Black Belt Dojo

Has to be seen to be believed?

So, here's the picture.... (not traditional comms garb but I'm sure you'll agree that this get up could be useful sometimes as the reception comms teams can get can be a bit frosty...)

So, across the Christian world this weekend, it was all about filling your face with chocolate  celebrating miracles. Now, this isn't a religious debate but neatly gets me onto my favourite subject of the communications miracle (or tipping point).

It is quite normal to read in magazines about turnaround stories - "How Bob saved IC from doom at Blah Ltd" or similar... I forget the specifics (for legal reasons). I'm always interested in these articles as I'd like to believe that a turnaround is achievable, that one day a company suddenly 'gets' IC. There's a catch in these articles though. Let me explain.

I'm a serial dieter (see unflattering picture for evidence). I, too, want a miracle cure for my inability to eat salad the entire time. So when I read the dieting equivalent of my comms stories, I sit with baited breath to see what the miracle cure was. Disappointingly, it is always something horrible and something that can't be replicated (husband ran off with 18-yo secretary, dog died, goldfish left home, dysentry). Something nasty made the obese woman drop 17 dress sizes. In communications articles it is no different - there is a factor that can't be replicated.

The most common one I see is "I was lucky to have a CEO who believed in IC / had seen it in action before" etc. This is all very well and good, but what happens if you are in a company where the leadership DON'T see the point in IC, don't think it can add value or even contribute to the bottom line? Is there a miracle cure, or do you have to wait for the figurative goldfish to leave home?

Has anyone been able to make the miracle happen? I haven't experienced it yet... and my natural scepticism for miracles (comms and other) lead me to think it can't happen. Prove me wrong.

p.s. I hear from the BBC that we'll soon be subject to rules and regulations on blogs. Hurrah for free speech and social media!

Is it that time already...?

I'm in the middle of preparing a workshop for a large group of managers which means I'm in full work-avoidance mode.  The slightest distraction drags me off (I'm thinking of asking my wife to lash me like Odysseus to my PC to make me concentrate!).

But one digression surprised me.  I came across a story about how the UK's Information and Consultation Regulations are two years old this April.  Apologies to non-British readers, but anyone here remember the enormous fuss that was made when the European rules were finally rolled out?  Apparently it was going to be the end of civilisation as we knew it and how many hours of conferences were devoted to the subject....?

If only global warming was as much of a hype...

Liam

Is there a future in print...?

Sorry - I'm not starting THAT argument...

It's just that someone showed me some research data compiled by the Larkins which suggested that when students are given web resources they learn less effectively than when they are given simple paper notes.  The theory is that the web is great for investigation and exploration but the natural desire to keep exploring stops you taking things in or committing them to your long-term memory.

The pay off was that if you want people to learn stuff - go easy on the weblinks in the document.  Intranets may allow people to choose the information they want but they may not be the best way of getting that information to stick.

Liam

Does jargon have a place?

The biggest dictionary I've ever owned turned up from Amazon this week. It was a present from Liam, following a recent, erm, 'discussion' on the subject of jargon.  It ended with him telling me I should improve my vocabulary and start looking words up in the dictionary, and me retorting that I didn't have a dictionary and had no intention of buying one. (Actually, I had no idea if I had one or not. But I'd got all competitive and would have argued black was white if I thought it would annoy him!)

We were talking about starting a campaign against jargon. Except we couldn't agree on what we actually wanted to campaign against!  Liam wanted a 'keep jargon in its place' campaign, on the grounds that 'jargon' basically means specialist language used by specific groups, so as long as it's kept within those groups, that's fine. 

He'd written an article to this effect, which contained a couple of words I didn't understand. I said you couldn't possibly write an article about jargon ... and then pepper it with obscure language. I wanted a bigger campaign that was about getting rid of corporate rubbish, meaningless buzzwords and complex language a lot of people wouldn't understand.  (60% of people in the UK have a reading age of 11 or less, and I learned at my reading in schools course last week that 1 in 5 people can't read well enough to look up the number for a plumber in the phone book).

A heated debate ensued, with me accusing him of over-complicating things and making communication more difficult, and him asking if I'd actually passed my English O Level and telling me I was dumbing down the English language. Passionate about communication - us?!!

Anyway, I've just opened said dictionary and discovered - I think - that we're both right. There are two definitions of jargon. The first is 'words or expressions used by a particular profession or group that are difficult for others to understand'. (Liam's definition) The other is simply 'gibberish' (my definition).  John Smurf 's Jargon Watch site has similar descriptions of jargon and buzzwords - specialist language belonging to a particular group, or unusual or pretentious language, trendy phrases or language used primarily to impress other people.

What do you think? Fancy joining in a fight against jargon? Willing to sign up to stamp it out in your own corporate communications? And what should we be campaigning against, exactly?! Is this the campaign to keep jargon in its place? Or the campaign against corporate rubbish? (I can think of other words to replace 'rubbish', but they're not polite enough to use).

Sue

PS Just found this business jargon dictionary which has a fair few terms I've not heard before. And this site is quite hilarious, only in that I really hope their explanations of the jargonistic terms (click on the letter to get the definitions) are supposed to be tongue in cheek!

 

Spring has sprung

A new month, and a new blogger! For a brief introduction before the ramblings begin, my name is Fiona Gibson and I'm a Communications Manager at Ernst & Young in the UK. I previously worked at Lloyds TSB doing Group communications and have only recently spread my wings to corporate pastures new - a challenge I'm very much enjoying. No piccie as yet (embarrassing ski tan at the moment) but I'll try to sort something out soon. Promise.

I love working in IC. Not popular to express such feelings for jobs in the UK. Better to conform to the national predisposition for doom or, even worse, ambivolence. But this is my first day back from holiday and I do love my job. It keeps me on my toes and gives me a decent mental workout. Someone once asked me why I like what I do. I'd never got the hang of the answer until I came to work here. I'd had to work out what job I wanted and why I should have it, which concentrates the mind somewhat. I like it because it suits my brain. Having a science background, I like analysis. But science isn't that creative (unless you were in my chemistry classes...) and I need to flex both sides of my brain to feel fulfilled in work. We're almost back to Sue's previous post on self-awareness.

So in a month of new beginnings (snowdrops, crocuses and gambling lambs), take a new perspective on life. Why do you love what you do? And if you don't, is it time to consider whether you can change that?

An easy way to sound well read...

...OK, here goes, I'm about to give away one of my secrets.  I've discovered the Harvard Business Review's podcasts and have been covertly listening in and later pretending I've read the magazine and trying to sound all clever and knowledgeable.  I would of course normally read the magazine, but it takes a lot of time and I'm sooo busy.  Nothing to do of course with the eye-watering cover price...

Anyway, there was a really interesting item the other day about what makes the "signature" experience for an employer.  The argument was that great employers don't follow a common path or use the same tools to make employees happy.  What they do is make the employee experience distinctive in some way or another.  The idea is people like to work somewhere that stands out from other workplaces - for what ever reason.

Well worth a listen and it got me thinking....

Liam