Categories
Communication Skills

Communication Styles in the Workplace: Goals vs. Flow

Article Contributed by Gary M. Jordan

As coaches, we spend a lot of time helping people understand the distinctions between the six different Perceptual Styles. Why? Because these distinctions are essential to understanding conflicts that arise in the workplace (and everywhere else, too).

A classic example is a corporate client we had that was in serious danger of bankruptcy. They hired a “turn-around” specialist who had the Goals Perceptual Style. His initial plan involved some severe “reductions in force” and the shutting down of all projects and lines of business that were not part of the organization’s core. The time frame he outlined was aggressive.

In explaining the Goals Perceptual Style, I often use a military analogy: If you tell a person with the Goals Style that the objective is to “take that hill”, they will immediately march forward, straight to the top of the hill, dispatching any resistance they meet along the way, and perhaps even sustain heavy losses to their own platoon in the process.

While the example is simplistic, the image conveys the Goals approach—direct, immediate, tenacious, determined, and fully focused on the objective. These qualities make such people a tremendous asset in a crisis, as they have the ability to see the most important objective and drive towards it, ignoring everything else.

This particular organization, however, had been around for over a hundred years and had a long history and tradition. Part of that tradition was placing a high value on people—an attitude of “taking care of our own”. The specialist failed to take these organizational values into account at the beginning of the process when he brought all the managers together and laid out his restructuring plan.

Three of the key managers involved had the Flow Perceptual Style. Those with this style are the keepers of history and tradition, and they understand the human dynamics involved in organizations better than any other Style. People with the Flow perspective see the impact on the human system that changes will create, and they know how to subtly use and influence the human community within an organization to mitigate, diminish or even block such changes.

This group of Flow managers began “doing their thing,” and before the specialist knew what was happening, he found himself in front of the company’s CEO defending and then finally backing down on the abrupt nature of his plans. He was shocked by this turn of events because he knew that unless the organization changed quickly, they would not survive. What he missed was that because of the power of the organization’s history and traditions, it could not survive if it tried to change so quickly.

This is a common Goals versus Flow conflict, and although the example is from a corporate client, this type of conflict can occur just about anywhere: in coaching relationships, in small business environments and even at home—anywhere these two styles interact.

People with the Goals Style step up to engage a problem and boldly and directly lay out a solution that will achieve the desired end, but ignore the impact and ripple effects it will have on people, the environment, and clients. People with the Flow Style see these impacts only too well and begin to refine, modify, discreetly block, or completely ignore those directives in order to soften the “damage”. The more Goals pushes, the more Flow backs away, and the more Flow backs away, the more Goals pushes.

As in all conflicts, of course, there is truth on both sides, and a solution lies in accepting that each view is limited.

In our example, the specialist had to accept that his ability to understand the human impact of his plan on the organization was limited, and that his plan would have a much greater chance of success if he listened to the managers’ advice on how to deal with its impact. The managers had to acknowledge the reality of the dire situation they were in—and accept that if they blocked all of the changes proposed, the organization would disappear.

Conflicts can be resolved by acknowledging the value that other Perceptual Styles bring to the table, and by accepting that one’s own understanding, without the input of others’, is both limited and incomplete.

About the Author:

Gary M. Jordan, Ph.D.: With a PhD and MA in clinical psychology, Gary Jordan is a partner at Vega Behavioral Consulting, Ltd, where he has been advising and mentoring people in all areas of life for the past 20 years. Gary is the visionary behind the Perceptual Style Theory, a revolutionary psychological assessment system that teaches people how to unleash their deepest potentials for success. For free information on how to succeed as an entrepreneur or coach, create a thriving business and build your bottom line doing more of what you love, visit www.ACIforCoaches.com and www.ACIforEntrepreneurs.com.

Categories
Communication Skills

Relationships and Communication: Transmitter vs. Receiver

Article Contributed by Gary M. Jordan

In Malcolm Gladwell’s latest book, Outliers, the author writes:

“Western communication has what linguists call a “transmitter orientation” – that is, it is considered the responsibility of the speaker to communicate ideas clearly and unambiguously. . . But Korea, like many Asian countries, is receiver oriented. It is up to the listener to make sense of what is being said.” p. 216

As far as the 6 innate Perceptual Styles go, there’s a block I’ve seen over and over again regarding communication between the Activity and Flow Styles, and I believe it can be explained by this concept.

Activity is clearly transmitter oriented, as people with this Style use plenty of contextual information to ensure that the receiver understands what’s being communicated. People with the Flow Style, on the other hand, use a subtle and nuanced combination of words that requires the listener to work to fully understand what is being conveyed.

Unfortunately, this difference in orientation is a set-up for conflict no matter which direction the communication is moving in.

When Activity is talking to Flow, Flow quickly interprets the meaning of the message and can become bored and/or offended by what they perceive as Activity’s excessive verbiage.

When Flow is talking to Activity, Activity misses much of the meaning that Flow intends because Flow’s nuanced choice of words is lost on Activity (who is waiting for context).  Activity often becomes irritated by what they perceive as partial communication by Flow.

In reflecting on the concept of communication orientation in relation to Perceptual Styles, I realized that there is a clear delineation among all six of the Perceptual Styles.

Three of the six—Activity, Vision, and Goals—are transmitter oriented, while the other three—Methods, Adjustments, and Flow—are receiver oriented. Within each group of three, each Perceptual Style uses the orientation a little differently and with different intent, but the orientation is the same.

Here’s how it breaks down by the Perceptual Style, based on the communication characteristics unique to that Style.

The Transmitter Orientations:

•    Activity makes sure to provide ample context when speaking and gives multiple examples through anecdotes that illustrate their point. This is to make sure that there is a solid connection and that ‘you are with me.’

•    Vision uses persuasive and inspiring language to paint a picture of what they want you to understand. This is to make sure that you are enthusiastic, enrolled and that ‘you buy into my perspective’.

•    Goals issues directives and commands and requires feedback in order to ensure that the listener clearly understands. This is to make sure that there is no ambiguity and that ‘you understand what I want you to do.’

The Receiver Orientations:

•    Methods delivers information in a matter-of-fact manner that requires the listener to put the data together themselves. This is because the correct conclusion is obvious to this Style and ‘you should draw the same conclusion I do’.

•    Adjustments
provides detailed, thorough, and precise information that displays the elegance of the topic but requires the listener to provide a context for its relevance. This is because ‘you should be intrigued by the sophistication and complexity of what I am sharing.’

•    Flow
speaks in generalities, employing subtly and nuance that allows the listener maximum leeway to respond in order to keep the conversation going, but this also requires the listener to declare preferences, needs, and wants. This is because ‘we’ve connected and you should care enough to understand my unstated intent.’

All of which underscores the fact that, in order to be effective communicators, we need to understand our own Perceptual Style (and how to make adjustments for each of the five other Styles).

About the Author:

Gary M. Jordan, Ph.D.: With a PhD and MA in clinical psychology, Gary Jordan is a partner at Vega Behavioral Consulting, Ltd, where he has been advising and mentoring people in all areas of life for the past 20 years. Gary is the visionary behind the Perceptual Style Theory, a revolutionary psychological assessment system that teaches people how to unleash their deepest potentials for success. For free information on how to succeed as an entrepreneur or coach, create a thriving business and build your bottom line doing more of what you love, visit www.ACIforCoaches.com and www.ACIforEntrepreneurs.com

Categories
Communication Skills

How Communicating With a Lack of Specificity is Sabotaging Results in Your Organization

Article Contributed by Skip Weisman

Communication is a catchall phrase for things that go wrong in companies and relationships. Unfortunately, the concept is too ambiguous to do anything constructive to fix it.

There are seven communication mistakes that lead to mis-understandings, and cause conflicts between co-workers, and bosses and their subordinates, which lead to low morale and toxic work environments.

They are called the “The 7 Deadly Sins of Organizational Leadership Communication.” This article will address the least understood and most common of these leadership communication sins, a “lack of specificity.”

The “Law of Specificity” states, “the level to which communication lacks specificity is the level to which individuals are required to become mind readers, guess and assume. We all know what happens we assumptions are made.

Three of the most common areas for non-specific communication, which will be addressed in this article, are:

  1. Lack of Specific Details
  2. Lack of Specific Direction
  3. Lack of Specific Meaning

Lack of Specific Details

This is one of the most regularly violated. It’s a simple as leaving out dates, times, and locations, etc. when making a request. Even when one believes they are being specific, often times they are not.
A recent client, who has embraced adding specificity to his communication, and has effectively integrated this strategy into his senior leadership team’s culture, sent me this e-mail recently:

“I will be in the office working on two projects Thursday and Friday. I can take a break to speak with you, though. To be specific, can you call me at 11:30am?”

He thought he was being specific. You may, or should notice, that although he was specific regarding the “time” he wanted a tele-coaching session, he forgot that he gave me two days to choose from.
This type of communication happens all the time. Double check your communication for specificity and ask for clarification when you feel you need it.

Lack of Specific Direction

Another client, a CEO, had a habit of moving things off his desk by putting them in his office manager’s in-basket. Because of his position, the office manager assumed that if he was giving her something “it must be important.”

Every time she would immediately stop what she was doing to work on the latest thing he had given her.
This seems like a very proactive assistant getting things done. The challenge is that it was causing stress and frustration for the office manager, as it prevented her from accomplishing her other priorities.

The problem was solved in 30-seconds by asking the CEO if everything he put in her in-box was an urgent priority requiring immediate attention. He said, “no,” that he was just trying to get stuff off his desk.

Moving forward the CEO began putting notes on items identifying the required level of urgency. This allowed the office manager to prioritize and schedule those items around her work without having to assume and mind-read.

Lack of Specific Meaning

A wife recently accused her husband of leaving the front door to their home “open” when he came home from appointments during the day. Her meaning for the word “open,” as it pertained to the front door of the home, and the husband’s meaning were found to be very different.

Upon further discussion it was learned the wife meant the door was not “locked” so as to seal the door to keep the cold winter air from seeping through the weather stripping. The husband’s meaning for an “open” front door was that the latch was not shut and the door was truly open so one could see outside.

Words have different meanings to different people in different contexts. Often times we assume the other person has our same point of reference. That is often not the case, causing misunderstandings and trust to break down.

A lack of specificity is just one of seven communication mistakes organizational leaders are making when interacting with their peers, direct reports and those they answer to such as shareholders and board members.

About the Author

Skip Weisman of Weisman Success Resources, Inc. of Poughkeepsie, NY (www.WeismanSuccessResources.com) works with organizational leaders to improve personnel, productivity and profits by helping them “Create a Champion Organization,” one that communicates effectively and takes action with commitment towards a shared compelling vision. His latest White Paper Report is “The 7 Deadly Sins of Organizational Leadership Communication” available free at www.HowToImproveOrganizationalCommunication.com

Categories
Communication Skills

Negotiation Checklist to Ensure a Successful Outcome

1.  Never negotiate with anyone who is not qualified to negotiate. If in doubt, ask your contact how they’ve handled a similar type of negotiating in the past.  Listen for names, dates and other details that will provide clues as to their level of responsibility.

2.  Never put things into writing unless you’re prepared to live with them. Once an item is put into writing, it becomes an anchor either for you or the customer. This is especially critical when negotiating with a professional buyer who will use anything put into writing as leverage.

3.  Always have room to give something the other person will deem as a perceived benefit. This is why it is so important to sell first and negotiate second. By selling first, you have the opportunity to ask questions and validate the key benefits for which the customer is looking.  During the negotiation phase, a customer will attempt to mask the benefits they desire, making it harder to determine exactly what the customer wants.

4.  Know when to walk away and be confident in doing so. To execute this requires the walk away point being shared in advance with others to ensure accountability is in place if and when this tactic has to be used.

5.  Know at least 5 things the other person wants that you can offer. Again, this is why it is so important to sell first and negotiate second. By doing so, it will be possible to know in advance of the negotiation phase what can be offered.

6.  Know at least 5 things you can say that will discount what the other person is offering (price not included). Never negotiate on price. Negotiate using other items, such as technical performance, operational efficiencies, etc. that will provide the leverage needed to avoid a price-oriented discussion.

7.  Always treat the other person with respect and dignity. Negotiate over things and services, not personal matters.  Never allow the negotiation to become personal in nature. This even applies to those situations where a close personal relationship may exist.  A quick rule to keep in mind:  If the relationship is so good, then why is anything being negotiated anyway?   If a negotiation does become personal in nature, do not hesitate to step away and arrange a follow-up time to resume negotiating.

8.  Never enter a negotiating process until both sides are clear on what is being negotiated. At the start of a negotiation session, it is appropriate to state exactly what is up for discussion. By doing this up front, it’s possible to avoid a waste of time and, more importantly, inadvertently negotiate things that don’t need to be discussed.

9.  Use the sell/buy approach first. Only move to a negotiating phase if you are unsuccessful closing the sale first.  Minimally, no negotiating should begin until the customer has rejected the close at least twice and the customer has provided you with at least one buying signal.

10.  Never offer up options until after you’re deadlocked on price and the customer has provided you with additional information. This includes providing you with a buying signal and credible benefits as to what the customer is looking for.

11.  Always put the negotiated outcome in writing immediately. Do not leave issues open for further discussion.  The person who puts the outcomes in writing first wins by being able to position things in the manner they want them to be.  Putting things into writing first also provides the opportunity to make one final modification with minimal risk.

12.  Upon reaching an agreement, thank the other party, but do not celebrate! Celebrating the outcome of a negotiation sends the signal to the other party that they have been taken advantage of. Sending this signal will jeopardize the long-term potential of the relationship.
About the Author:

Mark Hunter, “The Sales Hunter,” is a sales expert who speaks to thousands each year on how to increase their sales profitability.  For more information, to receive a free weekly email sales tip, or to read his Sales Motivation Blog, visit www.TheSalesHunter.com. You can also follow him on www.Twitter.com (TheSalesHunter), on www.LinkedIn.com (Mark Hunter), and on his Facebook Fan Page, www.facebook.com/TheSalesHunter.

Categories
Communication Skills

Communication With Your Virtual Assistant is Essential

Communication%20With%20Your%20Virtual%20Assistant%20is%20Essential.jpg

Pulling together a virtual team is vital to the success of any solo professional, but even more important is maintaining regular communication with your team. If you were all sitting together in a office environment, communication wouldn’t be such a big issue – you could just walk over and chat to your assistant. But working virtually you have to set aside that time on a regular basis to talk and update one another.

This is true for all of your team members, not just your virtual assistant, but your web designer, your graphic designer, your bookkeeper, or any other team member you have on board.

My clients are long-term regular clients, who are looking to develop a partnership with their virtual assistant. I maintain that communication by recommending that we have a weekly telephone call. I schedule it in as one of the first jobs I do when we start working together. We have our phone call on the same day/time each week, so it becomes second nature.

Some weeks we may only have a quick two-minute check-in call; other weeks it may last for an hour. The purpose of our call is:

– to get to know one another
– to keep each other up-to-date on work
– to discuss any issues that have arose during the week that need our attention
– to plan future projects

How we conduct our phone calls is just as important as the phone call itself, and to make the best possible use of our time on the call I draw up an agenda. We work through it just as if we were holding an in-person meeting. I type up the notes afterwards and send them to my client. The notes then form the basis for our workload during the week, and are updated to produce the Agenda for next weeks’ call.

Communication is so important in a virtual relationship that you do need a regular communication system in place.

Having used this method of communicating with my clients for several years I’ve found it to be one of the best ways of staying in touch.
As well as being able to discuss issues relating to their business we can get to know one another too – essential for any virtual team!
By following this simple system not only do my clients get the best possible value of my time, but they are able to grow their businesses too!