There’s a bad habit I see sweeping through companies. It’s not really new, but it has gotten much worse in recent years.

This particular habit used to be more the province of arguing couples, relationship counselors and divorce courts.

Always more of a guy thing, I now find it on the rise among women.

I call it “verbal avoidance” and it is irritating to say the least.

It occurs when something happens, or is supposed to happen, and person A needs to communicate that to person B.

And doesn’t.

A doesn’t because

• what happened is going to upset B and A either doesn’t want to be the messenger, since messengers are sometimes killed or deal with the fallout if/when B gets upset.
• B is waiting for A to notify him of good news, but B doesn’t have the information yet, so rather than saying that, he doesn’t call.

Of course there are dozens of variations, but they all boil down to the same thing—A does not communicate with B as expected.

When B does reach A, A offers a variety of reasons why the contact didn’t happen, but reasons don’t excuse anything.

B feels frustrated/disappointed/disgusted/angry/betrayed.

Verbal avoidance for any reason breaks trust.

And trust is the basis for any kind of relationship, whether at work, at home or in the world at large.

Silence isn’t always golden.

Stock.xchng image credit: Sigurd Decroos

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

John Warrillow, at BNET, writes that the best question for weeding out victim mentality is “Tell me about the last time you made a mistake.”

He says that if the person accepts full accountability and doesn’t try to excuse or blame anyone else he almost always hires them.

While I agree it’s a great question and that the response tells you a lot about the candidate, I disagree that taking full responsibility necessarily makes a good hire.

There is a substantial difference between making excuses and a situation that leaves the person with no choice but to make the mistake.

There are too many managers who set their people up to fail, whether unintentionally or not. (Yes, there are mangers who do it intentionally.)
There is a difference between stating why the mistake was made and describing what could/should have been done differently and playing victim.

I advise creating a different dialog.

Manager: Tell me how [whatever].

Candidate responds.

Manager: Is that how you would have done it if you were in charge?

Candidate responds yes or no.

Manager: Why?

Asking why gets you to what you really want to know, which is how the candidate thinks.

How the person thinks is the crux, whether the candidate is a senior exec, admin or somewhere in-between.

And while it’s a good question to add to your interview repertoire I don’t think it’s strong enough to stand on it’s own as a ‘make or break’.

While discovering if the person has a victim mentality is useful, what is the advantage of hiring someone willing to take responsibility for a mistake that really isn’t theirs?

You need to know more; extenuating circumstances that at first may sound like an excuse can turn out to be plain facts.

Explore why the mistake happened, if and how it was rectified and what could have been done to prevent it.

In short, take time to dig deeper into any response that brings up a red flag, but do it with an open mind.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wadem/2808468566/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Every conversation about leadership talks about ‘influence’ and how to increase yours.

In a post at Forbes, Howard Scharlatt defines influence this way,

Influence is, simply put, the power and ability to personally affect others’ actions, decisions, opinions or thinking. At one level, it is about compliance, about getting someone to go along with what you want them to do.

He goes on to describe three kinds of influencing tactics: logical, emotional and cooperative, or influencing with head, heart and hands and talks about ‘personal influence’ and its importance in persuading people when authority is lacking.

A couple of years ago I wrote The Power of Words and said, “Personally, other than socially acceptable definitions, I don’t see a lot of difference between influence and manipulation,” and I still don’t.

I realize most people consider manipulation negative and influence positive, but they are just words.

I often hear that leaders are good people, while manipulators are bad people. But as I pointed out in another post,

• leaders are not by definition “good;”
• they aren’t always positive role models; and
• one person’s “good” leader is another person’s demon.

Everyone believes that they use their influence in a positive way, but when you persuade people to do whatever who are you to say that the outcome is positive for them?

Influence, persuasion, manipulation; call it what you will, just remember that it is power and be cautious when you wield it.

Image credit: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/363547

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

What are your goals in 2011? Hike productivity? Juice creativity? Motivate your people? Strengthen retention?

Whatever they are, the best way to accomplish them is to engage your people.

Uninspired advice, since you hear it all the time, but this is a great time to actually start the wheels of engagement turning.

And you do it through conversation—face-to-face, verbal conversations with your team—whether it’s composed of the company VPs or a small group of staffers.

