his vision. His competitors ultimately lost belief arguably due to his rhetoric and body language - watch him on the touchline intimidating Aaron Robben.
Short of humility? There’s no doubt of that...and I can understand how this will lessen his wider appeal. But maybe not so in his world of football…which is why Real Madrid just appointed him. "
I have to admit I did admire my very well reasoned response. But I guess it only needed one slip up...and in my case it was the word intimidating...and my friend was back in minutes waving his red card at me.
Or "resting his case" as he put it...I don't think he went in for football metaphors!
But it was also getting personal. Now the testosterone was kicking in. More than reason with him... I just wanted to get even.
Which of course is what so often happens when we get into an exchange of opinions. And the reason this happens is because our opinions are based upon a "very personal"  belief system. A set of deeply held beliefs and values that started to form when we first became aware of the world around us. That were strengthened by the behaviour and lessons of the people around us like my gran with her "there is always somebody worse off! lesson on life. And were ultimately reinforced and cemented by our own subsequent experiences of life.

Not surprisingly these beliefs and values are not for shifting. So when somebody offers opinions that attack our values...even unintentionally or indirectly...our  instinctive reaction is to attack them!
Which is why when you are trying to persuade somebody around to your point of view...to offer opinions without regard for their beliefs and values can be a pathway to a row! Especially if the subject is football!
So I m pleased that I showed maturity and didn't go back for the last word with my friend on Linkedin.
No I'm happy to let the Wall Street Journal have that with an extract from an article they published on lessons that can be learned from football managers  http://tinyurl.com/3792vb5 Under a headline The way Mourinho manages, the quote I liked was: "Mourinho may come to be seen as a rare example of a model manager: Someone from the world of sports whose methods could profitably be emulated by business managers and executives everywhere." 
I'm just wondering whether I should post that link on Linkedin?

For more posts and articles on persuasion visit http://persuadability.co.uk/ and browse the Resource Centre.

Techno-dependent communication health warning

I work with some real techno lovers or maybe that should be "techno-luvvies" who seem to get off on owning the latest this or that ...plus of course loads of apps!

And when it comes to contact and comunication they are entirely techno-dependent.
They text when a 30 second walk would have allowed a face to face chat.
They can't have a business conversation without showing off their pivot table skills in Excel.
They choose the naffest audio-tones to signal incoming emails....and cannot resist immediately opening them ...to your constant irritation!
Up until now irritation has been the extent of it...but after reading a recent article in the New York Times I'm more than a bit concerned for them.
Telling the story of a businessman who "lost" a $1.3 million deal email amidst a "deluge of data" in his inbox , and of the distracting effect his gadget dependancy has on his family life and relationships, the article describes how "he craves the stimulation he gets from his electronic gadgets." Telling the reader "This is your brain on computers. "
Apparently there is a primitive impulse at play here to respond to opportunities and threats. The resultant excitement causing a potentially addictive "dopamine squirt!"
More worrying is the evidence that as we handle more information and attempt to multi-task we actually struggle to keep focus and shut out irrelevant information. And that this "fractured thinking" continues after multi-tasking ends. 
A further angle on this issue came out in a recent article by Dr Mark Goulston in PsychologyToday where he talks about the fact that we are simply interacting with machines. And because it's a machine then we communicate with it with less concern for consequence. Bit like shouting at the TV!
Added to this he feels that the speed of the technology prompts us to fire a reply off quickly. And that this is encouraged by feelings of anxiety if we don't reply quickly... and of relief when we have replied.
Something I'm sure we can all relate to. Ever had an "oh ____!!" moment when you've hit [Send] to soon?
For myself. I'll admit to a sceptical and cynical view on techno-communication.
Sceptical because words without accompanying tone and visual expression can be interpreted in so many different ways. Cynical because the product developers have done such a brilliant job in managing a market that has everything to do with ownership and aspiration and not too much to do with functional needs.
Nonetheless, as the The Forrester's Technographics Benchmark Survey of 2008 pointed out  "Generation X 'ers (29 to 42 year olds) uses technology when it supports a "lifestyle need" whereas it is embedded into everything Generation Y 'ers (18 - 29) do!

So like it or not it is the preferred way for an increasing portion of the working population but it doesn't have to be the only way!
And for the messages that really needs to be clear and understood...take that 30 second walk down the corridor.

For great tips on persuasive communication visit http://www.persuadability.co.uk/ and browse the Resource Centre

Do you want to speak like Barack Obama?

The recent Kraft Cadbury merger took me back to my early days in selling. Kraft gave me my first sales job. I loved it... and with rapid promotion quickly followed by a "fast tracking" secondment to Head Office I soon became a Kraftman.  I so much wanted to be like the "special ones." The guys who really had been fast tracked...to Chicago Head Office!  Instantly recognisable with their purposeful stride, short hair cuts... and affected mid-Atlantic language and accents. Often spoken in amusing blends of Bronx-London or Chicago-Scouse...the accent was always delivered with those exaggerated deep tones that Americans cultivate so well.

It was these guys that came to mind when I read an article in escience on work undertaken by Sarah Wolff and David Puts of the Department of Anthropology at Pennsylvania State University.
In a series of studies they examined the relationship between a deep masculine voice and male group dominance. And the practical conclusion from this particular research would seem to be. Yes...you are unlikely to power your way through a debate talking like Tiny Tim (remember him)...but trying to affect the bass tones of Bryn Terfel is not really going to make that much difference.
And the same can be said about affected language. The special ones loved all that...the jargonise...but we were amused rather than impressed...because it was so affected. And we found a satisfactory and satisfying way to deal with it that was based on the Honeywell Buzz word chart that was used back in the 70's to debunk computer jargon.
Here's how it works. When hit with jargon.... respond with a statement or question that randomly selects a word across each of these columns:
          Customer               Sensitive               Analysis
          Value                     Monetized             Campaign 
          Socially                  Reversed              Strategy 
          Real-time               Empowered          Model 
          Transparency        Centric                  Concept 
          Diversity                Integrated            Supposition
          Metrics                  Optimized             Mindset 
          Collateral               Aligned                 Threat 
          Supply                    Leveraged            Opportunity 
          Demand                 Segmented            Protocol 
          Organically            Embedded             Paradigm

 For example "we've approached this as a demand leveraged opportunity!"  "whilst working hard to satisfy a socially embedded protocol!"  Or.
"That's impressive but there are several organically aligned threats in that assumption aren't there!"
Then just shut up and watch the faces.
Cruel maybe...but a worthwhile lesson that effective not affected communication is what we want and that means being yourself and keeping it simple


For more tips and advice on persuasive comunication visit http://www.persuadability.co.uk/ and browse the Resource Centre

Picture the outcome

I had a quick glance this morning at the book that is permanently left open on my coffee table...

It's my book of goals.  There I am ...sailing my Princess 58 in the Mediterranean en route to some playboy resort...someday!  And it's that picture that helps get me at the desk for another day working on the business!
Visualising your goals isn't a new thing of course, and seeing success in the form of specific tangible outcomes is what many people have attributed their success to. And a recent study in the Journal of Consumer Research has shed some new light on this. Report authors Julia Belyavsky Bayuk (University of Delaware), Chris Janiszewski, and Robyn LeBoeuf (both University of Florida) carried out experiments to examine consumer behavior when it came to the goal of saving money. Some participants were asked to focus on a firm plan, some were asked not to plan, and some were asked to focus on why they should save...rather than how.
With an interesting question being raised over the traditional belief that a clear plan is always best, the How-focused group did less well, particularly when dealing with unforseen issues.  The authors concluded that "Planning is more effective when people think abstractly, keep an open mind, and remind themselves of why they want to achieve a goal'"

This same principle of focusing on why...Picturing the outcome...Showing you what  you will achieve... is what we see elegantly demonstrated by the best communicators. It's what CEO's do when sharing the vision.  It's what presenters do when imparting a message. It's what salepeople do when talking up a case history. The technique they use is simple story telling. Engaging our attention....shifting our thinking from where we were or are... to where we will be and what we will find there.
It's also happens to be a technique that we are introduced to very early in life. We eagerly learn it! We enthusiastically practice it! We passionately and imaginatively use it! Then we grow up. Lose our imaginative outlook on life. Get all self-conscious...and stop!!
For a master-class example of storytelling from the conference stage, watch Sir Ken Robinson persuading a Ted conference why we must alter our approach to education. The standing ovation shows that he was successful http://tinyurl.com/7swydn
Right...I wonder what the weather forecast is for St Tropez this week-end?

For tips and advice on persuasive communication browse the Resource Centre at http://www.persuadability.co.uk/

What you see is what you get!

Last Friday I thought I'd bring out my cherished Pierre Cardin burgundy leather "RHS" monogramed A4 executive organiser...rather than save it for special occasions. Gratefully appreciated as a gift (from myself) at our HP Foods annual sales conference in 1988...it nicely complimented the gold-plated, personally inscribed Cross pen and pencil..."earned" at a previous year's event! Yes we were a bit pretentious in those days... but we also knew that these eyecatchers worked for us in front of customers. Put it this way if the Trading Director of Tesco coveted them... they were working!

The psychology of this didn't overly concern us back then. But as it happens... one of our selling commandments was "Thou shalt always use a pen when presenting!"  That regularly involved persuading a sales representative to throw away his chewed Bic ball point and invest in a Parker Flighter. Flashing the Cross clearly helped with it's subliminal message "This is what you could aspire to one day....perhaps?"  

Subliminal influence has been a subject of much debate over the years. Most people think straightaway of subliminal advertising and the subsequently discredited claims of the Cocoa Cola cinema ad of the 1950's.  These days subliminal advertising is banned although this seems to have been forgotten by the Conservative Party in their pre-election advertising. But in fairness it wasn't deliberate or mischeavious ...according to an article in Marketing Week.

In fact it was quite the opposite. While intending to present negative messages about Gordon Brown they had unintentionally promoted a smiling likeable Gordon...as subsequent consumer research was to prove.

Maybe the advertisers hadn't seen Derren Brown's famous stunt where two executives designed a logo. The design having been subliminally implanted by carefully sighted ad' hoardings and the like passed en route by their taxi.

These examples plus numerous scientific experiments illustrate the power of visual communication.

People's minds are made up by what they consciously see...often they don't bother to read the text or hear the words.

Their minds are also made up by what they unconsciously see. We know that the sub-conscious channel of the mind is highly responsive to sensory stimulii. We also know that this route to the mind diverts thought away from the critical reasoning areas...encouraging a more creative imaginative outlook on issues.

Compelling reasons why presenting from behind a lectern and reciting from bullet pointed texts is such an ineffective way to communicate.

Get out from behind the lectern.  Communicate wth your body language.

Use areas of the stage to anchor different moods and then trigger emotional response.

Illustrate your meaning with graphics...or photographs....or animations....or  video.

Communicate with your audience through all the senses...consciously and unconsciously!

For more tips and advice on persuasive communication please visit us at http://www.persuadability.co.uk/

 

The map is not the territory!

"Neanderthals mating with humans!"  was a headline in last Sunday's  New York Times 
And instantly my mind was reacting.  With an amazing sudden grasp of anthropology I was explaining to myself the origins of man... and picturing the different evolutionary examples that I regularly see at the local shopping centre.

Of course my assumptions on evolution were flawed..if not to say rather facile. As was my reading of the headline. It said something quite different.
But I'm going to forgive myself... because we all do it.  We read a headline or hear a sound-bite and we get it all around our ears...rather than accurately into the grey matter between them!
Often that is down to ambiguity in the headlines and here are some great examples of that..
Astronaut Takes Blame for Gas in Spacecraft!
Plane Too Close to Ground, Crash Probe Told
Prostitutes Appeal to Pope
Sex Education Delayed, Teachers Request Training
And a lot of miscommunication can be blamed on the ambiguities of the English language. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the 500 words used most in the English language each have an average of 23 different meanings!
As a quick example of this ask yourself what does the word mean mean?
Another factor is how in recent times we have evolved different ways of absorbing and sharing news and information. When I was a kid we poured over the Newspapers, sat engrossed by the Radio or TV or was entertained by the wonderful British Pathe News at the cinema. And we shared it around on the telephone...but mostly face to face.
Today of course many of us are satisfied with the "bits" of news we see on-line. And we share it around through emails....posts on Facebook...IM's ...or text messages. And with a language that is cryptic going on coded!
One particular concern I have in all this is...the trend towards e pitching. The "dumbing down" of business presentations or proposal pitches into a click of the [send] button as another pitch document is e-mailed to a prospect!! Accompanied by the hope that the prospect team get our meaning.... and if they don't that the 100 Powerpoint slides we created will impress them and do it for us!!
I'm often reminded by a pal of the three rules of selling:
Talk to the People. Talk to the People. Talk to the People. 

And it's not just because of media constrictions and ambiguity that we should. It is also because as individuals we will always see things differently! One of the Presuppositions of NLP is "The Map is not the Territory!" Meaning that we each have a perception of the world and life (our map) that is based on our own personal beliefs, values, emotions, experiences....and this perception will differ from reality. 

So to make sure that your meaning is understood....and with a slight para-phrase of the "3 rules"
Rule 1: Get in front of the people.
Rule 2: Remember that they each have their own map.
Rule 3: Talk with them as individuals...not at them as a group.
Rule 4: Question them....understand their map... and walk it! 

For more tips and advice on persuasive presentation please visit us at http://www.persuadability.co.uk/