Clear, Concise and Compelling

Viva Helvetica!

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:53:00 +0000

Always a sucker for things Helvetica, I've fallen in love with Helvetimail, a script that puts Gmail into a much cleaner visual interface. It's the brainchild of Josef Richter, a designer and web entrepreneur from Olomouc, Czech Republic. Helvetica versions of Google Calendar and Reader, as well as Twitter, are also terrific.

As a typeface, Helvetica is clear and compelling. Although it has been shunted aside in favor of Arial, the feel of Helvetica is unmistakable.

Analyzing Communications by Bandwith

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:50:00 +0000

Seth Godin has an interesting take on a dozen or so forms of communication, which he's arranged on two axes. "On the horizontal, they rank from asynchronous (meaning the creator and the responder are separated in time--like a letter) and synchronous (meaning the creator and the responder are in real time proximity to each other--like a phone call)."

There could easily be a third dimension to be considered: static vs. dynamic content. Think about it, upper right quadrant communications (synchronous-highbandwidth, in Seth-speak) implies content where only the opening line is known, everything else builds on the dynamic of a conversation. Here, the content is less controlled, which can be a good thing depending on your desired outcome of the communication.

An early adopter comes in late

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:54:00 +0000

I didn't set out in life to be an "early adopter", but looking back, I guess I was. I was the first kid in my neighborhood to have a Schwinn Orange Crate Sting Ray and I had a Sony Walkman -- all 16 oz. of it -- a couple of days after they came into the US market. Early adopter also means that I wore a Nehru-style suit as a 10-year-old (don't ask).

Despite that stellar track record, I didn't get Twitter... until today. For me, it was a hammer looking for a nail. The nail is a virtual team that I'm working on, with colleagues 7-10 hours behind me and doing a gazillion other things. But I need their inputs and to give them a "head's up" on emerging client issues. So, I set up a new Twitter account, made it private (so only those who need to see it, see it), invited the team to Tweet and now I'm waiting to see what happens.

Maybe the Nehru suit wasn't such a bad idea.

Brilliant: When smart people are hard to understand

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:47:00 +0000

Seth Godin asks and answers the question: "If you're in a meeting with smart people and they start discussing a term or concept you don't understand, what do you do?" More proof of why Seth's Blog is one of the most followed.

Stacking up a trillion dollars

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 12:47:00 +0000

A trillion dollars isn't what it used to be. But, then again, what does $1,000,000,000,000 look like?
PageTutor.com decided to try out Google SketchUp and use it to visualize a trillion bucks. The pallet above shows a billion dollars in $100 bills (itself quite a bunch of benjamins...). Click here to see the entire visualization process.

Visualizing the Financial Crisis

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:10:00 +0000

An earlier blog described how the Madoff scam has been visualized. Now comes FlowingData.com with a collection of graphics visualizing aspects of the financial crisis. There's a nice range of styles and content.

I've long been a fan of the site, which believes that data visualization lets non-experts make sense of it all. And the 27 visualization and infographics here really help explain things.

Plain English

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:37:00 +0000

It's been 30 years since the Plain English Campaign was launched in the UK. No, it's not a Monty Python sketch, but a grassroots effort against gobbledygook, jargon and misleading public information.

Now, the campaign is being used to protect the democratic process: the Local Government Association has published a list of 100 banned words that they hope will be eliminated from government communication. ""If a [governmental body] fails to explain what it does in plain English then local people will fail to understand its relevance to them or why they should bother to turn out and vote." Hard to argue with that.

There are some laughable words and phrases on the list. My favorite is "coterminous, stakeholder engagement"; The suggested alternative is: "talk to people".

Feel free to add your own jargon below.

Jonesing for TED Talks

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:10:00 +0000

I only wish I had the time to listen or watch all of the podcasts that pile up when my iTunes subscriptions refresh. So it was reassuring to read today's New York Times Magazine's confession of a TED Talks addict.

Writer Virginia Heffernan comes clean on her own TED "problem", while also highlighting one dimension of what makes the offering so compelling. Sure, there are the obscure and varied multidisciplinary subjects that are covered, but the delivery is also key.