Notice the emphasis on ‘conversation’ which, in this case, means everyone talks.

First you describe the goals, not a laundry list of everything that needs to be done, but specific goals that you honestly believe can be accomplished in 2011, with a subset for Q1.

Then you shut up and listen to your people.

Not just let them talk, but really listen and hear what they are saying, even when what’s said doesn’t agree with your ideas.

But if you shut up and hear nothing then recognize that for what it is: a great insight into the culture you created, not to mention the fear and distrust in which you are held.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Carol Bartz was hailed as a savior both inside and out when she took the reins as CEO at Yahoo.

But that was then and this is now.

Martin Berko, who writes a pithy syndicated financial advice column, describes her this way,

Big Mamma is a brutish CEO who is not liked by Wall Street. She has no experience in running an Internet information provider or generating advertising revenues and is about as subtle as a train wreck. She’s confrontational with analysts, the media and key employees.

Make that most (all?) employees.

December 14 Yahoo announced a 4% layoff and started sending pink slips to 600 people.

Yahoo management chose to do this the week before Christmas.

I say ‘chose’ because when I called the half dozen Yahoo managers I know and asked when the layoff was decided they all said they had known in October.

The folks I talked with aren’t executives, but mid-level line managers.

Granted, there is no good time or easy way to lay people off, but there are better and worse ways to handle it if one becomes necessary and ten days before Christmas doesn’t qualify.

Layoffs, like deaths, are a shock even if you know it’s coming, not to mention the intrinsic “but me” factor.

If the layoffs had been done in October people would have had some time to get over the shock, prepare and batten down the spending hatches before the holiday season started.

Then there is the long-term damage to Yahoo.

Yahoo says it is still hiring in other areas, but it’s desirability as a place to work just sank even lower.

Even if Berko is correct and Yahoo is acquired and/or Bartz is replaced the memory of “the week before Christmas layoff” will remain.

Sure, people will accept offers because of the economy, but they are unlikely so see the company as a long-term career path.

The term “taxi job” refers to stopgap employment while looking for a permanent opportunity.

The timing of this layoff will certainly raise Yahoo’s positioning in the taxi lineup.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/yodelanecdotal/497378654/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Bosses, business coaches, academics, bloggers and many others bemoan the lack of communications skills in Gen Y, especially written communications, but they have plenty of company in preceding generations.

Not just bad writing, but opaque writing, the kind that leaves readers scratching their heads wondering what they are missing.

Of course, I shouldn’t complain, since on of my company’s most popular products is Clarity RE-writing, which involves using the fewest possible words to present even the most complex information in the most understandable way.

Who are the worst writers?

Granting that many of Gen Y don’t understand the difference between writing and texting, I find lousy writing much more offensive when it comes from those who (should) know better.

And while the more lofty their position the more offended I am, I save my greatest reaction for those old enough and senior enough to know better who work in the field—in other words, they are, or should be, professional communicators.

Charles H. Townsend, the chief executive of Condé Nast Publications, which includes Vogue, The New Yorker and Vanity Fair, is such a one. He recently sent a 500 word memo to his staff, here is a sample from it.

“…a consumer-centric business model, a holistic brand management approach and the establishment of a multi-platform, integrated sales and marketing organization.”… “To optimize brand revenue growth, we will shift responsibility for single-site, digital sales and marketing to the brand level. Publishers can now fully leverage their offerings across all platforms.”

Don’t feel badly if you aren’t sure what he is trying to say, his staff wasn’t sure, either.

If you want to write clearly here is some quick and basic guidance.

• Avoid jargon;
• shun multi-syllabic words;
• use short, simple sentences;
• pass on large blocks of text, especially on the Net;
• spell check everything; and, most importantly,
• remember that most people scan and don’t actually read.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nirak/2854421030/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Too many managers (of all ages and at all levels) tell me they are using texting, Twitter and email to manage their people. They’re even using them for performance reviews, layoffs and terminations.

When I ask why they use them I’m told some variation of ‘saves time’, ‘more immediate’, ‘modern way to manage’, ‘cool’ or the worst one, ‘lets me focus on what’s important.’

I may be a digital dinosaur, but I’m here to tell them (and you if you are on the receiving end) that that isn’t managing; it’s avoidance pure and simple.

