Tuesday, 22 of May of 2012

Tag » relationships

Management by Email (Pt 2): Mediocre Relationships

While there are many individual reasons why managers might prefer management by email (MBE), such a style does so at the expense of good relationships.

In the April 2012 edition of the Harvard Business Review, Alex “Sandy” Pentland goes even further in “The New Science of Building Great Teams”. Not only does he claim that “the most valuable form of communication is face-to-face” and “email and texting are the least valuable,” but he also suggests that MBE is an indicator of lower team engagement, a key component in building great teams.

In the same issue, Walter Isaacson writes “Engage Face-to-Face” as one of  “The Real Leadership Lessons of Steve Jobs”. Isaacson claims Jobs “knew all too well [the digital age’s] potential to be isolating.” Thus, referring back to my toxic soil analogy, emails focus on ideas and thoughts, many of which will not flurish if relationships are mediocre.

There are two aspects to interpersonal interactions, thoughts and feelings (head and heart). As managers, we need to be concerned with both. For example, consider your favorite well-known person such as a President of the United States. Whether he or she emailed you or told you face-to-face, “Hello,” the thought and idea of the message remains the same. However, the emotional impact of seeing that person in person overwhelms the emotional impact of a simple email.

That is why these interpersonal techniques hold great potential in building strong relationships in an intuitive way. They address the subliminal, indirect, intangibles (the blue approach) of our relationships with our teams. Moreover, returning to Pentland, we can assess the overall greatness of a team by the degree to which it relies on MBE.

Relationships, not the ideas in messages, make teams great.

 

Related post: Dealing with Bosses Who Manage by Email (MBE)

 


Placebo Management (Pt 3): Stories Change Taste

Wayne Curtis’ article, “The Secret Ingredient,” which appeared in the April 2012 edition of The Atlantic discusses liquor companies’ claims about centuries-old, secret recipes. His point is that marketing drives the myths and stories behind these recipes more than the actual ingredients of the spirits do. For example, citing chemist T.A. Breaux, Curtis says there are no significant production secrets behind vodka, the best-selling spirit globally. Yet, he concludes:

. . . a healthy measure of mythology actually makes for a better-tasting product. Never mind the mouth or nose as the chief receptors of flavor. Sometimes, imagination and suggestion trump all.

There are many ways for us to change the taste of food without changing anything about the food; however, stories impact us well beyond taste. Look at how emphatic politicians are about their personal stories especially focus on rising from humble beginnings or overcoming severe challenges, thus working to wrap their story inside the classical hero myth.

Stories influence the intuitive aspect of interpersonal interactions, tapping directly into people’s feelings by way of presentation. The way we present something, including people, dramatically influences people’s perceptions of it. Since stories can change the way we view people, they can change how we interpret what those people say.

Therefore, when it comes to Placebo Management, stories become a form of interpersonal branding. If they can affect something as tangible as the taste of spirits, consider what they can do for intangibles such as our personalities. Consider the story built around IKEA and its founder, Ingvar Kamprad; it’s a motivational force for employees and consumers alike.

So, with this in mind, what stories do you promote about yourself, your company and others to change people’s taste about their talents and efforts?

 

Other posts in this series:

 


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:

 


Toxic Soil Analogy: Good Ideas Planted on Bad Relationships

Imagine soil so toxic that nothing will grow. No matter how good our seeds, our farming techniques and the weather are; nothing will grow. The same thing happens when we try to promote great ideas in a bad relational environment: they fail.

That’s why relationships are more important than vision, culture more important than strategy. Vision and strategy can’t grow in toxic relational and cultural soil. This analogy also frames leadership as an affect influencing the hearts and minds of members, requiring the ability to tap both aspects of an interpersonal relationship: emotional and rational.

While this analogy’s point seems obvious, we are biased toward reason; thus, when problems arise, we tend to believe presenting new ideas, educating on the facts or reasoning better will solve them. It’s not unusual for me to have to restate this analogy several times in order to get people to focus on plans containing tactics to improve relationships or to manage conflict. In other words, our tendency is to just find better seeds, use better farming techniques or hope for better weather rather than address the soil.

This happens because no matter how good our ideas are, people will tend to decide that they’re bad if they don’t like or trust us. Our facts won’t change things either because people tend to believe perceptions over facts. People will naturally find reasons to discount our logic and facts.

When we combine all of this with the fact that a diverse workforce improves business, there is great stress on traditional management styles typically unsuited to nurturing the right positive feelings that can dramatically improve performance. By framing problems with this analogy, I increase my success in introducing relational solutions, which are often seen as too “fuzzy” or “soft.” Perhaps it will help you too.

 


Relationship Building Technique #7: Summarization

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.

Summarization rephrases the information or key points of the person in a condensed version. The technique verifies what we heard, demonstrates listening, allows focusing of the conversation, and defines parameters for additional discussions.  It also allows the other person – once we summarize – to alter, modify or restate so we can correct misunderstandings early.

Typically, summarization will rephrase the point of a sentence, paragraph or entire discussion. The focus is on subject matter not feelings and emotions, such as:

  • Information
  • Ideas
  • Facts
  • Opinions
  • Logic
  • Instructions

Of all the relationship-building techniques, it will tend to be the most lengthy and involved; however, if too long, its effectiveness diminishes. Often it’s followed by a closed question such as, “Did I understand you correctly?”

Some examples of summarization include:

  • “Just to make sure I heard you right, Jack, you’d like us to find a way to secure a steady supply of our old product from this vendor, to negotiate a price based upon our minimum usage, and to find someone else to produce our new product.”
  • “To make sure I’m on the same page, let me summarize what I heard. You want to send Sue and Tom out west and to promote Sally to run the plant. Also, you want to find a recruiter to help us to fill Sally’s job and to find us a good service person to manage our top customer.”
  • “It seems that what you’re saying is that you want us to start over.”

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

  • Understanding and valuing what the person is saying
  • Paying attention to detail and quality
  • Someone in whom the person can have confidence

The effect of summarization is to create:

  • A common understanding of what was said
  • Opportunities for correcting any misunderstandings upfront
  • Confidence in your abilities in the eyes of the other person
  • Confirmation that you know what was said or needs to be done

Summarization, is really a result of the other relationship techniques. It’s used less frequently, but when it is it covers a lot of ground – often the entire conversation.  Summarization heads off many problems before they damage relationships. It has helped me much in my career.

 

Other posts in this series:

 


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:

 


Need a Breakthrough? Delegate Upward

A while back, a manager requested my advice about moving a stalled initiative forward. She had sat down with her boss several times to discuss this, but nothing seemed to come from these meetings. After sharing with me her previous conversations on this, I noticed a trend and asked, “Have you ever asked your boss for help?”

She paused and then slowly responded, “No, I haven’t.” So, I went on to suggest that the next time she discusses this initiative with her boss that she begin by asking, “Nancy, I could use your help on something. May I discuss it with you?”

After her boss says, “Yes,” she is to thank her first, then describe her plan for moving the initiative forward and specifically telling her boss how she can help by asking, “Nancy, can you help me by doing . . .?”

Many times, as this manager did, we just expect bosses to suggest their help when we explain a situation. We might also be uncomfortable delegating upward, appearing inadequate or possibly receiving a rejection.

In this situation, the manager successfully moved the initiative forward by following this approach, but the point is this: bosses like to feel helpful too – they’re human. Of course, asking the right way helps. Bosses are more likely to help if we ask in a way that ties their help to us. This personifies our request. For instance, asking, “Can you help me by doing . . .” is much better than just asking, “Can you help?”

So, the next time a project stalls, an effort becomes difficult or a roadblock appears, ask your boss for help. Not only might you solve the problem at hand, but you might build a stronger relationship with your boss.

 


Relationship Building: Insincerity & Personality Differences

In response to my post, “Relationship Building Technique #4: Acknowledgement,” a reader emailed the following observation:

I often find this is a simple [technique], which has a very sensitive component to it and is frequently very “fake” . . . . I know of several peers whom I converse with who “appear” to be practicing acknowledging and listening to others. . . . I have noticed over time, for example, although they may seem engaged and interested at the very moment, they are either preoccupied (and do a good job of hiding it) or are insincere . . . . This is often evident in subsequent conversations with them as you realize they have very little memory of prior conversations. . . .

First, these techniques won’t have the same effect on everyone. Obviously, they didn’t work on this person. However, why this occurred isn’t simply a case of the speakers being insincere; it could just be that they were very different from the listener. The latter could have been born with  much greater sensitivity than the others were and thus greater sincerity.

As a result, despite the listener’s view, it’s very possible that the speakers felt that they were sincere. Furthermore, they might not even be self-aware enough to know they were coming across as insincere. It’s also quite possible that they didn’t care.

We need to remember that any human attribute will vary widely across individual humans. That’s why not remembering might be a sign of poorer memories than the listener’s and not just lesser abilities to express sincerity. Thus, the problem isn’t so much one of sincerity or listening but rather one of differences in personalities. It’s going to be very difficult for less sensitive people to convince those with higher sensitivities that they are being sincere.

 


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: