For Your Approval

The power of print

Had to share this great observation about print as a technology, by Walter Isaacson, President and CEO of the Aspen Institute and former CEO of CNN and managing editor of Time. It's from an interesting book called "What Are You Optimistic About? Today's Leading Thinkers on Why Things Are Good and Getting Better," edited by John Brockman:

"I am very optimistic about print as a technology. Words on paper are a wonderful information-storage, retrieval, distribution, and consumer product . . . Imagine if we had been getting our information delivered digitally to our screens for the past 550 years. Then some modern Gutenberg had come up with a technology that was able to transfer these words and pictures onto pages that could be delivered to our doorstep, and we could take them to the backyard, the bath, the bus. We would be thrilled with this technological leap forward, and we would predict that someday it might replace the Internet."

Ha! I love it.

A business leader's take on the communicator's role

We employee communicators are constantly trying to bridge the gap between ourselves and our CEOs. But we tend to drink our own bathwater, mainly looking at the problem from the communicator’s point of view. So it’s wonderful to get a fresh perspective on the subject, especially from a respected business leader.

I’m lucky to know Roger Martin, former management consultant, current Dean of Toronto’s Rottman School of Business, author and frequent contributor to the Harvard Business Review. I sent him a copy of my recent JECM article, which is an entreaty of sorts to CEOs to change the way they think about internal communication.

Roger has kindly agreed to let me share our short e-mail conversation about the article with FYA readers:

_________________________________________________________________________________

Ron:

Good article. I like the advice.  There is one thing that I would encourage further thinking about.

It is the following:  All of the functions want the CEO to involve them earlier in whatever process you are talking about – IT, legal, marketing, design, HR, etc., etc.  So you may think your call for earlier involvement is unique but it is not.  And if you told that to the CEO, he/she would probably roll his/her eyes.  The key is how can the communications team earn the right to have a voice earlier in the process. The answer?  By making the CEO’s job easier not harder; and that means solving the CEO’s toughest problem with respect to the task at hand, not telling him/her that what he/she is about to do is problematic for this, that or the other reason. If they do that, guess what, they will always be at the table. If they don’t, they will find out later and be asked to do the best they can to minimize whatever downsides there are.

Cheers.

R.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Roger,

You make an important point, and it’s a longstanding belief in the field of communications that the only way to earn that seat a the strategic table is to provide advice and deliver communications that directly support the business goals of the organization.

But I see how you might think my article is aimed at making CEOs’ lives harder by throwing a bunch of requirements and considerations in his or her path. But here’s the problem: too often corporate executives fall prey to short-term thinking that puts expediency ahead of investing in their relationship with employees. The challenge for communicators (and, as you note, IT, legal, design, HR, etc. etc.) is to find ways to elbow our way into the conversation before the decision takes place, and give the kind of advice that delivers results. From my point of view, that means having a conversation with CEOs during peacetime that sets the stage for better decision making, which in turn leads to the kind of positive outcomes that build trust and inclusion.

I’m optimistic that more of those kinds of conversations are going to take place in the coming years as corporate leaders come to the realization that if they don’t engage their employees, the best ones will go somewhere else.

Ron

_________________________________________________________________________________

Ron:

Agreed.  I think both have to bend toward the middle.  CEOs have to understand the importance of communications folks getting involved earlier AND communications folks have to be better integrative problem solvers.  Then it will all work.

Cheers.

R.

Book review: The Chief Engagement Officer

Last year I got a review copy of The CEO - Chief Engagement Officer: Turning Hierarchy Upside Down to Drive Performance. I had heard an interview with author John Smythe on FIR and I was excited about the book. Smythe came across as a passionate and eloquent advocate for a modern, more inclusive style of leadership that recognizes employees' need to be more involved in decisionmaking.

I'm of two minds on the book, which has received high praise. On the one hand, although it's only 212 pages, it's an incredibly tough slog and took me about six months to get through on my bus commute. I'm sure Mr. Smythe is a great consultant, but a great writer he ain't. Here's a particularly troublesom example:

"Selling to the many what has been decided by the few may be a rational choice in conditions similar to those where a tell mode is suitable but where the employee group is likely to be resistant to instruction and needs persuading to motivate and engergize them."

Whaaa? There are far too many passages like that. I often found myself shutting the book and taking out my iPod.

And it's less of a business book than an expansion of every powerpoint presentation the author has ever made. Lots of figures with little arrows pointing everywhere and boxes with words in them like "cultural drivers," "workplace drivers" and "instrumental drivers." A very, very corporate feel. Yuck.

But get past the corporatespeak (most of which could have been fixed by a good editor) and this book is a real treasure, with some great insights on employee engagement and organizational communication.

I honestly think it should be in every employee communicator's library, and I encourage you to order a copy. In the meantime, here are some of the key points:

• For Smythe (and his former colleagues at McKinsey) engagement is “a process by which people become personally implicated in the success of a strategy, change, transformation or everyday operational decision,” and “communication is essential to set the context for engagement and provide people with a sense of journey.”

• Engagement needs to be considered as part of an organization’s decision-making process – not something that takes place after the fact: “No operational decisions or grand plan can be said to be complete until the decision makers or sponsors have thought through how to engage those who are implicated in the decision/change.” Amen.

• Here’s an interesting observation: “Turbulence wakes people and allows them to see the repetitive patterns which they are either voluntarily or involuntarily ensnared by. It provides them with a moment of clarity in which they can make personal choices about breaking the pattern or going with the flow…”

• And here’s another: “Too often …the novelty of the original thinking is undermined by the way those are directing the change or decision engage those who are key to the execution. The danger is that the engagement and communication processes appear to be repetitions of past practices which dilute the novelty and freshness of the underlying strategy, change or decision.” In other words, avoid the SSDD (same shit, different day) syndrome.

• The move from a hierarchical, management-by-decree approach to one that is more inclusive and engaging doesn’t happen overnight: “…you cannot suddenly go from an autocratic top-down model to one in which you expect people to respond to a more inclusive approach. There will be distrust and a lack of collective skills. It will take experimentation.”

• Smythe is a strong proponent of what he calls “engagement interventions” – experiences in which participants are invited to contribute ideas, solve problems, or seize opportunities that “would normally be tackled by the higher levels of the hierarchy.” At the same time, though, he warns against imposed, programmatic change programs because they can alienate people and “often become unstuck during implementation.” How many times have you seen that in the corporate world?

• For Smythe, communication is an important component of engagement that needs to start early in the process. “The sad truth is that most leadership teams do not keep people in the dark deliberately. Some do not see the need for it, but most want to wait until things are looking better and they feel more confident. But the later they leave it, the harder they have to work to instill confidence in their people; an invisible plan inspires no one.” That's a great passage that helps redeem Smythe's writing. And, for communicators, it's our inconvenient truth.

• Of course, it’s not all about communication, but rather it should entail “Action not words: whilst creating a shared story with a higher purpose is critical, if it stops there as a marketing or communication process it will have been a waste of time and the sponsor will lose credibility. The prime outcome is action which will deliver the stated aims of the vision, and that action must be driven at all levels.” Amen, brother.

Despite the difficult read, I found the book to have lots of inspiring stuff and I hope some day to have a drink with Mr. Smythe. If you're as deep into the employee engagement business as he is, he must have lots of hair-raising stories to tell.

A side benefit: if you're ever in need of fodder for a powerpoint presentation about communicating change, there's lots of good material to draw on.

Finally, there's an unexpected treat that's worth the price of the book. The last chapter, by consultant, author and academic Johanna Fawkes, is a thorough overview of recent research on employee engagement, documenting the various different definitions, approaches, measurement techniques and lots more.  For all the engagement fatigue that's out there, it's clear from the research that this is a field that's in its early days, with lots of fine-tuning to come.

Why can't you get a Masters in employee comms?

This morning I got a query from an FYA reader in Spain asking me if I know of any Masters programs in employee communications. A quick note to veteran IABC-ers Les Potter and Wilma Matthews turned up nearly nada. Les doesn't know of any, and Wilma pointed to the only one she knows of, the Hugh Downs School of Human Communication's Masters program, but it's pretty broad.  Current areas of study include "intercultural communication and cultural studies, interpersonal communication, performance studies, organizational communication, and rhetorical studies and public communication." That doesn't really sound like the kind of specialization my Spanish colleague was looking for.

Dear blog readers, do you know of any Masters-level programs in employee/organizational communications?

And, if not, which is probably the case, the question is, why not? The answer, of course, is that employee communications is not generally recognized as a distinct profession, but rather as an offshoot or subset of human resources or public relations.

I think over the next 10 years this is bound to change. I've talked about this a lot: employee comms is on the rise, because of many economic, societal and technological changes that are putting huge pressure on big organizations to smarten up and treat their employees as if they are extremely important, and, in fact, a competitive advantage, to their businesses. We now know that companies who do employee communications well also deliver better business results. This knowledge is going to seep into the corporate world and it will eventually raise the game of internal communications.

This trend will also reach the highest levels of academia, and maybe now is a good time for that to happen.

