Much of my work in developing leaders and leading organizations focuses on communication. Since publishing Straight Talk® in 1997, I’ve continued to develop my understanding that people can develop four different levels – or “powers” – of communication. Here’s a description of these four powers:

The First Power: Expressing Yourself.

From the moment we pop out of the womb, we start expressing what we want. We communicate we are hungry, or sad, or happy. Over time, we learn how to use words. We learn how to name simple emotional and mental states. By the time we’re adults, we’ve developed a full array of strategies to express how we feel and what we want.

Yet even as adults, we are still working on this first power. Adults, rather than getting straight to the heart of what they want, often beat around the bush, deflecting attention from the real issue or need out of the fear of losing “face” – a fear of exposure, a fear they will look silly, a fear they will lose authority or power. Yet learning how to express ourselves even when it feels emotionally charged and sensitive is all part of mastering the first power.

The trick is to learn how to express our “inner scripts” – the things that might embarrass us if we express them – in a way that shows we are genuinely conflicted about them. For example, in giving feedback to a boss who handled a situation with her team insensitively, you might say: “I have an inner script: While I know this might cost me my job, I would like to find a time when we could talk about how you might have handled that interaction more effectively.”

The Second Power: Listening and Responding.

Soon after we are born we also begin developing the ability to respond to others. We laugh at funny faces. We sense other people’s moods. As we gain the use of language, we respond with words. By the time most of us reach age five or six, we can communicate our thoughts and feelings with another person in a manner that builds a fledgling relationship.

As we grow older, we learn how to participate in a conversation, recognizing that the other person is our equal and deserves our respect and attention. We begin to establish patterns of communication based on reciprocity and trust-building.

At a more advanced level, people who master this second power can extract a deeper meaning from a conversation than simply what is said. They can paraphrase what they’ve heard. They can interpret what someone means and add layers of meaning to it.

They can validate their interpretation and create deeper bonds of trust with other people. I call this “validating the exchange.”

The Third Power: Regulating Attention and Intention.

People with the third power show a level of self-awareness and self-control that distinguishes them from second power communicators. It’s clear to everyone that you are communicating from a place of considerable self-awareness. People with this power can vary their level of attention and their level of intent, thereby achieving high levels of emotional intelligence. Let’s talk about attention first.

There are four levels of attention you can bring to any communication:

• Level 1: Volition. Is my attention voluntary or involuntary?

• Level 2: Consciousness. Am I in a highly conscious state or a routine state?

• Level 3: Affinity. Am I attracted to or repelled by the communication?

• Level 4: Quality. Is my attention creative, analytical, or empathetic? Am I varying it based on the situation?

Third power communicators are aware of each level of attention. Moreover, depending on the situation, they display the social and political awareness to select the appropriate setting within each level. For example, in Level 4, if they’re talking to someone who’s having problems with a colleague, they may choose to respond analytically: “I’ve had similar experiences. I know what you’re going through. Here’s how I handled it.” Or empathetically: “I can really appreciate how you feel. How can I help?” Or creatively: It’s amazing that happened to you. Let’s think of some ways you could deal with the situation.”

Third power communicators are also conscious of their intent and can vary it. There are four types of intent: affirmative, controlling, defensive, and relinquishing. Only the first is positive. The others lead to conflict. Third power communicators are able to use an affirming intent 90 percent of the time. Even in the middle of a heated debate, they’ll say: “I hear what you’re saying and I respect your views – even though we disagree.”

Regulating the levels of attention and intent enables third power communicators to show a high level of emotional intelligence. Daniel Goleman, who popularized the term “emotional intelligence,” describes five practices that build a deeper and more satisfying approach to communication.

These qualities of emotional intelligence enable your feelings to be an asset rather than a liability in a political world. People with good political skills know how to read cues. They understand that there may be political limits to what is possible. Above all, they understand that politics count. Successful leaders need to be masters of political selfmanagement. To say in public to your boss, “I think we could have handled this situation much better,” is to put him on the defensive. To say in private, “Can we talk about how you might want to handle this situation if it comes up again?” is more diplomatic and politically savvy.

Political self-management is equally important in both large and small companies. A small software company was rendered nearly helpless when two senior executives made a move to buy its most profitable division. Ultimately, the CEO decided that both executives had to go, despite their years of service to the company. They were the casualties of poor political self-management.

Part of emotional intelligence is speaking consciously from the “I.” For example, rather than saying “that wasn’t clear” to someone who’s just suggested an idea, you could say: “I feel confused. Can you clarify this for me?” People with this power can also communicate subtle nuances and flavors of emotions. For example, you might say to a colleague who’s just gotten promoted: “I’m jealous you got that promotion, but I’m also really happy for you. Excuse me if I seem just a bit conflicted.”

In sum, to assess your third power skills, ask yourself:

“Am I conscious of my attention? Do I exert control over it? When I’m listening, am I fully in the conversation? Do I tune my mind to hear not only the things the other person is saying, but the things she is not saying?”

Ask yourself whether your intent is also under your control. “Am I asking good, affirming questions designed to deepen my understanding? Or am I always busy thinking about what I want to say and planning my response? Do I affirm the other person’s point of view, even if I disagree with it? What is my state of mind?”

Part of the third power is also asking powerful questions. Powerful questions let people know that you are genuinely interested. They can break the ice in almost any contentious situation. If you say, “I’m genuinely curious to understand how you feel about this issue,” that’s a powerful question. If you say, “Help me understand your reasoning,” that’s a powerful question. When you ask questions designed to give you real insights into the thinking of another person, you’re displaying the third power.

So ask yourself whether your attention and intention are under control and you’re able to manage them to ask powerful questions. if you can answer “yes,” then it’s a good sign you’ve mastered the third power of communication.

The Fourth Power: Understanding and Responding to People in Their “Style.”

People with the fourth power can take their communication one step further: they can vary their communication based on an accurate understanding of the other person’s communication style and the assumptions that underlie that style. they have the self-awareness to identify the other person’s frame of reference and adapt their own style accordingly – and thus help facilitate productive communication among people with different and often conflicting points of view.

To master the fourth power, you have to recognize that even when people are speaking the same language, they may be talking and listening past each other within different frames of reference and operating assumptions. You have to learn how to identify these different styles, and then learn how to vary your communication style depending on the situation. The fourth power means knowing how to foster better communication by varying your style.

In my book Straight Talk: Turning Communication Upside Down for Strategic Results, I described the four different communication styles: the Director, Expresser, Thinker and Harmonizer. Each of these styles operates from a different set of assumptions. Here’s a quick snapshot:

Director: Directors are hard-charging, action-oriented leaders, focused on results. The director’s style of communicating is assertive and task-oriented. Directors operate on the assumption that quick action and decisiveness are valued, and that people are rewarded for getting things done, the sooner the better. Directors frame the world as a competitive place of action and decisiveness.

Expresser: Expressers focus on leading through their creative ideas. The expresser’s style of communicating is assertive and people-oriented. Their operating assumption is that people should feel free to voice their opinions, think outside of the box, and articulate what they feel. They like to entertain. Expressers frame the world as a place where people are recognized for their personal creativity and achievement.

Thinker: Thinkers are detail-oriented leaders and focused on what it takes to get the job done right. The thinker’s communication style is less assertive than the Director and Expresser. Like Directors, Thinkers are also task oriented; they assume that there’s a best way to do things – and it’s their job to make sure no mistakes are made. They feel rewarded when a task or project is done well. They frame the world as a place in which to solve problems and get things done.

Harmonizer: Harmonizers lead by supporting others. Their communication style is also less assertive than the Director and Expresser. Like Expressers, Harmonizers are people-oriented. They operate on the assumption that they need to look after the needs of the team and other people’s welfare. They feel rewarded when the team performs well. They frame the world as a place where relationships with people are the most important aspect of their lives and prefer to work collaboratively.

People are not simply one of these styles, but an amalgam of all four. To understand how you communicate, you need to know how strongly you exhibit each of these styles.

