Month: May 2010

Posted on

Coaching Tip: Four Question Method for Proactive Problem Solving

Question and answer signage

Does your mind ever go around in circles or do you loose sleep trying to come up with a solution for a problem? As a coach, I find that my clients benefit by following this four question problem solving method.

1. What is the problem?

2. What are the solutions for resolution of the problem? (Include advantages and disadvantages of each solution)

3. What is the best solution with supporting rationale?

4. Once a decision is reached on the best solution, when will you act on it?

Try it out and let me know what you think!

For more resources, see the Library topic Personal and Professional Coaching.

Posted on

Communicating Across the Twilight Zone: Can You Hear Me Now?

young man working on his laptop talking on a phone

It’s well established in Dr. John Gray’s best-selling book, Men are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, that males and females communicate differently when trying to relate to each other on different levels. While it’s a slippery slope in the universe of communications to equate this gender-based metaphor to the public relations arena, slide with me for a moment as we slip into the Twilight Zone where what you say to the public or your target market may not be heard the way you intended it to be…..

You may have hammered out your message for your latest news release on Thor’s mighty anvil, or poured over it with your PR contact until you were both soaked in sweat (sorry it’s summer — and I am out of old Greek god references). You might have trained to handle the tough questions on TV with smart sound bytes until you broke the retainer budget for the month. But something went wrong: You were not heard right.

Maybe a nuance was missed. Maybe you used a word or expression that doesn’t play well in one part of the country but works just fine in your backyard. Maybe you simply mis-framed what your message was and now you are force to play the “I misspoke” card, or resort to “let me try and rephrase that” line. And that’s okay…. happens all the time. But it doesn’t have to.

It wasn’t what you really said that made your bucket bottom fall out, it was how you were heard. Language is tricky. Communicating is a highly dynamic and fluid situation. Always consider your word choices wisely. Make your verbs the right ones, the verbiest, you might say. Can you pen something differently so that it gets heard right the first time?

Turn the tables and consider how your message will fall across that greater distance — and it is a kind of Twilight Zone — between you and the object of your communications. Your choice of words might suit the aims and intentions of whatever it is you are trying to convey. But how people hear it and more importantly, how they relate to it, is ultimately what counts.

Posted on

Why Leaders have Trouble Restoring Trust

Trust

The challenges facing Paul Levy, the embattled CEO of Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, highlight the issues faced by many leaders: once in hot water, how to start on the road to recovery.

The problem is that many leaders don’t appreciate the nature of the ethics risks they face and what is in fact needed to restore trust. Most leaders don’t get that merely by being a successful manager and even a nice guy aren’t enough. Moreover, even coming clean with a confession of wrongdoing and a commitment to do better isn’t enough.

Blanket statements don’t work. Leaders have to get to the heart of what caused the problem in the first place. In this situation Levy faces two challenges to restoring trust: systems and relationships that inhibit trust as well as overcoming skeptical employees who only last year believed in him.

Levy recently contacted a local reporter for the Boston Globe as a step to get his story told. The reporter, Brian McGrory, was not impressed. As McGrory wrote in his column of May 19, 2010:

So I found myself in Levy’s office on Brookline Avenue on Monday afternoon, face to face with a man who is widely considered to be among the most charming members of Boston’s leadership elite. I came away with two distinct thoughts: This guy is good, and he just doesn’t get it.

The good part: Levy is thoughtful, he is expansive, he is conciliatory. He has been a force of nature in returning Beth Israel to the powerhouse that it is today.

Yet, forty-five minutes with him provided an extraordinary view into so much of what’s wrong with life in the city’s higher altitudes, where macho favor-trading, undue influence, and complicit governing boards are the way of the day.

McGrory goes on to discuss how despite rumors of an improper relationship circulating for years, the Board did not take any action until an anonymous letter was delivered.

The bottom line: words aren’t enough if the systems that perpetuate the distrust aren’t fixed.

The challenges of rebuilding trust also extend to the employees.