From my super-powerful position as an obscure blogger about employee communications, I officially call upon the business community - specifically, one of the big consulting firms like Mercer, Towers Perrin or Watson Wyatt -- to fund a new chair in employee communications at a North American university. Maybe IABC and Southwest Airlines could chip in.

Wouldn't that be cool?

Second anniversary

Two years ago today I launched this blog. One hundred and seventeen posts, 263 comments and nearly 25,000 page views later, here we are. Not exactly sure where that is, but we are here nonetheless.

For Your Approval continues to be a great outlet for me to write about employee communications. Although comments are fairly sparse, they are almost always meaningful, and I truly appreciate the dialog whenever it happens. And I know there is a core group of readers out there who might not comment but keep on visiting, which I also appreciate.

In addition to those who read regularly and comment sporadically, my blog stats show that FYA is frequently visited by folks who are searching for info on employee engagement and internal communications, and I'm glad the blog is used as a resource.

I'm particularly grateful for the unexpected connections this blog has brought me. Without it, I might not have met Deakin Lecturer Ross Monaghan, who ended up helping organize a speaking tour for me in Australia last year that is one of the highlights of my professional career.

Later this year I'll do an online survey to find out more about the readers of this blog, what you like about it, and how I might be able to improve it. In the meantime, any comments or suggestions are welcome!

Thanks again for visiting, and thanks even more if you're a regular. I'm looking forward to celebrating year number three.

Dear CEO

It’s time for corporate leaders to change the way they communicate with employees.

In an article in the current edition of the Journal of Employee Communication Management, I outline nine ways today’s CEOs can improve their vital connection with the people who make their businesses run. I’ve structured the piece as an open letter to CEOs.

When I first got this assignment, I invited readers of this blog to weigh in with their thoughts, which I incorporated into the article. Thanks, Mark, Steve, Robin and Kristen! Thanks also to my wise colleagues at Longview for their insights.

Here’s a link to the entire article, in .pdf format. Download ron_jecm_article_feb_08.pdf  

And here’s a blog-friendly summary of my advice to corporate leaders:

1. Think about communication as you’re making business decisions – not after the fact. Good business decisions can go bad in a hurry because communication implications aren’t considered as part of the decision-making process.

2. Involve your communications team much earlier than you do now. Your communicators can act as a proxy for employees who do not otherwise have a voice.

3. Recognize that today’s employees don’t necessarily share your values. Baby boomer CEOs have a different work ethic, a different set of priorities, a different idea of what a successful career looks like, and a different way of communicating. If you communicate as if all employees think just like you, you risk alienating and further disengaging your workforce.

4. Understand what your employees are thinking. Quickie employee polls, readership surveys and small focus groups can give you timely and useful information. Be sure to show that you’ve listened, and that you’re responding to employee concerns, and you’ll earn their trust.

5. Start a real conversation with your employees.  One of the easiest ways to increase engagement is to have a conversation with employees about the future of your company. Get ahead of the curve now and start experimenting with social media like blogs and podcasts. In the meantime, get out there and talk with people face to face.

6. For goodness’ sake, stop blocking the Internet! There are security and productivity issues, but they can be resolved. Severely limiting internet access is not the answer because it inhibits employee engagement. Open access to information invites involvement, breeds innovation and inspires commitment.

7. Improve day-to-day communication with your direct reports. The way to make the biggest impact is to model the right behavior with your own immediate team.

8. Don’t be reluctant to tell the whole truth. If you don’t talk frankly and openly about what everyone knows already, you lose credibility – and the next time you have really positive news to talk about, employees won’t buy that, either.

9. And, finally, and perhaps most importantly, speak plain English with employees. The language you may speak in the boardroom, or with your bankers and lawyers, may be truthful but it’s incomprehensible to most employees.

To communicators, all this stuff is as obvious as the nose on our faces. But many corporate execs don’t think in these terms, and their leadership suffers as a result. Part of our job should be to give them this kind of advice, and I don't think we do it often enough.

#3 of 8 things you don't know about me

#3: I have a nine-inch metal plate in my upper left arm.

On a rainy January morning in 2004 I went on a mountain bike ride with our family dog, Molly, galloping by my side. It was my usual fitness ride along Lynn Creek near my home in North Vancouver.

As usual, for a little middle-aged thrill, I rode into a skateboard bowl located along the trail. Except, this time, someone had ditched a shopping cart in the bottom, which I swerved to avoid. But the side of the bowl was coated in frost. My front tire gave way and I flipped, my body crashing into the sloped edge of the bowl.

