October 15th, 2011
Steve Jobs’ death has certainly caused the world to reflect on his brilliant career as a technology innovator but we should also remember that he was a brilliant communicator.
What lessons can we take from Jobs that can help you as a communicator and speaker?
Jobs had developed his own, very distinctive style that appeared cool, and laid back but at the same time highly polished. He knew how to create impact by keeping it simple. He had an amazing ability to speak with passion and make his ideas understandable and memorable through telling stories and demonstrations.
His Stanford commencement speech in 2005 was a classic and now very poignant example of how he did this.
Jobs Commencement speech
He was quite understated and his speech was simply based on three stories, personal stories from his life, with which he imparted some very powerful messages to the young people he was addressing and indeed to the wider world audience.
He kept it simple with his message and his graphics. He only focused on one idea at a time and did not muddle what he was saying by having busy PowerPoint slides behind him. His slides were simple and elegant .Jobs hardly ever used words on his slides; he let the image paint the picture and reinforced it with stories.
Jobs never let the fact that he was a techie and generally speaking to a tech audience turn his speeches stale with an overload of jargon and unnecessary complexity. In an age of information overload he knew how to create a clear signal that cut straight through all the noise. He knew that he needed to connect on a human level and speak about what a normal person really wanted out of a product rather than just reciting lists of impressive specs and stats.
His stagecraft was also simple. He usually worked with quite a bare, empty stage, not a fancy corporate set. That way he ensured audience focus was fixed on him and his message. The way Jobs walked around the stage freely, comfortably and relaxed is a lesson that everyone should learn and follow. You never saw him stationary, or with a death grip on a lectern like so many other corporate presenters!
Finally, and this is a lesson everyone should follow, Jobs rehearsed his speeches. You may think looking and sounding relaxed may have come naturally for him but he put in days and hours into rehearsing for every major speech and product launch. Simplicity and clarity are a function of hard work, or as Mark Twain put it, “I would have written you a short letter but I didn’t have time”.
So while much of what history will write about Steve Jobs will focus on his technology innovation and business skills let’s not forget that a large part of his legacy is that of a great communicator from whom we can all learn.
Posted in Communication, LESS is MORE, speech | No Comments »
September 8th, 2011
This is probably a familiar refrain to any parent – I found myself saying this to my children this very weekend. Perhaps children have always been poor listeners where their parents are concerned but it’s also an interesting question for managers – how many times should you have to say something to your peers, colleagues and staff so they actually listen, understand and respond in the way you want them to?
In the miasma of modern communication, (email, instant messaging, text, skype, etc, etc.) how do you make your message, your request, your requirement heard ? The answer apparently is repetition, repetition, repetition! Orators and public speakers have long known that subtle repetition of your key message is the way to be memorable and to influence your audience. Advertisers too, know the value of repetition. Their statistics show that we typically need to see or hear an advert 8 times before we remember a brand name, much less what it is or does.
In business however I frequently hear managers saying in an exasperated voice, ”I don’t understand why it hasn’t happened; I told them to do it”. Many seem to think that telling people, issuing an instruction or request ought to be enough to get things done. “Why don’t people just do as they are asked, it’s so tiring and wasteful to have to repeat yourself all the time”. Well perhaps it is, perhaps people should respond first time but the reality is, they don’t. People in business are drowning in data, information, demands, requests and instructions. The few I come across that are not working 60 + hour weeks and handling 100+ emails a day and constant phone calls are the lucky few, the exception to the rule. Most people I encounter are, to a greater or lesser extent, swamped. Against this backdrop it’s not really surprising that people often don’t respond to requests and instructions as well or as promptly as would be ideal.
SO, if you want to be effective you need to work with this reality rather than fight it or rail against it not being “right”. Some interesting research has recently shown that often managers who work with a virtual team, i.e. with people who don’t actually report to them but work in some form of matrix structure are frequently more effective than line managers at getting things done. The reason? because whereas line managers have an expectation that when they ask for something it will be done by their subordinates, managers working in a matrix structure don’t have these expectations and hence they make a much greater effort when it comes to communication. They proactively plan to communicate a message several times in several different ways. They recognise that to get things done it’s not just about clarity of message but also about making your presence felt. They know that one request won’t be enough so typically they might send an email and follow it up by a call or meeting and then follow it up again. Although line managers, especially senior managers can command more attention from their subordinates, the truth is that even they need to “over communicate”. The research suggests that this multiple communication approach is the way to be effective in 21st century business.
So how do you communicate for maximum effectiveness?
You might not like it, it might seem counter intuitive but the research suggests you need to expect to have to communicate one message / communication several times using different channels and different media if you want to guarantee an effective response.
For further insights, click here to read an article from Harvard Business Review.
Posted in Communication | No Comments »
July 27th, 2011
It appears that the ancient English pastime of Witch Hunting is alive and well and at work in Suffolk!
After months of vitriolic criticism and speculation Andrea Hill, the former chief executive of Suffolk County Council, left her job in July. She was forced out after she was accused of various expenses scandals, misuse of public money and anonymous accusations of bullying. And yet when investigated by the council’s Dismissals and Appeals Committee she was completely exonerated, they said “there was no dishonesty in the claims made and that allegations of bullying and misuse of expenses were unfounded.” Why then was she forced from her job?
The bile that has surrounded the reporting of this case has been extraordinary and is hence an interesting study in communication and use of language
The press disliked Ms Hill, they didn’t warm to her and they blamed her for the unpopular cost saving / outsourcing policy know in Suffolk as “New Strategic Direction”. The antipathy the press whipped up towards Ms Hill was founded on a fundamental inaccuracy. She was a council officer, whose role was not to set policy but to execute the policy given to her by the politicians of the Tory led council. Why was the leader of the council and his cabinet not getting the same or more tirades of abuse? She became a convenient scapegoat for both the politicians and the media. Perhaps because she clearly has a forceful personality and a striking appearance she was a media-useful “whipping boy.” She was proven to have done no wrong yet was essentially forced out of her job for carrying out the politician’s instructions on an unpopular policy.
The media reporting made Ms Hill into a “bogeyman” that was a convenient vehicle for them to purvey the scandal and outrage that sells papers. Let’s just look at a few examples of skilful use of language was used to do that:~
“Gagging order”
Ms Hill was accused of presiding over a record level of council, “gagging orders”. This is the term used by the Daily Mail to refer to compromise agreements. As anyone with any business knowledge at all knows, these are totally standard documents, used by almost every HR department, that are part of any severance arrangement and they essentially represent and agreement, by both sides to the terms of the severance / redundancy. All councils have to make cuts and make redundancies so a rise in compromise agreements is inevitable and probably reflected in many other councils if not all.
The use of the term “gagging order” is an inflammatory phrase that was used to imply something unusual and untoward without having to prove or justify that accusation.
“A grotesquely over-rewarded…repulsive woman”.
This was the phrase used by Janet Street-Porter to describe Ms Hill. Where were the facts? Repulsive? Ms Hill said in a statement she has never met Street-Porter so how can she make that judgement? Over-rewarded? Ms Hill was at least responsible for running a multi-million pound enterprise. Street-Porter, (who has homes in London, Yorkshire and Kent but not Suffolk!) has become rich on the basis of little more than being a “personality” with an unusual accent and a line in opinionated statements. No facts here, just pure attention seeking, headline grabbing inaccuracy.
“Smiling and posing around”
In 2009 (not 2010 or 2011) a photographer was engaged to take pictures of Ms Hill and all the senior managers at the council, for PR and media use, in what is a totally standard practice for virtually all businesses. Check out any business/ council website for evidence of that.
The Telegraph positioned this story thus:~ “At a time when libraries are being closed and school lollipop crossings scrapped, Andrea Hill, the chief executive of Suffolk county council, hired a photographer to take a series of flattering images of her. The pictures, taken by Robert Johns, a freelance photographer, show Mrs Hill, 46, smiling and posing around the council’s headquarters in Ipswich. “
The phrase “smiling and posing around” tacitly implies that MS Hill was behaving like a self obsessed celebrity. What did the Telegraph expect, a picture of the chief executive scowling?! The wording also implied that it was some kind of unusual, personal project driven by narcissism instead of it being totally standard part of any communication department’s requirements of senior managers. In that paragraph of 57 words, the use of 6 carefully calculated words created a totally biased and inaccurate message.
Whistle blower
Ms Hill was initially suspended “after an anonymous whistle blowing complaint, believed to include allegations of her “domineering management style”, according to the Guardian.
The phrase “whistle blower” is an interesting one. The meaning of the phrase is a brave individual who stands up to corrupt authority to expose wrong doing. Therefore by using the term “Whistle Blower”, it implies very strongly that there has been wrong doing. Whatever happened to” innocent until proven guilty”? How different would it have sounded if the Guardian article had been strictly factual and said, “Ms Hill was being investigated following anonymous allegations on a number of topics”. As it transpired the allegations were dismissed as unfounded and far from being the work of a courageous crusader, were probably the output of a cowardly anonymous individual with a personal grudge.
This whole case illustrates the way language is used to manipulate public opinion and politics. (Note also how James Murdoch at the parliamentary committee refused to use the phrase phone hacking but “illegal phone message interception” instead, in the hope that it sounded less damning!)
For sure the outsourcing policies in Suffolk were unpopular and public opinion wanted it reversed but it could be argued that media witch hunt of Ms Hill that forced her from her job was wrong and indeed threatens cherished British principles of accuracy, fairness and innocence until proven guilty. While it might be standard media practice, this scale of victimisation not an edifying spectacle for our democracy. As a keen observer of communication and language it’s an interesting case of the power of words to influence and shape opinion, one which we would all do well to learn from.
Posted in Communication, Use of language, voodoo speaking | No Comments »
July 7th, 2011
I have worked recently with several international companies from very different industries (cars, printers, language exams and trading platforms) all of whom have been focussed on developing global organisations. They have been international for years if not decades, by which I mean they have had people and offices around the world. Those offices have however been operating autonomously and independently and have had varying degrees of connection with each other and with the “mother-ship” or head office. For many companies, the international aspect of their business has been like a loose federation rather than a cohesive nation.
I began to wonder why suddenly there has been a move by many of my clients toward this global coherence and the simple answer lies in the fact that their customers have been demanding it and have been pushing their suppliers to work with them in a globally co-ordinated way. What has driven the end customers to demand this? I believe it’s the twin effects of rapidly accelerating globalisation and the effects of the global economic crisis that has caused businesses to look at efficiencies that they can achieve around the world by working in an holistic way. Customers have been saying to their suppliers, “I don’t want to have to deal with multiple different contacts around the world and to have to do different things to achieve the same effect in different geographies.”
The challenge for my clients and I suspect many other businesses has been, to truly operate on a globally cohesive basis is a lot easier said than done. What I’ve seen happen is that businesses will look at their organisation chart and start re-adjusting structures. They will change reporting lines and alter a few people’s titles to Global Vice president of XYZ and consider the job done.
Then gradually comes the realisation that this isn’t enough. To make a global organisation work in practice, rather than on paper requires so much more than tinkering with the structures.
The real challenge of global organisations is how to communicate and co-ordinate to overcome the issues created by different languages, different time zones, different cultures, and different priorities. When I was working for a British Insurance company on a cross divisional project on establishing consistent sales methodology, it proved to be more than that particular organisation could handle just to try and achieve common language in that group .How much harder is it to achieve a common and consistent approach than facilitates co-operation, teamwork and synergy in multinational groups?
I believe the key is realising (or perhaps accepting?) that that change takes time and resource .Changing some lines on an org chart and sending out an email or two is not enough to create effective change and cohesive global organisations. It takes clear vision, robust, clear and common process, high calibre skills and masses of iterative communication.
Posted in change, Communication | No Comments »
December 7th, 2010
This year research suggested that Briton’s will spend £6.4 billion online in the run up to Christmas, an increase of 15% vs. last Christmas. A large proportion of this will be spent on i-pads/ phones/TV’s/ PC’s/ digital games. This is symptomatic of the increasingly digital life we lead.
Human beings however remain slowly evolving mammals, and on at least some levels, we all struggle to keep up with the pace of change.
The danger of the digital age is that:~
- While the internet, the I-phone , the Blackberry, the I-pad and the laptop, allows us to gather information quickly, to multi-task and constantly communicate, it does not allow us the time to reflect on what all that communication and information actually means.
- It can create an “always on” state that leaves us wired, strung out and unhealthy with no time or ability to “be” rather than “do”.
- It can lead to superficiality in our thinking and behaviour. Being fully absorbed in a virtual world can cause us to fail to fully connect with the real world of live human beings! (and by the way, they are the one’s that do the work and make the decisions !)
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not being a Luddite and suggesting we go back to pigeon post and snail mail. All the digital technology available represents a set of fantastic tools, but the tools are, or should be, the servant not the master and it’s up to us to use them as such.
So if in 2011 you really need to win hearts and minds, to influence people, to persuade them and bring them with you, you may need to get less digital and more personal.
Here are my Top 10 New Year’s resolutions to help you better communicate with and influence those you need to, in order to achieve what you need to in 2011:~
- I will never email someone in the same office when I could get off my b*** and talk to them
( and at the same time build a little personal rapport)
- I will always prioritise spending time with people who work for me ahead of answering emails and spending time at the PC
- I will never answer the phone instead of talking to the person who has made the effort to be physically with me
- I will organise my day according to my priorities not the contents of my of my inbox
(alternatively, I will be proactive not reactive!)
- I will only look at my emails 3 times a day and do “real” work in between!
