Management Training - The Management Training Guru

Stop Moaning And Start Solving

2012-01-31T07:28:00.000-08:00

Oh, don't some people moan? And perhaps that's a good thing on some occasions. Don't we all need to let off steam every now and then when we feel frustrated, disappointed, angry and even downright disillusioned?

Having colleagues we can have the occasional moan to is a good thing. Externalising what's going on in our head can serve as a release for pent up emotions and emotional pressure. The real problem arises when moaning is accepted as the norm rather than the exception in teams and in organisations. Let me share an example.

When I facilitate leadership development training programmes, there's a clear standard set from the outset with, and in partnership with participants. That standard goes something like this...

'Shall we all agree that this leadership training event will focus on developing solutions and, in the event of you wanting to have a moan, you're welcome to it - on the condition that you also generate at least one solution to the problem or issue you're moaning about?'

In written form, this invitation or standard may look quite unfriendly, even unhelpful. But in reality its exactly the opposite. It's very friendly and very helpful in the right context. And that context is helping participants, good, decent human beings to take personal responsibility for themselves, their communication and, the problem situations they find themselves in at that moment in time.

My colleague and I have an unwritten rule whereby if either of us are feeling a little (or a lot) negative about a situation or predicament, we give each other permission to have a moan for up to ten minutes each. And, that's the absolute maximum allowed. If there's no focus on coming up with a solution, there's no permission to moan. However inhumane this may sound - it actually works really well!

Why Do People Moan?

On most occasions, moaning is due to at least one of our personal values being transgressed. For example, if your key personal value is trust, if a colleague makes a commitment to you on an important project and then, chooses to not keep that commitment - and doesn't let you know otherwise, trust can be damaged, the relationship soured and, it's emotionally healthy to find an outlet and share your disappointment with a trusted colleague. Not too many mind you or that can develop in to a pity party when you prove just how big a victim you are. And that's not healthy for anybody, plus, if it develops to this stage, people will start avoiding you anyway.

A five minute moan can help to release stress and anxiety too. Have you ever noticed one of your colleagues bounding around your office gesticulating and openly showing their captive audience (colleagues who care + those who don't) just how angry they are? It seems that actively demonstrating disappointment and other related emotions is viewed by the perpetrator as a sign that they care. But it's exactly the opposite!

Just because you've calmed down to your normal emotional state doesn't mean you don't care. It means that you are now able and ready to return to a more healthy, balanced emotional and mental state. It means that you are better able to address the issue at hand without resorting to emotional blackmail or guilt tripping. Tough Talks are most effective when undertaken in an emotionally balanced manner.

A Question To Ask A Persistent Moaner

If your ear is being repeatedly bent by a constant moaner - and it doesn't matter where they sit or stand in the organisational structure, an effective way of helping them step out of their emotional state and think more clearly (or at worst, sod off and bother some other poor person) is to ask a good question. And, good questions are not 'So how does that make you feel?' or 'Will s/he ever change?' A really good, snappy, solution focused question is this...

'And how are you maintaining this problem?'

With some people, such a question will push them to fly back at you on auto-pilot, pity party mode with a response such as 'I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING to maintain the problem. It's not my fault...dah di dah di dah....' You know how it goes. They're only telling you and moaning to you because they think that you'll listen, and listen sympathetically because you care. Here's a news flash. When you persistently moan - PEOPLE STOP CARING! They're just too polite to tell you.

For some people, such a challenging question will get them to pause for thought, look a little puzzled and then respond with something along the lines of 'Oh, I didn't know I was maintaining the problem...but now you mention it, I suppose I am.'

And this is where solutions are found. When finger pointing and blaming stops, personal ownership and responsibility has a space to get noticed and re-activated.

Another question that can prove helpful for people who are willing to explore solutions is this.

'What are three things you could do and would be happy to do to resolve this specific problem?'

Again, the moaners will quickly and smoothly absolve themselves of any responsibility, sticking with their well rehearsed story that someone else has to change before they themselves can feel better. But the solution focused people will start to think of solutions. And the beauty of this is - The Solutions Are Theirs - Not Yours! And this makes them far more likely and far more motivated to act upon their solutions.

Try this approach for 7 days and start to notice how things (and people's thinking) change - for the better!

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

http://www.ScottWatson.co.uk

A Tip To Try For One Week

What's So Different Between A Croissant And An Apple?

2012-01-13T06:28:00.000-08:00

A strange question? At first sight, maybe it's a little confusing, but when we explore the differences is more detail, it's quite easy to establish that an Apple a day is so much more nourishing, enjoyable and healthy than a croissant. Here's the story...

This morning I visited Manchester to obtain guidance on how to run my Mac computer more effectively and easily. As I was travelling from Halifax which is 25 miles from Manchester and the rush-hour traffic can be rather unpredictable, I set off on my journey rather early.

Arriving at my destination an hour before my appointment with a 'Genius' (we'll come to that in a while) at the Apple Store, I decided to grab a coffee and croissant at a branch of a high-street chain of French cafes. And here's where the challenge began.

My request for a chocolate croissant appeared to silently trouble the waitress who was taking my order. A pursing of her lips and slight frown with her eyes gave me a hint that something wasn't quite right with my request. I carried on reading my newspaper, the coffee arrived, but the croissant didn't. A full ten minutes later I politely asked the waitress if my croissant would be arriving. Her hesitance to any answer my straightforward question again gave a hint that something was awry. She proceeded to nervously advise me that 'We're just warming it up for you now.' My response of 'It's ok, I prefer my croissant cold please', was met with her reluctance to provide me (the customer...paying customer remember) with a cold croissant.

Long story short. The croissant arrived, the tough pastry and hard chocolate on the inside clearly demonstrating that this was 'old stock' and not at all fresh. As the waitress didn't return to my table to ask if everything was ok - because clearly it wasn't I left the croissant with only one bite out of it. As the waitress passed I asked 'May I check with you, is this croissant actually fresh?' She responded 'I'll take it off your bill sir'. I politely thanked her for her offer to remove the cost of the croissant from the bill and asked again, 'May I check, is this croissant fresh?' At which point the somewhat embarrassed waitress responded, 'Well...it was fresh YESTERDAY MORNING'.

So what happened here? The manager or person responsible for ordering 'Fresh' items over ordered? Perhaps the footfall wasn't as high as expected or predicted? Maybe in an effort to cut costs in a tough marketplace, it's company policy to sell pastries that are more than 24 hours old? Who knows? Well, the manager should know. But isn't it a poor reflection on the brand when they'll do everything they can (i.e. warm old stock up) to avoid detection?

This is a clear case of putting profits for the organisation way ahead of serving the trusting customer a decent product at a fair price. And, with the internet now being used as a feedback mechanism for such outlets - Tripadvisor.com being the most popular, what would drive a manager to mislead customers in such a way? But that's why an Apple can save the day!

Having left the cafe a little disappointed, and a lot hungry, I entered the Apple Store in Manchester's Arndale Centre to meet a Genius. 'The Genius Bar' is the name given to the resident experts who supposedly, can resolve any issue a user may have with one of their products. However difficult or unusual your problem, they commit to resolving it for you, right there and then in most cases.

As I waited for my very own Genius to appear, an elderly gentleman who was booked in for a personal coaching session on his new Ipad struck up conversation with me. He mentioned that at the tender age of 78 years young, he had decided to start learning again. Retirement had become somewhat boring and he wanted to keep his brain busy. But here's the stunning thing!

Just 10 days previous he had purchased his first ever Apple product, an Ipad 2. He spoke about how excited he was to be presented with an eye catching white box that he'd expected the Apple store rep to open and show him all he wanted to know, but he was surprised that he was invited to open the box himself, take out the Ipad and switch it on. He called this the 'Getting to know you' experience.

Realising that he was a little hesitant in getting to know his Ipad, apparently the Apple store rep asked him what he'd like to know about first. How cool is this? Involving the customer and entering their world rather than simply doling out information and babble whilst expecting the customer to enter Apple's world. As he grew steadily confident with his new machine, he began asking more questions to the in store expert. But, the happy, excited gentleman's Apple world was about to take a dramatic turn. He told me 'I was just learning over the table to get a pen to make some notes and then it happened...in a flash.'

CRASH. The Ipad fell off the table, hit the floor and landed face down. Yikes! This isn't sounding too promising. When he picked up his Ipad off the floor, the facia was smashed. His question to the Apple store rep of whether the Ipad could be repaired was met with 'No, it can't be repaired as it's all one single unit...BUT, it was an accident so let me get you another one and we'll take this one off your hands'.

And that's the story. How ridiculously good customer service is this? The store/brand treated him fairly and what does he do? He becomes an ambassador for Apple. He tells me, I tell you and Apple become even more trusted as a fair, socially responsible organisation. And of course, they will probably sell a few more products if this elderly gentleman has anything to do with it.

Isn't it a shame that whilst Apple replace a £439 item at no cost, and little inconvenience to their customer, a chain of cafes can't serve a fresh £2.50 croissant or at the very least, let the customer know that other, fresher choices are available?

Customer (Dis)Service is becoming more and more accepted in the UK. But if you the customer says nothing, you're just teaching these organisations how to treat you. And it's definitely not win-win.

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

http://www.CustomerServiceTrainingCourses.co.uk/

Customer Service Or Customer Nightmare?

2012-01-09T08:19:00.000-08:00

So many people in business view 'Customer Service' as a vital ingredient in their recipe for success. And that's fair enough and completely understandable.

But, customer service is only a good starting point, and not a final destination. Why so? Because what customer's really want, beyond 'service' is Customer Satisfaction. Service is what your company believes it should, and in most cases, can provide to potential and existing customers. It's your processes, standards, policies and even beliefs about 'what's right'. As I said, it's a good start. It's absolutely vital that you have some form of structured approach to serving your customers whatever your industry sector. But customer satisfaction is what's going to get buyers to your web site, through your doors and telling their friends about you. Here are a few real-life examples:

High Street Hairdressing Chain

I called my local salon to book an appointment for my hair to be cut. I've been a customer (or 'client' as the organisation states) of this company for 5 years and have always been happy with the level of cut delivered. Unfortunately, my hair is disappearing so perhaps I rather appreciate the stylist's ability to make my see through pat not so see through?

It's company policy for this chain to 'massage' your head as well as shampoo....and condition. It's all rather trendy and somehow adds value to the 'client experience' - or so the manager told me!?

I spoke with the receptionist who advised me of a time slot which she could book me in for. Due to the time slot not leaving me much time to return home and get ready for a business meeting I asked her 'May I just have a dry cut on this occasion as I have to be back home to get ready for a meeting?' A straightforward request and one which I thought would not encounter resistance.

But that's not what happened. Oh no, a dry cut? No massage? That couldn't be done. 'You can't have a dry cut, it's not possible and we don't do them' was the rather sharp response from the receptionist. I responded, 'It's because I have a business meeting shortly after the appointment and I need to get back home, change and then drive to the client office....I'm not asking for any discount, I'm happy to pay the full fee. It would be really helpful if you could just book me in for a dry cut with Anna'. Can you do that please?'

Without a pause for breath, the receptionist advised me that 'Appointments HAVE TO last forty minutes, and as a dry cut will only take twenty minutes, we can't do it.' Starting to notice where the nightmare is about to begin now?

I politely restated that it would be really helpful to me if she could book me in for the dry cut appointment, that I'd previously had 'the fully monty' and on many occasions, the appointment didn't last forty minutes, or anywhere near that duration for that matter. 'No, it's not our policy so you can't have it'. And that was most definitely her final answer.

Let's Review

Here is a long-standing customer (oops, client) doing his best to give a company cold hard cash and they simply won't accept it. Why not? Because the customers request is deemed 'unreasonable' and doesn't fit nicely with their 'policy'.

Here's the real bonus. It is the stylists job to keep the client in the seat for no less than forty minutes. Why? Because it's company policy! Even if it adds no value at all to the customer (oops, client), you need to keep him or her seated, right there in your salon.

After all, why let excellent customer service and customer satisfaction get in the way of a company policy?

Having advised the Head Office Customer Service Manager at the company of the situation she offered me a free haircut at the salon in question to resolve the issue. Will I be going back? Not a chance!

The Travel Agent Who Doesn't Deliver What He Offers

I listened to a regional news channel this morning and heard an interview with a Yorkshire based travel agent. The interview was designed to help listeners understand that, despite the turbulent economy and a need to watch the pennies, it was still possible for family's to get away from it all and bathe themselves in sunshine in some faraway land.

The interviewer asked the travel agent what special offers were available during January and the agent responded with deals including 'Australia for just £199' along with many other unbelievable deals. And that's just what they were, un-believable! I called the travel agent who advised me that his phone had been 'ringing off the hook' since the radio interview. And, upon further investigation, I wasn't surprised. He quoted me a £50 return journey from Manchester to Dubai, the only catch being, it was an indirect flight that would require a transfer of plane in Amsterdam.

But that really wasn't the only catch. The 'special offers' this crafty businessman had quoted on air, and to me on the phone were all net of taxes. Really, my wonderful £50 flight was over £450 when taxes were included. And shouldn't they be? After all, isn't this travel agent intentionally misleading listeners into getting in touch with him?