When I hit, my humerus (which, I learned, is one of the least funny parts of my body) snapped in two like a dry twig and I rolled to the bottom of the bowl.

So, there I was, lying flat on my back in the rain with my arm bent in a most unnatural position behind me, my dog staring down quizzically from the edge of the bowl, and Cheryl Crow blaring into my earbuds, singing "All I wanna do, is have some fun..."

First thing I did was flip the arm over to the front of my body. Boy, did that hurt. But it eased the pain to straighten out the limb and have it resting on my chest.

No one else was on the path that morning, but luckily I had my cell phone. Unluckily, in my trauma-induced confusion I gave the folks at 911 the wrong address for the skateboard park. An ambulance sped around the North Shore for about half an hour looking for me at other parks in the area. Finally, after some back and forth calls to the dispatcher, I was discovered and eventually my arm was screwed back together.

These days I mostly don't notice the metal plate (I think it's titanium, and it's fastened with about nine screws), and, interestingly, neither do the metal detectors at airports. Which makes me wonder what else they don't catch. I retain a long, loud scar, which makes me feel kind of macho, as if I had a past career in extreme sports.

I still go on that fitness ride, but no more skateboard bowls for me.

High concept and high touch

Finally, I am reading the brilliant The World is Flat by New York Times reporter Thomas L. Friedman. As predicted by those who recommended the book to me, it is blowing my mind. It features lots of stuff I kind of knew about globalization and technological change, but the information and analysis are presented with such clarity and color that my understanding of the world is now at a whole 'nuther level. And I'm only on page 343, with almost half a book more to go.

So far, the most striking passage in the book isn't Friedman's, but rather this excerpt from another writer, Daniel Pink, from his book, A Whole New Mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age:

"To flourish in this age, we'll need to supplement our well-developed high-tech abilities with aptitudes that are 'high concept' and 'high touch.' High concept involves the ability to create artistic and emotional beauty, to detect patterns and opportunities, to craft a satisfying narrative, and to come up with inventions the world didn't know it was missing. High touch involves the capacity to empathize, to understand the subtleties of human interaction, to find joy in one's self and to elicit it in others, and to stretch beyond the quotidian in pursuit of purpose and meaning.

"Developing these high concept, high touch abilities won't be easy for everyone. For some, the prospect seems unattainable. Fear not (or at least fear less). The sorts of abilities that now matter most are fundamentally human attributes. After all, back on the savannah, our caveperson ancestors weren't plugging numbers into spreadsheets or debugging code. But they were telling stories, demonstrating empathy, and designing innovations. These abilities have always been part of what it means to be human. It's just that after a few generations in the Information Age, many of our high concept, high touch muscles have atrophied. The challenge is to work them back into shape."

I can't think of a clearer or more inspiring mandate than this for employee communications.

#2 of 8 things you don't know about me

#2: I was a teenage parodist.

In the late 1970s I was a student at Carleton University's School of Journalism. For fun, I became part of a group of young writers and editors at the school paper, The Charlatan. Every year we put together an annual special edition of the paper that parodied something. One time it was People magazine (see Pupil magazine, with yours truly on the cover), another it was the local daily paper, and so on. I guess it was our version of the Harvard Lampoon. And what fun it was! We skewered pop culture icons. We stomped on convention. We threw big rocks at big targets. Some of my very best memories come from those days. I'd like to see the odd bit of parody injected into employee publications. Can you imagine putting out a spoof of your own annual report? Actually, when I was at Petro-Canada editing the employee publication, In Brief, which did a lot of reporting on downsizings, some wag did a desktopped parody and called it In Grief. Ha!

HR is in decline, but let's not celebrate

The latest article in the McKinsey Quarterly is entitled "Making Talent Management a Strategic Priority." (You may need to subscribe for the link to work; so here's a .pdf version: Download mata08.pdf.) It's worth a read, with lots of insights for internal communicators. One passage in particular struck me:

Our research confirms the idea that HR’s influence is declining. The executives we interviewed criticized HR professionals for lacking business knowledge, observing that many of them worked in a narrow administrative way rather than addressing long-term issues such as talent strategy and workforce planning ... As one HR director explained, senior executives “don’t see us as having business knowledge to provide any valuable insights. We’re doing many things based on requests, and they don’t see HR as a profession.”

Employee communications people have big issues with HR. Many communicators downright hate the function and dislike many of the people working in it. But before we start dancing on HR's grave, let's remind ourselves that employee communications often reports to HR, and we are often perceived by executives in the same way. There's plenty of paint on McKinsey's brush left over for us.

Whether you like HR people or not, the report's findings are a chilling reminder of how the human side of big business continues to decline.