The fourth power encompasses the highest level of selfawareness. Because they are conscious of people’s styles, people with this power can use that awareness to shape how they listen. This is truly powerful listening. As they listen, they are able to apply the matrix of communication styles. They can quickly identify the underlying frame of reference and respond in that frame. For the person being listened to, it’s an amazing experience. “I feel truly understood by her when I’m talking with her,” is how one person describes it. The difference can be gauged by the reaction you elicit. When you engage in the fourth power, you elicit honest, heartfelt trust. People share their most sensitive stuff. People feel that you truly value their point of view.

One of the most effective fourth power communicators I’ve met is one of the former deans at Harvard Business School. When talking to a Thinker, she could be very detailed and analytical. When talking to an Expresser, she would animatedly tell stories and joke around. When talking to a Director, she would cut right to the chase, and the discussion would be over in five minutes. And when talking to a Harmonizer, she would begin with some small talk before introducing the real topic of discussion.

What’s important about the fourth power is that it can be learned. It begins by learning your own style (at www.communicationstyles.net). You then need to learn how to decipher other people’s styles.

The key to leading through others is to orient yourself toward this Ubuntu ideal – toward viewing other people as having needs and concerns equal to your own. When you make this quantum leap, you model respectful communication. You get the right people on the bus. You lead through influence rather than authority. You manage meetings effectively. You develop effective teams.

Theodore Roosevelt said: “The best leader is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done, and self-restraint enough to keep from meddling with them while they do it.” When you lead through others, you create an environment where trust can grow. Decisions can be decentralized. Everyone begins to act like a leader.

What are some of the characteristics of these forums? First, they are honest. There’s no penalty for speaking your mind or challenging assumptions. Second, the discussion is disciplined. It is data driven rather than subjective. Third, it’s grounded in the idea that the conversation shouldn’t be about the work. The conversation is the work. From the conversation comes real change.

This failure to engage people in real, honest conversation saps the creative energy of organizations. It leaves people feeling frustrated. Managers pull out their hair, wondering why morale is low and innovation non-existent. The answer is simple: Its leaders have failed to create the type of engagement that inspires people to learn and pour their best selves into their work.

A certain type of manager squelches creativity and conversation almost by instinct. They operate out of a need to dominate and direct. They try to coerce behavior. They’ll tell people they want to see a five percent increase in quality, or a ten percent increase in output, without creating forums in which people can talk creatively about the barriers to achieving that increase or suggest solutions. These kinds of managers nearly always come up short – and their organizations with them.

Honest, open engagement is crucial to building a high-performing organization. A good leader understands this and creates conversational forums that embolden people to change.

Learn more about LRI’s change management consulting…

Inside the organization, there are four dimensions to consider – up, down, and across the organization, as well as consistently over time. Effective leaders communicate in “4-D.” they recognize their natural tendency to shy away from at least one of these dimensions. We each have strengths in how we communicate internally. Some are better with peers, others are better with their boss, others are better with subordinates. Many leaders neglect communicating consistently over time. it’s important to take stock of your weakest dimension and compensate accordingly.

All of this takes energy and commitment. You should employ a broad range of communication strategies, such as small one-on-one meetings, group meetings with employees and managers, “all-hands” meetings, performance updates, e-newsletters, blogs, employee forums, and off-site meetings. You need to make your workplace safe for this kind of communication. if you want to build trust, you have to create an environment where people can speak out, voice their concerns, and offer ideas without retribution. Communication takes place when a dialogue occurs. announcing a new goal or policy isn’t enough. You communicate when you ask people questions and help them learn. Communication occurs when you create face-to-face forums and energize people to exchange ideas about issues of real importance to the organization.

When you talk to movie and stage actors, you learn that the best directors create a safe place where new ideas can be tested and communication and respect can grow. the same is true inside an organization. if it’s not safe for people to talk, it’s impossible for trust to grow. Remember, the key to leading in a light speed world is to triple or quadruple the level of communication. it may seem like an expensive investment of your time. But as people begin to act in concert, you’ll feel the organization shift to a higher speed.

Leading at Light Speed – 10 Best Practices of High-Performing Organizations.

Director: Directors are hard-charging, action-oriented leaders, focused on results. The director’s style of communicating is assertive and task-oriented. Directors operate on the assumption that quick action and decisiveness are valued, and that people are rewarded for getting things done, the sooner the better. Directors frame the world as a competitive place of action and decisiveness.

Expresser: Expressers focus on leading through their creative ideas. The expresser’s style of communicating is assertive and people-oriented. Their operating assumption is that people should feel free to voice their opinions, think outside of the box, and articulate what they feel. They like to entertain. Expressers frame the world as a place where people are recognized for their personal creativity and achievement.

Thinker: Thinkers are detail-oriented leaders and focused on what it takes to get the job done right. The thinker’s communication style is less assertive than the Director and Expresser. Like Directors, Thinkers are also task oriented; they assume that there’s a best way to do things – and it’s their job to make sure no mistakes are made. They feel rewarded when a task or project is done well. They frame the world as a place in which to solve problems and get things done.

Harmonizer: Harmonizers lead by supporting others. Their communication style is also less assertive than the Director and Expresser. Like Expressers, Harmonizers are people-oriented. They operate on the assumption that they need to look after the needs of the team and other people’s welfare. They feel rewarded when the team performs well. They frame the world as a place where relationships with people are the most important aspect of their lives and prefer to work collaboratively.

People are not simply one of these styles, but an amalgam of all four. To understand how you communicate, you need to know how strongly you exhibit each of these styles.

Learn your own style at www.communicationstyles.net.

While new media are directly under your control, “old” media – controlled by editors and reporters – are not quite ready to roll over. The key is to make them your partners. You can do this by successfully mobilizing new media and creating internet buzz – which makes you a story they want to cover. You can also strike deals to trade your services or products in exchange for media airtime. Restaurant chains trade food and drink to media in exchange for advertising. Non-profits partner with the media to promote their message; in exchange, the media are seen as good community citizens. The deals are limited only by your creativity and willingness to explore the possibilities.

But there’s one kind of partnership that’s often overlooked: partnering with reporters to help them get the best stories. It may seem odd to think about partnering with reporters, but this should be part of your strategy for communicating effectively in a light speed world. We live in an age when there is no “under the radar” anymore. Information transparency is here to stay. So resist the temptation to view reporters as adversaries. Instead, partner with them. Be proactive instead of protective.

What does it mean to “partner with reporters”? It means to build relationships with a few key reporters who cover your industry, provide them with story ideas – and, in exchange, ask for their help in communicating your message. Partnering with them boils down to doing four things well: 1) know what motivates reporters; 2) understand each medium; 3) establish good ground rules; and 4) build longterm relationships.

1. What Motivates Reporters

I used to be a newspaper reporter. I know from experience that reporters are not out to get you. First and foremost they’re looking for facts or trends or interesting tidbits, the makings of a good story. Reporters like to get the story straight from the source, not from a spokesperson or public relations flak. So take the time to cultivate these relationships yourself.

Reporters don’t like to be lied to or misled. Who does? But unlike mere mortals, reporters have the power of the press. So if you’re facing some bad news, face it squarely. Don’t cover-up. Tell them the truth the first time – and if you can’t tell them everything, give them an honest explanation why not. “I can’t reveal the details of our negotiations just yet because it could upset the talks at a very delicate point,” is much better than “no comment.” Lawyers will advise you not to talk to the media. I believe you should. It builds trust.

2. Understand the Medium

Reporters have different deadlines and different needs, depending on what medium they work in. Television reporters have different deadlines than newspaper reporters. Bloggers need news right away. Magazine reporters have deadlines that can be as long as 30 to 60 days from publication. Understanding the unique needs of each medium takes practice. Ask them: “What’s your deadline? How much do you need?” You’ll be amazed to discover that reporters respond favorably to acts of human thoughtfulness.

