There’s so much that interests me in this field. So much so that I’m heading off to the Annual Summit later this year in Boston.

The gem that stuck with me yesterday was the role of humour and fun in adult learning. I’ve always tried to make my client interactions fun and lighthearted. It reflects my own approach to life. If I’m not having fun, well then why am I doing it?

And it turns out that when people are having fun, it actually opens neural pathways in the brain that facilitate learning and take-up of information.  Conversely, it turns out that lectures where words are spoken sombrely, or the dreaded powerpoint presentation with slides full of bullets,  actually turn off our ability to learn.

So if you thought it was impossible for you to get a lot out of those kinds of interaction, there’s a physical reason why.

Meetings where people laugh and have fun will help people to listen and learn and lead to better outcomes with less effort.

Sounds like a no-brainer to me.

Most of the organisations I work with are big into professional and formal communication. There seems to be an underlying belief that if you stray from “professional and formal”, you risk damaging your reputation or credibility.

Part of communicating professionally it seems, is keeping our language and sentence structure formal, using jargon, acronyms and technical sounding words. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting adopting twitter abbreviations or saying “Gday mate” at the end of the email. There is a middle ground.

Let me give an example. This is something that might be sent out. It is on the  Professional/Formal side:

“Please read the attached document before the meeting and come prepared with any questions or feedback. If you are unable to attend, let Jane know ASAP so she can make alternative arrangements”,

How about this instead:

“I’ve attached some pre-reading. We’ll use the meeting to get your feedback and questions. If the meeting time doesn’t work for you,  call Jane and we’ll work something else out”.

The first is cold, bland, and sounds like a business with no soul.  The second sounds warm, friendly and actually feels like the sender is a real person who values a more personal relationship.

The reality is that people really notice and appreciate the difference between the two. I can’t count the number of times that clients have mentioned how much they appreciate my relaxed writing style and approach.

In a changing environment, the tone of messages conveys so much. Warm up your messages and people will relate to them more easily. They will stand out from the other communications they receive, and properly done – will contribute to creating the right environment for change.

At any time a leader should be able to ascertain where their team members are in terms of stages of their personal change, and the stage the organisation is at as part of the overall change progam. This dual knowledge puts leaders in the strongest position for understanding and working througn resistance.

For example, lets say you – the leader – knows some team members need more communication about the rationale for the change -why it is a priority.

If the change initiative is in early stages, you know there is plenty of communication and  engagement activities yet to come. If the program is in the later stages then you know  there won’t be much more communication about the rationale from prgram level. You need to provide that information yourself.

An leader educated in change processes has the ability to diagnose issues respond effectively to help their people accept and buy into the change.

If you don’t have awareness of both processes, its a bit like trying to shoot fish in a barrel with a blindfold on. You know those fish are there, but you don’t know where to aim. So you shoot enthusiastically but randomly into the water – after all – how could you miss??

Sadly, it’s never an effective strategy. The outcome is usually that you mostly miss, but sometimes you might wound some fish, who will never look at you the same way again….

OK -maybe dead fish isn’t the best analogy, but you get the picture! The moral of this story is, unintentioned action to help people come to terms with change is often well-intentioned but ineffective, and at worst, causes more harm than good.

Sure – email is a convenient form of communication. Its fast, we can reach a lot of people,  and we can attach content like there’s no tomorrow. And once we hit the “send” button, we can tick the box and say communication is complete.  And afterwards we feel as though we can absolve ourselves of responsibility because after all – we did tell people.  If they aren’t doing what we told them in the email, it’s their problem right?

I think it’s still our problem actually. We already know that:

• depending on how much email people already receive, there’s a pretty good chance that your’s won’t even be read
• Or, it will be scanned through but not absorbed
• Or people will read the first paragraph, and when it doesn’t capture their attention they won’t read the rest
• Or it will go into a “reading” file, never to be read
• Or worse – for external contacts – it slides into the junk folder
• Or culturally, people are not used to changing their ways by reading emails, so it falls on deaf ears

Our responsibilities for ensuring the right information gets to the right people in a way that is meaningful to them, demands that we think beyond using email as the primary information channel.

 A good piece of communication should provide context and rationale, create trust, help people to understand how to change, enable people to make informed decisions, and answer the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of the change.

So nex time you’re ready to bang off an email with important information inside that you want people to act on – think again! You may need to task your managers with discussing it in team meetings, doing some presentations or workshops, even creating visual reminders. Post your information in multiple locations and find a way to get feedback on whether people are “getting it” and “doing it”

If you do some reading on the subject, you’ll quickly find the predominant school of thought is that all communication must be “professional”, and that if it’s not, you risk damaging your reputation or credibility.

Part of communicating professionally it seems, is keeping our language and sentence structure formal, using important sounding words and not letting anyone in on the big secret – that we are actually real people.

For example, saying: “Please le us know at your earliest convenience if this appointment is suitable”, rather than: “If this doesn’t work for you, just give me a call and we’ll work out another time”.

The first is cold, bland, and sounds like a business with no soul. The second sounds warm, friendly and actually feels like the sender wants a personal relationship with you.

My own experience is that in the business world -no matter how large or small the buisness – the  impersonal, cool, arms-length style is the preferred mode of communication.

At the risk of flying in the face of conventional wisdom, I believe letting our real selves shine through in our communications allows us to differentiate ourselves from our competitors. It’s not all bad news for corporates though. There are a few of the big organisations that do warm communication well. If you are a Virgin customer, you’ll know that they excel at friendly and fun communications.

For me this is closely linked with how people behave at work: 

not wanting to be “too friendly”, seeming in charge,  and appearing unemotional.

The reality is that people really notice and appreciate the difference between the two. I can’t count the number of times that clients have mentioned how much they appreciate my relaxed style and sense of humour.

So take a look at the messages you are sending out. Do they need to be rewritten in plain conversational English? Are the icicles dripping off the pages of your emails and letters, or is the hearth warm and inviting?

After all –who wants to sound big, bland and cool like everybody else? Leave that to those who think it’s important (although why they do escapes me).

Here’s what I’ve found to be critical to maintaining morale and gaining buy-in to a potentially unpopular strategy:

Be upfront and honest about what you tell people

Right from the start we’ve been completely open about what this strategy means. Keeping secrets from employees is the best way to disengage them and reinforce the “management – employee” dichotomy.

Tell people what you know, as soon as you know it.

Even if the news is “bad”, people feel as though they are fully informed if they believe and know you are communicating everything as it happens. In this project, we committed to keeping people informed as soon as any decisions were made, or as soon as the work led us to conclusions. Because of our commitment in Point 1, we even told poeple when we had no news. Again, this reinforced our credibility with the workforce, and helped them believe that we wouldn’t hold back information.

Give line managers the job of communciating to employees 

People prefer to hear things from those they trust and know. In most cases this will be their direct manager and /or the next manager up. The project team is remote, and in some circumstances, can be seen as “the bad guy”.

Always communicate significant stuff in person

Anything that provides informaiton on people’s roles and when/how they will be affected just has to be done in person.  People need to know you place the same significance on this as they do, and that you are making the time and investment to consider them individually, and understand their personal positions.

Frequency of communications

More more more. Use many different channels – but do it often. More than you think you should. And always meet any commitments you make around communicating within specific timeframes.

Support people in understanding their reactions

Validating people’s feelings and reactions is an important component of helping them come to terms with big changes. Providing support that explains how people move through change can help some poeple move faster. Of course, people will move at their own pace, and some may never get past the anger stage. This too, is completely normal and should be expected and planned for.

Get people to participate in the change

If possible, getting people involved can help them feel valued and useful, even though the change may be affecting their own jobs. If you have been a decent employer (or people manager), people will often take pride in working professionally through a difficult time. Alternatively, they may learn a bunch of new skills that could be useful later. 

Acknowledge the difficult environment – and thank people

Ignoring the fact that a change is happening at your preil. You need to spend some time validating how people feel (challenged, unvalued, stressed), and them thanking them for their attitude/efforts or whatever is relevant.

Of course there’s more – a lot more. But if you’re doing these things then I believe your approach to the change is the right one:

• Care about people and what they are going through, and
• Keep them as informed as you are

396 people had their conversations recorded for up to 4 days each. The result: women spoke an average of 16215 words per day, marginally more than the men who spoke at 15669 per day. (Reference: Are women really talking more than men? Science 2007; 317:82)

Of course what this study can’t tell us is how valuable any of those words were. I certainly know, as I’m sure you do, of people who speak rarely but with great insight and consideration. And I know people who speak plenty but I only tune in to the important 5%.

Sometimes talking is overrated. Trust me – quality – not quantity – is preferred. To those people who feel the need to “fill the silence”, please don’t. To those who feel the need to “have their say” in meetings so others will get that they understand – it’s really not necessary. We assume that you understand. And to those who just love to voice their opinion – stop talking at us.

