At the heart of the school’s courses is developing what David Kelley, one of the school’s founders, calls an empathy muscle. … the students are taught to forgo computer screens and spreadsheets and focus on people.
So far, that process has worked. In the eight years since the design school opened, students have churned out dozens of innovative products and start-ups. They have developed original ways to tackle infant mortality, unreliable electricity and malnutrition in the third world, as well as clubfoot, a common congenital deformity that twists a baby’s feet inward and down. (…)
Mr. Kothari also said his plans took a new path. Before he took his first D.school course in 2008, he said, he spent most of his spare time in front of a computer, brainstorming ideas for websites and mobile apps that never materialized. Design was always an afterthought. But he says that first ramen assignment became the prelude to a revolutionary new way of solving problems by spending time with people to understand how they live their lives.
Empathy muscle.
I like that.
Too bad the teaching is limited to design and only at one school.
It’s definitely a muscle that is lacking in many of the under-25 crowd and badly atrophied in much of the rest of the population.
Do you provide clear, concise, useable information and instructions to your people?
Are you sure?
Or are they clear, concise and useable inside your head, but your people hear something different?
The same words mean different things to different people, so what you say and what your team hears may be “off” one degree or ten degrees (or more) creating development problems and missed opportunities, not to mention tensions and negative reactions.
Obviously, the goal is to clarify your communications, but it’s not enough to “spell it out” if you spell in Latin and your people hear in Russian, Finnish, Kligon, whatever.
One of the unspoken tenets of good leadership/management is that understandable communications are the boss’ responsibility.
That’s you.
Option Sanity™ means clarity for ISO. Come visit Option Sanity for an easy-to-understand, simple-to-implement stock allocation system. It’s so easy a CEO can do it.
Warning.
Do not attempt to use Option Sanity™ without a strong commitment to business planning, financial controls, honesty, ethics, and “doing the right thing.” Use only as directed.
Users of Option Sanity may experience sudden increases in team cohesion and worker satisfaction. In cases where team productivity, retention and company success is greater than typical, expect media interest and invitations as keynote speaker.
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.
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 one 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.
Today is Super Bowl XLIV, so I thought it only appropriate to offer up some quotes relevant to more than just football—in other words, super quotes.
As you know, sports are often a metaphor for business and other parts of life.
I agree with Knute Rockne’s comment that “one man practicing sportsmanship is far better than fifty preaching it,” only I’d apply it to “leadership.”
Jock Sutherland said, “Speed is not your fastest, but your slowest man. No back can run faster than his interference.” This harks back to the weakest link theory and is true in business and in life.
Darrell Royal’s words are as true for entrepreneurs and they are for any sport, “The only place you can win a football game is on the field, the only place you can lose it is in your hearts.”
I thought it would be nice to end on a lighter vein.
Small errors can make your team focus too much on the words and not enough on their meaning as Bill Peterson should have realized when, while giving a pep talk, he said, “Men, I want you just thinking of one word all season. One word and one word only: Super Bowl.”
Then there are the questions asked in all seriousness, only to bring forth hilarious laughter or shocked silence; as these two examples show.
Before Super Bowl XVIII, Julie Brown asked Cowboys running back Emmitt Smith, “What are you going to wear in the game on Sunday?”
Then there was the reporter who didn’t just put his foot in his mouth, but his entire leg when he asked
Washington Redskins quarterback Doug Williams, “How long have you been a black quarterback?” (Super Bowl XXII)
Sadly, while the questions were preserved, the responses were not.
Finally, there is Duane Thomas’ question, the one could have been asked every year for the last 44, “If it’s the ultimate game, how come they’re playing it again next year?”
What do you think about slogans? Do they resonate with you or do you just shrug them off?
The subject came up when a client asked me whether it was worth the effort of finding an effective slogan for a new program at his company; he said the idea surfaced because of the success of President Obama’s “Yes we can” during the last election.
Our conversation reminded me of an article last year about the futility of slogans in today’s world by Dan and Chip Heath, co-authors of Made to Stick.
Now, Made to Stick has some great stuff in it and they made some good points, but overall I don’t agree that snappy slogans have no value.
There’s a reason that slogans have been around since 1500’s and that’s because human beings respond to them. They started as battle cries that roused the troops and gave them something to scream when going into battle; something that in a few short words told the world who they were and what they believed.
The Heaths think that has changed.
“People don’t speak slogan-language today unless they’re trying to put one over on you. So when you hear one, you immediately become cynical.”
They say this in spite of the fact that the first thing all the groups they described did, corporate and non-profit alike, was to find a slogan that encapsulated their goals.
The problem comes if the slogan is all there is; the Heaths used this example to prove their point, whereas I think it proves mine.