It’s having the title while avoiding every single action required to lead a high-performing organization. It trashes careers and shows enormous disrespect for people.

In short, it’s a total copout; unfair to the team, the company and the investors.

What’s important are the people, because without the people there is no company and if there is no company you have no job.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/danzen/4137160631/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

I read a great post by Jennifer Miller on the ubiquity of ‘perfect’ in descriptions and the dangers of embedding perfection as a goal in corporate culture.

It reminded me that ‘perfect’ and ‘perfection’ are right up there with ‘leader’ and ‘leadership’ on the overused/abused scale—more, actually, since they represent a condition beyond human abilities.

Humans don’t do absolutes particularly well.

They do better on a strictly personal level when they have absolute control over all parts of the equation, but even then their score leaves much to be desired—just consider the infidelity statistics.

Add to that the fact that the standards themselves are a moving target. Even those that seem to be absolute, like murder, have a definition that changes with societal attitudes towards what constitutes a victim.

Since humans so often fall short of perfection, society and corporations codify the definitions to make it easier to adhere to them. That’s especially important when it comes to ethical stances, which is why condoning deviations, as described yesterday, is so devastating to the organization.

The take-away is simple: never establish goals that set you or your people up for failure.

If you are prone to talking in absolutes, “we will always…” here is a simple rule to guide you.

“We will always” is acceptable if you are discussing well defined intangibles, such as ethics and values that apply equally to everyone in the organization, but isn’t applicable in setting tangible goals, such as quality rules for defects.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

This week has been about communications, so I thought it apropos to include some good quotes about communications.

I love communications and communicating, whether it’s a good book, a stimulating conversation or when something I write really clicks. I think Anne Lindbergh summed my feelings up best when she said, “Good communication is as stimulating as black coffee, and just as hard to sleep after.”

Do you ever feel that real communications is a dying art; and if not dying, severely incapacitated? Well over a hundred years ago Charles Dickens said, “Electric communication will never be a substitute for the face of someone who with their soul encourages another person to be brave and true.”

Before Dickens was even born Joseph Priestley said, “The more elaborate our means of communication, the less we communicate.” I guess he was prescient.

Erma Bombeck said, “It seemed rather incongruous that in a society of supersophisticated communication, we often suffer from a shortage of listeners.” That’s because so many people are enamored with their own voice.

Effective communications requires real effort; as Russell Hoban warns, “After all, when you come right down to it, how many people speak the same language even when they speak the same language?”

Sadly, we live in an era that proves the truth of Josh Billings words, “Most men had rather say a smart thing than do a good one.”

Changing this paradigm can only happen if each individual makes a conscious choice to do it; not through promises posted on a Facebook wall or tweeted to a mass of followers, but one person to one person.

Let’s get everyone as hooked on good communications as they are on coffee.

Sxc.hu photo credit to: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/547050

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

This week has been about communications, both corporate and personal, and what they tell the world beyond their words. Today is about basic ways to improve them.

Way back in 2006 I wrote Good writing fast—an oxymoron and in those four years only two things seem to have changed—writers care less and readers complain more.

It’s actually easy to make basic improvements on your writing using tools you already have. Yes, they take an extra minute or two, but consider the negative impression your writing can make will last for years.

Your writing will improve significantly just by using three simple tools

1. In Word (or what ever word processing program you use) and turn on spell checker and grammar checker (skip style checker) and use them.
2. Write blog comments, etc., in word and paste them where you want them.
3. Set your email to spell check automatically before sending.

But the most important tool to improve your writing is your MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™). You may find that you need to adjust all of them and this is as true for corporations as for individuals.

1. Foremost, you must think, not only about what you want to say, but also about the effect you want to have and the image you want to project.
2. You need to care; you need to own the idea that the stuff you write on the web really is people’s first impression of you and consciously decide what you want that impression to be.
3. Understand that jargon, rambling or complex sentences and multi-syllabic words will not make you sound more knowledgeable or your pitch more impressive.

You must be willing to spend the extra few minutes it takes to implement the six points; once it becomes your new norm and you see the effect you’ll wonder why you didn’t do it sooner.

Flickr photo credit to: http://www.flickr.com/photos/karola/3623768629/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL