Your Mouth is Moving, But What Are You Saying?

Our communication is comprised of much more than the words we speak – and our nonverbal cues often give us away if we are being inconsistent with what’s coming out of our mouth. We think of Albert Mehrabian’s 55/38/7 rule (55 percent nonverbal, 38 percent vocal, seven percent verbal) for nonverbal communication. However, it has since been critiqued and challenged based on the nature of the study (and the specific scenarios it was measuring: when the nonverbal channel and the verbal channel are incongruent). Thus, his research is indeed useful when incongruency is at play (e.g., a grimacing face doesn’t equate to the “I’m fine” vocalization).

This helpful insight aside, what about all the other scenarios we witness each – and every – day? The big presentation, the influential leader, the flustered colleague on the other end of the phone, the <insert one of the many other scenarios here>? It’s no surprise our verbal and nonverbal communication play a big role. Rather than focusing on the minute detail of how much influence each communication bucket has, let’s focus on actionable insights for communicating what you set out to communicate. That’s the bottom line, right?

Set your intent.
Is your intent to educate, to motivate, or to influence? Depending upon what you’re aiming to achieve, you need to adjust both your verbal and nonverbal communication practices. (Ah, yes, this comes back to expectations. Let’s not have individuals leave the room guessing.)

Decide how you want to be perceived.
Let’s say I’m aiming to influence (my intent). I need acceptance on new policies being implemented and I want buy-in, as well as understanding, from my audience. I’m also an executive at the company.

Do I:

• Read my PowerPoint (or notes), slide by slide, and ask if there are questions at the end (think Mr. Roboto)?

or

• Do I set the expectations for the meeting, maintain my agenda (also in front of attendees), and simply use the PowerPoint, or notes, as a reference?

Which will make you think I actually believe what I’m saying, and am bought into the information being shared? Simple.

(Having a trusted colleague or confidant to run things by – i.e., your presentation – will help you not miss these important communicative measures.)

Consider all levels.
To whom are you speaking? What language are you using? Speak to – not above – your audience. We call this “inflated vocabulary.” Does your language get your point across clearly, or does it confuse your audience further? I’m not saying dumb-down your messaging, but make it easy-to-remember and use language that causes understanding, not confusion. (Yes, as a leader/senior executive, you need to be knowledgeable and intelligent, but it’s typically the manager’s job to teach and train people – why non-executive managers are so important!! Thus, know what you’re talking about, but speak in a manner that allows each and every person to take away your message with profound impact.)

Consider multiple learning forms.
Some of us our visual learners – others are auditory, others reading/writing, and yet others, kinesthetic. If your intent is to influence, should you not want to influence each and every person in the room? Here are some guidelines for varying styles that can be incorporated into any presentation – especially those you find particularly important.

Visual Learners: Prefer to see information and need to visualize relationship between ideas. [Provide charts and graphics – show relationships between various points.]

Auditory Learners: Prefer to hear information rather than reading it, or seeing it displayed. [Give listeners a chance to repeat your points back to you – or someone else. You can do this through asking questions and calling on the audience for answers.]

Reading/Writing Learners: Learn best when reading and writing – interacting with text is more powerful for them than hearing or seeing images.
[Provide quizzes or allow them to write down what they learned. An easy way to do this: provide handouts.]

Kinesthetic Learners: Hands-on, experiential learners. They learn best by doing.
[Role playing – if the environment allows it and/or facilitate a way for them to write down what you’re saying.]

Next week I’ll discuss multiple ways you can leverage your body language to support your presence – the presence you want to exude – particularly in our digital age.

Remember: There's a Person Behind that Screen!

It’s been a burning question – and coincidentally one I have been hearing more from HR generalists at growing tech companies. “How do you create an effective virtual team and digital culture?”

Expectations.

Set them. Even if you have a laissez-faire approach to management, your team needs structure. (In fact, structure can help you be more effective with your day.) Expectations get a bad rap… But think about quarterly/annual reviews. It’s unfortunate we structure these formalized reviews in such a way that enable a once-in-a-while conversation to assess – and often critique – performance. Instead, shouldn’t performance, and correlated expectations, be fluid? If your employee receives a lackluster review, but you never speak with them about their professional shortcomings, do you think that’s their weakness, or yours?