The old saying of 'If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is', springs to mind here. But why mislead in the first place? Surely this approach erodes the very thing you want to develop with potential customers? Trust!

How Are You Doing?

So, these are a couple of quick examples where customer service, and indeed customer satisfaction have failed to materialise. How is your organisation doing in terms of delivering customer service that supports your organisation and its potential and actual customers? And, do you ever check to see if your customer satisfaction record is worthwhile and meaningful?

If you choose to ignore the very real problems that inept and/or inferior customer service can cause your organisation, you may have performed rather well during the economic boom, but, as many organisations are finding to their cost, this is the 'Bust' time and you need all hands on deck in attracting and retaining customers.

Scott Watson
http://www.CustomerServiceTrainingCourses.co.uk/
http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Would You Hire A Whistleblower?

2012-01-09T04:31:00.000-08:00

We've had Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat and even the MP's expenses fiddle. And, each of these scandals only came to light because someone chose to communicate the wrong-doings of their leaders to either the relevant authorities, or the general public at large.

The people who uncover a scandal or cover-up are commonly known as a 'whistleblower'. Someone who 'blows the whistle' or calls time on a certain behaviour, standard or communication. And, whilst their decision to tell all may at first appear commendable, it can have consequences that are more severe, and perhaps unjust, for them than it can for the perpetrators of the crime.

Recently, the business news media has covered the story of Japanese manufacturer, Olympus. A well-estblished, apparently well trusted organisation that fired its Chief Executive, Michael Woodford, apparently for blowing the whistle on alleged accounting fraud within the business.

Isn't this a turn up for the books? When have we ever heard of a top leader willingly unveiling a history of corporate deception and fraud within their own business? It's all about leading teams you can TRUST. Reports in the UK media detail the accounting scandal to be in the region of £1.2 billion. Not a number to be scoffed at, but one that has been willingly overlooked, ignored or perhaps even covered up by the very leaders who are/were trusted to lead Olympus honestly. What's more shocking is the fact that Olympus is a Japanese company. A nation that prides itself on trust and integrity.

The fact that Michael Woodford has been removed from his post is perhaps a reflection of the standards and beliefs the institutional investors of Olympus have about transparency, honesty and integrity. With, at present, many of the executives who oversaw the accounting issue still in place, where is there to go for its ousted CEO?

The reasons for his choosing to uncover the accounting fraud have yet to be reported. Perhaps he saw it as the right thing to do. Perhaps, he didn't want his name to be associated with such an outrageous policy, which appears to have been actively endorsed by members of its most senior leaders. Whatever his reasons for outing Olympus, who will want to hire Michael Woodford next?

Will he become an independent consultant to government departments across the globe to improve standards, transparency and accountability? Or will a private equity company snap him up to oversee their public and investor relations team? After all, if there has to be somebody watching over your business/es, it may as well be someone who is happy and willing to uncover supposed dodgy dealings.

Good on Michael Woodford for bringing the fraudulent practices of his company to the world. Don't we all need someone we can trust in our organisation?

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

A Few Top Tips To Manage Remote Teams More Effectively

2012-01-09T04:02:00.000-08:00

Managing Remote Teams can be a real challenge. And a challenge that can easily turn into a real problem if not managed effectively.

Our clients tell us that the lack of person to person contact with their team members, whether it be their manager or subordinates is the most difficult issue when working in remote teams. Remember, face to face contact over Skype or video conferencing is very different to person to person coaching or contact where you're in the same location.

Here are a few top tips on how to manage remote teams more effectively. Try them for 10 days - consistently- and notice the positive difference that begins to develop. Nope, just reading these tips won't add any value to you, your team or your organisation which is ultimately trusting, and paying you to do your best for them. And, neither will the 'I've tried that and it didn't work' attitude either.

You know as well as I do that a little practice and focus is all it takes to make improvements. And a 10 day timescale is absolutely adequate (as long as you remind yourself to use these tips). So, here goes:

Understand Your Role In Delivering The Goods

It's all too easy to unwittingly abdicate responsibility for the level of results achieved when managing a remote team. Yes, when all is going wonderfully well, bring on the plaudits and raving fans, especially if they're your boss, or even your boss's boss! But what about when it all goes badly wrong? Will you willingly acknowledge your role in failure? Much like success, failure is rarely achieved alone and this is where your mettle as a manager is really tested. Too many times I've heard examples of where a manager has stated something along the lines of 'I delegated the task to them and s/he said it was going well and on track. I guess I need to be less trusting and more careful next time.'

Too right you need to be more careful. Where were you in providing ongoing coaching support, asking for updates on progress and challenges, checking quality and evaluating risks? If you were too busy managing other team members and/or activities, it's still your responsibility to ensure that the outcomes you and your team commit to, are actually achieved. On time, on budget and spot on in terms of quality.

Your Role In Communicating Effectively

The ongoing developments in the world of technology were supposed to help managers and teams perform even more effectively. Sometimes I'm not so sure that this goal has been achieved. Super cool Iphones, tablets and Blackberry's have become more of a hindrance than a help to many. Come on, you've experienced it. You're sat in a meeting with colleagues and your phone buzzes, vibrates or plays an alert sound to grab your attention. And what happens? You look at your phone, pick it up and read whatever email or text message has been received. What message does this send to your team in that very meeting with you? Yep, 'You're not as important as my phone'. Madness, complete Madness!

How do you plan when and how to communicate with your team members?

Do you have a process in place which allows your team members to happily accept delegated authority without them feeling they've been dumped on? If you think you do, cool. But, I'd check what your team members think anyway.

Do you delegate in a manner that reflects trust, collaboration and shared ownership for the achievement of the required outcomes? Or do you 'delegate' by sending an email with an outline of expectations (with crazy deadlines even?) and then sit and wait to see what questions come back to you?

However well you think you communicate, you're probably nowhere near as effective as you believe. And, one really easy way to work around this is to ASK YOUR TEAM MEMBERS WHAT THEY NEED FROM YOU.

So much information gets 'lost in translation' and your team members will really value the opportunity to have some structured communication support from you. It will really help them perform even better for you. Just sit down over a coffee and ask them 'In terms of how I communicate with you and manage you, please will you give me three points I can improve on?'

Your question may scare the daylights out of some team members, as such questions are rarely asked. A high-trust relationship is required for this form of approach to be taken of course.

The long and short of managing remote teams is that YOU the manager need to take absolute responsibility for the delivery of the outcomes required, in the timescales agreed (not imposed) and ensure that your team members are adequately equipped to deliver what you're trusting them to deliver. If you don't communicate effectively, there could be tears at bedtime!

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

CIPD Conference 2011 Manchester - Come And See Us

2011-10-28T05:04:00.000-07:00

We'll be participating in the CIPD Conference in Manchester during 8 to 10 November - but not in the usual way.

If you'd like to find out more about how your organisation can benefit from our unique, results-focused management training courses and team building events, please email us at Info@SummitTraining.co.uk

10 Job Hunting Tips For Unemployed Adults

2011-10-28T05:00:00.000-07:00

As soon as you hear you are being made redundant, start seeking job opportunities immediately. Don't take a break or wait for an appointment at the job centre. By waiting, you could miss vital opportunities.

Regard job hunting as a full-time occupation, albeit temporarily.
Commit to five days a week for seven hours each day, minimum!
Keep your eyes off daytime TV and Facebook, and firmly on marketing yourself to
potential employers.

There will be days when you'll feel there's little or no hope of finding
a job. It's days like this when you need to re-focus your mind, your
efforts and your resources to make progress.

Don't explain in your application letter why you are unemployed. There's
no shame in being unemployed and you're not the only one who is. Plus,
the recruiter isn't interested anyway.

Do your homework. When applying for a vacancy, explore the company's
web site and identify their plans. Are they launching new products,
diversifying into new markets or exporting? The more you know, the
better equipped you are for when the interviewer asks you, 'So, what do
you know about our company?'

A job application is not about your life story. It is simply a
description of your qualifications, experiences and personal qualities.
Communicate clearly why you are the best candidate to fill the vacancy.

Show recruiters that you are willing and able to keep learning. The
saying 'Old dogs can't learn new tricks' is just an old cliche. Prove
to the recruiter in your application letter and CV that you are worthy
of an interview by demonstrating your commitment to lifelong learning.

You may have to move home, accept a lower salary and even start at a
lower level than you are used to. However much this hurts your
self-esteem, isn't it still better to get back on your feet rather than
being unemployed?

If you are a member of the 'Silver Generation', remember that you're not
retired yet. You are between jobs, and have many years of service to
offer a potential employer. Use your age and experience as a positive
marketing tool.

If you are a graduate without any work experience, it's important that
you communicate how your academic achievements and ability to learn can
add value to the potential employers' organisation.

For more information on how to support staff through redundancy, visit http://www.MyOnlineJobCoach.com/

For more information on interview skills training, please visit http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Scott on BBC Radio about helping people over 55 find a job with the help of the internet

2011-10-27T04:25:00.000-07:00

Scott Watson being interviewed on BBC Radio Leeds on how people over 55 can use the web to enhance their chances of finding a new job.

Main points:

The Web is an excellent source for business networking
Online resources can be as effective as outplacement seminars
Your job hunting skills might not be up-to-date anymore
You can build credibility online
Calderdale Council have a "Silver Entrepreneurs" programme to help people over 50 to set up in business

Resources mentioned:

LinkedIn
My Online Job Coach (Corporate site)
My Online Job Coach (Public site)
Facebook page with 5 free videos

Online Resource Launched To Help The Region's Unemployed

2011-10-21T03:49:00.000-07:00

A Halifax based human resources expert has developed an online training resource which aims to propel workers facing redundancy back into work.

Scott Watson, MD of Summit Consulting and Training has launched a web-based training resource, which has been designed as a support tool for individuals in the region who are currently unemployed or facing redundancy.

MyOnlineJobCoach.com offers expert guidance to jobseekers facing stiff competition for jobs in a tough economic climate.

The service includes more than 50 video tutorials which teach users a wide range of skills such as:

- How to develop credibility with a recruiter

- How to write a CV a recruiter actually wants to read

- How to answer tough interview questions well

- How to deal more effectively with the inevitable setbacks unemployment can bring

The service is already proving a big hit with private individuals, as well as the region's employers, who are intending to include MyOnlineJobCoach as a redundancy support tool for their staff.

The launch of the service comes at a time when our region is facing an unprecedented jobs crisis, as public and private sector organisations are reducing the size of their workforce due to spending cuts.

Scott Watson’s own research has identified that business leaders do want to support their redundant staff in securing their next role but either don’t know how to, or have found traditional outplacement support services too expensive and difficult to use.

'Uniquely, the Site enables individuals and families to share their learning and therefore maximise the possibility of their household securing further employment opportunities and financial stability. As the product is web based, users can access the programme 24 hours a day and have access for a full 12-month period,' says Watson.

Ends

Intro to Prof. John Thompson's Students

2011-10-19T05:45:00.000-07:00

Is Richard Reed Innocent? Absolutely!

2011-10-08T05:31:00.000-07:00

Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending a presentation by Richard Reed, co-founder of the Innocent smoothie brand. The invitation to participate in this event was extended by Prof. John Thompson, Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Huddersfield.

It was a refreshing change to listen to an authentic talk which covered the bumps and bruises of developing and running a business rather than the 'Look at me, I've made it' approach so often employed by the self-appointed motivational speakers and gurus. My view is that most of that crowd are more 'irritational' than motivational, but that's a discussion for another time.

Now, here's the fabulous news for human resources professionals. Mr Reed is certainly not a HR expert and he wouldn't claim to be, but he has some very clear boundaries and beliefs about how engaging employees (all, not just some) can add significant value to an organisation. I've detailed the key points from his thought-provoking presentation below.

95% of Innocent employees stated in an anonymous staff survey that they were 'proud' to work at Innocent.

Innocent's purpose is to 'Help people live healthy and die old' and everything they do is centred around this one commitment.

The recruitment policy at Innocent doesn't focus on getting bums on seats to fill vacancies, it focuses on 'spotting, attracting and retaining' individuals who can be passionate about the brand promise' which is to make things a little bit better and a little bit easier for everyone.

The success of Innocent is directly attributed to their commitment to getting the right people for their organisation. The 'default heart setting' for an employee should be 'YES', I can help, 'YES' I will do all I can to make things a little bit better for everyone.

There will occasionally be someone in your team who doesn't play by the values of the organisation and having these people in your team is toxic. Mr Reed stated 'Some will piss in the well rather than help draw the water from it' and these people need to be made aware they're not right for your organisation and your organisation is not right for them.

In a world where so many business leaders continue to claim that 'Our people are our most important asset' but fail to translate this old cliche in to an organisational reality (at least from the employees' point of view), it is quite simply inspiring to learn from from this gentleman that even without being a HR professional, clarity of purpose, straightforward recruitment based on authentic values and high levels of employee engagement can build a wonderfully successful brand and profitable organisation.

Wouldn't we all benefit if there were more business leaders who didn't just make the right noises about ethics, integrity and doing the right thing, but actually just made living such values a daily reality within their organisation?

By the way, a BIG THANK YOU to Richard Reed for his kind offer to contribute to the Job Hunting Bootcamp taking place in November. Your contribution will certainly make things a little bit better for everyone involved in this community centred programme.