- I will not send out an email at 5pm expecting corresponding action by 9am the next day, I’ll call and ask if it’s possible!
- I will not make hasty decisions on my blackberry between the aeroplane and baggage reclaim
(or any other time I’m on the move and only half concentrating)
- I will never send 10 emails when 1 phone call (or telecon) will make it all much clearer.
- I will never publish bad news by email when I know I should really talk to the people concerned instead
(even when that’s a longer process and really uncomfortable!!)
- I will never take a call and then say, “I can’t talk”, to the person who called because I’m “in a meeting”. (Firstly, that’s what answering systems were invented for. Secondly,It’s rude to the people in the meeting you’ve interrupted and thirdly it’s rude to the caller as all it really says is, “you’re not important enough to interrupt this meeting for” )
For more on this check out Nicholas Carr’s, “The Shallows; How the internet is changing the way we think”
Posted in Communication, Influence | No Comments »
November 19th, 2010
Wow, what a woman! The Every Woman Conference in London this week was kicked off by Sam Roddick, (daughter of Annita Roddick of Body Shop fame, and famous in her own right as an activist and proprietor of a chain of up market sex shops)
An unconventional but fantastic speaker, and what a great business philosopher. I like the idea, “attitudes are infectious, is yours worth catching?” She certainly infected the entire audience. In fact I think you could say this lady’s enthusiasm and sheer passion blew the audience away. She was not conventionally slick, but was 100% authentic and totally engaging. She had a variety of vocal styles which she used to great effect and she used no notes (she’s badly dyslexic so she can’t read her notes so she speaks from the hip and the heart and for her it works brilliantly!) Her pace, which could have been exhausting to listen to, was broken up by slower more emphatic passages. The words and phrases she used were powerful and delivered so well that you absolutely understood what she meant and felt the full force of the meaning.
• “My mother taught me to bring me to work, to bring passion and to take risks”
• “You are your business”
• “It’s time we made talking about women sexy again, feminism is back!”
• “I never believed I had the right to give up”
• “We have to allow ourselves to be imperfect”
• “I decided I was going to walk into the darkness and hope for a light”
Her philosophy of business is that it is absolutely about linking business and personal values (which is of course exactly her mother’s philosophy) and it is an inspiring one. She was asked what were her work place values are and I loved her response:~
• Be interested in your people’s growth
( want them to move onto something better)
• Be kind
• Allow encourage and utilise their interests
• Do business with nice people
“I’d rather give up a huge deal than work with a shit”
• Build a sense of happiness
Oh, that more businesses worked on those values!
Posted in Communication, emotion, impact | No Comments »
November 11th, 2010
Tony Hayward appeared on a BBC documentary last night and continued to confirm his status as the worlds worst corporate communicator.
His complete lack of awareness of ( or willingness) to acknowledge the need to communicate well and appropriately with the media and public was again revealed with a number of quotes that make the top ten list of corporate “ howlers”. His comment that he should have had an acting degree not a geology one, reveal an attitude that suggests dismissive distain for the whole idea that he might need to communicate well to people whose livlihoods have been destroyed by his company’s activity. His comments exercerbate anger against BP rather that mitigate it in any way. Small wonder that this man’s disasterous communication skills cost him his job.
Posted in bad speeches, Communication | No Comments »
October 1st, 2010
A client of mine held a meeting with her multi-national team and at the end of it asked for feedback on how the team felt the meeting was and what they could change for it to be more effective. An English person said there needed to be more banter, the Indian team member said there was too much frivolous banter and the Finnish team member asked, “What is banter?”
To me that sums up the challenge of multi-national working. Different cultures have different ways of behaving, different norms of how to express themselves in business and different understanding of words and phrases. For example, joking, sarcasm and even good humoured teasing/abuse is a standard form of expression in UK workplaces but does not work well in other cultures, especially Asian cultures. Working and communicating effectively in this environment requires sophisticated skills. Misunderstanding, misinterpretations and bad feeling can happen very easily.
Many years ago, I was once working with a European group and was explaining a particular sales approach and I was seeking to convey that this particular approach was but one, of many options available to them. What I actually said was “There are many ways to skin a cat”. The look of horror on German and French faces was enough to tell me that this particular English idiom did not translate well!! An idiom is a phrase where the words together have a meaning that is different from the dictionary definitions of the individual words and English is a particularly idiomatic language. The Cambridge International Dictionary of Idioms explains over 7,000 idioms current in British, American and Australian English. When you add in the effects of jargon, acronyms and business buzzwords it’s not surprising that there is often a poor level of understanding in multi-linguistic environments.
What are the solutions?