Communication skills are the foundation of so many other competencies. If you are getting feedback that you should listen more, or try and understand others’ points of view (point of views?), then getting additional insight into effective communication is a great idea.

I’m one of those – “only say what you need to when you need to” types – so maybe I’m just jealous. But in case I’m not……

Just a quick update on new statistics from my friends at TalentSmart, who do great things with EQ assessment and research.

There are 4 Emotional intelligence skill sets:

1. Self Awareness
2. Self Management
3. Social Awareness and
4. Relationship Management

A worldwide study of 500,000 people did reveal significant differences between the sexes:

It turns out that men and women have equal abilities in the Self Awareness Skill set. That is, we can grasp and identify our emotions as they arise, and

“can grasp their significance across time and situation”.

The genders have an equal ability, but men choose to use theirs less frequently (hmmm).

However as for the other 3 skills: self management, relationship management and social awareness……..women outscored men in all three.

The largest difference was in Relationship Management, with almost a 10% difference between the sexes. Taking all factors into acccount, the female gender had an overall average EQ score around 77% and males around 71%.

With EQ accounting for something like 58% of job performance, it’s worth paying attention to. On the TalentSmart website you can test your EQ online for a very reasonable sum. Try it!

As an aside, I am planning to become accredited in EQ shortly, so if you’re thinking about working with it in your business and want some information, drop me a line.

• presenter of ABC TV’s “Talking Heads.
• presented ABC Radio National’s Breakfast and AM for 14 years
• a Fellow of the Australian and New Zealand School of Government, where he teaches executive programs on strategic communication, and
• an Adjunct Professor at Macquarie University

….so he knows what he’s talking about. Here are the high points I picked up today, along with my “So What” comment in brackets:

Being persuasive is a big part of the work of leaders. The more skilled you are, the more you can successfully influence others.

If you are persuasive, you can help people to confirm a view they already have. But being persuasive is rarely enough to change someone’s mind if they hold a different view from you [So being persuasive isn't enough to effect change. Just talking to people, however persuasively, doesn't get them to change their minds]

There are 3 essential components to Successful Persuasion (and Aristotle thought of them first):

1. Ethos (Values and Virtues) – a persuasive speaker can tap into the values people aready hold to engage their attention
2. Pathos (Emotions) – a persuasive leader has the ability to arouse emotions and seeks to be the catalyst for others to take their first step
3. Logos (the facts) – a persuasive leader is able to articulate the facts of thr matter clearly and concisely.

[So all those people who love a good business case and present the facts and nothing but the facts - be aware that you won't change anyone's mind by doing this. You also need to address their values and emotions]

People cling to their existing attitudes even more strongly when challenged. [Ever had that political debate that just gets hotter and hotter as people refuse to give ground or listen to others views'? It's a lost cause so give it up.]

A change in attitude doesn’t necessarily lead to a change in behaviour – who was moved by “An Inconvenient Truth”, but hasn’t traded in their as guzzler yet? For behaviour to change, we also need to make changes to the environment. [Telling people to behave in certain ways is unlikely to be successful on its own, unless you add in an environmental modifier - like assessing behaviours as part of the performance management process.]

To create change, leaders need to balance Ethos, Pathos and Logos. [Speak to people's values, connect with their emotions, and back up your argument with relevant facts]

And here endeth the lesson…..

Books recommended by Peter:

Leadership for the Disillusioned

Eager Sellers – Stony Buyers

Meetings are usually a less productive way of spending time. Often, people aren’t prepared, or believe they can just turn up and spout great stuff at a moment’s notice (well – we’ve all been there). Plus there’s that whole bit about people arriving on time (not…), the pleasantries that take up 10 minutes anyway, the time you spend explaining something to someone who didn’t get the memo…..and so on.

If we only went to one meeting a day, we probably wouldn’t care. But the fact is, meetings are taking over our lives.

Last year, The Guardian mentioned a study that showed that meetings make people very unhappy at work, and that the more meetings one has to attend and the more time one spends in meetings, the greater the negative effects. This becomes especially depressing in the face of the fact that overall time spent in meetings is rising in most countries, and that some people, especially managers, spend most of their work day in meetings.

So if we can’t eliminate them all together (and I don’t think we should, by the way), how can we make them les of a waste of time? Alexander Kjerulf, who speaks and consults on happiness at work – wrote a great article on meetings. Read it here:

And these are the my favourite tips:

• Don’t let people join if they are late (it will only happen once…)
• Lose the table (stand up – you’ll be surprised how much faster meetings go!)
• Take a break every hour so people can recharge