TED supplies its speakers with strict guidelines. “Start strong” is the most obvious one, and there is virtually no throat clearing or contrived thanking. Instead, speakers blaze onto the stage like stand-up comics, hellbent on room domination. Some consult notes and stay close by their audiovisual equipment — PowerPoint is used for emphasis, but it never directs the talks — while others pace, spread their arms wide and take up space. No one apologizes for himself. No one fails to make jokes. The appreciative room roars at humor, when they’re not literally oohing and aahing at insight.

How to do a good job delivering bad news

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 13:56:00 +0000

There's no shortage of bad news coming out of the business world, so it's worth a few minutes to explore some ideas on how to do a good job delivering bad news.

Organizations show their real values and skills when they communicate bad news. The goodwill earned from telling stakeholders how important they are and how much the business cares about them goes down the drain if that same organization screws up the delivery of bad news.

There is no alternative called “Let’s not communicate.” If there’s bad news, it’s certain to find communication channel. Organizations can either step forward at the outset and orchestrate how the news is delivered or step back and react as the information comes out.

If open and honest communication is not part of the organization’s culture, personality, and history, communicating bad news is bad news. Without a well-established framework that supports a dialogue of full disclosure, there’s very little that can be done at the last minute to make the communication of bad news anything other than a disastrous disappointment.

Supervisors and managers must be included early, kept fully informed, and remain supportive. supervisors and managers are the organization’s most important employee communication vehicle. They provide an opportunity for two-way communication that will help lay the issue to rest as soon as possible. If they’re not on management’s team, the game’s over.

Proper planning prevents poor performance. This may sound like a "duh" statement —but it is essential in communicating bad news. In fact, organizations that are good at communicating bad news have contingency plans in case they’re needed. Good planning can’t occur at the last minute.

The worst alternative that management considers is likely to be communicated through the grapevine. In most cases, employees are aware somethingbad is about to happen. This is the main reason the “Let’s not communicate” alternative doesn’t really exist. On the positive side, when the bad news is not as bad as the worst alternative, employees sometimes are relieved to
hear it.

Here's a checklist for getting ready to communicate bad news:

Describe the news in a clear and compelling manner.
Explain why the action is being taken.
Explain how the decision is fair to as many groups as possible.
Involve a high-status messenger in delivering the message.
Deliver the message in a timely manner.
Identify who made the decision and what process was used.
Describe the effort that went into the decision.
Outline some of the alternatives that were considered.
Show that the organization cares about employees.
Describe what action is required and what, if anything, can be done to change the decision or help avoid the problem in the future.

(Disclaimer: this blog entry is a distillation of papers I have in a file labeled "Communicating Bad News". I claim no ownership and ask forgiveness for not citing proper credit.)

Dealing with Low Energy (when it's not Gazprom's fault...)

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:11:00 +0000

It's cold. Staff are just returning from holiday. The economy sucks. The coffee maker is broken. And you've just gathered 10 people into a meeting room to brainstorm on changes to the 2009 plan. The smell of low energy is in the air.

Here are some ways, as a facilitator, you can raise the energy level of participants:

Project energy to the group, by increasing or varying voice volume, moving around the room, using bigger gestures and more expansive body language.
Use the mood meter to engage the group in a moment of self-awareness around the need for energy to make the session work. Use one of your arms as the "needle" on a meter, down at the side as zero energy and up high as the peak. Ask the group how its feeling, and ask everyone to “beep” at the appropriate place as the needle passes from zero toward the maximum. Tell people that they have to project more energy if it’s low, and try again. Ask for suggestions if they have trouble getting themselves out of the slump.
Ask what’s going on (Everyone seems a bit low on energy after that delicious lunch – is that how you’re feeling?) as a prelude to having everyone swap seats, open windows, get a drink, stand up and stretch.
Break the larger group up into pairs or trios to answer or prepare for the next session. Anything to get them talking and thinking.
Physically rearrange the room during break.

A caffeine fix usually wears off after about 20 minutes. These interventions are longer lasting.