In multi-cultural environments simplicity and clarity are key to good communication. If you become more self aware of your own communication style then you can identify whether you tend to use idioms, jargon, acronyms, humour, sarcasm or if you tend to speak particularly quickly. Once you are aware of these things you can start to self edit and pare down your communication style to be clearer and simpler to help wider, multinational audiences understand you better. It takes effort and constant adjustments when you‘re doing this, but it can make a dramatic difference to how well you are understood.
Another key area is around checking understanding. If something’s important it’s never safe to assume that once you have said it, others have understood it. You cannot assume. You need to take responsibility for the other person’s understanding and check that they have received the message you sent. This is true of everyday communication but even more so of cross cultural communication. An Indian client of ours frequently has difficulty in managing their client’s expectations. When the client asks for something that is essentially not possible, Indian engineers will say they will try to achieve it. In Indian culture it’s impolite to say a direct no, so in saying it’s difficult but they’ll try they are essentially communicating; “No this is not possible”. The UK client’s interpretation is more usually “great, they said they’ll do it”. So if you think you’ve communicated that something is not possible you need to check that the other person has understood. How do you do that? By repeating your message, several times in different ways and by asking them questions to check their understanding, you might ask, “so, given we are not able to do that, how would you like us to proceed?”
The ability to communicate well with colleagues around the globe is clearly an area that is not easy but also an area that is a key communication skill for 21st business environments
Posted in authentic communication, Communication, impact, voice and accents | No Comments »
September 27th, 2010
This is the internet age, the information age, the age of perfect communication isn’t it? If we want to communicate with someone we can call them, email them, text them, tweet them or facebook them (yes, facebook now seems to have morphed into a verb! ) But does all this make for perfect communication ?
Actually in working with clients around the globe across the last 12 months I have noticed that the effects of the information age are creating as many challenges as opportunities. Many people are drowning in information and over-communication. Did you know that more than 171 billion emails are sent everyday! i.e. more than 2 million per second. Clients have told us that they often get over 300 emails a day. At only one minute, on average per email that’s 5 hours a day just on your inbox!! This is particularly bad for people working for organisations based in another time zone when an empty mail box can contain hundreds of new emails by the morning!
To thrive and survive organisations are increasingly working at a pan-European or global level, of in matrix-ed, virtual teams. The challenges of multi-cultural, multi-lingual communication are many and various. Handling the challenges of accents, idioms, acronyms and cultural norms is a communications minefield.
Many businesses are now operating on a European if not global level and many have moved to digital solutions (phone/ webinar/ video conference) in response to broad geographic spreads and credit-crunch induced travel restrictions. Indeed even those geographically co-located don’t necessarily take advantage of the proximity. A recent study showed seventy one percent of managers communicate through emails and only fourteen percent face to face.
If 75% plus of the meaning we take from a communication is from body language or para-language (tone of voice), that explains why virtual communication is so much less effective than face to face communication. It also means that our communication needs to be significantly better and more sophisticated to be effective in these virtual and cross cultural environments. It’s surprising though that organisations typically are not doing much to help employees deal with these challenges. I worked recently with a client that said they had been asking for several years for some training on virtual communication.
What’s your organisation doing to “up” it’s communication game ?
Posted in Communication | No Comments »
July 13th, 2010
Why ?
The messages that many speakers will need to deliver in conferences and key note speeches across the country this autumn will probably be challenging, uncompromising and in many cases, unpopular. With dramatic cuts being made in the private and public sector alike, the “doing more with less” message is likely to be a common theme. In tough times leadership is all about communication and being able to deliver difficult messages and yet still keep people engaged and involved.
One of the things that contribute to people’s dislike of change is the uncertainty they have to live with which causes them fear and anxiety. If a leader is able to communicate well, keep people informed and be open with them, this can lessen anxiety and help people cope with ambiguity.
Against this backdrop, keeping people motivated and focussed is a huge task. It is going require Churchillian or Lutheran grade rhetorical skills (along with authentic, congruent actions too). It’s going to require masterful preparation and delivery of these speeches to enable the speakers to achieve these almost diametrically opposed objectives.
The best speakers in the world know that to be that to be this effective takes hard work. They know that powerful and effective speakers are not born but created from force of effort. There is no substitute, there are no short cuts.
Many leaders are tempted to downplay the importance of speeches as the tip of the iceberg, style not substance, starter not the main course. They don’t want to have to assign the time to deliver excellence in this area. We can only hope that this conference season most leaders will recognise, now more than ever, the importance of the messages they need to convey and put in the “hard yards” to optimally communicate with their people and their organisations.
Posted in authentic communication, Communication, presentation for conferences | No Comments »
