Archive for year: 2012

Watching and reading about the current negotiations on the fiscal cliff is reinforcing my belief that everything in life, including politics, centers on communication.

The Washington Post ran an article this week, “Moral values and the fiscal cliff” in which the authors delineated how “Sharing moral commitments helps teams to function cohesively, but it also blinds them to reality.”  When each team gets focused on what is sacred, there is less chance for compromise.  They authors, Haidt and Movius, recommend the Democrats and Republicans negotiate and describe their progress, in which both sides can tout some moral victories, and then jointly call for shared sacrifice. My favorite quote from the article is, “President Obama and Speaker Boehner should develop shared language to convey to the American people the severity of our problems and the need for all Americans to make some sacrifice.”  Shared language.  That is at the core.  Communication.

Those of us watching our political leaders know that we need to make sacrifices.  We would like to see our leaders act like mature adults and communicate effectively, almost as much as we want to avoid this fiscal cliff.

Obama acknowledged this in his November 28^th press address, “Lyn Lyon, who’s here, from Newport News — where’s Lyn?  There she is.  She just wants to see some cooperation in Washington.  She wrote, “Let’s show the rest of the world that we’re adults and, living in a democracy, we can solve our problems by working together.””

NewsNation’s Tamron Hall discussed President Obama’s ‘outside-in’ strategy on fiscal cliff negotiations where he is speaking directly to the American people and asking them to make their opinions known directly to the Republicans. “I am asking congress to listen to the people who sent us here to serve,” said Obama.  What is at the core of this strategy?  Communication.

Communication scholars Roger Fisher and William Ury define a method of Principled Negotiation with four principles: 1) separate the people from the problem 2) focus on interests, not positions 3) invent options for mutual gain 4) insist on using objective criteria.  Four steps for effective communication.  To achieve these steps both the Democrats and the Republicans need to switch focus from party politics to economic reality.

ABC News, “Major Setbacks in Fiscal Cliff Negotiations” indicates that has yet to happen.  An agreement is not close to being reached and the article details how each side is blaming the other.

We have another month before we reach the cliff and I am sure we will be reading and watching much more on this subject.  One thing we can be sure of, it will all center on communication.

Building rapport is important for communication.  Starting a conversation with small talk surfaces commonalities that exist.   Finding commonalities gives people a better ground upon which to communicate.  But, as of late the trend has gone to the extreme.  There is an epidemic of oversharing.

Bloomberg BusinessWeek article “Enough with the Enemas: Why People Overshare at Work” lists many examples, from enemas, to third nipples, to men’s sizes.  Two reasons for oversharing are suggested.  The first is lack of privacy filters, when people share too much with everyone; the second is a false sense of intimacy, when people feel they are closer to co-workers than they actually are.

“Thank You for Sharing. But Why at the Office?” in the New York Times blames the trend on the continuation of online behavior.  People share so much on social sites that they get in the habit of sharing personal information that others may not want to hear.

Since younger generations have grown up sharing on social media, it may be harder to learn the skill of office small talk without TMI (too much information).  In a blog for Community College Transfer Students, career management specialist Carol Sand acknowledges that “Knowing where to draw the line is a learned skill that sometimes has to be learned the hard way.”

The New York Times article gives practical advice worth passing along, suggesting questions you should ask yourself before you share in the workplace.  I am passing along three key questions:

Who’s listening to me (a boss, a client, a colleague or a friend)?

Why am I sharing this?  What is the point?

Does what I am sharing benefit my career or the quality of my relationships?

As soon as you ask these questions, you become aware of your communication intentions and can adjust your behavior.  Being mindful of your communication is the basis for a good interchange.  If you know your audience and your purpose and adjust your message accordingly, you are communicating effectively.

So share, but share mindfully.

This summer’s special supplement to the Atlantic reads, “The Dialogue Economy, Social Media and the Marketplace” and contains multiple stories on how the power has shifted to the consumer and how companies are learning to engage with customers in dialogue.   The magazine has many examples of how the Internet has changed the relationship between those traditionally with power (corporations, government) and those without.  For example, Molly Katchpole took on Bank of America’s debit card fee and Verizon’s debit card convenience charge using social media, including change.org, and had an incredible amount of influence.