HBR Podcasts: Perceptive Insights on Coaching

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:38:00 +0000

If you aren't familiar with The Harvard Business Review's IdeaCast podcast series, you're missing some of the most insightful commentary available today. (Even if you aren't an iTunes user, you can listen right from the website.)

Several recent podcasts cover the evolution and current state of management and executive coaching. In "What Coaches Can Do for You", HBR editor Diane Coutu discusses her article from the current magazine which highlights a survey of 140 leading coaches and offers comments from five experts on the findings. Commentators and coaches agreed that the reasons for engaging coaches have evolved over the past decade. A decade ago, most companies hired a coach to help fix bad behavior at the top. Today, most coaching is about developing the capabilities of high-potential performers or acting as a sounding board.

In an earlier podcast, Marshall Goldman, author of "Ask the Coach" blog at HarvardBusiness.org, gets right to the heart of the matter, answering the question of when executive coaching works.

Is "strategic" the most misused word in the business lexicon?

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:02:00 +0000

I have a modest proposition for business communication in 2009:

Stop misusing the word strategic.

It's become a general-purpose adjective used to add weight to a weak case. And if recent conversations with several financial analysts are any evidence, when a CEO says "strategic", the investor thinks "will not make any money".

Something is described as a "strategic decision" when "important decision" is what is really meant. It seems to have reached a point where anything termed "strategic" (strategic acquisition, strategic shareholding) is usually a euphemism for something that will likely be unprofitable but made for reasons known only to a close coterie of insiders. Calling something strategic only weakens the word's impact.

For 2009 let's be a little more creative:

Goal is an objective, usually driven by specific future financial needs
Tactics are near-term actions taken to solve specific problems or accomplish specific goals
Objective is the result desired
Strategy is the long-term action plan for achieving a goal
Strategic Planning is the process of identifying a company's long-term goals and then identifying the best approach for achieving those goals

A picture is worth...

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 19:26:00 +0000

How do you visually communicate a $50 billion fraud? The Financial Times has a simple, but effective tile chart that provides a picture of Bernard Madoff's recently exposed scheme.

The tiles provide details of each investor, with the largest tile -- about half of the whole chart -- representing the $26+ billion of unaccounted for losses.

The interactivity allows the viewer to get more information, show losses within a specific range, or search for a particular investor. FT built the visual with Visokio's Omniscope engine.

[Added 12/31/08] The Wall Street Journal has an alternative take on visually communicating elements of the Madoff scheme, mapping the circle of friends and connections who invested in the pyramid.
Of the two, I think the FT's visual is more informative. I get more of a feel for the magnitude of the investment losses and less of the paparazzi delivered in the WSJ multi-media.

[Added 1/7/09] The mapping feature at Muckety.com has an impressive whiz-bang dynamic diagram of the Madoff web, doing a visual "six-degrees" on the scandal. [Left-click on "Map Tools" in the graphic below to change info and sample the dynamic graphics.]

Knowledge is good

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 07:30:00 +0000

We all buy in to Emil Faber's adage, but how do organizations become knowledge environments? On KM Edge, Darcy Lemons asks: "What's the Deal with Lessons Learned"?

Despite these efforts (collecting lessons learned), however, the actual learning--the behavioral change that would bring about a different outcome the next time around--never occurs. Why is that? What is it about capturing and applying lessons learned that so often trips us up and causes us to never get past the "capture" step of the process?

That question gets at the heart of the knowledge dilemma. Too often, knowledge management is framed and discussed in terms of the systems used to support it, without focusing on the behavioral changes required. "Effective transfer of experienced-based knowledge is a persistent cultural phenomenon, not a mandated one-time process".

Here's a fairly simple model that I've been using for a while to understand how lessons learned become part of actual learning.

There are three facets to the environment -- knowledge, methods, and learning. Knowledge is what's captured from your work. Methods are the tools -- methodologies, processes, disciplines, models -- created from knowledge that are used, replicated, and refined in each application of the work process. Learning is both the formal and informal channels of assimilating knowledge and methods in a risk-free, see-it do-it setting. Various communication channels are the pivot point for the cycle.