A newspaper reporter will want more of your time to understand the background and context; a radio or TV reporter will want two or three short sound bites. A welldefined message box gives you the discipline to deal with these different demands. Always communicate your most important message first.

3. Establish Good Ground Rules

Reporters operate on the basis of certain ground rules. You have a big advantage if you know what they are. The first rule is that any conversation with a reporter, no matter how casual, is “on the record” unless some other agreement is established in advance. Being “on the record” is only one of three possibilities. Your conversation could also be: 1) “off the record,” meaning it will not be used in any form, or 2) “on background,” meaning it can be used, but without attribution to you. (In this case, you can define how the attribution will be characterized – for example, a “company official.”)

Establishing the ground rules in advance enables you to control the discussion. Otherwise, you’re at the mercy of the reporter. I coach people to say: “I’m happy to talk with you. But here are the ground rules I want to play by: Our initial conversation will be off the record. Once we’ve talked, you tell me what you’d like to put on the record and we’ll discuss it.” You would then ask the reporter whether he or she agrees to these rules. If the reporter agrees, the discussion would then proceed off the record.

Remember, you can control the game if you clarify the ground rules in advance. Some reporters may not like it – but they’ll respect it. And if you hold fast to your terms, it’s a deal they’ll rarely turn down. (If the reporter does decline, then at least you know where you stand and can proceed accordingly.) Of course you can argue that this leaves you vulnerable to a dishonest reporter who goes against his or her word. But most reporters are honorable. Their reputations – and job security – depend on it.

4. Build Long-Term Relationships

It’s easy to find the reporters who cover your industry. Look for their bylines or their blogs. Cultivate a relationship with them! Invite a reporter out to lunch under the condition that the entire discussion is off the record. Talk about what expertise you have and the kinds of stories you would find interesting. Ask them what they’re working on. If you treat reporters with respect, they are far more likely to help you over the long-term. You won’t get everything you want. But they will be far more likely to help you out.

Once you are in their database, expect a call. They may want background information to flesh out a story. Perhaps a quote. Don’t hesitate to let the reporter know what you think might be a good lead for the story. A good relationship with a reporter can yield big dividends down the road.

Above all, think of a reporter as someone who needs interesting stories. If you can feed a couple of interesting stories each month to a reporter, you will be considered a friend, someone who deserves a thorough hearing when the chips are down. So invest in the relationship, just as you would invest in your relationship with key suppliers and customers.

Leading at Light Speed – Discover the 10 Quantum Leaps to build trust, spark innovation, and create a high-performing organization.

For example, your message box might be that “our highest priority is our customers’ and employees’ safety.” If someone asks you what you’re doing to deal with financial setbacks, the first thing out of your mouth should be “our highest priority is our customers’ and employees’ safety.” Every communication stays within the message box. Staying in the box is hard work. It can feel repetitive and creatively stifling. But the effort is worth it in terms of the consistency and trust building.

Remember that your message box should contain 1-3 simple messages. These are the things you would want every one of the groups listed above to hear. Don’t try to customize your message to fit a specific group. Over time, people will hear different messages, and they’ll perceive you and your company as opportunistic or disingenuous. On the other hand, if all your communications are driven by your company’s purpose, core values and vision, people will sense the level of commitment and integrity.

For example, the message box for a company that specializes in analyzing key indicators of future performance of publicly traded companies might be: “Our vision is to be a world leader in helping investors to realize long-term yields on their investments. Our core values of innovation and integrity guide us in everything we do.” It can be that simple.

To speak with a strategic planning consultant about developing a strategic plan to accelerate the pace of change, call (916) 325-1190 or email info@leadingresources.com.

At a daylong meeting with a group of neuroscientists at the University of California, I posed this question: “Aside from getting more money, what would most quickly help you achieve a major breakthrough in your field?”

One scientist talked about specialization. “We are so specialized in our individual research,” she said. “That’s how we win our grants and build our reputations. Yet as we become increasingly specialized, it’s like the universe itself. Our stars are flying farther apart from each other. It’s almost like we can’t see each other.”

“That’s true,” said another scientist. “The biggest breakthroughs are between specialties. If we’re to succeed, we need to understand what each of us is learning. Bridging the gaps between us is our biggest challenge.”

Another scientist jumped in. “In my last project, we put together an inter-disciplinary team. We met twice each week. It was slow going at first. But it yielded a brand new level of understanding about neuro-developmental disorders.”

“You’re right,” another person said. “The breakthroughs occurred when we built a shared understanding of what happens at three levels –  behavior, development, and biology. We need to bridge those gaps.”

“But that’s a huge leap,” one of the clinicians said. “Each of those is a different world with a different history and scientific protocols and language. How can we possibly do that?”

This conversation about transcending differences and finding common ground through communication was not new to me. But it was new for this group. I talked about how people make a similar leap when they become leaders. The breakthrough comes, I said, when they rethink how they communicate. To succeed, they build systems of communication that bridge the gaps.

“So who is responsible for that here?” someone asked.

“Good question,” I said. “What do you think?”

There was a pause. “I guess we all are.”

People started to toss out ideas. They became energized.

Within an hour, they had identified five new strategies to build communication across their various disciplines – and agreed to try all of them. They also decided to meet each quarter to assess how well they were communicating. They were making the leap.

Learn more in my book: Straight Talk – Turning Communication Upside Down for Strategic Results at Work.

Communication is an exchange of information between people. It may be with an entire team or only between two people, but the key is, that it is an exchange–it is bi-directional. Something is transmitted and something is received. Communication includes spoken, written and body language.

Does Your Company employ these Healthy Communication essentials?

1. A Voice — If there is to be honest communication, everyone must have a voice–a right to speak and to be heard. This is important in team meetings and in one-on-one exchanges.

2. Expectations — Setting expectations is a means of telling people what you need and want so that they have the best probable chance of accommodating you.

3. Information Flow — Information flow is critical in any organization. When information is on again–off again or cut off all together, something is broken. Set up flow processes to keep everyone in check and responsible for their part.

4. Information Accuracy — When bad information is passed, it can spread like a virus and be very damaging. Encourage the routine use of checks and balances at all levels of the organization.

5. Ban Exclusivity — If one person is doing the majority of talking in meetings or the environment only caters to a select few, inspiration and motivation will remain stunted. Managers should observe and guide group dynamics for maximum productivity.

6. Body Language — People can speak volumes without uttering a word. Management can set expectations by addressing this in staff meetings. Hostile, apathetic or inappropriate negative vibes make for a toxic environment and drag down morale. Workplace respect is crucial.

7. Get Real — Whether it’s false or misleading information, ugly-spirited gossip or inappropriate jesting, it’s not wise or healthy for any organization. Communication should serve the best interests of the people and mission of the company–adding to the health and success of the whole.

8. Same Page — When workers are not on the same page, they lose the essential element of mutual understanding. Don’t waste time and energy by overlooking this critical point and frustrating your employees or confusing your objectives.

If you have someone on your team who is de-motivated it might be that you are not providing enough flexibility or that you have not explained the procedures in enough detail. Just try talking to them in a different way and you might find their attitude changes for the better

Signature***********************
Mortgage refinancing Mortgage Calculator
mortgage refinance through our articles
most exquisite condominiums residences

Some people get the managerial position by working their way up the ladder, while some gets the position in fancy paper.  There are also some managers who assume the position out of need. But regardless of the reason, every manager has a huge responsibility on their shoulders. If you do not perform your job properly, your team and your company will suffer the consequences.

Here are three worst things that a first time manager can do.

Prioritizing tasks instead of people.

A regular employee is expected to do the task assigned to him within the set deadline and other requirements. Maybe you were once assigned to take care of advertising or to monitor the sales. However, now that you are manager, things are different – you are no longer bound to finish the tasks single-mindedly, but help your team carry out what they are expected to do the best way possible.

It is your responsibility as manager to ensure optimal output from your team. How good your team carries out their tasks will determine how good you are at managing people.