Influence And Persuasion - Don't Get Caught Out

2011-10-05T05:33:00.000-07:00

The ability and willingness to influence and persuade other human beings is a wonderful skill to possess. Each and every day, we are being influenced whether we realise it or not.

Here's a quick example of influencing and persuasion in action. We'll take a hotel booking for this example. Have a think about this so you don't get caught out.

So, you're booking a hotel for your next holiday. You explore holiday sites online and notice that the rates are so competitive, unreservedly low and you're wondering to yourself 'WOW, this is fantastic, I think I'll be booking'. But, sure enough, the initial elation turns in to despondency soon after. And here's why...

The room rates initially offered are starting prices and not final prices. Ah, you want a sea view room? Oh, a balcony too eh? My goodness, that's going to cost you. And it does! But you continue.

The rate was for a room only basis. But you'll want feeding, at least breakfast. And for how many travellers? Add these fees on to your 'low initial price'.

So, you arrive at the rather nice 4* hotel and are greeted by a welcoming receptionist. Before you know it, a bellboy has grabbed your luggage, popped them on to a trolley and awaits your departure to your room so he can follow you. Well, wouldn't it be rude of you to ask for your luggage to be taken off the trolley and returned to you after the so very helpful bellboy has 'been so helpful'.

Get this - He's not being helpful, he's generating income through your tips. He's gone straight for you as his next customer while your attention is on checking in after your journey.

And, have you noticed that when the check-in receptionist hands you the key/swipe card for your room, you just accept it? Why do you do this? It's an automatic, culturally accepted response where you can immediately lose out. BIG STYLE! Why simply accept this behaviour, which is simply a 'Go Away' signal from even the best hotels.

If you reached your room and found that it didn't represent what the web site or brochures had indicated, isn't it far more difficult to return to reception to ask for another room? You've been seen to 'accept' something you've never even seen simply by taking the key. And you can't even ask your bellboy to sort the problem out as he's soon disappeared (after waiting for your tip).

Lesson? ALWAYS ask the receptionist 'Which is a better room that is available for the duration of our visit?' Hotels ALWAYS hold the best rooms back in the hope they can up-sell guests.

So, you're settled in to your room and you fancy a drink. Oh, there's the mini bar. You explore the fridge, remove a couple of bottles and return both of them, choosing to visit the poolside bar instead. But, what you didn't realise was that as soon as an item is removed from the mini bar, it's electronically swiped (as if you had consumed it). Even if you don't consume the items and return them to the fridge, it doesn't matter. REFUNDS DON'T HAPPEN!

Now, how about calling home and letting the family know you arrived safely? There's a phone right by the bed. And it'll cost you up to 4 times more than a normal landline outside of the hotel to make a call. Gotcha!

Why not lay back and watch one of the many films available through your television? They're £7 to £10 per day. Here's the thing, these prices make the film available for 24 hours - just in case you want to watch the films numerous times.

Room Service? Make sure that you grab your tray at your door rather than letting the server in to your room. When they're in your room, they're in your room. This is where pressure for you to tip comes in to play.

I recently enjoyed a family break in Durham with my family. As a member of the hotel's loyalty programme we were upgraded to an Executive room. Part of this deal was 'Free Drinks Between 5pm and 7pm. Thankfully, the range of drinks available included my favourite beer Peroni.

Watch what happens next. The beer is served in 330 cl bottles, just over half a pint. It is served in a small glass. Imagine the shock on the barman's face when I asked for a pint glass and 2 bottles of Peroni. 'Ah, we can't give you a pint glass for Peroni sir' was the claim. When I enquired why not he replied 'It's not our policy'.

See, you can have something for 'FREE', but you're really not flavour of the week if you want to drink the FREE drink out of a glass larger than they want to offer. Perhaps their thinking is that if the guest has a smaller glass, they're likely to drink more slowly?

So, have a think about how you're being influenced on a daily basis. You could lose out if you're not careful.

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Client Video Testimonial - Management Training

2011-10-05T04:39:00.000-07:00

We've just received another client testimonial on video which you may enjoy watching. It's less than one minute long and reflects a management training programme and team building events we facilitated on behalf of a NHS regional team.

Enjoy

Tips For School Leavers Joining The Job Hunting Crowd

2011-09-19T07:22:00.000-07:00

Volunteer – show that you are looking for experience and to contribute to society. It also shows maturity

Research – what is the job about? What skills/character traits might they be looking for? If you apply for an internship at a Vet’s, the vet will want to know more than just the fact that you love cuddly animals. How are you with humans? How are your animal handling skills?

Appearance – you will not impress potential employers with the same fashion style that you would use to impress someone your own age. Dress smartly!

Establish reference points – you have done many things in your past. Maybe you were member of a football team or the school choir. How can the experiences you made there be useful for a potential employer?

Be honest – don’t take credit for things you have not done. Share credit with others.

Show potential – you learned how to learn at school. Show that you are willing to learn and develop you skills continuously. It is not important to be the best at having an outdated skillset, but to be able to learn the new skillset the fastest.

Be likeable – we want to work together with people we can get along with. Don’t be a brown-noser, but be polite, friendly, and enthusiastic.

Ask questions – the more information you gain from the prospective employer about the job and the company, the better you can tailor your answers.

Focus on applicable experience – when writing your CV, focus on the things that the prospective employer might be interested in. If you list your hobbies, make sure that they have some real-world application and you can show that you learned useful skills or developed positive character traits from them.

Prepare – what kind of questions might you be asked? “What is your biggest accomplishment so far?” “What are you proud of?” “Tell us about an instance where you screwed up.” Think through questions like that and come up with answers that are honest and show you in a positive light. Sometimes just showing that you learned a lesson and gained maturity will make a very positive answer.

Catch their interest quickly – when writing an application letter, get your main point across in the first paragraph. A prospective employer will receive dozens, sometimes hundreds of application letters and you will need to stand out. If applying for a job in a library, don’t focus solely on your love of books, but on how well you can organise, prepare, administrate, catalogue, and deal with visitors. Think about how your skills and expertise can benefit the employer and put those first in the letter.

Ends:

Scott Watson is Founder of Summit Consulting and Training Ltd and co-developer of http://www.MyOnlineJobCoach.com/

Yorkshire Jobs Disappearing Fast - Time To Do Something Proactive

2011-09-14T04:11:00.000-07:00

A report by Lloyds TSB has concluded that the Yorkshire region is shedding jobs faster than any other region in Britain.

According to Martyn Kendrick, Lloyds TSB Commercial Area Director for the region, new business stagnated last month, while backlogs of work also fell sharply. These findings have fuelled concerns that Yorkshire will bear the brunt of a potential double-dip recession.

Scott Watson, human resources expert and managing director of Halifax based Summit Consulting and Training states that, while there is little which can be done to reverse the trend in the short term, employers should take a proactive, socially responsible stance in efforts to help their employees facing redundancy to return to employment as quickly as possible.

'It is very important for company bosses needing to cut jobs that they remember that corporate social responsibility is not just reserved for the good times, it is perhaps most needed and appreciated by employees when times are hard. This is why we are encouraging employers to invest a few pounds in ensuring that employees are supported when the time comes to make cuts.'

"To this end, we have developed a comprehensive video based online resource that provides expert coaching on the complete job hunting and recruitment process. This includes helping the user to identify hidden job opportunities, market themselves more effectively and even how to recover when they screw up during a job interview.'

Our decade of research has identified that in a crowded jobs market where recruiters are spoiled for choice, it isn't always the best candidate who is successful in securing the job, it is the candidate who is the best prepared and most convincing. Our comprehensive online resource, MyOnlineJobCoach.com provides a very cost-effective redundancy support solution for employers who are under pressure to cut costs but also want to take a responsible role in helping their employees secure their next job as quickly as possible.

HR Expert urges LEP to focus on outcomes

2011-09-09T08:58:00.000-07:00

Last Friday’s Leeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) summit identified 4 strategic priorities to deliver sustainable growth into our region.

Key among these priorities is the enablement of a flexible and skilled work force. This is to be achieved by skills investment, the promoting of better information among employers and others and the boosting of employment and productivity.

According to Scott Watson, MD of Halifax based Summit Consulting & Training Ltd, these goals, if implemented in their entirety, will help deliver prosperity to our region, as well as a culture of innovation, entrepreneurship, and aspiration.

‘For this strategic priority to be delivered, employers and LEP executives need to be aware that turning these goals into reality relies not solely on training people in business skills, but also life skills, such as:

-how to deal more effectively with the emotional turmoil that unemployment can bring
-how to deal with adversity more effectively
-developing realistic levels of optimism
-developing the emotional muscle & resilience to not only set personal goals, but also the commitment to achieving them,’ Watson says.

‘This will not be done by basic one-day training events, which espouse the latest trends; it needs to be developed in a manner that endorses and supports an ongoing personal commitment to creating and maintaining a sustainable affinity for lifelong learning,’ he adds.

‘Employers and users need to be emotionally and intellectually engaged when introducing such a project – it is unrealistic to expect LEP to deliver this on its own,’
explains Watson

‘It can, though, be achieved through a stringent procurement process which is more focused on the potential partner’s ability to deliver substantial value in terms of real ground-level value rather than just classroom training which tick a box,’ he concludes.
- Ends -
http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Region’s Growth Damaged by Obsolete Job Hunting Skills

2011-08-10T08:51:00.000-07:00

Recent statistics have indicated that the UK’s recovery from recession is faltering, and that nowhere is this more apparent than in the Yorkshire region.

With quarterly economic growth languishing around the 0.2% level, our area runs the risk of falling behind the rest of the United Kingdom in economic terms, as well as vital job creation.

Against this backdrop, one Yorkshire-based company has launched a resource aimed at both public and private sector organisations which, as victims of economic flatlining, are needing to downsize workforces.

Myonlinejobcoach.com has been developed by two local HR experts with a wealth of experience in retraining individuals faced with the spectre of redundancy. The website features intensive video advice and little known tips and techniques for anyone wishing to secure their next job more quickly. It includes advice on searching for the right vacancy, developing credibility with recruiters, writing a CV that a busy recruiter actually wants to read because it stands out from the crowd for all the right reasons, as well as tips on how to recover from mistakes made during an interview.

Scott Watson, international business consultant and founder of Myonlinejobcoach.com, takes the view that many people re-entering the job market have probably not needed to apply for a new position, or even taken an interview, for over a decade. “Not only does this have adverse implications for the applicant, but it can also cause problems for a potential employer, simply because the best person for the job may not have the most up-to-date interview skills. This means that both parties could be missing out on opportunities, simply because of lack of recent training,” he said.

The services offered by Myonlinejobcoach.com are intended to be bought as a license by organisations needing to downsize. The principle is that, as part of an organisation’s legal and corporate and social responsibility obligations, the training package available will then be offered to individuals being made redundant. The site shares with job hunters insider knowledge and expertise which, until now, has only been available to Human Resources bosses and recruiters, explaining how to identify and attract the highest quality candidates.

According to Watson, recruiters are currently spoiled for choice, so they can more easily offer candidates a lower salary package, which will adversely impact on household spending, and hence the local economy. “Although public and private sector businesses sometimes provide one day outplacement training, participants tend to forget all that they have learned within this sheep dip approach. An ongoing support mechanism is required to maximise retention and application of learning through what is often an emotionally turbulent time. Classroom training on its own is definitely not value for money, for a business, for the employee or for local tax payers,” he explained.

“A positive approach is important, but this needs to be supported by a relevant, employer friendly mind set, together with appropriate self marketing skills. It’s vital to remember that you might be the right person for the job but, if you can't demonstrate this to a potential employer, tough. After all, people need to remember that it's not last century’s job market anymore,” Watson concluded.

ENDS

Editors notes:

Further details of http://Myonlinejobcoach.com are available by visiting the site. In addition you can visit http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk

For interview opportunities, expert comment and opinion, journalists are encouraged to contact Scott Watson by email at Scott@SummitTraining.co.uk or by telephone on 07968 241 818.

Helping Get UK Back To Work

2011-05-18T04:25:00.000-07:00

Article published in UK print media

A Halifax based human resources consultancy has developed an online training resource which aims to propel workers facing redundancy back into work.

Summit Consulting and Training will next month launch the web-based training resource, which has been designed as a support tool for employers faced with having to make redundancies.

Thought to be the first of its kind in the UK, MyOnlineJobCoach.com offers expert guidance to jobseekers facing stiff competition in a tough economic climate.

The service includes more than 40 video tutorials which teach users a wide range of skills such as how to develop credibility with a recruiter, write a CV a recruiter actually wants to read, answer tough interview questions well and even how to deal more effectively with the inevitable setbacks unemployment can bring. And the service is proving a big hit with a number of employers who have stated their intention to include MyOnlineJobCoach as a redundancy support tool for their staff.

The launch of the service comes at a time when the latest UK Government figures report that more than two-and-a-half million adults are registered as unemployed and an increasing number of public and private sector organisations are reducing the size of their workforce due to spending cuts. Summit director Scott Watson’s own research identified that business leaders generally do want to support their redundant staff in securing their next role but either don’t know how to, or found traditional outplacement support services too expensive and difficult to use.

