I just read an article on BNET, an online resource like the Free Management Library–no disrespect intended to FML, nor am I promoting BNET. I get my inspiration from all over. The article was titled the The 5 Dumbest Management Concepts of All Time.

The author says, “These five commonly-held management concepts are responsible for most of the bad management practices around the world.”

The rest of the article is an invective of management practices: downsizing, leadership, human resources, empowerment, and business warfare. Although I disagreed with the style of the author in writing this diatribe, I found an opportunity to look at business to see where some people could be coming from. The article had many applauding his case, but I think these people had been there personally and it affected their judgment. I’m smiling, but it happens to us all.

Those of us in training have the opportunity to see what may be wrong in the corporate culture and help employees, managers, and leaders alike improve their lot, while also helping the company and work toward changing the corporate culture.

Personally, I find invective to describe organizational failings hardly funny. I’d rather think about solutions.

It’s not the fault of individuals but an entire culture based on money and success based on who has more of it. This is obviously a piece about the author and other people who have had unhappy careers in business. The author made his point, but there are exceptions to every rule.

I’ve had people I was proud to work for and with, had personnel that really tried to help with my career plans, and had a boss who helped me achieve my goals even though it meant losing a “resource”–me. I don’t think this article is really about bad management concepts, but rather the corporate culture that made these Frankenstein creations, caring more about the bottom line and people are indeed just a resource, and not people.

As trainers, it is our duty and obligation to see to it everyone is served with what they need to succeed. Do that and all is great for the company, and hopefully consumer who is also well served.

Take these “bad” management concepts and look at them for a training solution:

Downsizing? Re-training for another job–even if it’s outside the company shows the company cares. A re-hiring of this person at a later date may be possible and he will have new skills the company may be able to use. And this person is probably not going to bad-mouth the company because he was downsized.

Leadership? If providing leadership training falls on deaf ears, perhaps, training means educating boards of directors about the corporate pitfalls and leadership monitoring.

Human Resources? HR personnel can be trained to be customer service friendly, to actually work for employees, rather than the company. I have seen it and seen it be a great retention factor. Helping someone direct their career within the company means the best use of that individual, not so much training in the traditional sense but certainly apart of it.

Empowerment? The biggest problem is not training people to empower themselves but to train others to allow it and use these empowered individuals to the company’s advantage. One empowered and enthusiastic employee is a team player and one less employee to watch closely.

Business warfare? That one I think just happens, but if we train our leaders right, concentrate on character, vision and those other traits that make company leaders great and companies thrive, who knows? It’s hard to do battle with a healthy, successful company. Business warfare will be a thing of the past.

Take care of people as you take care of yourself, and some people will do anything for you and the company, often for nothing.

If the corporate culture is flawed and I’m sure it is, we can still do our part cut down on the negatives, ensure the company’s most important resource is able to serve the company, and take an active part in molding that culture.

We all have our jobs to do. You can’t be unhappy with yourself if you’ve done your best. Complaining doesn’t solve anything, but people who look for ways to achieve positive change are heroes to the company. Unsung maybe, but I can live with that. Can you?

Happy training from the Passionate Communicator at Acting Smarts. Know your audience, know your subject and know yourself, and you’ll have the success only you can make as an excellent communicator (and trainer).

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

I recently had the pleasure of reviewing Naomi Karten‘s book on Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals and found it an excellent resource, not only for its intended audience but for others who may be giving technical presentations such as trainers. Naomi Karten, the author of several books, including Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals: Achieving Excellence and Changing How You Manage and Communicate Change: Focusing on the Human Side of Change, is my guest blogger today. You’ll appreciate her insight and guidance on facilitating learning through mimicking real life simulations in the classroom.

To Facilitate Real Learning, Use Experiential Training

by Naomi Karten

No doubt, you’ve attended training sessions in which the instructor reads from bullet-point-laden slides to students seated in rows, like second graders. For some topics, this passive approach to training is appropriate. But for helping people develop critical organizational skills such as communicating effectively, building relationships, and managing change, nothing beats experiential training.

