 |
Delegating Your Voice
By Ron Crossland
I read an article in the June 4th, 2007 issue of BusinessWeek that I found very disturbing. Entitled, "It's Not a McJob, It's a Calling," the article concerned how marketing departments are teaming up with human resources departments to help raise workforce spirits.
more
|
|
|
| |
|
UNLEASHED! Webinar
Join Gregg Thompson, author of Unleashed!, as he answers your questions about bringing high performance coaching into your organization.
Friday, June 29, at 1:00 pm EDT / 10:00 am PDT
There is no charge for this webinar.
Click here to register and submit your question.
more
|
|
|
| |
|
Behind the Brand
By Valarie Willis
In a recent Point issue, I invited readers to let me know about some of their favorites brands. I heard from several of you, some as far away as Africa. We definitely love or hate our brands. Let me highlight just a couple of those stories.
more
|
|
|
| |
|
Dangerous Conversations: The Leader's Tool to Coaching for Exceptional Performance
By Susanne Biro
How often do you engage in the kind of conversation that stimulates changes in performance? Before you answer this question, reflect on the following: How many conversations do you have during an average day? How many of these simply function as social lubricants helping you slide through the day without having to address the real and important issues you face? How many of them really matter?
Now, reflect on the few significant conversations you had over the last week.
more
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Delegating Your Voice
By Ron Crossland
I read an article in the June 4th, 2007 issue of BusinessWeek that I found very disturbing. Entitled, "It's Not a McJob, It's a Calling," the article concerned how marketing departments are teaming up with human resources departments to help raise workforce spirits. McDonald's, Delta, Staples, and other companies were mentioned as examples where an internal marketing campaign aimed at helping inform and inspire workers is helping workers become more attached and aligned with the company situation, goals, and progress.
I have no issue with the intent of these campaigns. In fact, I fervently believe one of the gravest problems with many companies is their lack of internal alignment communication due to their relentless pursuit of execution and external brand campaigning. For years now I have considered a company's true brand width to be a function of its ability to communicate and execute its brand externally and internally. I credit Tom Peters with stimulating my mind concerning brand outside and brand inside, but true brand width cannot be achieved if either of these is compromised.
So what caused my spasm of indigestion when I read the article? Communication purpose, passion, insight, and alignment is the job of leaders, not marketing departments and HR. Sure, these departments need to be involved, but in the McDonald's case I feel strongly that this campaign will have the same shelf life as one of their experimental menu items that doesn't work out. Supervisors at every McDonald's location need to be able to inform and inspire their local team, not just have a bright and cheery marketing department broadcast do this work for them. Banners on the wall don't make young workers feel valued and engaged. Their managers can, though.
A true leader's voice cannot be delegated to marketing or outsourced to HR.
Now it could be I am over-reacting to this brief article and that indeed the leaders-at-all-levels of the aforementioned companies are doing their communication jobs well. But the tone of the article reminded me too much of what I see in some of my client organizations. Senior leaders especially are so focused on the changing external environment, deploying a growth strategy, or worrying about what an ill-informed market analyst will say about their company (because so often their own compensation is linked to market performance) that they delegate their brand inside duties to others and reap the consequences of this decision.
Charles Sykes is a senior research fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, a journalist, and a talk show host. He is also an author of several books, including Dumbing Down Our Kids. I cite this book in terms of the McJob portion of the BusinessWeek article. Sykes takes the position that we aren't helping our children learn some of the basic realities of life, preferring to enable a longer stretch of adolescence (sometimes to the age of 30) rather than helping them learn about the things that cannot be taught in school. In his now famous and growing list of "Rules Kids Won't Learn in School" I offer Rule Number Five for review:
"Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your grandparents had a different word for burger flipping. They called it opportunity. They weren't embarrassed making minimum wage either. They would have been embarrassed to sit around talking about Kurt Cobain all weekend."
Of course the Cobain portion probably needs to be updated to the celebrity of the week, but I feel the rest of the quote has continuing merit.
In a similar vein, I offer my own Rule Number Five for leaders and their communication responsibilities:
It's not a McTitle, it's a calling. Your job is to inform and inspire those you lead. You may be mesmerized by your compensation package, but no one follows you because of it. Your grandparents described leadership differently. They called it a privilege and responsibility. They would have been embarrassed to sit around and talk about the personal wealth they were going to enjoy at the expense of letting others do their job.
Ron Crossland is Chairman of Bluepoint Leadership Development. You can reach him by email.
|
|
|
back to top ^ | |
|
UNLEASHED! Webinar
Join Gregg Thompson, author of Unleashed!, as he answers your questions about bringing high performance coaching into your organization.
Friday, June 29, at 1:00 pm EDT / 10:00 am PDT
There is no charge for this webinar.
Click here to register and submit your question.
|
|
|
back to top ^ | |
|
Behind the Brand
By Valarie Willis
In a recent Point issue, I invited readers to let me know about some of their favorites brands. I heard from several of you, some as far away as Africa. We definitely love or hate our brands. Let me highlight just a couple of those stories.
One person raved about the service she received from American Express. As a young student she was staying in Armagh, Northern Ireland, as she was traveling Europe and needed a deposit to her American Express account. Her parents graciously wired her the money - only to the Western Union office, rather than American Express. American Express interceded for this student, worked out the problem, made sure that she had the money in her AMEX account, and then worked out the details with her parents. She has been an American Express card member since 1984 and has provided all her children American Express cards as well. As she wrote to me, "That act of kindness on their part cemented my loyalty, and they have continued to provide great customer service to me and my family both at home and abroad for over 40 years."