Commenting on the launch, Mr Watson says: “MyOnlineJobCoach.com is designed to provide users with step-by-step, results-focused training that will help them to maximise their ability to secure worthwhile job opportunities.” As the product is web based, users can access the programme 24 hours a day and have access for a full 12-month period.

Summit has trained companies how to identify, attract and hire high quality employees with clients including international corporations and public sector organisations for more than a decade. In addition to delivering projects throughout the UK, since 2008 it has delivered projects across the Arabian Gulf states.

Mr Watson continues: “This product provides users with the most up-to-date tools, techniques and information available and normally reserved for our corporate clients. “It’s pleasing to know that despite the tough decision company bosses face in making job cuts, so many of them are committed to supporting their staff in finding their next role.”

The site will launch on Wednesday, June 8.

Ends:

http://www.myonlinejobcoach.com/index.php/home/syllabus

Doctor not entitled to legal representation for internal disciplinary hearing

2011-05-10T00:23:00.000-07:00

Doctor not entitled to legal representation for internal disciplinary hearing - Puri v Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

The High Court has held that, were internal disciplinary procedures are concerned, human rights law will only come into play where the effect of any disciplinary proceedings will have a considerable influence or effect on an employee’s right to practise their profession. While this decision echoes previous decisions on one level (and is arguably unsurprising), the decision of the Supreme Court in another case is eagerly awaited as it could have far-reaching implications for the way in which future disciplinary hearings take place.

As in previous cases on this topic, this case involved a doctor, Mr Puri, seeking to rely on European law to overturn the effect of a disciplinary hearing which he argued would deprive him of the right to practise his profession. The conduct of Mr Puri, a consultant urologist specialising in oncology, was investigated following complaints regarding his abusive and threatening behaviour. A subsequent disciplinary hearing resulted in his dismissal. The General Medical Council (GMC) did not impose any sanctions on him. He appealed the decision to dismiss him but, before that appeal could take place, sought judicial review in the High Court. Relying on recent case law, Mr Puri argued that art.6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which provides the right to a fair hearing, was engaged because the effect of the disciplinary proceedings was to deprive him of the right to practise his profession. He argued that art.6 meant that the disciplinary and proposed appeal panels should have been independent and impartial, rather than being (respectively) predominantly or wholly composed of trust members or employees. At the time of the hearing, Mr Puri was working privately in Leeds, but without opportunities to carry out the high-level cancer surgery in which he specialised.

The High Court stated that in ordinary disciplinary proceedings, where all that was at stake was the loss of a specific job, art. 6 would not be engaged. It is engaged if the effect of the proceedings could be to deprive an employee of the right to practise his or her profession (see Kulkarni v Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust). Referring to Hameed v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, the High Court concluded that Kulkarni only envisaged art. 6 applying in exceptional circumstances. As regards Mr Puri, the High Court acknowledged that it was difficult for him to find, within the NHS or elsewhere, a post of the same seniority and speciality as the one he had held with the trust before his dismissal. However, it noted that Mr Puri’s contract with the trust was as a consultant urologist, and was not restricted to oncology. In addition, the GMC had decided not to issue a warning against him. Therefore, said the High Court, it would not be impossible for Mr Puri to return to a position in the NHS, and found that this was not a case where the effect of the disciplinary proceedings was to deprive Mr Puri of the right to practise his profession, either within or outside the NHS. Even if he might struggle to work in the future in his sub-specialty, he would still be able to work as a urologist.

The other aspect of Mr Puri’s case was his complaint that although the disciplinary panel was constituted in accordance with the trust’s procedure, neither the panel, nor the proposed appeal panel, were art. 6-compliant, because they were neither independent nor impartial, consisting largely of employees of the trust. The High Court stated that, even if art.6 had been engaged with regard to Mr Puri’s disciplinary proceedings, it would not have held that compliance with art.6 required a disciplinary panel comprised of people external to the trust, or that the composition of the disciplinary panel was non-compliant. The High Court also held that neither the loss of the right to be employed in a particular job, nor the loss of professional reputation, are sufficient 'civil rights' which would engage the fair hearing requirement of art. 6.

The scope of art. 6 is very much a ‘live’ issue in employment law at the moment. Ironically, Mr Puri’s case was not helped by the fact that the decision of the GMC (not to impose any penalty on him) weakened his case in the High Court as it showed that he might be able to secure employment elsewhere. The reality is that the imminent decision of the Supreme Court in R (G) v Governors of X School will be more important than any Court of Appeal judgment in this case as it will hopefully give definitive guidance on how art. 6 should be interpreted in the context of workplace discipline.

Published with kind permission of Craig Gordon, HR Bullets.

Former employer liable to ex-employee for negligently written email

2011-05-10T00:17:00.001-07:00

An employer was liable in damages to its former employee for negligent misstatement when it send, six years after he’d left, a disparaging email to his subsequent employer which led to his dismissal. The fact that this information was not contained in a formal reference was irrelevant: it was eminently foreseeable that the damaging information would cause loss to the ex-employee and as such the ex-employer owed him a duty of care.

It’s well known that employers owe a positive duty of care when they provide a reference for a former employee. If the reference is inaccurate or the employee can show that they’ve suffered a loss (e.g. failing to get a job as a result, see for example Bullimore v Pothecary Witham Weld), then the provider of the reference can be liable in negligence.

Mr Mckie, a 58-year-old art historian, had worked as teacher at Swindon College for seven years until he left in 2002 with a glowing reference. In 2008 he started work as the Director of Studies at the University of Bath. The university was responsible for overseeing degree courses at FE colleges and part of Mr McKie’s new duties involved liaising with and visiting Swindon College, his former employer. Shortly after he had started work in his new post, the new HR Director at Swindon College sent an e-mail to the university stating that the college would not allow Mr Mckie onto its premises because it had safeguarding concerns in relation to its students and there had been serious staff relationship problems during Mr McKie’s time there. He added that Mr McKie had left the college before any formal action could be taken and that he understood that similar incidents had arisen at another FE college. The contents of that e-mail resulted in Mr McKie’s summary dismissal by the university.

Mr McKie brought a High Court claim for damages in negligence - as he’d only worked there for a few weeks he couldn’t bring an unfair dismissal claim. The court was satisfied that Mr McKie was a highly respected member of staff while at Swindon College and that the contents of the e-mail were ‘fallacious and untrue’ and its preparation had been ‘sloppy and slapdash’. The court referred to the House of Lords 1994 landmark decision on references, Spring v Guardian Assurance plc, where it was held that an employer who provides a reference in respect of a former employee has a duty to take reasonable care in the preparation of that reference and will be liable to the employee in negligence if the reference is inaccurate and the employee suffers loss as a result. Mr McKie argued that the e-mail was in fact a reference, and that the college owed him a duty to take reasonable care in supplying it. The court rejected that argument as this was plainly not a reference situation: the email had nothing to do with his appointment. But it nevertheless upheld Mr McKie’s claim. He had suffered financial damage by losing his job with the university; the damage was ‘eminently foreseeable’; there was a close enough connection between the negligent e-mail and the damage suffered; and the relationship between Mr McKie and the college was sufficiently proximate to give rise to a duty of care, even though 6 years had passed since he’d worked for the college.

James Tait, employment lawyer at Browne Jacobson, comments: ‘Employers now need to be very careful indeed when providing comments about former employees whether by way of a reference or not. They should not be fooled into thinking that making verbal or e-mail commentary of this nature will simply be forgotten purely because it is not a formal reference. Such comments are equally as important as though provided in the form of a reference. If slapdash comments are made which cannot be substantiated, and if the employee loses out as a result, the employer can be held to account. In some cases, the damages could be significant. Employers would therefore be well advised to review their systems, and ensure that staff are made aware of the fact that if enquiries are made of a former employee then comments, whether by way of a reference or otherwise, should only be made by authorised staff who are aware of the implications of this case’.

Published with kind permission of Craig Gordon, HR Bullets.

Trust in leaders at a record low

2011-05-10T00:06:00.001-07:00

Employee confidence and trust in senior leaders has dropped to record lows as the economic downturn continues to erode workers’ standard of living and undermine job security, according to the CIPD’s spring 2011 Employee Outlook survey. The proportion of employees saying their standard of living has worsened in the last six months has increased to 37% from 31% in the previous quarter. Public sector employees are most likely to say their standard of living has worsened (47%) compared with 35% of workers in both the private and voluntary sectors.

Although job insecurity has edged up since the previous quarter, with 21% of employees thinking it likely they could lose their jobs as a result of the downturn compared to 20% last quarter, there is again a big difference in the sectors. Almost one in three (30%) public sector employees say it is likely they could lose their job compared to 19% of those in the private sector and 27% in the voluntary sector. In all, 21% of respondents say their organisation is planning to make redundancies, rising to 58% among public sector respondents. In all 29% of voluntary sector employees say their organisation is planning redundancies, as do 10% of those in the private sector.

Perhaps not surprisingly against this backdrop, the net proportion of employees agreeing they have confidence in their senior leaders has fallen to a record -31 from -23 for the previous quarter, while the net trust score has also fallen to -8 from -1 over the same period.

The survey also finds that job satisfaction has fallen over the last three months from +39 in the last quarter to +34 this quarter - its lowest level since the CIPD started the survey in spring 2009. Employees working in the voluntary sector remain the most satisfied (+44), followed by public sector workers (+38), with private sector staff least satisfied (+33). On top of this, the proportion of staff looking for a new job with a new employer has increased to 24% from 19% for the previous quarter. Like last quarter, respondents from the public sector are least likely to be looking for a new job and those in the voluntary sector most likely to be doing so.

Employer attitudes to CSR are crucial for employee engagement

2011-05-10T00:04:00.000-07:00

Employer attitudes to CSR are crucial for employee engagement

Most employees want their employers to do more towards CSR (corporate social responsibility) and charitable giving, according to a survey conducted by LeapCR – and nearly two-thirds of them believe that having paid time off during working hours to commit to charitable initiatives would significantly improve employee engagement.

‘This correlation between employee engagement and CSR initiatives can’t be ignored by employers wanting to increase the productivity of their company’, said Malcolm Scovil, CEO of LeapCR. ‘If employers don’t get to grips with the expectations of employees then they face punitive recruitment costs and unsatisfactory levels of productivity from a workforce that feels its motivations are being ignored’.

Among the other key findings were that:

* 49% of employees said they were more likely to stay with an employer that encourages its workforce to donate time or raise money for charity within working hours
* 75% of employees want their employer to balance commercial success with good CSR strategies, including supporting charities
* 52% of employees believe that their employer should do more to encourage charitable giving during working hours
* 51% of employees felt that companies have a duty to commit to charitable acts and CSR
* 59% of employees of all ages said their ideal employer would consider allowing interested staff to take one (paid) day off every month to support charitable initiatives
* 15% of employees would take a significant pay cut to work for a company that has the right attitude towards charities/CSR
* 69% of Generation Y (aged 20-30) said that there were more engaged with their employer when they can undertake charitable initiatives within the workplace
* more than half (56%) of the Generation Y respondents said that senior management was ‘out of touch’ with their age group

It was also evident from the survey that UK employers are either not taking CSR seriously or failing effectively to communicate what they are doing to their staff. Just 58% of all employees know if their company has a commitment to CSR and a similar percentage (57%) felt their employer could do more in that area.

Malcolm Scovil said: “The reality is that the UK workforce passionately cares about CSR and expects their employer to share that commitment. If employers fail to meet these expectations, either through a lack of CSR initiatives or a failure to communicate what they are doing to their staff, then they will find themselves struggling to remain competitive’.

Published with kind permission of Craig Gordon, HR Bullets

Contractual notice runs from the day after it’s given (Wang v University of Keele)

2011-04-24T03:10:00.000-07:00

Overview
Unless the contract of employment states or can be construed otherwise, contractual notice, whether or oral or written, runs from the day after notice is given.

As is often so in such cases, this case concerned whether an employee’s unfair dismissal claim had been presented within the 3-month time limit. This entailed working out his effective date of termination and this depended on what date his notice began to run.

Dr Wang received an email, which he opened and read, on 3 November 2008 giving him 3 months’ notice of termination. The covering letter, dated 3 November but which could not have been received by post until 4 November, was received a few days later, stating that he would only be paid up until 2 February 2009. Dr Wang presented his unfair dismissal claim on 2 May 2009. The employer argued that his claim was 1 day out of time, because Dr Wang knew that his last day of employment would be 2 February, the effective date of termination of employment was 2 February and therefore his claim should have been submitted by 1 May. The tribunal dismissed Dr Wang’s claim as a day out of time as it said his notice ran from 3 November to 2 February. Dr Wang appealed, arguing that even though he was aware of his dismissal on 3 November, part days did not count when calculating the notice period, so notice did not start until 4 November.

The EAT agreed with him. The only issue for the EAT was when Dr Wang’s notice period started. It reviewed many of the cases on this subject and held that the principle in the 1987 case of West v Kneels – that when verbal notice is given, notice starts on the following day – applies equally to written notice. Part days do not count and notice does not always run from the moment it comes to the attention of the employee. The EAT could see no reason in principle for distinguishing between oral and written notice – ‘the message is the same and the difference in medium of communication seems ... insignificant’. Therefore notice did not start to run until 4 November (with dismissal taking effect on 3 February) and Dr Wang’s claim was in time. It was irrelevant that he had only been paid to and stopped work on 2 February; notice once given cannot be shortened without agreement.

The EAT pointed out that if the employer makes the dismissal date ambiguous, then the notice should be construed in favour of the recipient. It also observed (without recommending it) that written notice can include ‘methods of communication such as the SMS text message, internet based so-called instant messaging and email’.

Wang v University of Keele

Effect of Failure To Consult under TUPE and whether employee 'assigned' to undertaking transferred

2011-04-24T03:04:00.000-07:00

Marcroft v Heartland (Midlands) Ltd
Overview
Although a failure to consult under TUPE gives rise to a claim for compensation, it cannot make the entire transfer ineffective. And a person who gave his notice shortly before the transfer continued to be ‘assigned’ to the undertaking transferred despite not attending his office and only doing a small amount of work from home.

Mr Marcroft worked for PMI Health Group (PMI), responsible for sales in the commercial insurance department. His contract contained a restrictive covenant which he is alleged to have breached by approaching clients of PMI whose accounts he had managed or about whom he had acquired knowledge while with PMI with a view to their transferring business to a rival company. In August 2009, PMI started negotiations with a view to disposing of the commercial insurance part of their business to Heartland. On 15 September Mr Marcroft gave notice of his resignation and it was agreed that his notice would expire on 26 October. On 25 September Mr Marcroft was officially informed by the directors of the proposed sale to Heartland. It was agreed that he need not attend the office to work, as there was very little work to be done in the commercial side of the business, but that he would be ‘on call’ at home, if it became necessary. There was no consultation with him about any actual or prospective transfer to Heartland or to anyone else, nor did he receive any documentation about the transfer. Between 25 September and 2 October (when PMI formally agreed to sell to Heartland), Mr Marcroft did little work other than fielding some calls and finalising some account details. At issue here was who - Heartland or PMI – benefitted from the restrictive covenant in Mr Marcroft’s contract. Heartland claimed that Mr Marcroft’s contract transferred to it by virtue of TUPE which entitled it to sue him for breach of the covenant. Mr Marcroft initially sought to rely on the TUPE transfer to Heartland but then changed his tune. He argued that TUPE did not apply, that there was no relevant transfer, that he was not employed by PMI, that he was not assigned to that part of the undertaking transferred, that he had ceased to be assigned before the date of the transfer and that PMI had deliberately breached its duty to provide him with information about the transfer, thereby by depriving him of the opportunity to object to it and rendering the transfer of his contract of employment ineffective.

The judge held that there was a relevant transfer by PMI to Heartland under TUPE, reg. 3; that Mr Marcroft was employed by the transferor PMI; that he was assigned to the business of the commercial insurance department at PMI which was transferred to Heartland; and that he had adequate opportunity to object to the transfer.

The Court of Appeal had to decide whether, at the date of the transfer, Mr Marcroft was assigned to PMI's commercial insurance undertaking ‘on a temporary basis’, in which case he would not have transferred under TUPE, or whether he was fully assigned at the date of the transfer, in which case he would be TUPE-transferred. It had no doubt that the original judge correctly decided that he was assigned and could not bring himself within the temporary assignment exclusion. The court understood why it could have been said that ‘in the fag end of his contract’, there was a temporary quality in the timescale of Mr Marcroft’s work with PMI. However, the mere fact of his handing in his notice (and the subsequently much reduced workload) did not change the nature of the work he was performing: it ‘cannot be right, in principle, that an employee is automatically assigned on a temporary basis, thereby losing the protection of TUPE, simply as a result of handing in his notice’.

On Mr Marcroft’s claim regarding the failure to inform and the denial of his right to object, the Court of Appeal said that he faced a number of insuperable problems:

* There was no conspiracy by PMI and Heartland to evade TUPE which would disentitle Heartland from saying that there was a TUPE transfer. Mr Marcroft was informed of the proposed transfer by PMI on 25 September. He did not object to the transfer either before or after 2 October 2009. On the contrary, he asserted through his solicitors in a letter of 26 November, by which time he was fully aware of the circumstances, that TUPE applied to transfer him from PMI and that Heartland had the benefit of any restrictive covenant that he was alleged to have breached.

* There is no legal basis for saying that the transfer of his contract was ineffective. There is a duty (under TUPE, reg. 13) to provide the representatives of the affected workers with certain information (which does not, however, include the right to object). It is not an obligation to provide the information to Mr Marcroft personally. But even if such a duty could somehow be spelled out of that regulation, the duty rested with the PMI, not Heartland since they were not his employer. The remedy for breach of the reg. 13 duty is a claim in the tribunal by union or employee representatives, not an avoidance of the transfer that has taken place.

* Compliance with reg. 13 is not a precondition to an effective transfer of a contract of employment. If it were, there would be no point in TUPE conferring the right to object, since the transferor employer in the position of PMI could always prevent a transfer by the simple device of not providing the employee’s representative with information in compliance with reg. 13. Such a construction would undermine the protective purpose of TUPE.

* There is no basis in fact or law for the suggested implied term in the contract of employment that would render the transfer of it ineffective unless the employee has been provided with information by the employer about the transfer.

Published with kind permission of Craig Gordon, HR Bullets.

Compromise Agreements - McWilliam v Glasgow City Council

2011-04-24T03:00:00.000-07:00

Compromise agreements Friday, 15 April 2011
McWilliam v Glasgow City Council

Overview
The EAT in Scotland has held that compromise agreements entered into by Glasgow City Council to settle equal pay claims prevented the women affected from pursuing those claims, even though their solicitors had not advised whether or not the settlements on offer were a ‘good deal’. There is no obligation on advisers to comment on the potential value of a claim or assess the likelihood of its success – all that is required is that the employee is advised what the terms of the compromise agreement are and what they mean.

Glasgow City Council were faced with many thousands of equal pay claims and arranged for local lawyers to advise its female staff about their rights under equal pay law. The council then offered compromise agreements to these staff on the basis that the solicitors would act for these employees (not the council) in giving legal advice. The solicitors held a series of mass presentations to advise the female staff about compromise agreements, and offered one-to-one sessions with individuals on their own contracts so that, if they wanted to, they could sign compromise agreements (which stated that they would not bring equal pay claims covering a specified period). The lawyers specifically emphasised that:

* they could not advise on whether or not the deal offered was a good one for the employee concerned
* the employees could not bring a tribunal claim if they concluded a compromise agreement, and
* the employees did not have to sign the agreements that day, and if they were unsure, they shouldn’t sign

The applicable law (at the time) was s. 77 of the Sex Discrimination Act which set out the criteria which must be met for a compromise agreement to be used as a valid and effective means of waiving claims. In particular, it specified that the compromise agreement must relate to a ‘particular complaint’ and that the employee must receive ‘advice’ from a ‘relevant independent adviser as to the terms and effect’ of the agreement before it is entered into.

Ms McWilliam and some of her co-workers did try to bring equal pay claims against the council and the Glasgow tribunal had to decide whether it could hear their claims. This turned on the efficacy of the compromise agreements. The tribunal (ETS 132316/07) unequivocally upheld the validity of the compromise agreements. Ms McWilliam appealed to the EAT and lost.

The EAT held that:

* The term ‘particular complaint’ does not mean that a tribunal complaint has to be lodged before that complaint can be waived under a compromise agreement. What’s more, the complaint does not even need to have been articulated by the employee before the agreement is entered into. What matters, said the EAT, is that both parties know to which particular complaint the compromise agreement relates (i.e. both parties are aware that particular matter cannot be litigated in future) – there doesn’t need to have been a history of dialogue or communication about the complaint.

* The advice offered was ‘independent’ - the fact that the lawyers’ fees were paid by Glasgow Council was standard practice and in no way altered the fact that they were acting for the employees. Also, the fact that the lawyers had met with the council to discuss the logistics for the mass advice sessions was irrelevant.

* When giving advice to an employee on the terms and effect of the compromise agreement, the independent adviser does not need to offer a view as to whether or not the deal on offer is a good one or whether or not the employee should accept the offer given his or her particular circumstances. All that is required is that the employee is advised what the terms of the compromise agreement are and what they mean (e.g. the scope of the claims, what claims are being compromised, how any payment would be treated for tax purposes, etc.).

While this case related to the statutory requirements in the ‘old’ Sex Discrimination Act, these requirements are replicated in other statutory provisions on compromise agreements, e.g. the Equality Act 2010. They are also much the same as those in the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Re-published with kind permission of HRBullets.co.uk

‘Confusing’ policies led to unfair dismissal - A lesson in clarity?

2011-04-08T04:58:00.000-07:00

Liberty Living plc v Reid

Overview

An employee summarily dismissed for drinking alcohol off work premises during working hours was unfairly dismissed. His employer’s policies (one dealing with alcohol and drugs and the other with disciplinary issues) were inconsistent and had only been drawn to the employee’s attention after his dismissal.

Liberty Living (LL) owned and managed various student properties where Mr Reid worked as a maintenance caretaker. LL had two employment policies which related to alcohol consumption during working hours. The Disciplinary Policy referred to the possibility of summary dismissal if the employee is found to be ‘under the influence of alcohol’ during working hours, which amounted to gross misconduct. Its Alcohol and Drug Policy stated that ‘consumption of alcohol or being under the influence of alcohol while performing company business or in the workplace is prohibited’ and that ‘violation of this policy can result in disciplinary action up to an including discharge’.

Mr Reid was caught by LL’s general manager drinking in a local pub during working hours. He was given a letter summoning him to a disciplinary hearing for ‘being under the influence of alcohol during working hours’. A copy of LL’s Disciplinary Policy was enclosed with the letter but its Alcohol and Drugs Policy was not. At the end of the hearing Mr Reid was told he was being summarily dismissed, the reason given being that consumption of any alcohol at all during the working day constituted gross misconduct. A subsequent dismissal letter then stipulated that he was dismissed both for having had an alcoholic drink during working hours and for being under the influence of alcohol during working hours. Mr Reid appealed on the basis that he’d only had a pint of lager shandy and that he had not been ‘under the influence’. His appeal was dismissed because he had consumed alcohol during working hours.

By a majority, a tribunal upheld Mr Reid’s unfair dismissal complaint because he’d been unaware of LL’s Alcohol and Drugs Policy and the policy was, in any event, confusing. LL was patently unclear as to what its policies actually were and had created confusion at the disciplinary hearing by referring to both a prohibition on being ‘under the influence of alcohol’ and against any ‘consumption of alcohol’. LL appealed on the grounds that the tribunal’s decision was perverse and that it had substituted its own view for that of a reasonable employer.

The EAT rejected LL’s appeal and upheld the finding of unfair dismissal. It was not open to LL to say that, although it had charged Mr Reid with being under the influence of alcohol, that covered a situation where he had had a single alcoholic drink. Not only did LL not apply its own policies but it clearly didn’t know what they were. The Disciplinary Policy said that it was only being ‘under the influence’ during working hours that could be categorised as gross misconduct leading to summary dismissal. And while the Alcohol and Drugs Policy stated that consuming alcohol while on company business or in the workplace was not allowed, it was not expressly designated as gross misconduct. LL’s cause was not helped by the charges it brought against Mr Reid being different from what he was actually dismissed for.

Here are some suggestions as to what HR can learn from this case:

-Have policies which are consistent and not contradictory.

-Avoid phrases such as ‘under the influence of alcohol’; it’s pretty meaningless unless you are going to spell out precisely what it means.

-Make sure policies are brought to the attention of staff, e.g. get them to sign and date that they have received, read and understood them.

-Make sure your managers know what your policies say – in the case above the dismissing manager wrongly told Mr Reid that because he had had a drink during working hours, this was gross misconduct; neither policy actually said this!

Liberty Living plc v Reid

Republished with the kind permission of Craig Gordon, HR Bullets

Flexible working now the norm

2011-03-22T04:15:00.000-07:00

Four fifths of UK companies are now offering their staff flexible working, according to Flexible Working Goes Global from Regus.

But trust remains a major hurdle for many companies with over a third of UK businesses only offering this privilege to senior staff. Those companies embracing flexible working practices are reaping major benefits: 40% report improved staff productivity; 67% say staff achieve a better work-life balance; and 55% acknowledge that flexible working costs less than conventional, fixed office working.

Flexible working can incorporate office hours and/or location. Indeed, a quarter of respondents pointed to the recruitment benefits of mobile or home working, claiming flexibility in location helps them access a wider talent pool and attract staff based in remote areas. Rising oil prices are likely to further focus attention on remote working in the coming months, as UK employers face pressure to help commuters reduce their monthly transport costs.

