Black Belt Dojo

Look at it another way

This morning I showed the Black Belt group this video. It's actually an advertisement for an Argentinian political candidate, but it's also a thought-provoking example of how something can look entirely different, when viewed from two different perspectives.

I first learnt about it thanks to someone on the recent Change comms Masterclass. They had used it with their exec. team to help them see the importance of looking at things from the employee perspective, not assuming that their view of the world was shared by everyone else.

See what you think.

Sue

Do you come from a land down under?

(Hope other people remember the Men at Work track, otherwise that title probably makes no sense whatsoever!)

Just a quick note to say you might have noticed we now have a Black Belt Australia section of the blog, so you can hop between the UK and Australia sites whenever you want, to catch up on what's happening with all things internal comms on opposite sides of the world.

I'm typing this at Cranfield whilst prepping for our first session today. There's a Tai Chi (apologies - I've probably spelt that wrong, but you get the gist) session going on outside, so bizarrely I have the sounds of people humming in the background. 

Actually I'm also relieved to read in the news this morning that there were various earthquakes across the UK in the night. I was woken up (and NOTHING wakes me up!) by the bed shaking and half started wondering if Cranfield was haunted before falling straight back to sleep...

Sue

No kidding huh?

Sometimes I regret subscribing to Google Alerts.

You sign up to be told whenever Google thinks something interesting has been said in whatever area you ask it to look.  At first I went mad and signed up for alerts about all sorts of things including my favourite bike rides and cakes (I'll explain why one day).

After being swamped with my very own personalised junk mail I deleted a few of the alerts and just stuck with 'Internal Communications' as my preferred category.

Although this does throw up some odd things - including a great deal of really geeky stuff about the inner workings of Cisco equipment - there are a few gems in there.  Including one that at first I found a bit irritating.

It was a link to a piece of promotional stuff from the Irish operations of one of the biggest PR agencies.  It breathlessly told me that their latest survey has revealed:

"that employees rank trust and open, honest internal communications as major contributors to their job satisfaction, organisational commitment and decisions whether to stay with or leave their employers. In Northern Ireland 38 percent and in RoI 32 percent of those surveyed expected to leave their current employment in the foreseeable future, while an overwhelming 74 percent of all Northern Ireland and 80 percent of RoI interviewees indicated that an improvement in communications would positively influence them to remain with their employers."

Rather snottily I thought "Well knock me down...I never would have guessed that..". 

But then again, there's a good justification for repeating this stuff. 

Many of us have seen the work of companies like Watson Wyatt and Mercers over the last few years trying to prove the linkage between good communication and employee retention, effort and advocacy.  For years all we had to point to were hoary old case studies such as the Sears model but now people are getting closer to showing causal linkages.

Yet - much of this evidence still seems to be unknown outside our field.  It's worth repeating this stuff simply because so few people actually know it.  I couldn't put a figure on it, but I wouldn't mind betting that a significant proportion of managers still doubt the vale of good communications apart from those involved in dishing out orders.

I think the sad truth is that this stuff is still news to a great many people...sometimes we're too clever for our own good!

Liam

Drunk in charge

Once upon a time I thought there was little risk attached to going on-line when drunk.

I've changed my mind a little recently after a couple of sessions on ebay (does anyone need to buy 1000 glow in the dark fiberglass Buddha garden sculptures?) and frosty email exchange with an ex-friend and a great deal of spam from life insurance companies.

And in my new sober state I notice that drunken internetting is alive and well in the blogosphere.

There seem to be two sorts of intoxicated bloggers  - the hip shooter and the obscure Oscar Wilde.

The first one is the more annoying - it's the bloke (they do seem to be men mostly) who dip into a blog, half read it and then post the first thing that comes into their head.  Often the posting agrees with an imaginary point that no one has made or takes violent exception to an entirely fictional argument.

You know when you take a stool at an airport bar only to accosted by the drunk who is still rambling his way through the conversation he was having with the previous occupant of your seat?  That's what it feels like.