Expectations are all the more essential with a virtual team. There’s something about being able to see a person each day (or even, each week). That eye-to-eye lock, the handshake, the 3-D elements that make us human. Yet, as I shared with you last week, this whole virtual management thing can be done (and done well). Our technology has caught-up to enabling virtual employees. We just need to know how to effectively use it.

As an expectations example, and to demonstrate the ripple effect it has, let’s say it’s important for you to hear from your virtual team members during Monday-morning meetings. Unfortunately, you’re left feeling frustrated because the virtual members often don’t contribute to the conversation.

Ask yourself:

1. Are you using technology conducive to their inclusion?
2. Did you convey that you want each virtual member to speak-up? In what capacity?
3. Have you shared the value with your on-site team members that there is in hearing from their virtual colleagues? (And even more essential – have you requested the onsite members be cognizant, and considerate, of those “present but not physically present”?)

If you’re frustrated by an absence of engagement, it’s probable the situation isn’t a one-way street.

Setting expectations, especially with thorough communication, results in behavioral change – and it’s those behaviors that construct (or reconstruct) culture. With expectations, there’s minimal ambiguity; this aids in communication efforts as well as accountability.  

Transparency.

Is the ethos of your team to be candid, forthright, and truly honest? Technological advances allow for just that. Take pay grades, for example. Historically this is a very sensitive topic. But what if it wasn’t anymore? What if there was a resource for earnings, and calculated measurements of justification (e.g., education, experience, etc.).  

Transparency doesn’t have to start with such grand gestures i.e., above... But, it should be omnipresent. We have social tools, chat functions, video technologies, and the like, to communicate. Is there a new release? Is there a policy change? How will that information be disseminated? Coming up with guidelines (yes, the notorious expectations) for how information is communicated, and how often it’s communicated, will ensure consistent transparency, even amidst rapid change.

Your People.

I realize you may not always be able to choose your team. However, when you can, take this into consideration: effective virtual team members typically have higher-than-average emotional intelligence, writing aptitude, and strong communicative tendencies. Yes, there are always some challenges (hence this list of guidelines) but this type of individual will likely not cause a lot of virtual headache.

Open Door Policy + Trust.

Without fostering trust among your team you’ll have a much harder time achieving resolve (and results). Practice a true open-door, honest exchange, policy. Actively put forth effort to engage the virtual team member.

A couple ideas:

• Ask them for a 60-second tour of their work space so the team can envision what their day-in-the-life looks like.
• Implement a five-minute “pre-business” discussion about anything other than work, on weekly calls.
• Initiate the distribution of surveys to measure team inclusion.
  • If the team feels disconnected, or there’s a defined line between the in-group and the out-group, change is needed!

It’s particularly important to significantly invest in your team early on in working together. That’s when the foundation is built for trust, rapport, and an exchange of ideas. Put aside your task-based leadership brain (temporarily), and engage the relationship-based leader!

There are a lot of helpful technological tools we have access to; but have you ever thought how you use them may affect the intended outcome? “Is this a Skype, Slack, Video chat, email, or phone type of conversation?” I recently published a cheat sheet for one of the largest privately held companies in the U.S. on the topic. Interested? I’ll gladly share it with you.

[OH! I almost forgot. Make sure people know how to use the technology that you’ve implemented. Whether that’s through company-wide training or one-on-one sessions for those who need a little time to adjust, do it without anyone needing to ask. Having resources at an arm’s reach will not only support adoption, it will encourage a culture that lacks apprehension to learn new things.]

Age of the Standing Desk & the Virtual Team

As I stand here, writing this blog, I’ve realized how normalized the standing-desk phenomenon has become. I remember interning in undergrad. The back closet/office/ice box did not afford such a stylish leisure! But, now we know why standing is helpful for our health and why sitting all day is “out.”

Similarly, virtual teams did not exist prior to the geographical expansion of companies – this big booming occurrence of globalization, paired with technological advances. The digital culture isn’t going away – in fact it will only continue to rewrite office dynamics as we know them.

So. How do we get virtual teams right?

Teams comprised of individuals in varying locations continue to rise. I repeat: they aren’t going away. If you want to scale your company but think you have all the talent you need in your backyard, good luck to you. Our virtual world of laptops, wi-fi, chat tools, video, etc., allow people to work from anywhere (and be effective).