The key findings of the research as it relates to the UK are:

83% of firms offer flexible working, whether related to office hours or location
38% only offer flexible working as a privilege to senior staff
proportion of firms reporting that flexible working
costs less than fixed office working (55%)
improves employee productivity (40%)
enables a better work-life balance ( 67%)
is more family-friendly (81%)
makes staff more motivated (36%)
helps attracts a wider talent pool (21%)
in terms of location (remote working) enables them to employ valuable people that live in more remote parts of their country (24%)
is pivotal in achieving business scalability as we emerge from recession (22%)
encourages staff to be more self-sufficient and pro-active in their work (37%)

Article published on this blog and 'Britain's Got HR Talent' Linkedin group with kind permission of Craig Gordon of www.HRBullets.co.uk

Corporate learning and development priorities 2011

2011-03-22T04:10:00.000-07:00

Investment in HR as a discipline has fallen dramatically in comparison with last year but investment in people development as whole remains a top priority according to Corporate Learning Priorities Survey 2011 from the Henley Business School. Talent retention and managing change are the other two top priorities.

While developing the HR team is not seen as a priority, 74% of respondents said that developing people to achieve growth and competitive advantage is paramount (up from 69% in 2010). Retention of talent is the second highest priority for development activity with 73% identifying it as crucial, a rise from 63% last year, and concern about managing change, reflecting a continuing volatile economy, came third with 64% naming it as a learning objective, compared with 60% in 2010.

The survey, of 2,500 HR and non-HR senior managers from private and public sector organisations employing in excess of 500 people, captures a snapshot of learning and development priorities at a time when public sector organisations are implementing severe cuts and the private sector is facing increased competition and having to do 'more with less'.

Despite the apparently positive attitude towards development as a whole for next year, there seems little appetite to focus on HR capability with the development of HR teams plummeting in the priority list from 34% in 2010 to just 3% in this year’s survey. HR and non-HR respondents also have a very different view on Learning and Development spending this year with 24% of respondents in HR roles saying they will spend more in 2011 as against 32% of those in non-HR roles.

Nick Kemsley, the co-director at Henley's Centre for HR Excellence, believes that while focus on HR capability may have become a victim of the times it is vital that HR continues to develop and transform in 2011. He believes HR functions have to address gaps in their content, structure, process, system and skills to ensure they are meeting the needs of organisations - or risk being side-lined. He says: ‘This change must happen quickly. HR will need to live the values of the post-downturn world – speed, pragmatism, tangibility, impact – in its own evolution, or else risk being left isolated in a business world which has to get on with things with or without its help. If HR can pull this transformation off, then the kind of work which happens within the function will be genuinely business-critical and offer both enormous opportunity and challenge for those who want to, and are able to, work like this. HR would be a place where a connection with business strategy and performance was immediate and tangible’.

Other key findings of the research include:

Attracting new talent - 64% said this was important, compared to 52% in 2010
The development of middle managers remains significant with 43% naming this as a first or second priority

Just over a third (35%) of respondents place developing senior managers in first or second place, while 31% identify developing the management skills of new leaders
The overwhelming majority of respondents will be doing more, rather than less, learning and development activity in 2011 – specifically many will be ‘doing it for themselves’ with 62% of respondents saying they would be doing more informal knowledge sharing between peers and 59% more mentoring between peers in 2011 than in 2010

Article published on this blog and 'Britain's Got HR Talent' Linkedin group with kind permission of Craig Gordon, www.HRBullets.co.uk

Use of compromise agreements increases significantly

2011-03-22T04:01:00.000-07:00

More than half of employers surveyed by the CIPD say that their use of compromise agreements has increased in the last two years, with more than two-thirds saying they use such agreements, even in the absence of an existing claim. This is one of headline findings of the CIPD’s Conflict Management survey. The median compensation payment was £10,000 but one in five employers reported that the typical payment was £25,000 or more.

Albeit on a relatively modest sample size of 206 organisations with an average number of staff in each of just over 2,000, the CIPD’s survey reveals that more than two out of three employers (69%) say they have no effective protection against employees making wholly unjustifiable claims to employment tribunals. The report shows three in five respondents (61%) have experience of an employee claiming unfair dismissal and ‘tagging on’ a discrimination claim in the hope of getting more compensation. Over half of employers (55%) say they have endured a complaint against their organisation on malicious grounds. More than half think the law on unfair dismissal should be amended to make it easier for employers to dismiss. A similar proportion (54%) also support more effective case management to identify ‘vexatious’ claims, with exactly half supporting the move to require tribunals to award costs against losing claimants.

Mike Emmott, Employee Relations adviser at the CIPD, said: ‘This survey reflects the strength of feeling among employers about the failings of the current system for resolving workplace disputes. [It] also suggests that recent plans outlined by the government – to increase the minimum period employees serve before they can claim unfair dismissal from 12 months to two years – will have only limited impact on the number of claims. This is because many claims are linked to discrimination claims which can be made from day one of employment. The real problem is that the employment tribunal system itself is broken and its costs and benefits are wholly out of line. The government needs to take a radical look at the existing machinery for protecting employment rights’.

Other findings include:

The number of days management and HR spent on managing both disciplinary and grievance cases as gone up since 2007, the last time the CIPD conducted a similar survey: from 13 to 18 days (disciplinary) and from 9 to 14.4 days (grievance)

There are significant differences between sectors – the number of days of management time (excluding HR) spent on handling grievances in the public sector (9 days) is much higher than private services (5.5 days)

There have been significant increases in the use of most forms of managing conflict, internal and external. Almost half of respondents say their organisation has increased its use of disciplinary action (50%) and grievance procedures (48%)

More employers seem to be using mediation to resolve workplace issues (some 80% in the public sector and nearly 50% in private services. Those who don’t use mediation cite its costs and their belief that there is no clear business case

Three out of five (62%) say their organisation is making increased use of training line managers in handling difficult conversations

Major reasons for using compromise agreements (other than to settle an existing claim) are to remove an employee on grounds of poor performance or misconduct (39%), to avoid legal challenge in relation to redundancy (26%) and to make it easier to remove senior staff without embarrassment (24%)

The median cost of management time for dealing with a typical compromise agreement is reported as £1,000; the median cost of legal advice in drawing up an agreement is £750. Looking at the total costs involved, including compensation, the median was £11,000 and the maximum £110,000

Article published with the kind permission of Craig Gordon or www.HRBullets.co.uk

Video Testimonial - Mark Eliott

2011-03-08T00:03:00.000-08:00

Emotional Intelligence Video Case Study

2011-03-07T23:57:00.000-08:00

Message to Mark Holloway's Students at the University of East London

2011-03-02T07:41:00.000-08:00

What To Do When People Screw Up

2011-03-02T02:58:00.003-08:00

Dealing with Labels

2011-03-02T02:48:00.000-08:00

Summit Director of Learning & Development Dirk Bansch on how to find the confidence to deal with people senior to you.

A Negotiation Skills Masterclass from Blackpool FC

2011-02-09T07:31:00.000-08:00

Blackpool Football Club bosses pulled off a master stroke on transfer window deadline day for British football.

For many months, there's been speculation surrounding Mr Adams and the keen interest being express by clubs such as Liverpool, Manchester United and Chelsea. OK, there's been 'speculation' and that's very different from a genuine offer being made to Blackpool FC to secure Mr Adams' services. On a day when Fernando Torres left struggling Liverpool to join Chelsea FC (who are also struggling but still in the top 5 league positions) for an astounding £50 million fee, youngster Andy Carroll leaves Newcastle FC to join Liverpool for a staggering £30 million - remember that Mr Carroll has played less than 45 minutes for the England national side and his transfer fee is only £10 million less than that paid for master footballer Zinazin Didane over a decade ago, don't you just wonder where, in an environment of austerity and cutbacks, how much does one club have to pay for a player from a competitor?

The master stroke from Blackpool FC? It's a wonderfully simple, if not perhaps unethical approach to retaining the services of a very influential player. What did they do? Well, Sky News reported that an offer for Adams had been received from high-flying Tottenham Hotspur (remember, it's deadline day and more 'last minute' deals get done on this day than at any other time during the transfer window), but a deal was not able to be done due to the fact that several Blackpool FC shareholders weren't available to sign documents which would have approved the deal before the 11pm transfer deadline.

Isn't this a fantastic strategy? A well established negotiation tool is to 'refer to a higher authority' if you want to get something done more quickly and easily. But Blackpool FC turned this approach on its head. They appear to have ensured that the 'higher authorities' were unavailable, whether they be in different locations or just not contactable by phone. Well done Mr Holloway, you've kept the player you never wanted to sell and let other clubs know what challenges they'll face in future when you don't want to sell one of your players.

Can't we all learn something from this that relates to the world of business?

A key tool when influencing another person or group is the element of scarcity. Whether it's a scarcity of funds, resources or time, creating the illusion of something or someone not being available for long tends to create an element of urgency in the other party. Look at how Ian Holloway played out this drama. And he did it fantastically well! He started with the approach of 'Don't ask us to sell our player as he's not for sale.' In an interview a few weeks later he stated that in his opinion, his player could be worth up to £48 million. How crazy is that valuation? and that's possibly what he wanted his intended audience (other Premiership managers) to think. And are you guessing what's next? Even though £48 million is ridiculous as a transfer fee, if you do want to buy the player and you get him for £20 million - doesn't it then look like more of a bargain?

Remember, in business, whether you're a leader, manager, sales person or customer service agent, you are ALWAYS negotiating. And if you're not using effective negotiation and influencing tools and techniques, you could lose out. And, with great respect for Mr Holloway, if you don't want to sell out, make it amazingly difficult for the other party to access the relevant resources (in his case, the shareholders) to approve such a deal.

Find out more about negotiation skills training courses at http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

The George Hotel Huntingdon - How about this for quality?

2011-01-20T09:44:00.000-08:00

The Premier League Chairman Approach to Performance Management

2010-12-14T03:58:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, the new owners of Blackburn Rovers Football Club decided that Sam Allardyce, the manager who last season saved the club from certain relegation, and this season has steadied what some commentators would term 'a sinking ship' was no longer the manager for them.

Stories of disagreements between Allardyce and the owners regarding the availability of cash to fund transfer purchases were initially reported, however, the club's chairperson stated that the somewhat unexpected sacking was due to Allardyce not being the right person to take the club where the new owners want it to be. and, the place they want to be is in one of the top 4 spots in the Premier League - spots virtually guaranteed to the likes of Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United and erm...well, not Liverpool - for this season at least!

It's not always about the money

Manchester City's billionaire owners pumped several hundred million pounds into a transfer fund to maximise the possibility for them to be a top 6 club in the Premier League. Perhaps the eager investors and owners are quick to forget that former manager Sven Goren Erickson reached the dizzy heights of seventh in the Premier League before being sacked....because City wanted to be a 'top six' club! And Erickson spent very little on buying new players.
What are the lessons here for managers in your organisation?

Just because you saved a team from failure in the past, doesn't automatically qualify you to lead a team to sustained success in the future.
You (the manager) may not be the problem. Sometimes, it's the team (or several members of it) that need to play/work in a different role or, at worst, be moved on. Carrying dead weight doesn't help your team or organisation perform perform optimally.
Manage 'poor' or 'inadequate' more effectively. OK, in the football arena, the owners can sack you on the spot, but you're likely to be paid off quite handsomely and not need to find alternative employment for a while. In business, it's very different. There's a process to be followed which is aimed at either improving performance or, getting rid of the manager whilst remaining within legal constraints so as to guard against an unfair dismissal hearing.
When you inherit a team, find out specifics about performance history from the previous manager or, at the very least, performance appraisal records (but be careful, they can be very fluffy and inaccurate in detailing facts). Team building is key!
Seek feedback from your boss. What are their most important goals? What are their top priorities in terms of results required? What reporting do they require from you? What are minimum performance standards? When you obtain this data, you have boundaries to work within and goals to work towards. There's no guessing.

Don't you find it a little strange that just last week, England football manager, Fabio Capello was tipping Allardyce as his potential successor in the most challenging job in English football...and just a few days later, Allardyce is looking for a new job?

Learn to See Situations Differently - A Lesson from Bernie

2010-12-09T06:16:00.000-08:00

An integral part of our role as facilitators is to help delegates see a situation, however emotive, challenging or unattractive, from different angles. This skills is commonly termed 'reframing'.

We often share true stories with delegates on how creating (and maintaining) a strong emotional connection to a situation, or at least, a strong emotional connection to how we perceive it, can cause major problems if we allow it to. Take this recent example:

A Qantas A380 super jumbo flight makes emergency landing due to a component shearing off one of its engines. Not a significant problem perhaps. And if you're a passenger and the calm pilot has advised you that all is in order and that you remain safe, no problem at all perhaps? It's more likely to be a story for your family and pals to enjoy back home.

But, what was identified later by 'experts' was that the component became dislodged from the engine because of what is termed 'faulty manufacturing'. And remember, this is a Rolls Royce engine. The cream of the engineering crop! Experts have advised that the component falling from the engine mounting, whilst not good for PR, didn't actually cause a problem with flight safety. BUT, they did comment that the component smashed into a wing. What's the problem? The wings of a A380 store the kerosine which fuels the aircraft. They are packed with flammable liquid - liquid you really shouldn't consider lighting at 30,000 feet. If the fuel had lit, a fireball would have fallen from the sky. Rather like the ill-fated Space Shuttle incident from the 1990's. An incident which, if some people had done their jobs effectively, would not have happened.

So. You're a passenger on the Qantas A380 above. You disembark and what happens?

- Are you grateful that the incident was 'minor' and that you landed safely? After all, no harm done eh?