You won't catch me naming names or finger pointing but we've all seen it somewhere.  You know the sort of thing - in the middle of discussion about team cascades someone weighs in with a  furious objection to using flash on the front page of an intranet.  Rather reminds you of the ancient uncle who wakes up half way through Christmas afternoon and starts banging on about Michael Cane in Zulu when everyone else was discussing the price of children's shoes. (Micheal Cane is much more fun but you know if join in that conversation is will quickly meander off somewhere even duller than Start-Rite vs Clark's finest)

But the drunken blogger probably swings through a range of emotions - I suspect they either slip over to MyFace to tell their friends that they really really love them.  They might get a little lecherous later on but I wouldn't know where you get to do that on line!

Or they turn a bit nasty (see Sue's previous post) - they go and say stroppy things and launch personal attacks (I learned a new phrase this week - thanks Lele - Blogstorming - when loads of people start beating up on someone or something like Dell's exploding batteries or Kryptonite's dodgy locks).  Sadly - there doesn't seem to be an on-line equivalent of night in the cells for these people.

But we mustn't forget the on-line Oscar Wilde.  They're the people who go to all the trouble of writing a comment, getting past the typepad verification if only to say "Frankly my dear...." or "Sic tansit darling" or something equally obscure. 

Check out most of the treads on the BBC or your local newspaper - there will be at least one of these posts in each thread.

In real life you see them standing harmlessly in the middle of the high street at closing time waving their arms and reciting Catullus' love poems in the original Latin.

They seem nice, but are a real pain when you try to get past on your way home or to the kebab shop.

So I'm starting a campaign for an end to binge postings.  I'm asking my local supermarket to put up the price of booze for anyone who looks likely to own a PC and who might be tempted to start late night blogging. 

It's for their own good.

Liam

Is this what we're afraid of?

For the first time ever, this weekend I reported a blog comment to a moderator. It was one of 805 comments relating to a post on The Guardian's travel site.

I found the original piece by chance on a list of 'most read' articles. Posted on February 14th, it was the start of a new weekly blog by a guy called Max. 19, about to travel around India and Thailand for two months and planning to blog about his experiences.

I read the post and didn't think too much about it .... but then found myself far more interested in the comments.  There were LOADS. 475 in fact - posted between 11am (an hour after the original article was posted) and the end of the day, when the Guardian closed down the thread.

I started off being fascinated by how much more interesting the conversation going off in the comments was than the article itself. (Thinks 'ah - good old social media - this is what it's about - creating dialogue, giving people a voice!').

But as I read further, I started getting quite sickened by the comments being posted. Someone had googled the guy's name and found a Guardian article from some years ago written by someone with the same surname. So then everyone assumed person has only been given his blog because his dad works at the Guardian. Series of comments folllowed about nepotism, terrible writing, awful concept in the first place, 'posh people' foisting their views on us, The Guardian losing touch with its readership ... Some really acidic, personal comments directed at Max, a fair few removed or edited by moderators.

The next day, the Guardian's travel editor wrote a post in response.  (It turns out Max's dad wasn't a Guardian employee at all - just a freelancer who writes the odd article for them) 330 comments later, the debate was stopped. That was after several people had called for the editor's resignation, lambasted Max's dad -who dropped into comment - for his terrible error of judgment in allowing his son to write the blog and had a go at the moderator who broke the news that comments were being closed at 7pm because they didn't have enough moderators to cope on the evening shift.

It was like watching a fire spreading out of control. Maybe the blog wasn't a great idea and mistakes were made, but I coudn't believe the vitrolic, personal comments it provoked, the harshness of the response (fire the travel editor? Really? Because of one blog entry?) and the way rumours turned into 'facts' and were then very hard to undo. Somebody started a Facebook group. Someone else set up a spoof blog. It was picked up on various message boards and forums. It seems word spread virally as people started sending the link to the article around. Apparently someone even listed it on wikipedia as an example of nepotism at one point - although I've had a look and I can't see it now.

Two of the biggest concerns I hear in our Black Belt social media debates are around a) the loss of control and b) what happens if people say things we'd rather they didn't?  So, some questions:

1. Is this an example of the nightmare scenario we're afraid of?
2. Is there something about an on line environment that allows fires to be stoked very quickly and lead comments to get harsh/personal?
3. What was it about this that lit the blue touch paper and started the fire spreading, and could/should the Guardian have done anything differently?

