Most people, it seems, talk more than listen. They want to be heard, want to make their point. But don’t we all respond better to someone who listens to us? Really listens, so that we feel that we are actually understood? The difference is profound.

It is important advice to remember in discussions where there are different points of view, such as with people from different departments in a company. In fact, this is where our client usually found the reminder most helpful. A company’s president, CFO, head of HR, and head of marketing typically have a very different points of view about issues that affect the company.

The advice is important in negotiation. Rather than just pressing for what you want, if you first understand what is most important to the party you are negotiating with, you may well be able to come to an agreement that gives you both more of what you want.

The advice is important in personal relationships. Many arguments stem from a simple misunderstanding. Mismatched expectations or underlying assumptions are often the problem. Rather than reacting to what was said, if we seek first to understand what the other person expects and assumes, the conversation may not turn into an argument at all.

Being a marketing guy, I’ve found that this great advice is rarely considered in marketing or in sales. Most companies’ marketing reflects the company’s point of view rather than the customers’. But we know that isn’t effective. Prospective customers want to know what the product or service will do for them, not just what it will do. They want to know how what the company offers meets their needs, relieves their pain, or fulfills their desires. They want to know why they should deal with that company, not just why the company thinks its offerings are worth buying.

Here is a sales example: Let’s say you are shopping for tires. The salesman tells you all about the latest performance tires that look cool and really hug the curves. But if you are interested in tires that will last the longest, guess what? He has lost you.

If he pushes the latest “in” thing like tires have the lowest profile, and you are interested in tires that give a comfortable ride or have the best safety rating, he has lost you.

But, if he seeks first to understand what is important to you rather than just telling you what he think is sales-worthy, he can connect with you. And probably sell you some tires.

By seeking first to understand, we can then communicate more readily with the people in our lives, and, in business, with clients and customers.

Understand?

Photo by maldiviandude.

No related posts.

Every afternoon he’d come toddling in and the wait staff would fall in behind him as wound his way through the bar and headed to the patio where we offered draft beer for a buck a glass.  WE called it our really, really happy hour.  The first brew would land nearly simultaneous with his arrival at ‘his’ table.  He would smile a broken smile and settle in, shoulders slouched, ankles crossed, and adopt the thousand yard stare of a man who has been too many places but no place to go.

We became friends of sorts. I’m not good at having ‘buddies,’ especially when I have a restaurant to run.  He loved to start a conversation knowing it would lead to prolonged discussion.  Sometimes I could feel the day growing longer, passing in slow motion, but for him, I think the conversations made days going slowly nowhere feel a little more life-like.

He was a smart man.  He talked about encounters with great thinkers whose names I knew and books I had read but never dreamed of meeting.  And to be really truthful,   my little judgmental voice oftenwhispered that he hadn’t met such people either.

We sold the restaurant and I gave no thought about what would fill his long afternoons.

Within a month a flat, letter-size envelope arrived looking for all the world like it had been carried in a back pocket for a week.  The return address, written in dull-pointed pencil, read “Richard Cage” in block print letters that looked not much better than mine.

I thought, “Who the hell is Richard Cage?” and turned envelope every which way in a futile attempt to divine the answer.

Buns had just finished with her pile of mail and with the eagle-eye of a BINGO player poked her finger at the slab of Manila and pronounced, “You know Richard. He’s the buck-a-beer guy!”

Sliding the contents the envelope onto the table revealed a letter. Nine pages. Little did I imagine that this scene was to be repeated every month or so. Each envelope followed by as surprisingly artful rendition of an armadillo?

There were letters, all of them long, on a wide range of topics.  We discussed, via old fashioned post, aerodynamics, hydraulics, basic physics, management, history, and more. His final letter was on philosophy and his big point was, “You can’t punish or embarrass someone into doing something.”

Our hometown weekly paper includes a column by a local radio personality and, in this particular issue he told the tale of a local builder attempting to file a request for an inspection.  Being close to City Hall the builder entered the appropriate department and stated his business only to be told by the clerk that all inspection requests must be phoned in. (The system allows requests to be logged and performance measures to be reported.  In the vacuum of an office it makes pretty good sense.)

Not thinking, the busy clerk said she could not accept his request in person. And without further thought or explanation told the gentleman to just use his cell and an inspection would be scheduled right away.