Talking more, listening less.

Any seasoned manager will tell you that the best way to run a team is by listening to them. You can try doing a listening tour during your first couple of days as manager. Go to lunch with a particular set of employees or have coffee with the departments and other key personnel. Find out what matters to whom, who needs what, and how to help who.

The only way you will know what somebody needs is by hearing him talk. Besides, nothing is more annoying than a new manager who talks a lot and never listens.

Delegating tasks without knowing employee capability.

This is perhaps the most common mistake that all first time managers commit almost all the time. This leads to one of two things: one, the task gets done but with poor quality; or two, nothing gets done at all – either way is bad news for you and your team.

That is why you need to evaluate the skills and the capabilities of your employees first. You have to evaluate their weaknesses and strengths first so that you will know what nature of tasks they can handle.

Using an LMS is a great way to do training and at a low cost. Choose one that has robust features and is easy to set up and use.

Learn more about first time managers.

In a light speed world, you should expect to deal with a crisis. It may never come; but if you’re prepared, you’ll be much better off.

When a crisis occurs, the feeling is like no other. Events unfold at a speed that is beyond your control. Events are magnified beyond proportion. Confronted with a bewildering array of data, options, and demands, you’re tempted to retreat into a protective shell, taking your cues from what other people do or tell you. In a crisis, it’s important to understand the trust/empathy matrix.

The trust scale is within your control. How openly you respond under pressure will dictate whether you can continue to lead at light speed or crash into the ground. If you communicate openly, proactively, and provide all the facts as soon as you have them, you will build trust and the story will be less likely to spin out of control. On the other hand, if you withhold pertinent facts or leave reporters with further leads to uncover, you will erode trust. Reporters will attack people who mislead them. It is not pretty.

The empathy scale is governed largely by circumstances. Someone or something caused a crisis to occur. If it is clear that you or your company is not responsible, empathy will go up. If you or your company are victims of some natural disaster, empathy will go way up. On the other hand, if you perpetrated a crime or accidentally caused harm, empathy will go down. Sometimes way down.

While the empathy scale is largely beyond your control, there are things you can do to tilt it in your favor. Rule one is this: Broaden your sense of responsibility even if you’re not at fault. Remember to protect other people first – customers, employees and citizens. Not your shareholders or yourself. protect the public and your customers, and the shareholders will follow. Why? Because the long-term reputation and goodwill of your organization are more important than any short-term risk to shareholder value or your own job security.

This may feel counter-intuitive, especially when someone else is clearly culpable. But re-framing and broadening your level of responsibility will gain you empathy and help lead you out of the crisis.

A classic example is the Tylenol scare of 1986. When cyanide-laced containers of Tylenol were found on supermarket shelves, it was clear that a pathological killer was responsible. Johnson & Johnson ’s executives could have focused on the criminal aspects and exhorted police to take responsibility for catching the perpetrator. Indeed, he was caught within a matter of days. But they didn’t. They focused on one of their core values – safety – and acted immediately in ways that built trust.

The company chose to recall every Tylenol product, design strong anti-tampering packaging, and conduct a massive awareness-building campaign. Johnson & Johnson’s executives understood the need to immediately take responsibility for the safety of their consumers. It is estimated to have cost the company $2 billion, but Johnson & Johnson emerged the stronger for it.

In contrast, consider another classic case. In 1989, the oil tanker Exxon Valdez went aground in Alaska’s Prince William Sound. Nearly eleven million gallons of oil spilled onto pristine shoreline. In the immediate aftermath, Exxon’s CEO Lawrence Rawl was slow to accept responsibility. Instead he issued a flurry of press releases stating that the company was investigating the accident. The opportunity to contain the spill was squandered. Hundreds of miles of coastline were fouled.

Public furor built and the company’s reputation plunged. Several weeks passed before Rawl grudgingly announced that the company would take responsibility for the cleanup. Eventually, thousands of workers and volunteers were mobilized to mop up the oil, save the wildlife, and minimize the damage to the extent possible. But Exxon’s public image was left in tatters. Rawl’s response was a classic example of how not to communicate to the public when your company messes up.

In the case of the Exxon Valdez tanker spill, there was little question that the captain was drunk and that Exxon, as his employer, was at fault. Exxon’s leaders had little control over the empathy scale. But they did have control over the trust scale, which they messed up. In the Tylenol case, Johnson & Johnson was clearly not at fault. Yet it chose to assume full responsibility. As a consequence, the company was rewarded.

The art of communicating authentically is a learned skill. It takes coaching and practice to do it well. Communicating authentically means being honest, open and thoughtful in what you say – and in how you listen and respond to what you hear. This post describes four skills that will help leaders communicate authentically.

Speak for Your Self

Effective leaders express their views directly. They state their concerns up front. One good way is to personalize your comments, taking responsibility for your positions, opinions and values, rather than offering generalizations or blaming others or outside forces. Say, “I feel disappointed about our progress,” rather than, “This group is the pits.”

The advantage of this approach is that it reduces defenses by not placing general or even specific blame on others. No one can argue that you’re not really concerned or that you’re secretly more optimistic than you admit. “I would like us to begin promptly at nine” is clear; “You’re late again! You hold us up every week” is guaranteed to provoke a defensive reaction.

Another way people hide their real positions is by burying them in questions. “Are you planning to make that statement in public?” is an attack, not a question. “I would rather you would not say that when we make our presentation” is also a negative comment, but at least you are directly acknowledging that this is your view, not an absolute judgment.

Does it seem like nitpicking? It’s not really. The major difference is in the kind of response you seek to evoke from your listeners.

Tailor Your Communication Style

Everyone has a signature style of communicating. These styles can be scientifically broken down into four categories: Directors, Expressers, Thinkers and Harmonizers. Straight Talk® enables you to discover your own style, and the style of others, and gain tips on how to make your communication more balanced and effective.

Once you understand your communication style, you’ll have a deeper appreciation of what it takes to communicate into someone’s “listening space.” Directors, for example, want information in quick, bottom line bullet points. Expressers want a fuller exploration of different options and ideas. Thinkers want to hear the detailed thinking behind a proposal. And Harmonizers want to understand the impact of any proposal on people.

The most effective communicators tailor their style to fit their audience. By tailoring their style, they help people relax and feel more receptive to what they’re saying. This makes them more successful as managers and leaders. As needed, they also make overt reference to differences in style to defuse tension and resolve conflicts between styles. This goes a long way toward building trust.

Be a Powerful Listener

Powerful listening is not a passive activity. A good listener concentrates not just on words, but on understanding the underlying point of view of the other person. Powerful listeners focus on subtle tones, facial expressions and context, and then respond in a way that demonstrates they have heard the speaker’s meaning as well as the words. They listen to understand, not just to figure out how they’re going to make their argument.

One way to be sure you understand exactly what the speaker means, and to communicate your understanding, is by reflecting back to the speaker what you believe he or she is saying. Paraphrasing does not mean just parroting their words. It means restating the speaker’s position in your own words, taking into account the non-verbal signs you see and the tone of voice you hear.

Typical lead-in phrases for paraphrasing are “It sounds like . . .” or “I can see that . . .” Paraphrasing is also invaluable when you disagree with someone and must, nonetheless, offer an encouraging reply. Being able to express the speaker’s position clearly says to the speaker that, even though you disagree with the position, you value him or her enough to listen carefully.

When you paraphrase, you also give the speaker a chance to clarify his or her position. He may say: “Yes, that’s it.” Or he may respond: “You know, let me clarify a bit.” That sets the stage for a deeper conversation – one in which you can play the role of facilitator.

Remember that 60 percent of communication is non-verbal. In other words, if you listen only to what someone says, you’re missing more than half of the conversation.

It’s not enough to listen; you also must show that you are listening. Maintain eye contact, lean forward, nod, vocalize agreement when appropriate by saying, “I see,” “Um hmm”; take notes if that is appropriate. Don’t glance at your watch, focus on outside events, wear your dark glasses, cross your arms and lean back, watch TV, or wave to other people. Instead, teach yourself to focus entirely on the communication at hand.