Experiential training revolves around the use of simulations—activities designed to mimic real-life situations. In participating in these activities, students learn about themselves and others, and because they are fully engaged rather than passive listeners, what they learn tends to have staying power.

Here’s an example of a simple simulation that I’ve used dozens of times in my presentations on managing change. After introducing the topic and offering some initial comments, I ask everyone to gather their belongings and move to a seat that’s at least two seats away from their present seat.

When people get settled, I ask for their reactions to being asked to move. Keep in mind that these are people who lead (and experience) large-scale organizational or technological change. Surely, something as simple as changing their seats would be a minor matter. Or would it?

Here are some typical responses:

• I didn’t want to move. I liked where I was.
• It seemed like a fun thing to do.
• I had the perfect seat and I wanted to stay there.
• My seat had a bad leg. I was glad to move.
• It seemed silly.
• I resented having to change where I was.
• I didn’t understand the purpose, but it was fine.
• I got here early to get the best seat and you made me move.
• I was thinking of refusing to move, but finally I went along.

The presence of so many different reactions, from resentment and anger to eagerness and curiosity, is an eye-opener for those who assume everyone else must have had the same reaction they did. This range of reactions beautifully sets the stage for my information on how people experience change and what that means for change leaders.

About a half-hour further into the presentation, I ask people how they are now with their new seats. The woman who said she had the perfect seat and wanted to stay there admitted that her new seat was just fine. Others voice similar comments; though they may not have been eager to move, they adjusted to their new location. Their realization of the change process they just experienced enables them to join me in identifying guidelines for reducing the duration and intensity of the turbulence associated with change.

This experiential approach invariably helps people gain insights both into how they themselves respond to change and how they can better manage change in their own organizations. In addition, it generates some fascinating discussion. It’s full of learning for those present including, I’m happy to say, the presenter.

*******

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

Naomi Karten (www.nkarten.com) is the author of several books, including Presentation Skills for Technical Professionals: Achieving Excellence and Changing How You Manage and Communicate Change: Focusing on the Human Side of Change. Contact her at naomi@nkarten.com.

The Ongoing Debate Between Subject Matter Experts and Communicators

To most who have read other blogs by me, you will think you know my answer to this question. You might be surprised. In my usual style I will try to delineate why I believe as I do and why others disagree. As always I take the middle to begin with to say there are times for both to be effective in their own way. Now that I have said that, the debate can begin.

What I am really talking about is interest, focus and passion.

We talk about different ways people learn, process information, and deliver that information. If those things matter, what does a subject matter expert (SME) offer that a communicator does not? A little bit of a no brainer. Knowledge, of course. Specific knowledge. The communicator: general knowledge. What does the audience need? Specific knowledge? How specific? Is he or she doing research at the seminar?

Is it best to get the highlights and get back to the SME to clarify and add information not available or not enough time to deliver in the seminar? So maybe the seminar or training session is not the place to gather as much detailed information the SME has available or wants to give at one time, but the fact he was there made you come.

What if he were there to answer your technical questions instead of speak and make a presentation? We can leave the less technical details of introducing the topic and putting it in perspective for its audience to someone who specializes in doing that, a subject matter expert in communicating with an audience.

Communicators can boil a complicated subject to a level understood by many members of the audience. We all don’t have the same level of understanding or interests. I have spoken to high level audiences, even Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates, a Chinese delegation of political leaders, civic and industry leaders from around the country. In most cases, we should say these are not dummies, but I spoke on Air Force Military Logistics and the Industrial Military Complex, which I can assure you I am no expert; there were plenty of SMEs in the room to answer questions, but you need only one. And, as a communications expert (a public affairs officer, in this case), I was less likely to blurt out information of a classified or sensitive nature that I shouldn’t have.