Now there is some debate as to whether or not he was denied use of the department phone or whether or not it was suggested that he leave the building to place his call.

Even if you don’t believe the entire story there is still plenty of reason to shake your head and think, “Your tax dollars at work.”

If you think about it, someone who cares about the city might have called for a supervisor. But if your goal is not to solve the problem but to rub a face in an innocent mistake, you take the story to the media. Where it grows with each retelling.

Perhaps the intent was to make things better by “punishing or embarrassing someone into something.”

“Oh, golly!” said the poof of silvery hair that sits across the table from me at breakfast.  “Richard Cage died.”  I thought instantly of the pile of letters I had received and the pile that would go unwritten.

At the funeral there was a small clutch of Masons and, other than ourselves, only one couple who we guessed managed the small apartment complex where Richard had spent his final days.

When the preacher spoke we were surprised to learn that Richard had been CIA and Special Forces, an expert in the martial arts.  That he held numerous degrees from elite universities explained the long and thoughtful letters he shared with me.  He was someone. But I knew that.

And so I suspect that the clerk who just for a moment got a little stupid is also someone. Maybe she is a good mom, a loving daughter, and who knows, a budding musician or a community volunteer.  I’ve got a feeling that had Richard Cage been the one applying for the permit the situation would have turned out differently.  He would have recognized that this clerk was ‘someone’ and that you can’t punish or embarrass anyone into something.

(Richard, I owe you another seven pages.)

No related posts.

I’m guilty myself. I see a problem. I assume other people see the problem and that they will define it the same way that I define it. I assume that we all understand what the criteria for a “good” solution will be. And I dive head-first into a conversation where I try to “sell” my solution to the problem as I see it.

Here’s a thought: stop discussing the solution until we agree on the definition of the problem.

In the process, you might ask questions like:

• Do we both agree that there is a problem?
• What is the problem?
• What is the scope of the problem?
• What is causing the problem?
• What would a good solution look like?

Until we reach agreement on these starting questions, we can never agree on the solution to the problem.

How many conflicts could we resolve, reduce, or even eliminate if we all stopped talking about the solution long enough to understand our different ways of defining the problem?

Photo courtesy of www.sxc.hu.

No related posts.

For several years, StoryCorps has been running stories of everyday people on National Public Radio, and in the process has evoked memories of people coping and celebrating the challenges and joys that life presents.

While StoryCorps is focused on personal stories, it teaches us key lessons that leaders can practice.

One, listen to one another. StoryCorps invites relatives as well as close friends to venture into their special recording booths to tell their stories via personal interviews. Leaders need no booths or recording devices. They simply need time. And time is what few leaders have, but savvy ones realize that if they can carve out time for their people, dividends in the form of information and insight are valuable. Surveys and polls cannot share the up-close and personal views that individuals carry with them. Listening in can open the leader’s ears to what is happening as well as what is not happening.

Two, share your experience. StoryCorps interviewees become interpreters of unique experiences, such as coping with loss, raising a child, caring for an elderly person, or helping a neighbor. A bond between interviewer and interviewee is shared by radio listeners. The same can occur, but much more directly, when leaders sit down and converse with their people. Genuine leaders are those who can make their listeners feel as if they are the only people in the room. That creates a foundation of trust that is essential to getting things done right, especially in tough times.

There is a third lesson, as evidenced by the vast collection of stories gathered by StoryCorps: all of us have a story to tell. Leaders need to spread the stories of their people as a means of creating meaning as well as purpose to their organization. These stories come in all flavors. Celebrate the good things that employees do for customers. Most often this comes through in customer service people going the extra mile for their customers. But they also come in the stories of volunteerism. So many organizations encourage their people to participate in community service programs, even on company time. The best way to encourage such participation is to allow people to share their stories through the corporate website. Do it via podcast or simple videos, or simple newsletter items.

Stories, as StoryCorps reminds us, are acts of sharing that enables others to gain insight into your own personal experience. Leaders who spread stories are encouraging the practice of learning in ways that extend behind words to create experiences reinforce organizational culture and purpose.

Photo courtesy www.sxc.hu.

No related posts.

Buon Giorno Coffee, located about a mile from my office, has built a booming business for that very reason.  It sells good coffee, but those who gather there go for connection.  It’s definitely a destination stop; there are no other shopping attractions nearby.  On any week night, you’ll find teens hanging out there to do their school projects.  On weekday mornings, moms meet for muffins, Bible studies, investment seminars, and after-workout lunch dates.  Business professionals take their laptops there to work out spreadsheet data with a colleague.  Couples meet friends there after a ball game.  Lines are long, but nobody seems to mind waiting for a table.  Tables are not the point; hanging around is.

What do they all have in common?  Talking to someone who cares to listen.

Starbucks also generates buzz because it creates community for those who gather there.  A couple of years ago, it “featured” a book called Listening Is an Act of Love, a collection of compelling excerpts from more than 10,000 interviews recorded and compiled by StoryCorps founder Dave Isay.  Each story—a single moment in time, either historical, emotional, or personal—grabs the essence of that person and reflects their human struggles with love, family, loyalty, or whatever.

StoryCorp’s founder had a correct hunch: Many people feel invisible. They believe that what they think, feel, and say doesn’t matter.  They fear they’ll be forgotten once they leave planet earth—that their lives will not have mattered.  So all the producer had to do was to provide a facility, recording equipment, and a facilitator, and then wait for people to invite their family members and friends to sit down and talk.

The results:  Poignant stories for those willing to listen.

French philosopher Voltaire summed it up well:  “The shortest route to a man’s heart is through the ear.”

As you approach the high school or college reunion, graduation ceremony, wedding, family gathering, or other social event, consider your listening-talking differential:  Which body part does most of the work when you’re with friends and family—ears or mouth?   Where’s the love?

No related posts.

Delivering bad news is as undesirable as it is unavoidable. Nobody wants to do it. Yet sooner or later, most of us have faced the agonizing responsibility of communicating a message about corporate downsizing, quarterly losses, or poor job performance. Even the highest-ranking executives take extreme measures to sidestep the task—they hide out in their offices or delegate the duty to the next in command.

When it comes to delivering the tough stuff, we tell ourselves:

• If I wait, the situation will resolve itself.
• This isn’t a good time; I’ll do it later.

Most likely, these statements are unfounded and thinking them only puts off the inevitable.

Here are some tips on serving up bad news with compassion and dignity:

1) SET THE STAGE for the relationship between the presenter and audience. Identify the goals, needs, and expectations of the audience. Consider the emotional temperature—the nature and intensity of the audience’s thoughts and feelings—that will be brought into the meeting. For example, how will the company downsizing impact them? Then take your own emotional temperature as well.

2) SEND THE MESSAGE. Think about what the audience should be inclined to do, think, or feel at the end of the presentation. Avoid generalities like, “I want them to understand the infrastructure changes.” Instead, think along the lines of “I want them to be excited about the direction our company is taking and see this as a positive change.”

3) ACKNOWLEDGE THE PROBLEM. The Good News: “Congratulations, you’ve been promoted to Managing Director!” The Bad News: “Despite increased performance, there will be a substantial cut in your bonuses.” This message was not likely to be well-received by my client’s group. After Setting the Stage and rehearsing, she began announcing the news by acknowledging the problem, then continued with an outline for turning the situation around. She complimented them on effective teamwork, while keeping the focus of her presentation on how this would translate into future financial rewards for everyone.

4) STAY ON TRACK. The stress of telling someone something they don’t want to hear can be paralyzing. Here are some inner monologues to help you avoid “meltdown.” Repeat these phrases to yourself to help you stay on track:

• I need to tell you this
• We need to discuss this
• You must hear this

5) BE SPECIFIC. Start out with a positive statement about the person’s performance. Make sure it’s sincere, not empty flattery. Then get on to the hard stuff by expressing feelings of concern. Start with, “This is very difficult for me to say, but I need to tell you…” Use specifics, stating clearly what happened and giving as much detail as possible. Provide concrete examples of goals for change as well as target dates. Giving critical feedback won’t work without offering alternative actions and a time period for fulfillment. Finally, solicit feedback. Take into account the listener’s thoughts and perspectives and you will dramatically improve their chances of meeting the objectives.

Photo courtesy of www.sxc.hu.

No related posts.

My wife is outgoing and more task-oriented than people-oriented. She likes to move fast. She tends to make decisions on-the-fly and to work in a stream-of-consciousness fashion. She finds it easy to jump from topic to topic or from task to task.

My oldest daughter is much like me with a female perspective. She is a bit more sensitive than I am, but not much. She recently told me that she often does not like people because they do things that do not make sense. We have a running joke between us that one of us hurt the other’s feeling (Yes, feeling is singular and not plural.)

My youngest daughter is a lot like my wife. She moves fast, talks fast, and decides fast. She is different from my wife in that she tends a little more towards the people-oriented side of life. She loves to laugh, have fun, and play. She often leaves clothes on the floor or dishes on the counter because she “forgot” about them in moving on to the next thing.

I struggle with understanding the three female perspectives on life that live in the same house with me. I struggle to shift mental gears when either my wife or my youngest daughter makes a request of me with an “oh, by the way…” start while I’m working on a project that requires focus.

My wife struggles to find ways to communicate with me that respect my need to stay focused on my current task-at-hand without interruption. She struggles to slow down and allow my oldest daughter the time she needs to process requests before answering. She also struggles to restrain her frustration when my youngest daughter fails to follow-through on a task.

My oldest daughter struggles to understand and value her sister’s more light-hearted perspective on life. She has to guard against her own perfectionism when she comments on her sister’s singing. She also struggles with her mother’s intensity and drive when tasks need to be finished in a short period of time. To her, her mother looks angry, and she often responds accordingly by withdrawing from rather than engaging with her mother.

My youngest daughter struggles to allow me to work without interruption. She finds it difficult to stay quiet or to work without music when I am working on business matters. She can run afoul of her mother with her occasionally too quick wit and mouth. She really gets frustrated with her sister’s performance expectations.

In a nutshell, that is my team, my family, my work unit. And somehow we have to find a way to make this work.

We all understand the DISC model of human behavior. We all work to understand each other’s perspective. We work (almost) every day to apply what I have learned professionally to our family dynamic. It’s still hard work.

How different are we from your family or your business team?

I would guess, not very.

We are all similar, and yet we are different. We have different levels of maturity, different levels of knowledge, different levels of skill, and different perspectives on the “right” way to do things.

Still, we have to find a way to make this work.

All the knowledge and skills in the world don’t make a difference in the functioning of a family or a team without a desire and willingness to make it work. As one of my mentors taught me, “commitment and compatibility are two different things.”

As you move forward in your business and personal life, I encourage you to focus more on commitment than on compatibility.

After all, we have to find a way to make this work.

No related posts.

These descriptors almost universally come from clearly observable behaviors, thought processes, or attitudes common to a group of people. In and of themselves, most descriptors are neutral – neither good nor bad. It is what we do with them and how we use them that determines their worth and value relationally.

For example, I am a man and my wife is a woman. I have read many books and articles, listened to many audio programs, and attended many workshops in an effort to learn what I need to learn to make our relationship as powerful and dynamic as possible. In nearly twenty years of marriage and after many efforts to understand this other human in my life, I have come to two startling conclusions:

1. In general, men and women do not process information the same way. They do not tend to see the world through the same lens, interact with people in the same way, or have the same emotional needs.
2. No matter how hard I try, my wife will not think the way that I do and I will not think the way that she does.

There, I said it. Men and women are different.

Now, what do I do with this information?

I see two clear options. One, I can label, classify, and put my wife in the “woman” box so that the word “woman” becomes a label on her and her approach to life. Or two, I can use the  “statistical norm” that describes the female perspective to create a reference frame for entering her world to understand her in a deeper and better way.

The first approach leads to stereotyping, criticizing and tolerating the other person. In my experience, I have never met someone who wanted to be stereotyped, criticized, or tolerated.

The second approach leads me to use what I have learned about the “typical” female perspective to discuss things with my wife. (No, I do not believe that there is a “typical” female response. I am using this phrase very lightly, and just to make a point.) Based on this understanding of how women often interpret a situation, I can engage in conversation and dialogue with my wife to better understand her unique perspective. I use the “statistical norm” describing the general female perspective to help me understand how we might see a situation differently. Understanding the general differences gives me a lens to see into her world rather than to reach a judgment of her.

As we work, interact, and communicate with others, understanding our differences can help us to connect at a deeper level. Using this understanding to build bridges to others rather than to label and judge others creates a positive environment where we can move past tolerance to celebration.

No related posts.