Monday, 21 of May of 2012

Category » Processes

Relationship Building Technique #8: Reflection

We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur in relationship building.

Reflection phrases our assessment of the other person’s emotions and feelings in a nonjudgmental way. It’s similar to summarization but with a focus on emotions, how others are feeling. This puts us in a better position to assess how others are interpreting our message while letting others know we are in tune with their feelings. Reflection is extremely helpful in venting as part of a conflict management.

Examples of reflection include:

  • “You seem very pleased with the assignment.”
  • “It’s obvious that you enjoy working with Bob.”
  • “It appears that something about this project displeases you.”
  • “I can tell that this subject upsets you.”
  • “It looks like you’re very happy with the results.”

From a relational perspective, reflection conveys the feeling that we are:

  • In tune on a deeper, human level
  • Appreciating their feelings
  • Finding their emotions important and worthy of discussion
  • Grasping the seriousness or importance of the conversation’s subject matter
  • Aware of their emotional state

The effect of reflection is to:

  • Lower emotional barriers preventing a positive conversation
  • Establish an emotional connection
  • Encourage additional conversation on a more open, truthful level

Reflection is the most difficult of the relationship techniques because emotions are fuzzy, making them difficult to assess and verbalize. As with summarization, it’s used less frequently, but covers a lot of ground.  It does a great job of uncovering underlying emotions because even if we’re wrong, others will likely correct us by stating their true feelings.

Since emotions often determine people’s interpretations, reflection is a very important technique in an integrated, holistic package of relationship building ones.

 

Other posts in this series:

 


People Eat Escargot, Not Snails

The research behind behavioral economics is full of emotional solutions to everyday problems. By tapping into the emotional biases behind our decisions, we can expand the range of limited solutions offered by rational thought models. The exploring of emotional solutions has gone big time as the article, “Nudge Nudge, Think Think” explains in the March 24, 2012 edition of The Economist by focusing on the amount of investments governments are making in this area.

Said simply, “How we phrase things matter.” I’ve written how this can change the taste of food and even change the reactions to a bonus plan. As the article explains, nudging “shows it is possible to steer people towards better decisions by presenting choices in different ways.”

For example:

  • People were three times more likely to pay an outstanding vehicular tax when the letter was simplified and included a picture of the automobile.
  • Boys did better than girls did when a technical drawing class was called “geometry,” and girls did equally well or better when it was called “drawing.”
  • People were more inclined to use less energy when their consumption was compared to their neighbors.

Not only does this help us solve problems, it also helps us avoid them by being aware of what we say so we don’t sabotage our well-intentioned plans. Choosing the right words for a personality can go a long way in helping us to effect the change we desire by tapping the right emotions.

For example, my wife won a bet at a party by talking a friend’s six-year-old daughter into selecting a vegetable over chocolate to eat. Understanding and appreciating the power behind words’ connotations helps us immensely here, and Roget’s Thesaurus is invaluable in our efforts.

Remember, people eat escargot not snails.

 


Relationship Building Technique #6: Synchronization

We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur in relationship building.

Synchronization is using words or phrasing of the other person to ask, comment or respond. The technique facilitates communications by ensuring he and you are “speaking the same language.” It’s keying in on the person’s pet words and phrases that emphasize key thoughts or emotions. It can be difficult to use since it requires intense listening and conscious avoidance of mocking or mimicking. We might also require some time and experimentation to ensure we are using the person’s words the way he does.

Some examples of synchronization include:

  • Buzz words, for example:
    • “Reorg”
    • “Rush job”
    • “Strategize”
    • “Devi’s in the details”
  • Acronyms:
    • ASAP
    • RFP
    • Industry specific ones
  • Particular to person:
    • Person: “Run this by Sue before doing anything.” You: “Ok, I’ll run this by her first.”
    • Person: “This is an awesome idea.” You (later in the conversation): “I believe this other idea is awesome too.”
    • Person: “This report has some sound and strong recommendations.” You (later in conversation): “The reasoning behind Tom’s idea is sound and strong.”

From a relational perspective, synchronization conveys the feeling that you are:

  • Complimentary through subtleties
  • Connecting, recognizing similarities
  • “On the same page”

The effect of synchronization is to create:

  • Synergies
  • Perception of being on the same wave length
  • Establish and improve common understandings

Synchronization effectively builds relationships when integrated with other techniques.  It ensures that we use words the other person understands, thus reducing miscommunication. More importantly, since this technique, when done well, is very subtle, it promotes the development of relationships on a more interpersonal, emotional level.

 

Other posts in this series:


Relationship Building Technique #5: Encouragement

We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur in relationship building.

Encouragement directs the other person to elaborate on a point. It’s similar to an acknowledgement except it’s a clearly worded, short statement expressing a more direct interest. It’s also more effective in directing conversation to a previous point. Encouragement usually occurs as a conversational transition from open-ended questions to closed questions.

Some examples of encouragements include:

  • Short statements such as:
    • “Tell me more . . .”
    • “Explain that further …”
    • “Please elaborate …”
    • “Please explain, I’m not sure I understand . . .”
  • Redirections of conversation such as:
    • “A few minutes ago you mentioned the analysis that was done by the group, tell me more about that and its findings.”
    • “Please go back to your comments regarding when you started the project and tell me more about that.”
    • “You mentioned that earlier as well. Elaborate on it since it’s obviously important to you and the team.”

From a relational perspective, encouragements convey the feeling that you are:

  • Interested in the conversation
  • Closely listening when you are able to redirect conversation to a previous point
  • Remembering what was said earlier

The effect of encouragements is to:

  • Encourage further comments especially from quiet people
  • Substantially increase receptivity when redirection occurs
  • Move the conversation to a more personal or confidential level

Encouragements effectively build relationships when integrated with other techniques.  They promote a more casual, interactive, directed and friendly conversation as opposed to an interrogative one. More importantly, through redirection of the conversation to a previous point, they can dramatically convey to others that you’re listening to them.

 

Other posts in this series:

 


Management Lessons from Online Dating

The article, “The Modern Matchmakers,” from the February 11, 2012 edition of The Economist contained two major business lessons that I’ve discussed earlier regarding the solving of people-related problems:

  1. What people think they want isn’t necessarily what they will choose
  2. When faced with too much choice, people have less energy to think about them

    For example, the article cites the work of Eli Finkel of Northwestern University on speed-dating in which he found that “people’s stated preference at the beginning of the process do not match the characters of the individuals they actually like.” Furthermore, “that when faced with abundant choice, people pay less attention to characteristics that require thinking and conversation to evaluate . . . and more to matters physical.” In short, just as Sheena Iyengar of Columbia University and Mark Lepper of Stanford concluded that too much choice is demotivating,” Finkel found it can dull thinking processes.

    As I had also done in an earlier post on online dating, we can translate these themes to our business efforts by asking three questions:

    1. How much freedom does someone want?
    2. What does someone really want; what will he really do or decide?
    3. How much (and what kind of) thinking will someone require from a leader?

    These further translate into more tactical questions for managers and executives such as:

    1. How much flexibility or process must I give someone?
    2. What differences do I see between what he wants and what he actually does?
    3. What kind of decisions do I give her to make and what (or when) do I decide for her?

    Complicating this further is the fact that the answers will vary for each employee, requiring deeper and more interpersonal skills from managers and leaders. Are your managers up for the challenge?

     

    Previous post on online dating:  What the Failures of Online Dating Can Teach Us

     


    Relationship Building Technique #4: Acknowledgement

    We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur in relationship building.

    An acknowledgement is usually a short utterance, statement, phrase, question or gesture. It lets the other person know we are listening, paying attention and interested while remaining non-judgmental. It avoids a conversation from being a monologue especially when the other person is doing most of the talking. Indirectly, it can direct conversations by emphasizing points of interest.

    Some examples of acknowledgements include:

    • Single words such as “Yes/No,” “Sure,” “Certainly,” “Amazing!” “Gee!” and “Yeah!”
    • Short phrases or sentences such as “I see,” “I agree,” “That’s amazing,” “I understand,” and “That’s interesting.”
    • Short questions such as “Really?” “Why not?” “Are you joking?”
    • Utterances in the form of sounds such as “Hmm,” “Uh-huh,” exclamation tone in voice, and laughs or chuckles
    • Gestures such as nodding of head, raised or squinting eyebrows, smile or other looks expressing our mood, making direct eye contact on a specific point, moving or leaning forward, and looking at a nearby document that is being referenced

    From a relational perspective, acknowledgements convey the feeling that you are:

    • Engaged in the interaction
    • Listening and digesting
    • Perceiving value
    • Complimenting the other person

    The effect of the acknowledgement is to:

    • Encourage further comments
    • Lower barriers and increase trust
    • Subtly move the other person to topics you find of interest

    Acknowledgements effectively build relationships when integrated with other techniques.  They encourage a more casual, interactive, directed and friendly conversation. By demonstrating that you’re acknowledging what others say; you convey that you’re listening too.

     

    Other posts in this series:

     


    Culture, Relationships Trump Vision, Strategy, Process

    Businesses spend much money on developing their visions, strategies and processes; however, they spend relatively little on culture, which trumps all of the others. Megan McArdle discusses her observations of General Motors and others in “Why Companies Fail,” appearing in the March 2012 issue of The Atlantic.

    When we talk about vision, strategy and process, they are very much head concepts as opposed to heart ones. For example, they don’t concern themselves much with the relationships that employees have between one another or even the relationships that the management team has with employees. The simplest relational techniques are rarely connected to these heady concepts when, in fact, it’s relationships that drive the cohesion and morale of any organization.

    Unless we touch our employees on their emotional foundation, vision, strategy and process will fall far short of their intended success. This perspective transforms leadership into more of an emotional function from a rational one.  This perspective also helps us understand why common business tools such as incentives and processes can retard our efforts to build relationships and effect change.

    Using a farming analogy, it doesn’t matter what vision, strategy and processes we use; if the soil isn’t good, we will struggle. In business, the soil is the relationship between the management team and employees. It forms the foundation of a company’s culture. If that team can’t develop effect relationships or isn’t motivated to even use simple relationship building techniques, then how can we expect it to implement great visions, strategies and processes?

     

    Related post: Great Strategy? Don’t Neglect Culture

     


    Real-time Personality Assessment: Freedom-Order Duality

    The Freedom-Order duality expresses a dimension of our personality involved in interpreting how we balance freedom and order. It can help us – in real time – understand, appreciate and predict better the reactions of others to such things as processes, decision-making, management, customer service, change and organization.

    However, all of this is arbitrary, subjective, meaning different people are comfortable with different levels of freedom and order. To some freedom is chaos because it seems anyone can do whatever he wants. To others order is slavery because there is someone or a rule telling her what to do. Therefore, since there are no absolute states for either, you can be the benchmark as the figure shows. This allows you to assess whether people are more freedom-oriented or order-oriented than you are by the feelings and thoughts they trigger in you.

     

    Freedom-Order Duality

     

    For instance, more freedom-oriented people might make you feel they are:

    • “Wild cards”
    • Unpredictable
    • Emotional
    • Spontaneous
    • Dynamic
    • Unfocused
    • Disorganized
    • Unprepared
    • Winging it
    • Scattered
    • Undirected
    • Flashy

    You might also notice they tend to use words such as these:

    • Flexible
    • Tolerance
    • Independent
    • Different
    • Adaptable
    • Unlimited
    • Dynamic
    • Customize
    • Diverse
    • Free hand
    • Openness
    • Deviate

    By contrast, more order-oriented people might make you feel they are:

    • Structured
    • Uptight
    • Controlling
    • Domineering
    • Inflexible
    • Unimaginative
    • Micromanaging
    • Analytical
    • Narrow-minded
    • Detailed
    • “By the book”
    • Rule fanatics

    Similarly, you might find them using words such as:

    • Structure
    • Process
    • System
    • Arrange
    • Classify
    • Control
    • Accountable
    • Quantify
    • Collate
    • Distribute
    • Manage
    • Discipline

    In our daily business lives, this means adding process and procedures to those who are more freedom-oriented than we are might stir anxious feelings about becoming nothing more than an automaton. Conversely, more flexibility and options to more order-oriented people might trigger anxious feelings about what is the right thing to do.

    Once we are sensitive to this, we can better position the change by adapting immediately to what we observe in others. To the freedom-oriented people, we will need to reassure the flexibility of adding their own dimension, and to order-oriented people reassuring clear definitions of their duties will exist. In essence, we personalize our approach and words to by appreciating people and their needs better.

     


    Relationship Building Technique #3: Pause

    We often don’t learn the value of listening techniques in building relationships. Consequently, people might not realize we are listening; this needs to occur to build relationships.

    A pause is usually a short, silent break in an interaction of about ten seconds or less. However, it requires discipline to stay quiet, especially if you’re waiting for an answer or a reaction. Pauses give others thinking time, encourage others to talk and fill silence, and slow down a conversation to temper negative emotions.

    We employ pauses by suggesting others take their time, asking for “a moment to think,” looking upward or to the side before responding, and incorporating thinking gestures such as:

    • Connecting finger tips of both hands
    • Hand to the chin
    • A couple fingers over mouth
    • Clasping hands

    Some examples of pauses include:

    • Silence before responding
    • Asking, “Do you mind if I think about this a moment?”
    • Allowing the listener time to think after asking a question

    From a relational perspective, pauses convey the feeling that you are:

    • Thoughtful, not thinking off the cuff
    • Deliberate in decision making
    • Not reciting some canned response or talk
    • Patient in waiting for a response
    • Not fearful of silence
    • Willing to give others a quiet “space” to think

    The effect of the pause is to encourage people to:

    • Open up as they attempt to fill the quietness
    • Cool down from heated remarks (good conflict management technique)
    • Share more because you are giving thought to conversation

    As simple as pauses seem, they are effective relationship buildings when integrated with other techniques.  They encourage a more casual and friendly conversation. By demonstrating that you’re thinking about what others say; you convey that you’re listening too.

     

    Other posts in this series:

     


    YinYang as Problem-solving Methodology

    Taijitu

    YinYang, as expressed by the Taijitu symbol, has helped me solve many problems. The two major components represent the two major opposing forces in any event. The smaller part of each in the other represents the interplay between the two.

    I have extracted five principles from YinYang that have helped me. In short, optimal solutions will:

    1. Have opposing forces (i.e. ideas, emotions, things) at work
    2. Not choose one force over the other
    3. Balance and integrate the two forces
    4. Have one force as dominant and the other supportive
    5. Vary by situation

    For example, let’s consider the problem of how much to water a plant. Two forces exist, dryness and wetness (#1). If we choose dryness over wetness by never watering the plant, it will die. If we choose wetness over dryness by constantly watering the plant, the plant will die (#2). Thus, we need to integrate the two and find the right balance between watering and drying (#3). In this balance, the plant’s soil will be mainly dry or wet (#4). This balance varies by plant (#5, i.e. cacti versus willows).

    In business, we often view these as tradeoffs such as processes versus flexibility, positive versus negative reinforcements, best practices versus differentiation, focus versus situational awareness, change versus resistance, profits versus investments, and glass half-full versus half-empty. However, tradeoffs encourage the temptation to choose one over the other; it’s really about integrating the two (#4).

    Many times, it’s difficult to identify the opposing force. So, I ask myself this question:

    If I take an obvious solution to the extreme, what would happen?

    For example, too much process makes everything bureaucratic. Too much importance on profits retards investments. Once accomplished, we can begin balancing the two to arrive at an optimal solution for the situation at hand.