As a thoughtful CEO, Levy knows what he needs to do.Levy said to Adrian Walker, in yesterday’s Boston Globe:

“Ultimately, the authority to do this kind of job, to be a CEO — as important as the board is — does not derive from the board. It derives from the people you work with. And maintaining their trust and confidence is important,’’ Levy said in an interview last week.

After the story erupted, Levy didn’t help himself by issuing a series of statements that apologized for a “lapse in judgment’’ that didn’t explain anything about the lapse, or the circumstances. He says now that his statements — which were downright Nixonian in their evasiveness — had to be approved by the board, and that he could not be more forthcoming while it was still deliberating his fate.

“I could go in front of them and say ‘I want to do what I can for the low-income workers but that means everyone will have to take a bigger sacrifice.’ I was able to do that because I had the moral authority to say those things,’’ he said. “If it were today, would I have the same amount of moral authority? I think not quite. I’d like to get back to the point that I do again.’’

The good news is that our human nature allows us to forgive. But we don’t want to feel like we’ve been duped. Levy has to do more than simply acknowledge a lapse of judgment and empathize with his staff’s feelings. He needs to acknowledge how and why he ended up doing what he did in order to allow his staff to hold him accountable for future actions that could lead to the same issues happening again.

Regaining moral authority means that Levy has to acknowledge his human foibles AND do what is needed to ensure that he won’t walk down that same path again.

_____________________________________________________

David Gebler can be reached at 617-314-6280

dgebler@skoutgroup.com www.skoutgroup.com

Posted on

Grants Are Not Gifts

member-of-a-board-signing-a-grants-proposal

That’s an important distinction. The defining characteristic of a gift is that control over its use passes to the recipient the minute the transfer is made. While some donors may restrict a gift to a general purpose — scholarships for example — decisions over the deployment of the funds within that restriction rest entirely with the recipient.

Furthermore, the donor receives nothing in return, as is clearly stated in standard gift receipts.

The opposite is true with grants. A grant is an exchange transaction in which each party receives a “benefit.” The grantor maintains an element of control throughout the life of the grant, and sometimes thereafter.
The terms of the grant are spelled out in a grant agreement or contract that is signed by both parties, and the grantee is obligated to fulfill those terms or risk forfeiting the funds.

The terms typically include performance of the project procedures described in the grant proposal, accomplishment of enumerated outcomes, reporting on a specified schedule and adherence to accepted accounting standards … including maintenance of separate accounts for the grant funds.

What does the grantor get in return? While not a tangible benefit, the grantor’s agenda is promoted. To be successful in obtaining a grant, an applicant must address the funder’s agenda, and create a partnership in which the grantee conducts programs or projects that are mutually beneficial.

Government grants especially fit this model, although it is also true of many large foundations. Government grants essentially are elements of policy control – the government agency promotes its policy initiatives by using funds to enable the grantee to conduct programs consistent with that agenda.

In the case of corporate grants, the expectation is that the company does get some tangible return – if nothing more than good will in the community; but, more on that in a future blog on corporate funding.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Have a question about starting or expanding your grants program? Email me at Andrew@GrantServices.com..

Posted on

How Do You Screen a Media Trainer?

Someone screening a media trainer

[This supersedes and is a greatly expanded version of a post originally published on May 14.]

Retaining someone to provide a service about which you know little yourself can always be tricky, whether it be an auto mechanic, a lawyer, a plumber, a computer tech or — the topic du jour — a media trainer.

Below are a list of questions to ask any potential media trainer. The answers should provide you with insights critical to making an informed decision about using his or her services.

    1. Have you been a working journalist yourself?Good answer: Yes! It’s much harder to understand the workings of the media if you haven’t spent any time on the “inside,” at least at the collegiate and/or intern level.

 

    1. If yes to #1, what type of journalist were you (e.g., anchor, investigative reporter)?Good answer: Investigative or feature journalists are much more used to “digging” for a story and hence ask more of the tough questions for which you need to prepare. Some anchors engage in investigative reporting as well, but not all, so be sure to ask if the answer is “anchor.” You want a trainer who knows how to “dig.”

 

    1. If no to #1, what is the basis for your understanding of the media?Good answer: I made a point of spending part of my PR career actively networking with working journalists.

 

    1. Does your training include how to deal with non-traditional media, e.g., social media?Good answer: Yes! If the answer is no, say goodbye. Traditional media is no more than 50% of the media that will impact you and/or your organization.

 

    1. Do you teach us how we can maintain the skills we have learned from you? Be specific.Good answer: Yes. I do that by coming back to conduct refresher training twice a year, teaching you how you can practice on your own, etc. One or even two days of media training, alone, are insufficient to maintain the new skills you’re learning; practice is essential.

 

    1. Does your training prepare us both for routine interviews and for crisis-level interviews?Good answer: Yes. We focus __% of the time on routine interviews and ___% on crisis-level interviews.Then you decide if that balance represents your needs.

 

    1. How long have you been a media trainer?Good answer: 10 years (or more). That said, everyone has to start somewhere. You may find a very skilled trainer with less experience and correspondingly lower pricing, but check their references carefully.

 

    1. Could you show me anything you’ve written about this topic, and/or articles in which you’ve been interviewed?Good answer: Yes, and I’ll get you copies or links right away. If someone’s really good at what they do, they understand that they need to both publish in that field and make themselves available as media interview subjects.

 

    1. If the stuff hits the fan, can you also provide us with spot advice on what we can say?Good answer: Yes, I can help craft messaging as well. You want a trainer who is more than just a trainer, but someone you can call on when “the real thing” happens.

 

    1. Are you an experienced media interview subject yourself — i.e. do you practice what you preach?Good answer: Yes.

 

——————————-
For more resources, see the Free Management Library topic: Crisis Management
——————————-

[Jonathan Bernstein is president of Bernstein Crisis Management, Inc. and author of Keeping the Wolves at Bay – Media Training.]

Posted on

Is Transformational Leadership Overly Heroic?

Heroic figurine

In Cater McNamara’s blog entry from earlier this week (“Are we Really Just Looking for Leaders to Save Us from Ourselves?”) he asks how much consultants are fantasizing when they come up with all the “wondrous traits” that the leaders of today are supposed to possess. I am not sure if it is fantasy, but certainly agree that it is not based in reality. I would like to keep in mind this question (i.e. is it fantasy?) in mind as we explore the theory of transformational leadership.

Introduction to Transformational Leadership

James MacGrgeor Burns was the first to talk about transformational (and transactional) leadership theory in 1978. It is relatively evident to me that the research, training, and academic teaching on transformational leadership have outpaced that of any other theory of leadership in the past twenty-eight years. There is an interesting phenomenon in the way that transformational leadership is almost never discussed, at least not at length, without differentiating it from transactional leadership. I will lend support to this claim by doing just that.

What is Transactional Leadership?

Transactional leadership is grounded in the notion that leaders lead through social exchange. That is, they offer rewards to followers, financial and otherwise, for meeting productivity and performance standards, and withhold rewards to followers if productivity and performance are considered deficient. These transactions are established by leaders specifying with followers the rewards that are available for meeting expectations.

What is Transformational Leadership?

The theory of transformational leadership views the transactional leadership style as appropriate in certain circumstances, and even as an extension of transformational leadership, but believes leaders must also attend to the sense of self-worth of followers and the garnering of full-fledged commitment to individual, team, and organizational objectives. In conducting a quick scan of the literature the following attributes and qualities of transformational leaders emerged: charismatic, inspirational, challenging, persuasive, intellectually stimulating, considerate, supportive, respected, risk-taker, coach, mentor, consistent, ethical, enthusiastic, encouraging, and personable. It is a long laundry list of worthwhile qualities and roles. But does it cross some line, intimated by Carter, which has the theory flirting with foolishness? I say “yes”, “no”, “maybe”. In my mind it depends on whose version of transformational leadership you embrace. I like the way that Bass delineates the main components by stating that transformational leaders should:

  • Inspire followers to extraordinary performance and to a shared sense of commitment to a vision for the organization
  • Encourage and challenge followers to be creative and innovative in their efforts to solve organizational problems
  • Focus on the development of the leadership skills of others through coaching, mentoring, and other forms of support

Conclusion

While the proponents of transformational leadership, of which there are many, may excessively romanticize the theory at times, it is my opinion that the central components of the theory are just tangible and relevant enough to make it a valid and valuable leadership model. In future blogs a more in-depth description and analysis of transformational leadership will be provided. In the meantime, what are your thoughts? Is it too much, too little, or just right?

Posted on

Be Nimble, Be Quick; Be Disruptive, Too

Black and light brown chess pieces

In a world with dynamic markets and fickle customers, it’s best to build into your plan strategies to respond quickly to new opportunities and threats. Long gone are the days when you could just create a valuable product, price it to attract customers while making a profit, and then just keep doing the same thing year and after.

Today, that’s a formula to go under before your banker invites you to the annual golf outing. And that’s assuming anyone will put money into your business in the first place, which is unlikely if you can’t convince them that your business will adapt quickly when the reality of your business plan meets the reality of the marketplace.

So how do you build adaptability into your plan? First, do your homework so you come out of the box with a solid plan with real world assumptions, but also create systems to keep gathering that data to test those assumptions. Successful entrepreneurs keep collecting data about their customers, competitors, supply chain, industry trends, and so on long after they’ve written their business plan.

Then they act on it. Be sure your plan includes a management structure that enables quick decisions, without more process than is needed to properly vet things.

One way of looking at the CEOs job is s/he needs to be constantly disrupting things as a means to achieve that kind of adaptability.

A recent Business Week article describes successful CEO’s who intentionally disrupt the status quo, their own business models, and institutional analysis paralysis; that’s when slow moving organizations seek complete clarity before acting. For most important business decisions, that’s too late. Your goal should be to understand just enough about the problem to make your next decision.

It might be the wrong decision sometimes, but often there are even greater risks from inaction, moving too slowly, or just taking too long to act.

So make sure you build decisiveness into your business plan.

——————

For more resources, see our Library topic Business Planning.

Copyright © 2010 Rolfe Larson Associates – Fifteenth Anniversary, 1995 – 2010
Author of Venture Forth! Endorsed by the late Paul Newman of Newman’s Own
Read my weekly blogs on Social Enterprise and Business Planning

Posted on

What’s What

A-female-speaker-in-a-training-class-with-staffs

After reading another blog by Carter McNamara titled Are You Doing OD? Training? Consulting? Coaching? All of These? I decided to look at the definitions I had laying around in my paperwork of HRD, T & D and OD and what I consider at least the objectives of all three types of processes, although personally I think the objectives are more training objectives. However I thought it might clear up some of the differences between the three.

Human Resource Development (HRD)

A process developing and/or unleashing human expertise through organization development and personnel training and development (T&D) for the purpose of improving performance at the organization, process, and individual levels.

Training and Development (T&D)

Training is the process of systematically developing knowledge and expertise in individuals for the purpose of improving performance. Development is the planned growth and expansion of the knowledge and expertise of people beyond the present job requirements. This is accomplished through systematic selection, training, assignment, and evaluation efforts.

Organization Development (OD)

The process of systematically implementing organizational change for the purpose of improving performance.

Objectives

  • Assist an organization in improving job performance through training and non-training solutions.
  • Analyze employee job effectiveness to determine true organizational training and performance needs
  • Explore needs assessment and understand its importance in relation to the Human Performance Improvement process.

In the end all three are similar in so many ways, a couple of the reasons I went into training were a) it was a great marriage between T & D and my behavioral psych degree and b) the T & D HPT profession is so diverse you have the ability to work in so many capacities. I thought that was great, I love diversity and the ability to be a lot of things rolled into one.

Happy Training and comments questions concerns and guests are always welcome!

Leigh

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

– Looking for an expert in training and development or human performance technology?
– Contact me: Leigh Dudley – Linkedin – 248-349-2881 or 248-277-2966
– Read my blog: Training and Development

Posted on

Building Email Marketing Lists – Are Business Cards Fair Game?

