I’m all conferenced out…(so it's a long post!)

It seems to be conference week for me – which is good given that I rode in an event at the weekend and my brain is definitely best switched to receive mode… There's an even longer one I'm doing on Saturday so don't bother trying to get any sense on me for most of next week!

On Tuesday I was at an event on brands and employees – where I learnt the new phrase “brandwashing” – meaning to bombard staff with brand messages in the hope of creating zombie-like ‘brand advocates’.

What struck me was the fact that there seems to be a shortage of practical examples often at these events.

For example someone talked about the phenomenon that is Magners Cider (if you’re in the UK you’ll know what I’m on about. Five years ago, the brand didn’t exist. But by careful market analysis and patient marketing the brand has been driven to redefine the category). So if marketers can create a brand from scratch, can’t HR people create employer brands from a zero baseline?

I’m sure they can, but the examples don’t always come out at conferences which are often long on theory and short on real ideas that you could actually apply in your own workplace.

By contrast, at the Melcrum Engagement conference yesterday morning, Mark Blundell of McDonalds talked about the practical steps that they are taking to retain and motivate staff. He illustrated his story with press cuttings and told a fascinating story about how they are creating a diverse workforce. He also gave some thoughts about how they use online communities to build the confidence of their staff (their model is that confident staff are better performers but many of their employees enter the workforce with development needs – needs that the company invests in).

Annette Ware of Vodafone kicked off with a couple of really strong stories about her personal life as a commuter – a great way of drawing you in. And then she backed it up with lots of fascinating detail on how they use they use survey data and research.

Debbie Whitaker from Standard Charted blew me away with her use of data to test her hypothesis that line managers made a difference. – she’s definitely going to be a case study when I refresh the line manager session of Black Belt!

And it shows in the questions that people ask. Mark Blundell was asked dozens of questions on topics that ranged from the theoretical through to some quite detailed practical points. Ditto with Annette – lots of “how did you…?” questions.

As my chum Monika Stafford would say, they showed that people were actively processing in their minds what they are being told – rather than switching off at slide 2.

Ironically, when I got home last night I found an email from the organiser of a conference that I’d chaired a few months ago containing an analysis of the delegate feedback. Guess what…people said “give us more practical examples please!!!!!!!!! – enough of the theoretical waffle!”.

I’ve been reading an excellent book which uses the development of psychiatry as its backdrop…It explains how, at public lectures, the great founders of the profession posited theories but supported them through case studies and demonstrations. OK, Freud made up a lot of his case studies (allegedly) but at least there was a recognition that we learn about our world through practical testing of hypotheses.

I think I've said on here before that as a profession we need to be more critical.  I'm all for a bit of free-thinking and energy but Sue quotes someone who always used to say “In God we trust – everyone else brings data…”

Liam

Comments

[Fiona Gibson]

I think this post just highlights some of the many other inputs into IC that we need to be aware of: psychology, branding, data mining (and translation into what that means) and journalistic skills to get those case studies. BB part deux?!

[Liam]

Funnily enough I was just about to blog again on this subject.

When is someone going to do some proper longitudial studies of how IC makes a difference over time? Or maybe provide some references for their wilder assertions?

I've seen a couple of 'reports' this week, which I won't name out of a sense of diplomacy and good manners that are frankly rubbish - with a shockingly poor level of analysis behind them.

I know I love to pontificate on subjects on which I know nothing - but can't we get into the habit of testing each others' evidence. When Sue and did our reserach into competencies - the only person who gave us a trot around the park was Christine Daymon from Bournemouth University.

I think we stood up to a bit of examination.

Anyone who stayed at school to 18 should know how to test a hypothesis and challenge evidence - you don't need a PhD to ask questions about the assertions that people make...

In fact, I think I'm going to start making a pain of myself by asking people to provide the evidence...

lIAM