Be Data Driven

When you’re data-driven in your communication, you do two things:

First, you put your own assumptions on the table. “I assume that we’re going to experience the same downturn in the economy everyone else in our industry is experiencing.”

Second, you probe for missing data. You ask: “Does anyone have any data that would help me clarify my assumptions?”

When you’re data-driven, you also look to get other people’s assumptions and issues on the table. You ask: “Help me understand your thinking. What are you assuming will happen?”

When you’re data-driven, you make sure you bring issues to the table. If there’s a relevant conversation in the hallway, you raise it in front of everyone. If you’re experiencing confusion or discomfort, you let people know (recognizing that if you’re experiencing it, others are likely to be experiencing it, too). If there’s an issue you feel you can’t raise without suffering some grave consequence, you consult the chair or someone else in a position to help you develop a strategy.

When you’re data-driven, you use concrete examples and specifics to help people get on the same page. You don’t get mired in generalities; you introduce specific cases that help people understand whether you’re talking about a 2% increase in spending – or a 20% increase.

Finally, when you’re data-driven, you stay humble. You assume that you don’t see things perfectly. You ask for other people’s points of view. You are aware that human beings can fall prey to the “assumption of competence.” You appreciate that people who assume they are competent are usually the least competent among us.

Building trust is all about communication. And where vision is concerned, you have to communicate four critical things:

1. That the leaders of the company are seriously committed and engaged in achieving the vision.
2. That a plan is in place.
3. That no one is exempt from change; everyone is part of the effort.
4. That the benefits are large, and the risk of failure is shared.

One of the important themes for leaders to think about in communicating vision is that it is based on an act of will. Certain assumptions have to be made about the future. the most important thing a leader can do is to articulate the vision, explain clearly the benefits associated with it, and then contrast them to the consequences of inaction.

To lead at light speed is to galvanize people in a single, focused direction. Nothing can be a priority if everything is. To lead at light speed, you need to define what is truly important. You also need to make clear what the organization will not to do and what is not a priority. A nationwide chain of auto parts stores planned to open an average of one new store a month for two years. The CEO told his managers: “We are not considering any mergers or acquisitions. We need to devote all our energy to supporting the new stores.”

In contrast, mediocre leaders waffle on their vision. They aren’t willing to take the risk. They worry that people will disagree. They make the mistake of thinking that people will resent their taking the lead. In my experience, the opposite is the case. People respond positively to leaders who have the courage to say: “This is where we need to go and this is why.”

At some point, the decision is made. The next step is telling people the results and explaining the rationales behind the decision. Surprisingly, this is where a lot of decision processes break down. You may be done, but others are still in the dark. A complex decision affects a lot of people. I’ve never seen an instance in which people erred in communicating a decision too broadly. On the other hand, I’ve seen countless examples of failing to let key people know what happened.

Don’t forget to publicly recognize everyone involved. Small tokens of appreciation – a team t-shirt, a team photo– are important symbols of having participated in an important decision. Small things can symbolize big contributions and provide people the recognition that builds trust.

Once the decision is made, there’s one more thing you should do. You should convene the people involved and ask for their feedback on how well the decision was managed. What worked well? And how could it be better managed the next time? This feedback may seem unnecessary – but believe me, you will glean things that can help you improve all your future decision processes.

Leaders who want to build high levels of trust need to clarify expectations all the time. It’s not enough to say something once. You need to say it often and have regular check-ins to make sure people’s receivers are tuned to your transmitter. If you have a very specific outcome in mind, make sure you communicate it. Don’t expect people to develop telepathic powers! If you have a particular expectation in terms of how a report will look, provide an example. If you know the data you want, explain what it is. If you have specific selection criteria, communicate them. You shouldn’t expect people to understand intuitively what you want unless you’ve worked with them for many years.

Part of laying out expectations is defining a timetable. It’s not fair to leave people guessing whether something is due next week or next month. You should also identify the “critical path,” that is, decisions upon which other decisions are contingent and dependent. For example, in opening a new store, the construction schedule will affect hiring, promotions, acquiring inventory and so forth. Sharing the timetables for critical path issues and monitoring those timetables is necessary to ensure strong levels of trust.

A key part of clarifying expectations is giving people context so they understand why a given decision is important. How does this fit within our overall vision and goals? Why are we focusing on this product line now? As a middle-manager for a large retail chain told me: “My job is to communicate the rationales for our decisions, enlarge understanding, and provide light through the trees.”

As you make this quantum leap in managing decisions, clarifying expectations, and delegating decisions, you begin building a Light Speed culture. As shown below, a Light Speed culture is one where people focus on the overall goal and their role in achieving it. The “we/they” distinction disappears. What emerges is a culture in which people act both like leaders and followers simultaneously.

Stage 1: The Hierarchical Culture

A culture in which decisions are made by a boss or series of bosses. Communication, for the most part, is one-way, top to bottom.

Stage 2: The Goal-Driven Culture

A culture in which people are encouraged to achieve common goals. Communication is more dynamic, because goals are being articulated and tied to performance measures.

Stage 3: The Values-Based Culture

A culture in which people make decisions based on shared understanding of what is essential to the company’s success and related performance information. Communication is complex, because people are empowered to make decisions.

Stage 4: The Light Speed Culture

A culture in which the “we/they” dichotomy dissolves, and everyone is united in a seamless system of communication and performance. Communication is highly complex, because everyone feels empowered to lead and follow simultaneously.

Understanding intent is key to improving the quality of communication. This tool describes each of the four types of intent in detail and provides useful tips for people who want to display positive intent. (2 pages)

Download the PDF.

The four internal dimensions of communication (up, down, across, and through time) may seem like enough. But leaders have to communicate externally as well. There are eight more dimensions to consider, bringing the total number to twelve. That’s what I mean by communicating in 12-D. Fortunately you can leverage the same “message box” to communicate with many or all of these external groups.

Even though there are eight external dimensions, you don’t need a different strategy for each group. You need a unified message that resonates with all – or most – of them.

Second, you need to leverage different forms of media in order to reach these groups. (That’s another reason for a single, unified message: you can’t control which group hears your message through which medium.)

Finally, many people in your organization need to be trusted and empowered to communicate with these external groups. Given the rise of so many different forms of communication, a tight command and control strategy won’t work anymore.

Here are the eight external dimensions of communication:

This tool describes how to work effectively with both broadcast and print journalists. It describes how to prepare for an interview, what to ask the reporter, what the journalists “ground rules” are, and how to handle the press when you are in “crisis mode.” This tool is invaluable for managers and leaders at any level. (3 pages)

In a light speed world, people need to communicate at increasing speeds (and from increasing distances) in order to build trust. Internally, this means a focus from the top on building systems of communication. It also means focusing on external communication. In a light speed world, people on the outside scrutinize and analyze every action that the company takes. There is constant pressure from the media. New websites, blogs, and watchdog groups crop up every day, fueling more feedback and “e-chatter.” Since there is  no “under the radar” anymore, leaders need to invent new ways to communicate and shape the rules of the game.

At a daylong meeting with a group of neuroscientists at the University of California, I posed this question: “Aside from getting more money, what would most quickly help you achieve a major breakthrough in your field?”

One scientist talked about specialization. “We are so specialized in our individual research,” she said. “That’s how we win our grants and build our reputations. Yet as we become increasingly specialized, it’s like the universe itself. Our stars are flying farther apart from each other. It’s almost like we can’t see each other.”

“That’s true,” said another scientist. “The biggest breakthroughs are between specialties. If we’re to succeed, we need to understand what each of us is learning. Bridging the gaps between us is our biggest challenge.”

Another scientist jumped in. “In my last project, we put together an inter-disciplinary team. We met twice each week. It was slow going at first. But it yielded a brand new level of understanding about neuro-developmental disorders.”