Sometimes the overview is what matters, giving the audience time to think about what is said before applying it to their particular interest. I also spoke on the operations of the North American Aerospace Command complex inside Cheyenne Mountain and Air Force Space Division missions and projects. Now, again, I am no expert, but I was able to know enough to be credible and to encourage the use of SMEs for a more in depth view, most often the high-ranking man or women running the show on the inside. How’s that for credibility?

Most speaking opportunities or even training sessions are not intended to be the end all—all the information you’d ever want relayed. What I recommend is a look at what the audience needs and what they are likely to get at that moment. If you want your audience to be pumped up about learning new information on a topic it’s better to get a person who is passionate in a way lay people can understand. SMEs are passionate about their subjects, too, but may lack the ability to “dumb” it down enough for an audience. Communicators lack the specific knowledge, but good ones can lay it out for an audience and make them want more.

Now I welcome your thoughts and comments as always. Meanwhile, if you need a communicator, an SME in communication (and training), give me a call.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.

If we only knew what others were thinking, it would make our job so much easier as trainers. Especially if we are a trainer for the hospitality industry as a friend of mine. Cherry Santos, Learning & Development Manager at Taj Resorts & Palaces, is working on a module simply titled:

“How to Read People’s Minds” – How to Approach Your Guests in the Restaurant or Hotel

This got me thinking that this is an important topic. She said and I’m sure you would agree that while “you can read body language, use empathy, or make educated guesses on what a person might be thinking or feeling, reading minds is simply impossible. The value of this workshop would be to assist hotel associates to interact/communicate effectively among guests, or anyone, for that matter.” It’s a good idea.

In this age of international travel, it’s easy to overlook the basics about invading other guest’s personal and private space, sometimes just by talking to them or reaching for a plate at the wrong time. The last thing an hotel associate wants to do is irritate a customer. Yet, if he or she does not intervene at the proper moment, there is the risk of neglecting the “guest’s experience.” Or, even worse, alienating that guest.

Now that I got your attention with reading minds, I’ll tell you what I think are some solutions. Is there a way to read minds? Probably not really, but we can ask ourselves what works for us as customers.

Trevor Penton, a communications consultant in the United Kingdom, weighs in, “If I go to a hotel or restaurant, I want the service to contribute to a positive experience; proactive, but not intrusive, open, friendly, caring, and engaging. If I were putting your module together, my focus would be on two key areas:

• Raising awareness of how to read body language; visual and verbal cues, and critically what signals the hotel/restaurant guests are giving off about their mood.
• Practical tools/techniques to help the hotel/restaurant staff come across as great hosts: proactive, open, friendly, caring, empathic and being great ambassadors for the hotel/restaurant.

Obvious stuff but critical to get right to enhance guests experiences.”

I would agree. However, still too often that “caring” comes off as artificial based on the guests’ preconceived view of expectations. Behind all this employee “friendliness” a guest has an obligation to show his or her gratitude for service rendered. It’s difficult to have genuine relationship based on that. When money or a favor is expected, there exists a business relationship, plain and simple. So, how can you change that relationship, and maintain it at the same time?

If we were only able to read minds.

Interpersonal communication is complex, full of nuances, possible miscues, unknowns, and yet we manage to get along with each other every day and most of us survive. Listen, watch and learn. I just made that up for this occasion. Expressions and body language say a lot, but there is a lot you don’t know and can’t assume is going on.

In my government job, I have about a minute to scrutinize the people I talk to before I start talking. I need to listen to them. It’s important to know “who” my customer are and genuinely care about that. Hospitality staff have less time than that.

Perhaps, the answer is as basic as operating with no expectations. Look at the behavior of most staff in an “all-inclusive” resort where tipping is totally forbidden. Nice, friendly, approachable people open your guests’ hearts and although those guests may forget the staff for the moment, they remember the actions later when it is really important–like re-booking. And, I’ve been known to run down an employee later to “thank” them for their seemingly unselfish service.

Sometimes, training is an attitude culture change, not an act you can necessarily train for. As always I welcome comments, opposing views, and wisdom from readers. If I can be service as a trainer or communicator, or even as an actor, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

—

For more resources about training, see the Training library.