It's an evolving model, so please offer your own insights in the comments to this post.

My sediments, exactly

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 08:00:00 +0000

Illustrator Christoph Niemann has created a wonderful history of his love of coffee (done, of course, on coffee shop napkins). Just the thing to go with your first cup.

Coincidentally, The New York Times also reported this week that a cup of strong coffee might make you feel wide awake, but an afternoon nap works better.

Why not both?

Coachability

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:58:00 +0000

It amazes me how many smart, highly motivated and apparently responsible people rarely pause to contemplate their own behavior. They'd much rather move on than reflect deeply.

My question, though, is "Is everyone coachable"?

This came to mind as I watched David Rose's TED
presentation -- 10 things to know before you pitch a VC for money -- essentially what an entrepreneur needs to know about him/herself -- and prove to a VC -- before stepping up to make a pitch.

9 of the 10 "things" were familiar, but #10 -- coachability -- really made me think.

"You need to be coachable. The VC has experience and they want to know you're willing to listen to it."

I sought confirmation from a few VCs in my network.

Jack Levy, founder of Israel Cleantech Ventures, tells me great entrepreneurs are constantly seeking input to challenge their assumptions. He senses coachability when he hears: "That is an interesting idea, we'll look into it more".

"People who are driven to succeed are willing to learn from others; this is true of successful entrepreneurs, athletes or artist," notes Mark Ziering, formerly of Genesis Partners and now launching Impact Capital. Mark's experience is that successful entrepreneurs are passionate about their business and "need to constantly be open to analyze, question, and discuss their business assumptions, and seek partners -- investors, board members, colleagues -- who challenge them".

Candidly, it's not just entrepreneurs, but anyone in a leadership position, which leads me back to Max Landsberg's "The Tao of Coaching", which has yet to be bested for business coaching, with priceless insight for those about to coach. Max addresses coachability as "dealing with reluctance" to being coached. On one hand, there may be a reluctance to the specific coach, but my experience supports his insight that there is an intrinsic reluctance fueled by the coachee's

Unwillingness to admit scope for improvement (in general or in the specific coaching topic)
Mistrust of the organization (providing or pushing the coaching)
Temporary lack of available time.

Are you coachable? Have you tried to coach the uncoachable? Share your experiences in the comments to this post.

Why ideas die

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:19:00 +0000

What is the leading cause of death of ideas? Absent any conclusive data from the CDC or the WHO, it seems that thousands of ideas die each year because of a lack of influencing skills.

Sure, there's the random accident here and there that kills an idea, but by and large, if you can't influence, your idea is going to die.

It's been nearly 20 years since Rosabeth Moss Kantor wrote that influencing is an important managerial skill for now and in the future...

“The new kind of business hero… must learn to operate without the might of the hierarchy behind him. The crutch of authority must be thrown away and replaced by their own ability to make relationships, use influence and work with others to achieve results”.

Well, the future is here and influencing's importance has never been more evident. Influencing creates movement and the ability to involve others and get their commitment. For both the individual and the organization, influencing nurtures the flexibility necessary for change. People are more willing and able to delegate when they influence. There's a greater chance of hitting targets by being able to mobilize all resources within your control. So, influencing makes for more effective work teams and higher morale.

So, why is influencing difficult? To do it, you need to hone skills in asserting and listening, more specifically active listening.

Asserting is all about expressing yourself clearly, confidently and concisely. The engineer advocating an idea up the organization sees her idea die because she failed to clarify her intentions or because she lacked the courage to persist.

Meanwhile, active listening is a skill most of us are not particularly good at. Why? 1.) We think much faster than we talk. Not surprisingly, we fill the void with our own thoughts. 2.) While at university or in other formal training, we learned to “reload” while others are speaking and then interrupt. (The Mandarin Chinese character "to listen" includes symbols for heart, ear, and with effort.)

Active listening is hard because it requires us to attend fully to the person who is speaking. It's also hard because we fear it requires us to abandon a perspective. True, active listening requires that you are open to other perspectives and show a willingness to explore them collaboratively with your counterparts. But, hearing and processing another person's ideas is a far cry from abandoning your own.

Here are four things you can do to improve your listening skills.

1. Release your agenda. How? Close your eyes for a minute (really. 60 seconds). Notice how many things went through your mind during that minute. All of that comprises things that get in the way of your being able to focus on the other’s agenda, things that you are likely to be hearing more loudly than you hear the other person’s words…that is, if you have even stopped talking! Why are we afraid to release our agendas? It just release, not abandon.

2. Attend to the speaker. Can you show the person physically that you are focused on her completely? What does it look like when someone is clearly not attending to you?

3. Ask good questions. Get him not only to tell you his point of view as he sees it now, but also push his thinking and perhaps even get him to see a situation in another way. Questions should never seem like an inquisition or a not-so-subtle leading of the witness. Good questions naturally flow with the conversation and are always focused on the other person, not on you!

4. Amplify and play back what you heard. Isn’t this incredibly time consuming and somewhat irritating to the speaker? It doesn’t have to be. It’s important because it is the part of listening where the rubber meets the road. It’s the part where you say to the speaker…”I understand your point of view” even if you don’t agree with it. It also gives both parties the chance to check out their assumptions about where the conversation is going and be sure that true understanding is achieved. Talk about building trust!

Good ideas don't deserve to die.

The Thinking of an Idea Killer

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:14:00 +0000

There is always one right answer
It is not logical
One has to stick to the rules
Let's be practical
To make a mistake is terrible
This is not my area
I am not creative

7 Rules for More Effective Prose

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 01:30:00 +0000

It is not possible to establish a definite recipe for good writing. Maybe that's a good thing.

Writing is in many ways a matter of personal style. If standardized to a high extent, you would bore your reader as you have cut yourself off from exploiting the richness, variety and power of the language.

Correct spelling and grammar is of course the basic prerequisite. This subject is not covered in this database, except for one reminder: Don’t trust the spelling checker on your computer to find all the mistakes. Always have important documents proofread. Another good habit is to actively use a dictionary and a thesaurus when you write. It will enhance your linguistic awareness and ability.

Even if writing is no exact science, there are rules of thumb that always will improve your prose, whether you are writing a personal letter or an executive summary to the CEO. My former colleague Henrik Bakke put together these seven rules of thumb to make things easier and writing better.

1. Be brief

Ruthlessly remove all words and phrases that are not strictly necessary. Kill your darlings. Your prose will become more powerful by each deletion. There should normally not be more than 25 words between each full stop.

Don’t write: The steadily growing aggressiveness exhibited in the competitive environment definitely represents a considerable threat to the Company's long-term prospects for sustainable profitability.

Write: Growing competition threatens the Company's long-term profitability.

2. Present one idea at a time

If you try to present two or more ideas at a time, you will risk fogging all of them. If logical, the relation between your ideas will be clear even if you separate them by a full stop.

Don’t write: Responding to the sharp rise in raw material prices over the past year and the dramatic increase in shipping costs in the same period, the production division has had to revise its budgets.

Write: Over the past year, raw material prices as well as shipping costs have risen sharply. In response, the production division has revised its budgets.

3. Avoid the verbophobia bug

Particularly in business writing, the tendency to make verbs into nominal phrases is a widespread disease.

Don’t write: The production process was made subject to an examination

Write: The production process was examined

4. Place your main verb early in the sentence

This will make the action element of the sentence clear to the reader at an early stage, easing comprehension.

Don’t write: A lengthy report on the status of the project and its organizational implications has been prepared by the manager

Write: The manager has prepared a lengthy report on the status of the project and its organizational implications

5. Use the active tense

In many cases, using the passive tense is unnecessary and only weakens the impact of the sentence.

Don’t write: A realignment of the corporate structure should be considered by the management.

Write: The management should consider realigning the corporate structure.