“You’re right,” another person said. “The breakthroughs occurred when we built a shared understanding of what happens at three levels –  behavior, development, and biology. We need to bridge those gaps.”

“But that’s a huge leap,” one of the clinicians said. “Each of those is a different world with a different history and scientific protocols and language. How can we possibly do that?”

This conversation about transcending differences and finding common ground through communication was not new to me. But it was new for this group. I talked about how people make a similar leap when they become leaders. The breakthrough comes, I said, when they rethink how they communicate. To succeed, they build systems of communication that bridge the gaps.

“So who is responsible for that here?” someone asked.
“Good question,” I said. “What do you think?”
There was a pause. “I guess we all are.”
People started to toss out ideas. They became energized.

Within an hour, they had identified five new strategies to build communication across their various disciplines – and agreed to try all of them. They also decided to meet each quarter to assess how well they were communicating. They were making the leap.

Instantly download over 100 leadership tools you can immediately put to use. Enhance your leadership skills through quick bursts of management expertise crafted by LRI’s experts. These articles contain zero filler and are condensed into 3-5 pages of solid content.

Download the podcast (right click Save As) or Download the PDF (right click Save As)

In order to align the core values, you need to view them as part of a coherent framework, a way of communicating what the organization is all about and where it is going. “The Six Rings Model” is this framework. The Six Rings Model looks the same whether you are JC Penney or the White House. The beauty of this model is that you start in the first ring and work your way outward. Each ring provides a different perspective – or lens- with which to define your company. When one ring is done you move on to the next. It’s an iterative process: the work on one ring informs the work on the others. Each successively narrows the aperture and defines the specific ways in which the organization creates value for its owners and its customers.

The first three rings together form what I call the “strategic focus,” a nexus around which all activities are coordinated and organized. Will we make this product? Yes, because it’s consistent with our strategic focus. Will we enter this market? No, because it conflicts with one of our core values. In short, when you have a well-defined strategic focus, you can make sound, consistent decisions at all levels. Having the strategic focus is the first quantum leap that leaders make to build a light speed organization.

The strategic framework is discussed in Chapter One of Leading at Light Speed, a groundbreaking leadership book describing 10 Quantum Leaps to build trust, spark innovation, and create a high-performing organization. Take this free work survey to assess how well your company measures up to the 10 Quantum Leaps.

Download the podcast (right click Save As) or Download the PDF (right click Save As)

Aligning people around core values is the first thing leaders must do. It is the framework that enables you to start moving at light speed. “We are constantly making sure people are aligned with our values,” says Laura Batten, the CEO of a consumer goods manufacturing company. When people truly understand the core values of their organization, they become aligned. The long-term drivers of the company’s health are widely understood. People start to make decisions based on the core values. The enterprise starts picking up speed.

When an organization feels united around well-understood core values, performance is no longer about what’s good for you or me, but what’s good for the long-term. Employees trust the company’s direction. Talented people are motivated to join the team. Customers are drawn to its products and services. Think about Apple and its core value of innovation. Or Starbucks and its core value of consistent quality. Those are not empty promises; they are reflections of the values-driven nature of those enterprises. Think about Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, and 3M Corporation. These are all companies driven by a framework of core values.

There is a clear link between core values and performance. A grocery chain’s revenues rose 24 percent the year after our firm facilitated its shift to core values. A $200 million software company’s profit margins rose 37 percent. There are many other examples I will describe in detail in this chapter. As Larry Johnston, the CEO of Albertson’s supermarket chain puts it: “There are two dimensions to leadership. Performance and values. You can’t have one without the other.”

Focusing on core values attracts and retains talented people. It’s easier to get the right people to join your organization when you can clearly communicate what’s important, and what behaviors you’re looking for. This reduces turnover, thereby cutting the costs associated with recruiting, retaining, and retraining employees. In a service economy with higher intrinsic labor costs and increasing labor mobility, this is an important source of competitive advantage and profit.

Focusing on core values also attracts and retains loyal customers. People are attracted to companies that are value-driven. Smart companies use this to build tight bonds with their customers. Starbucks, Google, Apple, Southwest, Nordstrom, IBM, and Porsche are all examples of companies that have effectively aligned their employees and customers around a set of core values.

The benefits of an organization driven by core values is discussed in Chapter One of Leading at Light Speed, a groundbreaking leadership book describing 10 Quantum Leaps to build trust, spark innovation, and create a high-performing organization.

One CEO describes his experience leading people through change as follows: “It’s a race where you run the first four laps as fast as you can – and then you gradually increase the speed.” In order to lead at light speed, you have to accelerate the pace of learning inside the organization. It sounds easy, but it’s not. People are naturally resistant to changing their ways. The secret is what I call “learning loops.”

Learning loops are a process of sharing performance information with people and empowering them to make the changes needed to improve performance. They are similar to feedback loops except they are deliberately designed to achieve organizational change at maximum speed. It means giving the right people the right information at the right time – and sparking their creativity and innovation.

Read the full post and listen to the podcast by signing up for premium content.

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

Learning loops depend on communicating information about performance in a way that’s easy for people to understand. How are we doing on customer satisfaction? how about service reliability? What about finance? Assuming you have a balanced scorecard in place, you can tie it to a performance dashboard that visually depicts whether the organization is achieving its performance goals. You can signify with green, amber and red areas of relative strength and weakness. You can provide detailed comparisons of past and present performance. Arming people with data that is reliable, easy to understand, and has sufficient background detail makes it easy for them to see where they need to make adjustments.

Learning loops need to be immediate. People need to know as quickly as possible what’s going on. It’s not good enough to have quarterly or bimonthly performance “updates.” Feedback needs to occur as soon as the information is available, so that people can communicate and adjust their plans in a way that can actually influence outcomes.

Learning loops need to be shared with people who have the authority and responsibility for improving the performance levels. Start with the people who wield the most influence – typically the members of the senior leadership team. As soon as information becomes available, they need to be talking about which targets are being met – and which are not. It’s not enough to email the report or publicize it on a web site. People need to hear the report as a group, think through the implications, discuss options and share ideas. If progress seems too slow, ratchet up the pressure. That’s how learning loops work.

[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses based on the leadership book Leading at Light Speed.

Premium members can download the PDF here:

[emember_protected for=3]

The Five Types of Decisions

[/emember_protected]

The easiest type of decision is autocratic: It’s a decision you make yourself. You pick out your shirt in the morning. You decide how to respond to your email. No one else gets involved. I divide autocratic decisions into two sub-types:

• You make the decision by yourself using the information you have available,
• You obtain information from another person (or other people), and then decide by yourself.

Read the full post and listen to the podcast by signing up for premium content.

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=13]

Many decisions are autocratic, but they are also relatively trivial. What you eat for breakfast, where you park your car, the color of the socks you wear – these are decisions you make on your own. If you reflect on all the decisions you make during a day, you can appreciate how much of life is filled with autocratic decisions.

I can only think of three situations in which a leader should make important decisions in this manner: 1) when the decision is straightforward and you have all the information necessary – in which case you still need to communicate what you’ve decided and why; 2) when time pressure forces you to make the decision quickly – in which case you need to explain those circumstances to people who are affected; or 3) when there’s an overarching imperative to maintain secrecy.

Leaders who want to build an organization capable of operating at light speed should not make important decisions autocratically. Instead, they need to use one of the other four processes.

[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses based on the leadership book Leading at Light Speed.

Let’s look closer at the consensus decision. By definition, a group makes a consensus decision – not an individual. Consensus means that the vast majority of the group agrees with a particular course of action, based on a thorough airing of all the relevant information and viewpoints. It doesn’t mean unanimous agreement. But it does require that the group reach a decision collectively – and that those who disagree are willing to stand aside and support the will of the group.

There are two sub-types:

• You and another individual share the issues, and then you both generate and evaluate alternatives and reach a decision that you mutually agree on.
• A group of people share the issues, and then everyone generates and evaluates alternatives and reaches a decision by group process that you mutually agree on.