Benefit to employees?

• Flexibility.

• Global interaction with colleagues.

• Efficiency (nothing says “kill the productivity,” to me, like a shared space of noisy banter).

Benefit to companies?

• Spend more money on the talent, not the real-estate.

• Empower employees by trusting them. (Hip-hip hooray for the empowerment culture!)

Hold the phone: When we re-write the rules of workplace interaction, there will also be downsides, unquestionably. Client expectations can fail, tasks get lost in the ether, and workers feel overwhelmed by the number of communication forms. [Uh, Sally, I sent that to you… I think it was via Skype – no actually email… Hm, no, actually slack?]

Without rules of virtual engagement, expectations can slip through the cracks. We all make the joke: the hardest part of our “Gotomeeting” is getting it to work before our call begins. When people don’t show, there’s background noise, reception is poor, or you’re half-engaged, problems will arise.

However – and virtual grumps pay attention(!) – well-managed dispersed teams can actually outperform those that share office space. They can also increase productivity, according to an Aon Consulting report, by 43 percent.  

If you’re still a mis-believer in how successful a virtual team can be, I’ll help you through (but not until next week). Stay tuned.

What's the Difference? Leadership + Management

This week I was asked to explain the difference between leadership and management, and this is a fair question. Often, I use “leadership” and “management’ as interchangeable terms. Yet, there have been ample disagreements about the definition of each over the years, and the innate variance the terms hold. Thus, it seems helpful to reveal some key differences, and explain why the pairing of the two is most helpful to achieve our interpersonal, team, and corporate goals.

I should note, first and foremost, we are not comparing apples to apples here. Leadership is a notion, practice, term, ideology, etc., that has many spins, approaches, and theoretical concepts. In fact, “There are almost as many definitions of Leadership as there are persons who have attempted to define the concept.” (Stogdill, 1974)

To further make this point, let’s take just two definitions of Leadership (from a lengthy list):

• Leadership is the process of influencing the activities of an organized group toward goal achievement (Rauch & Behling, 1984, p.46)
• Leadership is “the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organization…” (House et al., 1999, p. 184)

OK, back to our core premise: what is the difference between leadership and management?

Managers are concerned with doing things right. Their primary goal is to be efficient, and to make their teams efficient. Conversely, leaders are concerned with doing the right things. In this context, the “right things” means “to be effective” i.e., effectiveness.

Does this mean there’s no crossover? Of course not. But understanding the core can help us be conscience about the rhetorical nuances. (And their undeniable synergy, regardless of the mutual exclusivity.) It may be useful for you to know if your company places more importance on management or leadership. Further, you may want to understand if, as a manager, you will also be awarded credit for leading, not just managing.

While the core of these terms differs, this does not mean a single person cannot possess the skills to be both a manager and a leader.  Great minds have differentiated between the two – from core processes to intended outcomes. But rather than picking apart what each isn’t, let me give you some distinct differences for your own comprehension.

In the spirit of simplicity, I liken management and leadership to one of my runs in Central Park. Leadership is the long game – that is what’s going to get me home. My intended path, my pre-determined endurance, or the element-appropriate workout gear.  Management is what I do to test my agility, make sure my ankles don’t turn on rocks, and ensure I’ve taken the steps to prevent a muscle strain.

If my analogy didn’t do it for you…

Leaders influence relationships. There’s a defined line between leaders and followers – leaders are followed joyfully. Leaders seek change, and intentions are often very clear. Leaders are often charismatic, insightful, motivational, well-spoken, and practice truthfulness.

Managers tend to identify as authority figures and it's not uncommon to associate subordinates with managers. Management is correlated with a defined goal: team members are responsible for the selling of goods or services. Metrics are recorded and KPIs are crafted. Managers and their teams are also very closely correlated. It is rare to see a manager who has very little working knowledge of the task for which their subordinate is responsible. The idea of management is to provide a connected link, resource, and subject matter expert to the subordinate. 

Point is this: they're different, but I'd argue you need both (and that they work best in tandem). Why do you think a manager may be more effective with leadership traits, or vice versa? Understanding this for ourselves, and for the environments in which we work, will only lead to self-realization and further contentment among those we serve.