Allstate insurance company has been conducting surveys they call Heartland Monitor designed to keep a pulse on middle-class America.  This special issue included the results of the most recent Heartland Monitor XIII: Networked Nation.  The poll focused on “how technology and social media are transforming the relationship between individuals and institutions” and found significant influence.  According to this poll 64% of Americans are active on social media and those people are more likely to be involved in political and community activity.  Fifty-five percent of polled social media users indicated that online access to information made it easier for them to research and compare candidates, and 54% indicated it has given them more influence with institutions.

The Deloitte 2011 Shift Index, Impact Index included the Consumer Power Metric, measuring the relationship and relative power between consumers and vendors.  Consumer Power is increasing in almost every category of the past few years.

As this shift of power to the consumer happens, institutions are changing their ways.  Listening more.  Using unidirectional communication less.  The Dialogue Economy issue shared how Fortune 500 companies are using social media to engage in dialogue with consumers.  Coca-Cola has the most Facebook friends with 42.1 million likes, followed by Starbucks at 30.2 million and McDonalds at 19.8 million. Google has the most Twitter followers with 4.7 million, followed by Whole Foods at 2.6 million and Starbucks at 2.5 million.  These Fortune 500 companies are using social media channels to say ‘thanks’ and ‘sorry’, in addition to promoting themselves, according to an analysis of 24,000 recent tweets.  So, there is definitely dialogue between consumer and institutions.  But, it is really changing the power equation?

Ralph Nader, king of consumer protests, doesn’t believe the power is actually shifting.  He does agree that it is much easier for consumers to get comparative information and that gives them power with their pocket books to make informed choices about their purchases.  Yet, corporations have all the power in over the government and, therefore, real change cannot happen.  Although consumers get temporarily riled over an issue and create a small change, such as the Bank of America debit fee, Nader doesn’t see consumers sticking with a significant issue long enough to make lasting change.

I see his point.  I agree that much of the dialogue on social media seems trivial.  But, I also believe that many little changes can add up.  Consumers do have a voice in a way not previously possible.  We as consumers need to use this voice in order to effect long-term change.

Seems to be a trend that companies are realizing people need space – both mental and physical – in order to put forth the creative work required for the 21^st century American innovation economy.  The business section of the New York Times explored this concept in two articles on Sunday.  The first “When Technology Overwhelms, It’s Time to Get Organized” explored the effectives of productivity gains on today’s worker, who is expected to use technology to complete in one day what took three people to do the last century.  The article suggests that the sense of overwhelm felt by most can be combatted by gaining more space in a day through organization skills.  Four steps were recommended:

1. Capture everything that has your attention in writing
2. Clarify the importance and action needed of each item (aka prioritize)
3. Use technology to set up reminders for these required actions
4. Deploy you attention and resources appropriately (aka focus)

The worst-case scenario, which is all too common, is to let recency guide your attention.  “I have found that most professionals take action based on whatever is the latest and loudest in their universe, as opposed to making a conscious, intelligent choice,” commented David Allen, author of “Getting Things Done” and this article.  Instead, David recommends saying ‘not now’ to that which is not important.  The idea is that if you get organized and prioritize, you will have more space in your day to deal with the important things.

On the Mayo Clinic website, tips for coping with stress at work include identifying triggers, managing your time, and curbing burnout.  The first part, identifying triggers, is similar to David’s recommendation to capture everything that has your attention, only this time you capture everything that is perceived to cause stress.  Then you get organized and prioritize and find solutions to your stress-creating dilemmas. The stress management article goes on to recommend that you protect your time, “For an especially important or difficult project, block time on your schedule when you can work on it without interruptions.”  And, take breaks because “Even 10 minutes of personal time can be refreshing.” In other words, take space.

Taking space can be literal as well.  The second article in the NY Times on Sunday, “In New Office Designs, Room to Roam, and to Think” discussed physical space.  While the trend is open offices and shared space, companies are having offices designed with inspiring spots for employees to spend time alone or in small groups.  Taking physical space seems to help with creativity and achieving what David Allen recommended for combatting overwhelm.

Along side these two articles on taking space were examples of innovative companies, like Google and Dream Works, where employees are pushed to take risks and push boundaries.  And for that, they need space.