Read the full post and listen to the podcast by signing up for premium content.

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=11]

A consensus decision requires extensive attention to process. The group has to meet often enough to hear all the evidence and viewpoints. Someone has to facilitate the process – to organize the meetings, keep the group focused, record the results of each meeting, and summarize the progress made. A team of senior managers may spend several weeks reaching consensus on the strategic direction of the company. The outcome has to be worth it.

Because consensus decisions consume more time and resources than other types of decisions, they should be reserved for occasions when there are enormous stakes on the line – and when the responsibility for making the decision and owning the results must be shared – or when a group of peers is working to reach agreement and no one has final authority.

Too often, managers use consensus to make decisions that should be made consultatively. This erodes trust. People want their leaders to assume responsibility. They don’t want to try to reach consensus if someone has the authority to decide. But this is what happens every day, in organizations around the world. I vividly remember the head of information technology for a New York bank trying to facilitate consensus among her group of 200 employees. The issue was the selection of a new suburban location for the bank’s back office. She attempted to engage her employees in a discussion of whether to move to Long Island or New Jersey. Yet the decision had already been made by her boss, and it was clear to her employees that her hands were tied. The “faux” process quickly turned ugly. As a result of her attempt at consensus, there was an open revolt against her leadership.

“Faux consensus” inflicts great harm on the organization by eroding trust. Hypocrisy is rarely forgotten. People perceive their leaders as lacking the integrity and honesty to make sound decisions. The lesson is clear: Assume responsibility for communicating the decision-making process. People respect leaders who do. The clearer you are in managing decisions, the more effective you will be as a leader.

[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses.

What are consultative decisions?

A consultative decision means you recognize that you don’t have all the information you need, and you actively engage other people in the process. You literally consult with another person or persons. But you make it clear that the final call is yours. Many important decisions are made consultatively.

There are two sub-types:

• You involve other people individually by sharing the issues and obtaining their ideas, suggestions or recommendations. Then you decide.
• You involve other people as a team or a group by sharing the issues and obtaining their ideas, suggestions or recommendations. Then you decide.

Read the full post and listen to the podcast by signing up for premium content.

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=11]

Who should be consulted in a consultative decision? The ground rule is this: If someone is going to be significantly affected by the decision, or if someone has relevant expertise, then their input is important. Including people in a decision can also help them develop as leaders, so that is an important consideration. These ground rules don’t mean you have to engage everyone – or consult with every expert. But you do need to cast a wide net. The best decisions are made when people hear and offer different points of view, even if you have to stretch farther than you might like.

When the consultative process is managed well, it’s clear who is going to make the decision. “Ultimately the call will be mine,” you’d say. “But we need to hear everyone’s views in order for me to make the best decision.”

There are certain phrases you want to avoid. Don’t say: “We need to agree on this” or “I want to get your buy-in.” This implies a different type of decision – a consensus decision. (More on consensus in a moment.) This lack of clarity chips away at trust and teamwork. People think to themselves: “You misled me into thinking that I have a larger role to play than I actually do. Why should I trust you in the future?” Leaders should avoid this trap at all costs.

Some people think that consultative decisions will offend people. They fear hurting people’s feelings by not empowering them. On the contrary. Consensus decisions take much longer than consultative decisions. You’re actually empowering people by valuing their time. What offends people is a lack of straightforward communication. If you mislead people into thinking they have a larger role than they do, they’ll resent you when they learn the truth.

So in answer to the question, “What’s my role?” the leader of a consultative decision would say: “Because I value your expertise and because you will be affected by this decision, I care about your viewpoint and I want to understand it. In the end, because this is a decision for which I am responsible, I need to make the call. And if I make the wrong decision, I assume full responsibility.”

[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses.

It starts with writing down the behaviors that are most important for success in a particular job – not the tasks. Managing a team, motivating people, developing under-performers, starting a line of business, engaging people in change – these all might be behaviors you’re looking for. This list becomes your litmus test for selecting the right people.

The corollary of behavior-based interviewing is open-ended recruiting: When a position comes open, you keep searching until you find the right person, even if it means temporary hardship. Finding the right person is simply too important to warrant settling for less.

The quest to get the right people means you should always be on the lookout for talent. After all, talented people are almost by definition not looking for work. So if you want to build a great company, you’re going to have to employ unusual means to get the right people on board. Good leaders typically spend 25 percent of their time recruiting and developing talent.

Get the full post and podcast by signing up for premium content (free trial).

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=9]

The cost of settling for second best can be huge. First, there’s the cost to ensure someone is trained properly. That’s a cost you would bear in any case. But by settling for second best, you may have to spend more time training them to make sure they don’t make mistakes. Maybe you spend more time checking their work. Maybe you insist on multiple signoffs on their decisions. Maybe you revise a process to make sure his or her work is reviewed by someone you trust. For the sake of filling the position, you add a little bit more bureaucracy to the organization.

Now comes the higher, hidden cost. The talented people in your organization start to resent the new person. They’ve got to deal with his or her blunders. Maybe they have to subject themselves to the same bureaucracy. This irritates them at first – then it starts to grate. Morale suffers. Ultimately, the genuinely talented people decide to move on. The net result is a significant erosion of trust. All because you failed to find the right people in the first place.

Here is an example of a typical interview vs. behavior-based interview.

Typical Interview:

Describe your experience in sales.
Have you ever had to manage large accounts?
Describe your greatest success.
What motivates you?
How do you handle conflicts?

Behavior Based Interview:

This position requires a person to make five sales calls a day while traveling in a territory from Minneapolis to Atlanta. Tell me about your experience managing those kinds of sales logistics.

This position requires people to manage large accounts with three or four contacts inside the organization, all of whom need to say “yes” to consummate a sale. Tell me about your experience making such a sale. How did you get them all to say “yes”?

We expect people to be self-motivated. Describe your own motivations for success. Describe examples where you went an extra mile for a client – and for your company?

Tell us how you handled a situation that made you look bad. What did you do? What did you say? What was the result?

This position requires working with an internal R&D team to help them modify our product for a new launch every twelve months. Describe how you’ve successfully managed internal relationships with R&D teams to maximize the success of upgraded products?
[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses.

The CEO of one of our client companies calls it his “$35 million mistake.” That’s the total cost of selecting the wrong person to be CTO. The company had been on a fast track to develop a new web-based version of its software application. But after six months, the software team failed to hit its milestones. The CTO blamed it on a lack of quality programmers. Others blamed the CTO, saying she was not a very good manager.

Get the full post and podcast by signing up for premium content (free trial).

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=8]

Initially, the CEO defended her. Then she alienated a key member of the development team. Another member quit. The CEO started to wonder what was going on. He hired a training firm to conduct an assessment and provide team-building sessions. But the team-building sessions failed to produce any meaningful change in the team’s performance.

Three years after hiring her, the CEO finally fired her. The cost to the company? When he considers the loss of anticipated revenues plus the additional capital needed to sustain the development effort, the CEO conservatively estimates it to be $35 million. “That’s a mistake,” he says ruefully, “I will never forget.”

The next hiring cycle was more successful. During the interview process, the CEO focused on the specific behaviors he was looking for. Within three months of hiring a new CTO, the development team was back on track.
[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess your organizational strengths and weaknesses.

Aligning people around core values is the first thing leaders must do. It is the framework that enables you to start moving at light speed. “We are constantly making sure people are aligned with our values,” says Laura Batten, the CEO of a consumer goods manufacturing company. When people truly understand the core values of their organization, they become aligned. The long-term drivers of the company’s health are widely understood. People start to make decisions based on the core values. The enterprise starts picking up speed.

Get the full post and podcast by signing up for premium content (free trial).