Sue

Another nippy Black Belter

What is it about Black Belt that seems to attract people with cats or an interest in running?

The latest runner in our midst was Helen from the Jan BB and she's off to do the London Marathon!

Her email begging for sponsorship follows:http://www.justgiving.com/helenmccarthy

As you know, I'll be running the London Marathon on April 13th. I will be doing it on behalf of a charity that a friend of my running buddy works for, called the Charlie Waller Memorial Trust.

Charlie Waller suffered from depression and killed himself at the age of 28. His family set up this charity to help raise awareness and reduce the stigma of depression, and also to help sufferers and their families cope with this horrible illness.

I've committed to raise 2000 pounds (which, frankly, I think will be more difficult than running 26 miles). If you would like to help, I have an account on justgiving. As UK taxpayers, the government also gives an extra 28% in tax.

http://www.cwmt.org

Thank you very much for your support.

Regards

Helen

Seems fair enough to me!

Liam

This really is too much...

There are times when I despair of my professional association the CIPR.  Awarding London Mayoral candidate Boris Johnson with an award for excellent comunications is the latest.

Non-brits may not know much about our favourite political buffoon.  He's a bright chap who edits the conservative political journal the Spectator and is a Member of Parliament.  Boris can always be counted upon for a witty bon mot and we've all sniggered at his sideswipes at the more outlandish examples of political correctness. 

However, he does often go too far.  I imagine a lot of black people haven't seen the funny side of his quaint language at times and on more than one occasion he has stupidly gone too far and been forced to apologise in public.  The people of Liverpool are still smarting from his comments about them.

And as a candidate for the post of London Mayor his comments about communications professionals make the CIPR's decision to honour him seem like an odd choice.  He recently made some wild claims about the number of professional involved in communications on behalf of the greater London authority and the Mayor's office.  His point was less about over-staffing but more about the inappropriateness of employing communications professionals at all.

Given that a public body can achieve a great deal through public information and education it was a cheap remark that played on widespread misunderstandings about the role of communicators in modern society.

And hey presto - the CIPR goes and honours him! 

Result?  Howls of protest... puzzlement...

I'll admit to not liking Johnson's politics but I have no objection to the CIPR honouring political figures.  Indeed the past honour to my old boss Lord Bell was appropriate and wise.  And I'm proud that people like Desmond Tutu have been recognised as well

But surely the role of a professional body is to stand up for professionals and professional standards.  How can this square with celebrating a man who makes racism acceptable and rejoices in his denegration of our craft?

Maybe it was a great excuse for a jolly lunch.  Hoorah and pip pip!

Liam

A mini reminder

Whenever I talk about avoiding jargon/ businessspeak/ corporate gobbledegook (and a couple of other obvious but less polite terms), I refer to what I call the 'red mini moment.'

By which I mean ... you know when you're thinking about buying a new car?  You start pondering what car to buy, and then you think 'hmm, I really fancy a red mini' (for example).  Have you ever noticed that from then on, you start seeing red minis everywhere?  "Blimey!" you think to yourself. "I never realised there were so many red minis on the road".

Ah, but there were - it's just that you weren't looking for them. Now you've put a sign up there in your head saying 'interested in red minis', suddenly your brain starts pointing them out for you, where previously it wouldn't have bothered.

That's my theory on corporate jargon, too. It creeps up on us. We start using it without even noticing. But give yourself a nudge now and again to remind yourself that this kind of language is cringe-worthy, meaningless and provokes much rolling of the eyes amongst employees, and your brain starts noticing the next time you think about using it.

So, here's a red mini moment for you. I was just hunting around for some prime examples of mind-numbing corporate speak and came across Nick Selby's blog and his '2007 BullshIT awards - the top ten tech-flack quotes of the year.'  Have a read, have a good laugh, and then repeat after me: "I must not talk/write meaningless rubbish in my communication ...."

Sue

TLAs

That's three letter acronyms to you. We love them, don't we? I've got used to not being able to understand what people are talking about some of the time in my in-house line manager workshops.

It starts with the introductions  ("I'm Paul, and I'm the HORM for the CDT section of the AMR") and goes from there. By the time I've gone around a room of 20 people and they've all introduced themselves in similar terms, people are usually laughing at themselves a fair bit.  But back in the office, they wouldn't really notice it.

TLAs are often useful shorthand, although sometimes I raise my eyebrows at people's compulsion to use them at every conceivable opportunity, often when there's no need. And as someone who is often walking into a totally new company to run a workshop, I get a feel for what it must be like to be a new person. I could either spend the entire time asking questions, or accept that I won't know what people are talking about and let it go over my head.

Some TLAs are quite amusing. What are your favourites?  Back in my Royal Mail days our senior leadership team in Personnal (as HR was back in those days, you know!) was rather unfortunately called the Personnel Management Team.  At Barclays I remember having a fit of giggles in a meeting when I was talking through a comms plan and said "then we need to get the HORSes talking to the ARMs.' (Heads of Regional Sales, Area Retail Managers). 

Anyone want to offer any personal favourites?

Of course, in an entirely different category is text speak. Sort of TLAs ('two/three letter abbreviations', maybe?) of a totally different kind, but just as alien to those who don't speak it.   And loved by Generation Yers. (This post from Les Potter made me laugh - look at the number 1 reason why his students don't blog). Although help is at hand - I just found a website that actually translates text speak into plain English. Excellent.

Of course, the danger of TLAs is that they can cause blocks and misunderstandings. Take the case of one of my much-loved NTL team (yes Wendy, it's you!) who was convinced one of our employees had a bit of a crush on her because of the affectionate emails he kept sending.  Eventually she got around to asking in our team meeting, "LOL does stand for 'lots of love', doesn't it?'

lol! (take it whichever way you like - hey, it's Valentine's day!)

Sue

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater

It's quite a bug bear of mine that, as a profession, we often seem to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Activities are deemed good/bad, in/out - a bit like those lists you get in women's magazines about 'what's hot and what's not.'  Some examples would be:

• IN - strategy                         OUT - tactics
• IN - engagement                    OUT - raising awareness, giving
                                                     information
• IN - consultancy & coaching     OUT - crafting and drafting

Nothing against those things on the left. I'm all for them. But we have this nasty habit of  assuming that because one thing is 'in', the other thing has to be 'out. There is no in between. 

I think I'm a reasonably competent communicator (no corporate plugging intended) but I still find myself questioning whether the solutions I'm recommending are too 'tactical'. Or feeling guilty because I happen to like writing. Or wondering whether people will look down their noses at a conference if I'm not speaking about scenarios that could genuinely be termed examples of engagement.

Then I give myself a good slap and remind myself not to fall into the 'either/or, in/out' trap, because the things on BOTH sides are important.

• Tactics for the sake of tactics ('we have a newsletter because it's al ways been there') - thumbs down.  But strategy on its own goes nowhere. Strategy sets the direction and should drive - surprise - what tactics to use. Tactics are how strategy gets brought to life.
• Consultancy and coaching - yep, great, all for it. But crafting and drafting too - one of the most important skills valued by CEOs in Melcrum's recent research into what CEOs want from their internal comms people. Their companies have complex strategies, they want people to understand them, they need comms people with good messaging, crafting and drafting skills to make them simple, memorable and understandable.
• Engagement. Yes, if you want people to change attitudes and behaviours, you need to choose tactics from the top of the escalator which involve people. If you just need them to understand something, having a conversation with them will probably work fine. If you just need to raise awareness about something, telling them is OK. Honestly. And sometimes, 'just telling people' something - well - can be incredibly difficult and takes skill and persistence. Ask anyone who communicates with dispersed employee groups who hardly ever get together face to face, have no access to a computer and never stop anywhere for long enough to read anything.

Just wanted to put my two penneth in on this one.

Sue

PS I had to smile at the message that came up from istockphoto.com when I bought the baby photo:  "Purchase small child." !