Laptop screen displaying loading gmail

You’re trying to keep up with the times and build a meaningful marketing email list. After all, email newsletters and email blasts are (almost) free. And they can be segmented to accommodate a wide variety of target marketing messages. Beautiful!

Is it fair to add contacts from business cards you collect at a business or social function?

I’ve followed a group discussion on this topic for a few weeks now, and the feedback is quite divided. If there is a tie on this subject, I’m going to break it.

The pros and cons of “business cards and email list building”

Some say “YES” – Some business people and feel that it IS fair, that the person who gave their card should expect some follow up. Business cards have been the source of the traditional list-build for hard copy newsletters for years, so it’s only natural to extend that to email lists.

Some say “NO” – The flip side of the coin is that the person who gave the card did not give it with the expectation that they would become a subscriber.

We get so many newsletters, emails and spam that it’s very time-consuming (and potentially irritating) to be forced to open emails and sort through them – to scan and delete those that don’t interest you, and to be sure to keep those that do.

How many emails are sent and received every day?

Statistics, extrapolations and counting by Radicati Group estimate the number of emails sent per day at around 247 billion – more than 2.8 million every second. Around 80% of these are spam and viruses!

Average number of corporate emails sent and received per person, per day:
2008: 156
2010: 199

Percent of work day spent managing email for the average corporate email user:
2003: 17%
2006: 26%
2009: 41%

What’s the answer – add them or not?

In my opinion, it’s a clear NO. You run a very high risk of creating ill will if you add those business card contacts to your email database without asking permission. Many business people simply drop your email into their spam and block folder – thereby banishing you forever. Horrors!

Ideally, a “double opt-in” method to build your marketing email list organically is the best and most positive way to create and nurture important relationships that last.

Do you ask permission first, and if so, how?

——————

For more resources, see our Library topics Marketing and Social Networking.

.. _____ ..

ABOUT Lisa M. Chapman: With offices in Nashville Tennessee, but working virtually with international clients, Lisa M. Chapman serves her clients as a business and marketing coach, business planning consultant and social media consultant. As a Founder of iBrand Masters, a social media consulting firm, Lisa Chapman helps clients to establish and enhance their online brand, attract their target market, engage them in meaningful social media conversations, and convert online traffic into revenues. Email: Lisa @ LisaChapman.com

Posted on

Here’s a Procedure for Making Decisions

Business professionals deliberating over a business decision

Why a Policy for Making Decisions?

How often have you heard Board members assert that they’d made a decision, when they really hadn’t — all they had done was talk about a topic for a long while?

Or, how often have some Board members or the Executive Director asserted that a decision had been made, but other members didn’t remember making that decision at all?

Or, how often had Board members made a decision by a majority vote, but the members in the minority claimed it was “not their decision”?

First, a Necessary Prerequisite for Good Decisions

For good decisions to be made about a topic — and for all to recognize that indeed a decision had been made, the organization should have:

  • Sent out the Board meeting materials well before the meeting
  • Put the topic on the meeting agenda
  • Listed the type of action needed for the topic, e.g., a decision needs to be made
  • Associated a specific amount of time in the meeting to address that topic

Sample Procedure to Make Formal Board Decisions

As long as a quorum of Board members is present in the meeting:

  1. Board members discuss/debate and then decide within the time allotted on the agenda.
  2. Consensus is attempted within that time.
  3. If consensus cannot be achieved, then a seconded motion is sufficient to call a majority vote to delegate to a committee to gather more information by a certain time frame.
  4. If delegation is not selected by a majority vote, then a seconded motion is sufficient to call a vote about a certain suggested outcome of the decision.
  5. The decision outcome goes to the majority vote.
  6. The decision is documented in the next issue of Board minutes.
  7. In the future, all Board members must support the decision – they must speak from “one voice.”

What do you think?

———————————————————————————
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD – Authenticity Consulting, LLC – 800-971-2250
Read my weekly blogs: Boards, Consulting and OD, Nonprofits and Strategic Planning.