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=7]

When an organization feels united around well-understood core values, performance is no longer about what’s good for you or me, but what’s good for the long-term. Employees trust the company’s direction. Talented people are motivated to join the team. Customers are drawn to its products and services. Think about Apple and its core value of innovation. Or Starbucks and its core value of consistent quality. Those are not empty promises; they are reflections of the values-driven nature of those enterprises. Think about Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, and 3M Corporation. These are all companies driven by a framework of core values.

There is a clear link between core values and performance. A grocery chain’s revenues rose 24 percent the year after our firm facilitated its shift to core values. A $200 million software company’s profit margins rose 37 percent. There are many other examples I will describe in detail in this chapter. As Larry Johnston, the CEO of Albertson’s supermarket chain puts it: “There are two dimensions to leadership. Performance and values. You can’t have one without the other.”

Focusing on core values attracts and retains talented people. It’s easier to get the right people to join your organization when you can clearly communicate what’s important, and what behaviors you’re looking for. This reduces turnover, thereby cutting the costs associated with recruiting, retaining, and retraining employees. In a service economy with higher intrinsic labor costs and increasing labor mobility, this is an important source of competitive advantage and profit.

Focusing on core values also attracts and retains loyal customers. People are attracted to companies that are value-driven. Smart companies use this to build tight bonds with their customers. Starbucks, Google, Apple, Southwest, Nordstrom, IBM, and Porsche are all examples of companies that have effectively aligned their employees and customers around a set of core values.

[/emember_protected]

Take this free work survey to assess how well your organization measure up to the 10 best practices of high-performing organizations.

Read the full post and listen to the podcast by signing up for premium content.

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=6]

Great leaders build trust by defining vision. People want to know that there’s a plan and a direction. Vision has two components. The external vision defines the outcomes that the company wants to achieve. Sony ’s vision in the 1950s was that “fifty years from now, our brand name will be as well known as any on earth.” General Electric’s vision in the 1980s was “to become number one or number two in every market we serve.”

The second component is an internal vision of change. GE said it would “revolutionize the company to have the speed and agility of small enterprise.” Sony said it would “create innovative products that become pervasive around the world.” Vision needs to be linked to a clear understanding of the strengths and assets of the organization along with the opportunities in the marketplace. Often it means a dramatic shift in focus and direction. Occasionally it requires a full scale revamping of the company’s business model. Typically, it takes months to develop a fully-understood and fully-realized vision.

Here are the crucial steps:

Step 1: Pick a Time Horizon

The first step is to decide on a time horizon. For some organizations, vision spans a ten-to-fifteen year period. But in others a shorter horizon – three years – is just fine. At Teradyne, a fast-moving maker of software that monitors web performance, the time horizon was one year. Why? Because the software industry was moving so quickly its CEO didn’t see any value in planning beyond a 12-month time horizon.

Step 2: Map the Strategy

Once you decide on a time horizon, the planning team needs to meet and have initial discussions about vision. Ask people to think about these questions in advance. (For this example, I’m assuming a typical time horizon of three years.)

1. What are our strengths as an organization? What do we do exceedingly well?
2. What are our weaknesses? Where do we consistently fall down?
3. What are our opportunities? What’s new that we could be capitalizing on?
4. What are the challenges? What alternatives to our products and services do our customers have? How are those alternatives changing?
5. Who are our primary customers? Who are the people for whom we are trying to create the most value?
6. What trends are affecting our customers? How might their perceptions of the value of our products and services change over the next three years?
7. Are we focusing on the right customers? What would happen if we shifted our customer focus? What could we do more of (or less of) to create increased value for our customers?
8. What is our current business model? How do we create value for customers? how does that translate into profitability?
9. What might be some essential innovations in our way of doing business that would create added value for our customers? How could we re-define our way of doing business?
10. Based on the above, what should be our external vision? What outcomes are we trying to achieve in three years? What are the rationales for that vision?
11. Based on the above, what is our internal vision – how do we envision our organization changing over the next three years to support the external vision?
12. What do we see as the major priorities for change and investment to realize this vision?

Once everyone has discussed these questions, you can create a map, laying out the components of your emerging vision. Plotting them on paper enables people to visualize the emerging vision (see the example below).

[/emember_protected]

Sign up for the 14 day free trial of premium membership to read the full post…

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3][wp_eStore_download_now_button id=5]

First, we have our personal values. These are what we value most as an individual: survival, family, personal dignity, and freedom. Beyond these lie other personal work values. Some people value amassing a vast fortune. Others value public service. Some people value creativity, teamwork, or hard physical labor, while others may value intellectual activity. It’s probably safe to assume that Donald Trump holds a different set of personal values than Ralph Nader.

Another layer of values are our community values. These are the things we consider important in our immediate communities. Some value development; some value green space; some value conservative politics; others value progressive politics.

Orbiting around our personal and community values are cultural values. Cultural values vary greatly. Freedom of individual expression is highly valued in the United States. People in Denmark value egalitarianism. Deference to authority is valued in Saudi Arabia. Close-knit families are highly valued in Mexico. Clearly, a culture’s values permeate the people who live within it.

Finally, there are the organization’s core values. When I talk about an organization’s “core values,” I’m referring to the things that are essential to its success, such as product reliability, customer satisfaction, financial success and ethical integrity. These are the values that the organization, if it could speak on its own behalf, would say are essential to its long-term success.

[/emember_protected]

Sign up for the 14 day free trial of premium membership to read the full post…

Premium members can download the podcast here: [emember_protected for=3]

[wp_eStore_download_now_button id=2]

The First Ring – Purpose

A company should know why it exists, right? Yet purpose can be exceedingly elusive to define. Disney and Merck have both struggled to reconcile their shareholders’ demands for quarterly profit growth with the goal of innovation, whether it be artistic excellence (Disney) or basic scientific research (Merck). Their purpose statements have provided them with needed clarity during these clashes.

A purpose statement doesn’t sum up everything that the organization does. It’s just the first ring. But it needs to be very clear. Disney’s purpose is to make people happy. Southwest Airlines’ purpose is to provide low fares. That’s it. Clear and simple.

Every person has a set of core values. You have yours, I have mine. Sometimes these are in conflict. To make things more complex, every culture has a set of core values. In an increasingly globalized world, with increasingly diverse workplaces, this means there are more and more opportunities for core values to collide.

The first quantum shift is to recognize the importance of aligning everyone around a single set of core values – the organization’s core values – defined as the behaviors and activities essential to the organization’s success. This is a significant departure from the traditional ways of thinking about core values. It is the leader’s job to discover these core values and make them apparent to all. By doing so, you begin to instill deep feelings of trust, ownership and mutual accountability.

Here are some questions to ask yourself:

Do you communicate clearly and consistently the organization’s core values (what is essential for its success)? Do you make sure there are measures of success tied to the core values?

[/emember_protected]

Communication 2.0 is transforming the strategy and the skills needed to implement and execute effective communications practices with employees and customers. In the age of Communication 2.0, there are two types of businesses out there: those who understand how to leverage communication and those whose performance suffers.

Leaders in HR, PR, marketing, and employee communication are realizing that employees need a new toolkit of skills to effectively manage relationships internally and externally.

Here are three skills that business communicators MUST have in Communication 2.0.

1. A keen ability to initiate, build, and maintain relationships. Communication 2.0 and the democratization of media has elevated the importance of relationships with clients, customers, and employees. These stakeholders are converging: they’re becoming the same person. Invest resources in cultivating these relationships.

2. The ability to listen and learn. The rapid pace of Communication 2.0 means that employees must understand how to gather and weigh evidence and thoughtfully participate in conversations with stakeholders.

3. A deep understanding and appreciation of human behavior. Communication 2.0 demonstrates that human factors associated with doing business drive change, innovation, and collaboration. The media tools themselves merely amplify the best and worst of the human condition.

BaRENaked Communication designs customized solutions to help leaders understand the impact of Communication 2.0 on their business, redefine their communication strategy, and build the skills of their workforce to meet the demands of a continually changing marketplace. Learn more about our services at http://www.barenakedcommunication.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Christopher_Groscurth