- Or, are you filled with panic, anger and resentment that 'I could have been killed because of these lazy, stupid engineers'? (Time to submit that claim for trauma...or insist on the Business Class upgrade).

There's always a different way to look at a situation, if we're willing to do so. Now on to Bernie Ecclestone and a rather creative piece of brand management and product marketing.

SKY News reported that Mr Ecclestone was the victim of a 'mugging' and that his rather exclusive HUBLOT watch was taken by the perpetrators of the crime. And this is when Mr Ecclestone decided that there was a marketing opportunity to be had. He allegedly contacted the watch manufacturer and, as SKY News quote an advertisement was launched showing Mr Ecclestone battered and bruised, accompanied by a tagline of 'See what people will do for a Hublot'.

Fantastic reframing and a lesson in self-promotion and marketing!

From Service to Satisfaction - What a Journey

2010-12-09T03:52:00.000-08:00

The Christmas shopping madness has started. The spirit of goodwill doesn't appear to have kicked into place yet - at least it hadn't in the hectic Leeds city centre last Saturday.

The problem? Lots of people eager, perhaps a little too eager, to get their gift shopping completed before the streets and shops got too busy. Well, we're not really bothered about the streets being too busy are we? That we can handle. But queues? Oh no, not again. Waiting, waiting and more waiting. only to be served by a store assistant who doesn't smile (because they've seen the length of the queue they HAVE TO serve) and so in their own mind are planning just how stressful their day will be. Isn't it strange how some people plan their stress...in advance? Talk about an unproductive mindset that could ultimately ruin your day, week (or even life).

Thank you for your patience

I visited a beauty store in Leeds last Saturday to buy a few gifts for my wife. And yes, I'm rather good at forward-planning so set off from home at 9am in an effort to avoid the worst of the expected stampede of people who can sometimes forget their manners when 'enjoying' the Christmas shopping experience. And, it was this forward-planning and foresight that allowed me to witness a simply fantastic demonstration of turning a problem into a solution - a very creative solution too. Here's what happened.

Having been served by a very helpful female staff member at the store, I'd selected my purchases and walked to join the queue of around 20 shoppers who were waiting to be called to pay for their purchases. And that's where the problems started.

The two staff members behind the cash desk were fumbling around with a cash register, paying no attention to the queuing customers and talking to each other in shallow whispers. A full 60 seconds later, there was no communication forthcoming from behind the cash desk, or from anywhere else for that matter. And wouldn't you just know it. One of the employees behind the cash desk wore a badge stating 'MANAGER. But clearly, this 'MANAGER' was not 'managing' very well at all. She was so involved in the problem that she forgot that the people in the queue were not obligated to wait AND actually wanted to give her their hard-earned cash. And that ultimately means, the people who keep her, and her employees in jobs were not allowed to purchase their items, at least not for now.

As some members of the growing queue began to share their frustrations with each other, others chose to return their items to the shelves and simply leave the store. After all, these people are actually in the store and in the queue for the cash till BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GIVE THEIR MONEY TO THE STORE! It's quite a simple concept that some retailers should concentrate on. Accept money from those individuals who wish to give it to you.

A full 2 minutes following my noticing the initial fumbling behind the cash desk, still no communication from the Manager about what was happening, why it was happening or, how she would ensure that the now even longer queue of shoppers would be cared for. Now, I'm a patient guy and I am more understanding than many people that problems can arise. And that's ok with me. What I do appreciate knowing is how the problem (which is affecting my shopping experience) is to be resolved. I'm from the 'Just tell me and I'll understand' tribe of shoppers.

Saved by an Angel

With more staff gathering round the cash desk,the manager becoming even more frustrated and more would-be customers leaving the store - without spending any money, it became apparent that one of the cash tills was not operational. Yes, there's only so many times you can say 'Re-Boot' before even the queuing customers want to shout out 'Stop RE-BOOTING...Even we know it's not working'.

Now for the flip. And a fantastic flip at that. In a moment of pure inspiration (or perhaps, desperation), the young lady who had served me 5 minutes earlier takes a stand. Here she goes in a warm, genuine and very apologetic voice. And remember, at this point, the manager is still not speaking to customers in any way and not aware that a public demonstration of brilliance is about to take place - right in front of her.

'Ladies and gentlemen, as you can see the cash till isn't working.....and we continue to re-boot...even though that isn't working.' At this point, the shoppers focus is drawn to the solitary figure of a smiling store assistant attempting to help, and without her Managers' permission or knowledge.

At this point, the Manager, and crowd of followers look up and towards their renegade colleague. How could she break rank and dare to think for herself? She continued 'One of our two cash tills isn't working, BUT, the other one is and we can now serve you on this one.' Fantastic eh? Even the manager was so involved in the problem which was the faulty cash till that her awareness wasn't drawn to the fact that their other cash till was completely operational and waiting to start chomping cash and visa cards. Remember, would-be buyers are still leaving the queue and exiting the store without making their purchase/s.

And on she goes, 'Now, I just want to let you know that I can't sing...and I can't dance very well...' drawing smiles and giggles from her audience,...now for the dramatic pause and a bundle of shoppers wondering where this was leading.... 'BUT I AM THE BEST gift wrapper you'll meet in Leeds today, so please bear with us and we'll do our best to take good care of you.'

No applause from her audience, but she attracted lots of smiles, a few 'Thank You's and an abundance of goodwill. As her reactive colleagues got their brains in to gear, she politely asked the next in line how they would like their gifts wrapped - in a box? in a bag? Would you like a bow too? Even grumpy children got a treat as, after seeking parents permission, she asked if they would like a sweetie. All of these questions and a few polite and timely offers helped her to flip a problem with 'Customer Service' in to an experience of 'Customer Satisfaction', at least satisfaction with her contribution.

This is a true story about an experience I had last Saturday. Now for some questions for you about your organisation:

- Do you focus on delivering 'Customer Service' or 'Customer Satisfaction'? And do you actually understand just how your bottom-line financial performance is adversely impacted by your employees missing opportunities to satisfy would-be and actual customers?

- Do you train your employees, not just customer service staff, but, sales people, even your IT team to focus on delivering customer satisfaction? If not, you're very likely to be wasting your company money. Just because you don't see it go missing, doesn't mean it's not being wasted.

- How do you actually know when a customer of yours is genuinely 'satisfied' with your product or service? And beyond that, how do you know when they are genuinely 'satisfied' or 'dis-satified' with the quality of service/dis-service you delivered?

- Excellent customer satisfaction doesn't just save you money (fewer complaints, more efficient communication, right-first-time), it can actually make your company money too.

In short, forget about delivering excellent customer service. It's a worn out statement that whilst well-meaning, has become an empty platitude thrown around by some corporate bosses and many motivational (or as i term many of them 'Irritational') speakers that it's become virtually worthless. Focus on satisfaction and your financial performance could be boosted beyond your highest expectations.

Summit prove a popular choice for Middle East HR leaders

2010-11-02T05:54:00.000-07:00

Following our participation in the 7th Middle East HR Conference held in Dubai last week, we are pleased to announce that Summit has received a number of invitations from HR leaders in the region to visit the UAE and Arabian Gulf during December 2010.

During the 4-day conference, an abundance of HR Directors and Managers approached us to discuss how we could help them overcome their most pressing challenges including:

- Succession Planning
- Attracting and retaining high-quality managers
- Supporting government initiatives to develop more home-grown talent
- Enhancing Employee Engagement in multi-cultural teams in a transient region

Summit is pleased to announce that it intends to visit Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia during December 2010 and looks forward to being of service.

Launch of New Summit Web Site

2010-10-21T02:07:00.000-07:00

Monday 8th November sees the launch of the refreshed and updated Summit Training web site.

The revamped site doesn't just have a new look, it has a bundle of benefits including a client only video coaching academy, interactive blog and a more extensive range of training programmes and HR Consultancy solutions.

If you don't find exactly what you're looking for, please give our expert team a call on 0845 052 3701.

With best wishes

Scott

Influence - How Much or How Little Do You Notice It?

2010-08-13T02:22:00.000-07:00

It seems that the most effective influencer in the UK is the magician/hypnotist/entertainer Mr Derren Brown. If you've ever witnessed Mr Brown's live show, even the untrained eye can notice that his approach is a potent mixture of trickery, sleight of hand, misdirection and exemplary timing. Twin these with a charming personality and there you have it - persuasion magic!

If you've not seen Mr Brown in action, just type his name in to Youtube and you're bound to enjoy yourself. But we don't all want to be a Derren Brown type of influencer and persuader. And that is a good thing. But we all do have situations at home, at work and in the street where we want to or indeed have to influence another human being, or even group of human beings to either start doing something or stop doing something, to do more of something or do less of something. Indeed, if nobody influenced anybody else - nothing would happen.

Are you aware of how individuals, government, companies and groups influence you? Maybe you are on some occasions, maybe not on others. I've detailed below a number of situations where we are being influenced, perhaps unconsciously or perhaps, because we pay so little attention or place so little value on the influencing stimulus - we tend to comply.

You're too well dressed to be a beggar

I've just returned from a family holiday in the city of Nice, France. Each evening an abundance of tourists explore the beautiful 'Old Town' area of the city to enjoy the architecture, the street entertainment which spans music to martial arts. But the one thing that really stood out was the fact that the 'beggars' who hounded unsuspecting tourists for money - were all really well groomed and remarkably well dressed.

A 'team' of male beggars worked the Palais de Justice square where thousands of tourists passed through and hundreds more enjoyed the cafes and restaurants. Each 'beggar' had a transparent plastic cup which they would shake as their next target approached (so the target could hear the sound of coins and so be encouraged to contribute). But who did they target each and every time? Females - females on their own, females in a group but ultimately no males were targeted. Why not? Perhaps because females are perceived to be more compliant, the beggar can flirt a little and maybe because the response from a male would be more forthright, less polite and more aggressive. See what the beggars have done? They've selected their target market, put their own money in their plastic cups to imply that other passers-by have been kind enough to contribute (to their next Armani clothing purchase) so you should too.

There's a lesson here. If you're going to beg - don't dress, look or smell like you've just got yourself ready for your first date with a beautiful super-model! It just doesn't fit the profile.

The Restaurant Bait

Again, and you'll have experienced this in many holiday destinations across the globe. Restaurants and cafes place a member or two of their team on the street just outside their hostelry to attract potential customers. But why do they always choose to employ rather attractive, in-shape and often blonde (natural or bottle) in this role? Have you ever seen a spotty, greasy-haired, ginger plump lady - or male in this position? Not a chance. Why not? Because the restaurant and cafe owners realise that where a family is passing by, it's usually the father/the male that holds will be paying for the meal and booze - and that they will most likely enjoy the 'sights' too as well as enjoying the food. You just got influenced and it cost you a bundle!

Supermarket Sweep

Why do we buy the 'Special 2-4-1 Offer' in a supermarket so often? Because it appears better value than simply buying the one item you really wanted. It's like 'If I don't buy it now, I'll lose out'. But how can we really 'lose out' by buying something we didn't really need, only wanted? Supermarket bosses use fantastic, perhaps sometimes unethical, influencing strategies to influence the shopper to just keep on shopping. Even when it comes to checkout, the sweets, chocolate and other snack foods aren't there to be of help to you - what they're really doing is providing an opportunity for you to impulse buy a product, or even worse, get your kids to pester you in to buying something for them. And wouldn't it be oh so embarrassing for you if your kid/s caused a scene in front of so many other people at the checkout?

Amsterdam Airport Has the Best Idea

You've heard it over the airport speaker system. 'Will Mr Williams flying to Dubai with Emirates please board immediately as the flight is ready to depart?'...to be followed a few minutes later by 'Will Mr Williams flying to Dubai with Emirates please board immediately as the flight is ready to depart?'

See what's happening here? A supposedly important message, with consequences for the passenger - missing his flight, and the airline - missing its slot and the potential onward delays, isn't becoming any more important to the passenger as there isn't a consequence for him. Now, imagine if you are Mr Williams for a moment and you're flying from Amsterdam's Schippol airport. This is the term they use, and it creates a very different impact.

'Will Mr Williams flying to Dubai with Emirates please board immediately or your baggage will be off-loaded from the flight?' See the difference? If you're Mr Williams, you'll actually feel the difference - emotionally and perhaps financially too. This message delivers a sense of urgency, a sense of responsibility and also a sense of consequence as Mr Williams has no control over the airline shutting the doors without him.

Low - Cost Airlines - The Devil is in the Detail...and Your Visa Card Bill

So, your flight ticket from Leeds to Paris is ONLY £5 each way. Fantastic, WE MUST GO!

You go online, choose your flights and all is looking well. Until that is, you want to take baggage, one piece each to be stored in the hold. £20 to £30 each ticket. And you'll have to check-in online as the airline doesn't employ staff to do this at the airport....DUH! so that will cost you a further £5 each, each way. So that's another £20 creeping its way on to your visa card. Oh, you want to pay by visa or debit card? That's another 2% charge of the total transaction please. But I have a question about the booking, I'd better call the airlines 'customer service' number. Oops, didn't we tell you that it's not only an 0870 number, it costs upto £1 per minute...AND THAT INCLUDES THE TIME IT TAKES FOR US TO TELL YOU YOU'RE IN A QUEUE, ATTEMPT TO SELL YOU MORE OF OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES not just the time you have speaking to one of our staff.