“Recently, a task force of top execs at a large technology company was brainstorming about a new leadership initiative. It wanted the company’s managers to spend more time developing their people and less on giving orders. To make this happen, the firm would have to change the way those managers were groomed, paid, and evaluated. Yet, facing these epic changes, the task force felt the need to hammer out a slogan. It was a doozy (mildly disguised for confidentiality): “360-Degree Leadership: Because we all matter.” Just then, all the employees in the universe rolled their eyes.”
I’ve seen many similar slogans that deserved the eye rolls, but this one doesn’t.
If all the execs had done was to announce the slogan and tell the company’s managers that they needed to put more effort into developing their people, then the slogan would be cheap, feel-good talk and I would agree with the cynicism—but they didn’t.
The key to the difference lies in these words, “the firm would have to change the way those managers were groomed, paid, and evaluated.”
Assuming that the company followed through with the changes and educated its managers to their new responsibilities, then the slogan has teeth and it becomes a war cry that can rally the troops.
The stories the Heaths recommend are great; use them to explain; use real examples to show the words in action, but as good as they are for communication, you can’t scream them when going into battle.
Slogans can inspire and encourage; they can tell a story to the world in just a few words; the good ones can be a lifeline when there is nothing else to grab.
People like slogans, even Millennials; what they don’t like are feel-good words and empty promises wrapped up in a snappy package.
Today’s post is on a subject that angers me no end; it’s also a lead-in to tomorrow’s post.
I wrote about this lunacy shortly after I started writing Leadership Turn, but several recent phone calls made me go back and find the post to bring it to your attention again.
Of course, since you’re here reading this it’s likely that you’re already in agreement with me and don’t inflict this mindset on your people.
It’s about all those bosses (far more than you might imagine) who evaluate their people based on the language they use to discuss their actions as opposed to the actions themselves.
I thought about rewriting it, but decided not to, nothing has changed and the folks who called me recently are all facing similar problems.
Speaking In Leadership
I had a great time with “Jean,” who took me up on my free coaching offer and also received permission to write about her situation, since I’ve heard similar stories over the years.
She told me about a specific situation within her department and what she was doing to handle it. I asked her if it was working and she said it seemed to be, but that she’d rather solve it using leadership skills instead of just management skills.
Jean went on to say that she wanted to be chosen to attend her company’s leadership classes and to do so she had to demonstrate strong leadership potential.
Jean and I had a great discussion (we ran over the hour) about her interest in leadership, her goals, how she communicates with her people, her group’s culture within the overall company culture and what she’s accomplished—solid management, on-time/in-budget projects, low attrition, high morale and strong productivity in her organization.
Apparently the accomplishments aren’t enough for Jean’s boss, who’s been know to skip over DOers in favor of people who “speak leadership,” when describing what they’ve done.
In fairness, and before you get the wrong idea, Jean said that she loves working with him, he’s been a great mentor and promoted her twice. He just has this thing about leadership.
Since, in my opinion, Jean’s already demonstrated her ability to lead, what she needed to learn was how to talk about it. I knew she had read both books and blogs on the subject, so I asked her to choose something and then describe it to me as she would to her boss.
As I listened, the problem was evident. Jean’s description was low on “I,” high on “us.” It was about the challenge and how the team succeeded in overcoming it—exactly the way a good leader talks.
When I mentioned that, Jean laughed and said that speaking “leadership” sounded pretentious to her and that none of the leaders that she’d been around spoke that way, including her boss. She said that although she’d found a lot of the tools she used described in leadership books, she just assumed that they were different when used by a “leader.”
Now, I’m the last person to stomp on common sense (it’s too uncommon), so I suggested to Jean that she walk her boss through the prequel to the event, in other words, how she planned to achieve whatever, since when describing her planning she did use leadership terms.
As for all you bosses who recognize yourselves in the above—stop it! Stop focusing on the talk and check out the walk of your people who DO. Maybe they haven’t learned the language of leadership or maybe, like Jean, they find it pretentious to describe what they do that way, but if you’re desire is to identify those with the best potential I hope that you’ll start looking for it in what your people DO.
Entrepreneurs face difficulties that are hard for most people to imagine, let alone understand. You can find anonymous help and connections that do understand at 7 cups of tea.
Crises never end.
$10 really does make a difference and you’ll never miss it,
Do you consider yourself a good communicator?
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.
Today is Super Bowl XLIV, so I thought it only appropriate to offer up some quotes relevant to more than just football—in other words, super quotes.
What do you think about slogans? Do they resonate with you or do you just shrug them off?
Now, I’m the last person to stomp on common sense (it’s too uncommon), so I suggested to Jean that she walk her boss through the prequel to the event, in other words, how she planned to achieve whatever, since when describing her planning she did use leadership terms.