6. Be concrete -- don't use words for decoration

Resist the temptation to use rare words and terms, words in fashion or scientific terms when they are not strictly necessary. Be concrete if you mean spade, write spade, not manual excavation tool. If you can describe difficult issues in a plain language, you demonstrate true mastery of the subject.

Don’t write: The rising penetration of parabola antennas for satellite-transmitted broadcasting will cause a shift in the TV distribution pattern.

Write: More use of parabola antennas will change TV distribution.

7. Apply ear control

Make a habit of reading out to yourself aloud or silent what you have written. It can help you see possibilities to simplify and improve the flow.

24 Ways to Kill an Idea

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:12:00 +0000

1. We tried that before
2. We cannot try that because of the risk
3. We do not have that item in our budget
4. The savings are not for my budget's credit
5. Who is going to pay?
6. I do not have the people to investigate it
7. It sounds good in theory, but it will never work
8. To do that now would be moving too quickly
9. For this we need the permission of X
10. Fine in the long term, but we live in the present
11. Fine in the short term, but we must look to the future
12. We are already doing better than any other firm
13. The clients would never agree with that
14. Our competitor is doing it the other way
15. Too complicated for my people
16. How will it affect other departments?
17. That is against the principles of the firm
18. Maybe it works for firm Y: we are different
19. I cannot use my people for that
20. If it is that good, why hasn't it been tried before?
21. There are only 8 hours in a working day
22. With Z as our boss we will never get it approved
23. You can prove anything with figures
24. This is a problem for the company as a whole

Stay... just a little bit longer

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:40:00 +0000

Over at Say It Visually, Matthew Dunn and Jordan Schaffel think video is the secret to getting folks to stay on your website. "Now nobody reads your Web site. Sad but true. We scan - we don’t read. But we’ll watch and absorb a story."

How long?

"I read a reliable stat - average time a user spends on a Web page: 8 seconds!"

"8 seconds, right! But people spend an average of 90 seconds on our site - in fact, 48% of them spend over 5 minutes on our site. Video is hot; HTML is not."

Compelling visuals. What a concept!

Should a company have a visual explanation?

Matthew: "Business answer: shorten your sales cycle."

Jordan: "Sales guy answer: it'll get me in the door."

Matthew: "Media guy answer: because your audience will pay attention. Your Web site is your company's first impression these days. If you want engaged prospects, give 'em engaging content."

Audience Rights

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 13:26:00 +0000

Three hours of watching bad PowerPoints yesterday sent me running for my copy of the Audience's Bill of Rights, which originated with Gene Zelazny.

Objectives

The right to know what you want me to do or think as a result of the presentations.
The right to see the reason for my involvement.
The right to receive value for the time I devote to attending the presentation.

Respect

The right to contribute to the intellectual content, and share in the outcome.
The right to be spoken neither down to nor up to, but with respect for my experience, intelligence, and knowledge.
The right to honesty when you don't have answers to my questions.

Timing

The right to have the presentation start and stop on time, as predetermined by my busy schedule.
The right to expect breaks once in a while.

Content

The right to know where we're going, how the presentation will progress.
The right to know what decisions are at issue, your rationale for your position, and the facts that support this reasoning.
The right to get the important information first.

Visuals

The right to be able to read every word on the every visual without resorting to opera glasses, not matter where I sit in the audience.
The right to have complex charts explained.

Flexibility

The right to stop for discussion, to help the group reach a shared understanding.
The right to ask questions.

Delivery

The right to be able to hear you from the back of the room.
The right to absorb the presentation without the distraction of wild gestures.
The right to see your face, not the back of your head.
The right to enjoy your sense of humor when it helps to make a point, relieve tension, or achieve rapport.

Ending

The right to a clear view of what has been agreed to and what will happen next.
The right to leave feeling that something meaningful was accomplished.

Storytelling

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:46:00 +0000

Since I'm on a bit of a tear about capabilities, a few words on storytelling or narrative. Most of us tell stories the way we came to know the information.

"there were these 3 bears..."

"then Goldilocks..."

It's fine for bed-time but it doesn't work for business-time.

The objective of a bed-time story is sleep. The objective of a business-time story's is action. This is why top-down storytelling can be so effective in the conference room.

This is a narrative that explains or defends a point of view. By design and by default, they are essentially prescriptive. They answer a question or solve a problem. They recommend a course of action.

Conclusion-oriented communication. Results-oriented presentations. It has "structure when its components are assembled, not at random, but with necessary relations to one another".

Determine your conclusion. lead with it.

What Capabilities Matter?

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 07:19:00 +0000

In a world that's flat, what capabilities matter? This question comes up with some regularity in conversations with colleagues and clients. More importantly, is there some global skill set that's needed to compete?

A couple of observations. In 2004, my colleagues at Kenning Associates surveyed executives who had left consulting jobs (McKinsey, Bain, E&Y) for line management roles. They were asked about the skills and competencies found lacking in their new organization. Specifically, "How often do skill gaps in the following areas impede the performance of your direct reports and teams?" #1 answer: "Communicating results clearly and persuasively".

At about the same time, strategy+business published a piece that defined"what business needs from business schools". The writers posited six principles (below) for reform, topped by a recommendation for more courses in communication and other skills vital to effectively managing people and team-driven organizations.

In the intervening five years, it's unclear what's been done to reform the typical MBA curriculum.

Over at McKinsey -- where a global skill set has been the norm for decades -- the development road map is based on three dimensions: IQ, CQ, and RQ.

IQ is "business insight"; intelligence, raw talent, and the ability to integrate that intelligence. For the new consultant, the goal is to possess and demonstrate a solid problem solving platform.

CQ is "capability" quotient, which reflects the individual's awareness of core concepts by sector, industry and McKinsey's own practice groups in those areas.

RQ, or "relational" quotient, is the individual's ability to relate to and to understand clients as people and as organizations. For the new consultant, the goal is to be viewed as a trusted colleague.

McKinsey's MD Ian Davis believes "RQ is about much more than personal relationships and emotional intelligence – it's about really understanding how clients make decisions, how their culture works, how they respond to each other, how their leadership teams interact with each other, and what their people dynamics are."

So, consider what capability gaps impede your team's performance. Then, think about the skills you are most often asked to develop in others – formally and informally -- and how your organization supports development (or doesn't).

Going Deaf to Change Mindset and Behavior

noreply@blogger.com (Robert Lakin) — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:09:00 +0000

A dozen product managers went deaf for the morning.

They have been assigned responsibility for leading a multi-country organizational change, moving from a silo'd working environment to what the CEO described as matrix on steroids. I needed them to understand that their responsibility for organizational change would require them to change both mindset and behavior.

Going deaf was extreme, but well worth it.

A little background. The Children's Museum in Holon, Israel has staged two amazing experiences: Dialogue in the Dark allows participants to experience complete blindness; Invitation to Silence is the deaf experience. After having the experiences with my family, I decided "going deaf" would be a unique learning exercise for clients.

Back to the story. I've been working with several organizations that have launched major organizational change efforts. Organizations change most effectively when individuals change their mindsets and behaviors. Change programs that do not address mindset and behavior shifts may work for some time, but they generally do not achieve lasting change. Consequently, changing mindsets and behaviors must be one of the major aims of any change program.

Without getting too deep into the model of how this works, suffice it to say that there are four key levers to shift mindsets and behaviors:

1. Reinforcement with formal mechanisms, which is all about the structures, processes and systems to reinforce the change in behavior

2. Role-modeling, where individuals see superiors, peers and subordinates behave in a new way

3. Slide 6Talent and Skills, so that everyone have the skills and competencies to behave in a new way

4. Understanding and Conviction, where everybody knows what is expected of them, they agree with it, and it is meaningful to them

Embarking on a major change effort, most organizations get #1 but they assume #'s 2,3 & 4 will follow or happen by some natural process. Wrong. That's why I made the managers go deaf.

Did it work? Still to early to tell, but they get it. They were able to identify what needed to change in people's heads to get from current behaviors to desired behaviors.

Shit happens. Change doesn't. It requires explicit actions to influence mindsets and behaviors. Going deaf was explicit.