Several wrote me about their Honda experiences. More than one person trusted and loved the Honda brand and what Honda stands for. One man said that he continues to buy a Honda whenever he needs a new car because Hondas are reliable, hold their value and have low maintenance. This brand is so well trusted that it is highly recommended to others.
Another reader related his great affection for Proctor & Gamble. Affection is usually a word we associate with people, which made me think about what is really behind the brand.
Trusted brands garner such powerful loyalty and dedication by those consumers who love them. But what is really behind the brand that makes it so powerful? We have to move beyond the marketing campaigns, the glossy magazine ads, and glitzy packaging to the real essence of the brand . . . people.
Yes, behind every great brand are the people who bring the brand to life. In every brand story that I have heard, both good and bad, those stories were really about the people who delivered the service, ensured the quality, cared for the workers and who moved beyond the standard customer service levels to create the trusted brand.
Those organizations that get their people to understand and embrace the brand promise create compelling customer experiences for consumers. Organizations that do not, run the risk of having an inconsistent brand image which tarnishes trust and reduces business profits.
BusinessWeek online published the 100 Top Brands for 2006. The top five brands were Coca-Cola, Microsoft, IBM, GE, and Intel. These brands were judged to be the most valuable brands. One of the keys to maintaining a strong, valued brand is to get brand alignment with the associates who can then align their work to keep the brand promise. Associates can discover ways to connect with the consumer and instill higher levels of trust.
Gallup summarizes best what a company must do to have strong brand values:
- Increase its ability to connect with prospects
- Build its capability and commitment to engage its customers
Both of the above actions require people to understand the brand, live the brand, and respond appropriately to the consumer.
Don't miss the opportunity to connect your people with your brand; doing so can increase brand loyalty and build a stronger brand. Behind every great brand is a cadre of brand ambassadors that bring the brand to life.
Valarie Willis is a Senior Facilitator with Bluepoint Leadership Development. She can be reached by email.
|
|
|
back to top ^ | |
|
Dangerous Conversations: The Leader's Tool to Coaching for Exceptional Performance
By Susanne Biro
How often do you engage in the kind of conversation that stimulates changes in performance? Before you answer this question, reflect on the following: How many conversations do you have during an average day? How many of these simply function as social lubricants helping you slide through the day without having to address the real and important issues you face? How many of them really matter?
Now, reflect on the few significant conversations you had over the last week. Consider the following: at the end of the conversation did you feel complete - did you say everything you needed to say to that person at that time? Did you feel good about the interaction? If so, notice why. If not, consider why not. Notice if there was something else you wish you had said or done. For example, do you feel that you held back in the conversation, and if so, in what ways and why? Did you find yourself later having the conversation you wish you had had - but doing so with another co-worker, friend or perhaps your spouse? If so, you are not alone.
Leaders at all organizational levels are being asked to be more coach-like with their team members, colleagues, and even their customers. Unfortunately, many of us who lead organizations find ourselves ill-equipped to provide such coaching. It's not that we lack the requisite interpersonal and leadership competencies, but that coaching requires more. It challenges us to engage in a different kind of conversation; one that confronts real issues and is, therefore, risky, uncertain and often uncomfortable. Coaching requires us to engage in the "dangerous conversation" - dangerous because the conversation confronts questions that need to be asked and the issues that make even the best of us uncomfortable. (Incidentally, we are equally uncomfortable confronting the good stuff as we are in confronting the bad.)
Walk Away Empty
When we engage in a dangerous conversation we walk away empty; everything that needed to be addressed was said in the moment, to the person with whom it needed to be said. We know immediately when we have done this because we feel great. Even if we have a very difficult message for another about his performance, if we share our real thoughts, we can take comfort in knowing our work is done. We did not hold back in our communication. We respected the other person enough to tell him the truth, and we cared enough about his success to take the risk and to be uncomfortable for his benefit. As a result, we are no longer forced to carry the conversation with us. We leave with a sense of peace.
Conversely, we also know immediately when we haven't given everything to a conversation. We held back, not wanting to hurt another and arrogantly believing that our truth would be too much for that person to handle. As a result, we leave the interaction feeling unsettled, still filled with our real concerns and all the thoughts we censored, left to run them over and over again in our mind. Sometimes we even seek out a third party with whom to finally speak our truth--the conversation that we didn't have the courage to share more directly.
Leaders who foster exceptional performance in those they work with and through, have the dangerous conversation. They are willing to take the risk of sharing their true thoughts and concerns. Sometimes this requires them to recognize the exceptional work of a colleague, other times it may require them to share their deep concerns with their boss and her performance. Either way, leader coaches are those people who are willing to have the uncomfortable and risky conversations. They are the people with whom we most want to work. Because they can and do have the dangerous conversations, we know we can trust them. Are you a leader coach? Are you known to be able to have the dangerous conversations? Would others call you a coach?
Try This:
Think of something you have complained about recently and then ask yourself, "What is the dangerous conversation I need to have?" Make a promise to have that conversation today.
After the conversation, notice how you feel. Do you feel empty? Did you say everything you needed to say to the person at that time? If you felt you held back, notice what you held back and why.
Susanne Biro is Director of Leadership Coaching at Bluepoint Leadership Development. Email Susanne.
|
|
|
back to top ^ | |
|
|
|
