by Rob Biesenbach, author of ACT LIKE YOU MEAN BUSINESS In 25 years I’ve heard every excuse there is for not making communication a priority in an organization. And I’ve heard them from every source: indifferent leaders, risk-averse lawyers, sluggish communication departments – you name it. Here are some of the most common excuses. You've probably come across these in your own organization. Maybe you've even used them yourself a time or two. Here's why they don't hold water and how you can overcome them. 1. We Can Make It Better Do documents and publications in your company routinely get caught in a perpetual churn cycle, where people offer endless edits that add little in the way of real value? That may be the sign of a dysfunctional organization. After all, if people are fussing over every detail of a speech or web page for weeks or even months, how are they handling the really big decisions?

These so-called perfectionists mistake changes for improvements and activity for action. It’s a terrible waste of resources.

So tighten the review circle, identify the bottlenecks and cut them out of the process. Enlist a high-level ally if necessary. Enforce quick deadlines, demand fast turnaround on approvals and use the old, “If we don’t hear from you by [x date/time], we’ll assume it’s okay to go forward.”

2. We Don’t Have All the Information

When do we ever enjoy the luxury of having all the necessary facts at hand? Even in an age where the information spigot is wide open and always gushing data, it’s a rarity.

So don’t bother waiting. Come to terms with the fact that just about anything you communicate these days is out-of-date the instant you say it, send it or post it anyway. The best you can do is tell people what you know when you know it and promise to get them the rest of the information as soon as you get it.

Silence is not a good alternative. Like nature, gossip abhors a vacuum.

3. The Lawyers Won’t Let Us

Let me share a secret: a lawyer’s words are an opinion. It may be a well-informed opinion. Or not. Either way, it’s that one lawyer’s view based on his or her interpretation of the facts and the law. And his or her personal tolerance for risk.

Some lawyers are more conservative than others. Some have been burned badly by loose-lipped people. Some are just too busy to deal with it. Some are absolutely correct.

But you’ll never know unless you push them a little. Sit down and negotiate. Start from the perspective of “what can we say” instead of “what can’t we say.” Don’t accept “no comment” for an answer.

4. They’ll Ask a Question We Can’t Answer

So? Get over the fear of being labeled uninformed or out of the loop just because you can’t answer a question. Nobody is expected to know everything, and those who try create nothing but aggravation for themselves and those around them.

Here’s a simple answer for any situation where you’re unsure: “I don’t know.” Deliver it without apology or shame and people will admire your self-confidence. And what a delightful contrast to those who regularly demonstrate that they, too, don’t know – only with 20 times the words.

Of course, “I don’t know” should be followed quickly by, “But I’ll find out and get back to you.” (Which should then be followed by actually getting back to them!)

5. They’ve Already Been Told

Have they really? How and by whom? And if they have been told, do they understand? Don’t assume.

Everybody knows that a message requires lots of impressions before it sticks, but many leaders need to be reminded of this fact. They often have a blind spot when it comes to their own communications. They can’t bear the thought that people aren’t hanging on their every word.

So one email or presentation or web posting won’t cut it. It has to come through multiple channels and sources. Worried about sounding repetitive or people getting bored? Honestly, we should be so lucky to get that level of attention!

It's important to over-communicate, because people tend to under-listen.

6. We Don’t Have Time

Lack of time, of course, is the mother of all excuses, and certainly not exclusive to communications. The fact is, we make time for the things that are important. If someone isn’t taking the time to communicate, they don’t consider it a priority.

Or as Lao Tzu, the ancient father of Taoism, put it, “Time is a created thing. To say 'I don't have time,' is like saying, 'I don't want to.' "

Make the time to communicate. And don’t let fears, assumptions – or lawyers – get in the way.

Rob Biesenbach is a Chicago-based communications consultant, actor and author of the book ACT LIKE YOU MEAN BUSINESS: Essential Communication Lessons from Stage and Screen, published by Brigantine Media. A version of this article originally ran in Ragan’s PR Daily.
 

Are great leaders born or are they made?  In their book The Extraordinary Leader, Jack Zenger and Joe Folkman look at research on leadership and show not only that leadership can be developed, but that essential leadership skills are relatively few in number. Further, virtually no leaders possess all of these skills, nor do they have the same patterns of skills.  The researchers found that there are different styles of leadership, but they can all be great.  SOCIAL STYLE and the Extraordinary Leader is a new whitepaper from The TRACOM Group and Zenger Folkman.  It looks at how these two popular workplace models can be used in conjunction to help leaders succeed.

The whitepaper includes:

• An overivew of The Extraordinary Leader Model
• A discussion of how SOCIAL STYLE & Versatility contribute to Extraordinary Leadership
• Discussion of "Leader's Style" and "Follower's Style" issues
• Research on interpersonal skills and leadership performance.

This is the newest paper in the SOCIAL STYLE Connections Series loking at how SOCIAL STYLE complements and supports other popular workplace programs.  Others in this series look at The Five Dysfunctions of Teams, Situational Leadership, Crucial Conversations, SPIN Selling, Strengths Based Leadership and Emotional Intelligence.  

Click here to download other SOCIAL STYLE Connections whitepapers.

It seems like Tell Assertive people have a natural advantage when it comes to climbing the corporate ladder. TRACOM’s most recent research found that 70 percent of executives are either Driving or Expressive Style, compared to only 49 percent of individual contributors who have these Styles. Related to this, a 2009 study by researchers from the University of Minnesota and Baruch College found that 60 percent of top level executives displayed high levels of extroversion. Extroverts maintain and refresh their energy by being outgoing, talkative, and sociable. Introverts, on the other hand, replenish themselves by spending time alone, and tend to be more reserved and less outspoken. While there is not necessarily a direct correlation between introversion/extroversion and Ask/Tell Assertiveness, the two are similar.

While businesses may be biased toward selecting and promoting extroverts, new research from Harvard Business School shows that these businesses may be short changing themselves when they fail to promote individuals with more subdued styles. Further, this research highlights the importance of learning and practicing different behaviors, no matter what a leader’s natural behavioral style may be. In other words, leaders and those who aspire to leadership roles should learn and practice Versatility. 

In a forthcoming paper, Harvard researcher Francesca Gino argues that introverted leaders are more effective than extroverts in day-to-day teamwork, particularly when teams have members who are knowledgeable, proactive, and have their own ideas. In these circumstances she found that introverted leaders allowed team members to fully express themselves and listened carefully for new ideas, and as a result improved their teams’ performance. In contrast, extroverted leaders were more dominant, drove conversations, and were less receptive to new ideas, negatively affecting team performance. Gino cites examples of successful introverted leaders, such as Jeff Bezos (Amazon) and Bill Gates (Microsoft).  You can watch a video interview with Gino here.

One of the key takeaways from Gino’s research is that people of any style can learn to practice effective leadership skills. In her study, she found that when people were pushed to try different styles, they were able to learn the positive leadership characteristics of both introverts and extroverts. However, introverts may need to try harder since it is not their natural style to be dominant or outgoing. The good news is that these individuals can learn specific behaviors to help themselves be heard, and simple cues can help, such as raising a finger during meetings or saying someone’s name to get his or her attention.

With a 50+ year track record, Situational Leadership is a popular model for improving leadership effectiveness.  Originally developed by Dr. Paul Hersey and expanded by Ken Blanchard, the model describes four leadership styles, or strategies, that can be used when interacting with followers. TRACOM’s SOCIAL STYLE Model is a complementary tool when using Situational Leadership.  Style describes a framework for understanding the behavioral style and preferences not only of the followers, but of leaders themselves.

TRACOM has written a whitepaper that shows how SOCIAL STYLE & Versatility complements and enhances the Situational Leadership II Model.   The whitepaper explains how awareness of Style is fundamental for maximizing the impact during each step of the Situational Leadership process.
 

Download the SOCIAL STYLE & Situational Leadership whitepaper.

The book Crucial Conversations has struck a chord with many people. The authors give advice about how to turn potentially disastrous conversations into successes. A crucial conversation is one where stakes are high, opinions vary, and emotions run strong. In such conversations it is almost inevitable that at least one person will go into Backup Behavior. The book discusses a very similar concept called “style under stress,” and this is really the basis upon which the book builds by providing advice for engaging in crucial conversations. TRACOM has written a whitepaper that shows how SOCIAL STYLE & Versatility complements and enhances the Crucial Conversations model. In particular we describe how an understanding of Style contributes to managing difficult conversations in a way that is more likely to lead to positive outcomes. We discuss how practicing Versatility can lessen the occurrence of these types of conversations in the first place, and how Style and Versatility can be used during the much more common everyday variety of conversations.

Download our Crucial Conversations Whitepaper.

A recent article by Rebecca Schalm, an HR columnist at Troy Media, considers the idea of emphasizing a person’s natural strengths versus building up weaknesses in an effort to become more effective. The article is available here. 

As Schalm points out, this strength-based approach has become a common philosophy in personal and organizational leadership. This is not surprising in an era when people are encouraged to become their own “brand.” And certainly it’s easier to quickly label someone as “a numbers guy”, “a marketing whiz”, or “a turnaround specialist” than to make the effort to fully understand the nuances and intricacies of ourselves and others. 

But emphasizing strengths is almost always going to limit a person’s potential. Particularly because the higher a leader advances, the less time they spend using functional skills (sales, accounting, etc.) and more time on things such as building consensus, motivating others and establishing effective teams. 

Schalm goes on to identify a person’s ability to recognize their shortcomings and develop strategies to address them as a key factor in long-term success. Such self-awareness is a fundamental aspect of Emotional Intelligence (EQ), a frequent topic of this blog. Of course working hard on things we do poorly is not typically as much fun as applying our strengths, but it is necessary for improving our overall capabilities, and even our EQ. 

Another insight Schalm makes is the importance of balancing self-reflection with objective input when identifying strengths and weaknesses. TRACOM’s own research has shown that individuals frequently rate their own behaviors and EQ skills different than the people with whom they work. An over-reliance on self-reflection often leads to significant blindspots. TRACOM offers a whitepaper for those interested in the topic of Self-Perception vs. Third-Person Feedback.

What are your thoughts? What is the right balance of using strengths and developing weaknesses?