See what's happened? You've been influenced to make purchases because they feel compulsory. Of course they aren't compulsory as we reserve the right to not travel or choose another airline, but the influencing psychology is 'I MUST COMPLY IF I WANT THE TRIP'. Some call this influencing, whilst others may call it scamming!!

The lessons? Start to notice how you are being influence, who is influencing you and reserve the right to choose not to comply. You might live to regret it if you don't.

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

http://www.ScottWatson.co.uk/

Cialdini's Influence Principles Aren't Just for the Business Arena

2010-08-02T06:43:00.000-07:00

So, this isn't the usual kind of blog post. As you know, many, if not all of my posts relate directly to the corporate arena. But this one is different. Perhaps very different - in terms of subject, and also in terms of how to apply the wonderful principles and teaching of Professor Robert Cialdini (influence and persuasion), to a rather distasteful subject. The subject that is so distasteful?

Dog Mess!

Now, if the subject hasn't put you off, stick with me on this as I'll quickly demonstrate how to apply Cialdini's principles to under-pressure and often under-resourced local government officials who are charged with keeping our neighbourhood safe and streets clean.

A quick re-cap of Cialdini's principles

1. Reciprocity - you help me, now I'm obliged to return a favour to you

2. Commitment and Consistency - If you say you'll do it - do it! Keep your commitments

3. Social Proof - People will generally do what they see other people doing/or not doing

4. Authority - People tend to comply (willingly or otherwise) with those who are in authority

5. Liking - People are more influenced by people that they like.

6. Scarcity - People tend to want more of something when it is becoming scarce.

Straight to the point. Who do you fear the most, or at least far less likely to be offensive to?

a. Police Officer (a real one, not a 'hobby bobby')

b. Dog Warden (in full uniform)

Let me guess, you went for option A. Why? Possibly because a police officer has far more influence. Not just the individual, but the uniform that he or she wears represents AUTHORITY.And however much, or however little someone respects authority, the police offer has the right, and power to encourage or insist on compliance with the law. Another point is that if a police officer actually arrests you for an offence, you're far less likely to enjoy the experience.

Indeed, encouraging irresponsible dog owners to clean up the mess that their pet just made shouldn't be all that difficult if Cialdini's principles are applied effectively and consistently. Whilst people generally COMPLY with authority, they only comply when somebody is observing them - not afterwards. One example is spotting speeding drivers quickly slow down when they notice a speed camera...and then speed off when they are out of the cameras range.

Management Development Training

2010-06-10T05:57:00.000-07:00

The need for and value of effective management development training is often sidelined by busy executives who are so focused on ensuring that nothing goes badly wrong, that they miss the opportunity to ensure that far more things go wonderfully well.

Yes, executives do need to hit the numbers and achieve the goals they have agreed, or been set, whether it be by eager investors or other parties. And especially during or following a recession.

Executives ignore management development training at their peril. Why? Simply because the more effectively a manager performs, the more effective an organisation can be. One objection I often face from well-meaning executives is 'But who will do their work if they're on a training course?' An easy question to answer. 'Somebody else'.

There are many ways, other than traditional classroom based management training to develop your existing and emerging managers. They include:

- One to one coaching with colleagues (same and different teams and departments)
- Peer group coaching with colleagues (same and different teams and departments)
- Group learning with immediate manager
- Group learning with key internal customers & stakeholders(90 minutes per session)
- Self-directed learning with internal HR/Training team or trusted peer
- Real-time, on the job coaching
- Online learning - have you seen the extensive audio book selection on Itunes?

Management Development training and coaching doesn't have to take the person out of the business. They can learn so much 'inside' your business - but only if they are allowed the time and space to undertake such learning. And remember, just because a manager is sat at their desk tapping their pen on the desk or even staring out of their office window, it doesn't necessarily mean they are avoiding their responsibilities. It might just mean that they are thinking, or even learning.

The most effective management development training usually includes a mixture of all of the points detailed earlier. How often have you participated in a training programme, thought that the ideas and concepts were absolutely fantastic, and then, not applied your learning? We've all done it I suppose. But this isn't management development - it's budget mis-management.

I have facilitated thousands of management training programmes across the globe. But whilst so many different factors influence just how effective the learning will be, one major sticking point often appears. And that's participants checking in with the office on their mobile phone. Why do they do this? Well, there's a number of reasons including a desire to ensure that all is running smoothly, a desire to show their deputy that they care about them, a desire to demonstrate self-importance to their deputy....'Oh, you can manage without me can you?' and finally, a deep rooted fear that something will go wrong and they'll be the one who has to sort it out.

There's one simple solution to the problem of managers focusing as much, if not more, on their mobile phone and emails as there is on the learning they are being paid and trusted to participate in. And that's DELEGATE EFFECTIVELY! But that's a subject for another time.

For now though, remember that developing managers isn't all about sending them on training courses and having them return motivated for a few days, or hours, depending on the quality of the learning. It's more about providing an abundance of well-considered options from which they can select their preferred method/s of learning. In addition to this, it's down to the line manager to ensure that time and space is allocated well in advance to allow the manager to immerse themselves in a worthwhile learning which will benefit them as an individual and of course, your organisation too.

-

The Unattractive Customer Offer - Why Do It?

2010-05-15T04:38:00.000-07:00

It's not rocket science, so why do so many retail companies disadvantage their existing customers with offers which don't make logical, emotional or possibly even financial sense? Here are two examples of offers which I have received during the past 10 days.

While visiting the beautiful city of York with my wife, we noticed a retail clothing store called White Stuff. They sell a very attractive range of mid-price, unique design clothing for men and women. What I enjoy about this store's approach to customer satisfaction and value is simple. They serve first - and earn second. How so?

Well, my wife and I first came across this store during a holiday in the Lake District. My wife wanted to purchase some clothes for her new job and she enjoyed browsing the unusual but very attractive designs. They had a sale on which was also a bonus for me! As my wife browsed, the store attendant gently offered to assist my wife if she would like. Politely declining the kind offer, my wife continued to browse. The attendant's attention smoothly changed focus from my wife....to me!

You're welcome to relax on the sofa if you wish sir', and a half-second later continued, 'or you can enjoy the range of gentlemen's clothing over here', gesturing towards where she wanted me to be. Buying!

I did notice a jumper which I would have liked to have bought, but the only size in store was too small for me. But, it wasn't a lost cause. She picked up the phone and called their store 8 miles down the road. Yes, the sister store did have a larger jumper in store and they would deliver it to this store for 9am the next morning. 'I'd be happy to arrange delivery for you sir....Shall I do that for you?'. How clever as well as professional! Why? Because this young lady had been so polite, gently helpful and discreet that I would have felt a little awkward rejecting her offer of help. Also, by accident or design, including the words 'Shall I do that FOR YOU'? added a very personal slant. It's the law of reciprocity in action. She was offering to be helpful to me, so I was compelled to return the favour.

Yes, we did buy and the whole experience was very positive. So, on to York. A different store location wise, but very similar in terms of offers. Unfortunately for me, there was no sale or discounts being advertised, but a genuinely friendly welcome from the female assistant was followed around 5 minutes later with an extended arm offering to hold the 3 shirts I had taken off the rack, while I continued to browse. The next offer? 'I'll put these in the changing room for you to try on when you've finished.' How cool! In a very professional, non-pushy sense, there was little opportunity of me leaving the store without first trying on the items of clothing she had 'kindly' held for me.

Another offer, and a very subtle one at that was this. 'I'll give you an over the shoulder bag which is free of charge'. Nice gesture. Not that I ever pay for carrier bags in any store. My local health food store wants to charge ten pence for a carrier bag (apparently to help the environment and save the planet). All along, there I was thinking that they were just generating additional income from themselves because they were jumping on the bandwagon of being good corporate citizens. This is the health store that following ringing over £30 of goods through their cash till stated to me 'And the carrier bag is ten pence...is this ok?' My polite and assertive response? 'Well, no actually it isn't, I won't be paying additional funds for the privilege of paying you good money for these goods'. Stunned silence followed until the gentleman advised me that it was 'Company Policy' to charge for bags. My polite and still assertive response? 'Thank you for letting me know that, as I stated earlier, I won't be paying YOUR COMPANY to make money off an environmental issue.' When I asked whether the proceeds generated from every bag sale - and every customer's blind compliance with their 'Company Policy' was donated to a charitable organisation his face changed...as did his manner. Guess who lost a customer?

Back to White Stuff. The offers they made were timely, beneficial for the customer, cost nothing but a few seconds of their time, generated rapport and an element of trust and were partnered with a high-quality product at a price I was willing to pay. How cool is that? Very cool I think!

Now let's look at the other side. Last night I spotted an advert in the newspaper from my local hairdressing salon. The offer is detailed below, word for word as published.

MANAGER SPECIAL - CUT & BLOW DRY
NEW CLIENTS ONLY £40
SAVING YOU £15

What's wrong with this offer? This SPECIAL offer? You guessed it! If you have never visited this salon and had your hair cut by the manager, you pay ONLY £40. Apparently, this SAVES YOU £15. Let's think about this. If you've never had your hair cut by the Manager previously, you benefit from a perceived saving of £15. But, if you are a regular client of the Manager, YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY FULL PRICE! How fair is that offer? In simple terms, if you're a long-standing client who has helped this company grow their business, or at the very least, remain in business, you are penalised. Why? Because you are a loyal, existing client.

The acquisition of new clients is absolutely essential to any company. I understand this fully. But actively penalising existing clients and customers is potentially commercial suicide. So, if you are a consumer, be careful what offers you accept from organisations. If you are a business, you too need to think carefully before publishing well-meaning but potentially dangerous offers.

The Problem With Scarcity

2010-04-19T10:10:00.000-07:00

As I write this post, the Icelandic volcano has paused from its spewing of volcanic ash. For now at least! The leaders of the 3 main political parties still all believe they are the best person to lead Britain out of recession and on to better times. And, as ever in these situations - there's a scam to be had and a victim to be found. How so? Let me explain in more detail.

When a resource is scarce, we human beings tend to place more value on it - in our own minds at least. Whether it's the TV shopping channels that do their best to sell their unsuspecting, no, gullible viewer to purchase something they don't need, and probably don't want - just because 'There's only seventeen left in stock and they're 'Selling out fast and won't be back in stock for 4 months at the very earliest.' No there isn't only seventeen left in stock and well they know it! There's probably hundreds, possibly thousands of the item left in stock. They're just using the scarcity trick to influence the viewer to believe there's hardly any stock left - and so 'I'd better buy one NOW before I LOSE OUT.'

How does this relate to Iceland and their mis-behaving volcano?

Before I answer that question, another example first. Due to the collapse of the Icelandic economy, and several banks and investment houses, each with a presence in the UK financial services industry, when the country and its banks went bust, no UK customer was permitted to withdraw any of their personal funds. Thankfully, the UK government introduced an investor/saver protection policy, basically providing a £50,000 insurance policy to protect UK investors from financial loss. This is even if they possessed more than £50,000. In basic terms, The Icelandic government owes British investors several billion pounds ($5 billion according to www.thisismoney.co.uk) in lost savings.

So, how does this relate to scarcity? Well, the scarcity rule doesn't only apply to products, services or money. It also relates to the scarcity of choice. Limiting the number of choices an individual, group or population can make. Try this one for size!

The Icelandic government allowed their population to vote on whether they should pay the debt to the British savers (who trusted the Icelandic banks with their funds). It was a straightforward 'Yes' or 'No' vote. Guess the result? A resounding 'NO'. Was it reasonable to expect a population to vote 'Yes' under the circumstances? Unlikely and perhaps the Icelandic governments public referendum was a ploy to absolve themselves of responsibility for making such a decision? After all 'They didn't say 'No'..the people did!'

Many trusting British savers now have scarcity of financial resources or reserves due to the actions of a government.

Sticking with Iceland, the volcano eruption has caused enormous disruption for travellers across Europe. Air travellers especially have suffered significant inconvenience due to aviation authorities cancelling all flights for fear of accidents occurring due to the volcanic ash. And for some serious entrepreneurs (or perhaps some would call them unethical business people at the very least), what do they do knowing that other people's suffering could make them a bundle of cash and profit?

UP THE PRICES...AND QUICK!

Virtually every major news channel in the UK has reported that train companies, including Eurostar have increased the cost of their ticket prices - due to the increased demand. Hotels in regions affected by travellers not being able to depart - have increased their prices and food outlets (not the major chains), have increased their prices. Why? BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY CAN! Of course, however reluctant the weary travellers may feel, they do need to eat and they do need to sleep. Catch 22.

THE TAXI SCAM

Have you ever travelled abroad, or even to a new city, jumped in to a taxi and stated your destination, only to be asked by the driver, 'Is this your first visit?' Next time, please ignore the question or respond 'No' and leave the conversation there. Whilst some taxi drivers may ask in an effort to build some rapport and influence you to tip them well, others, I know from many personal experiences ask this seemingly innocent question to establish just one thing. And that is 'Can I scam you?'

Answering 'Yes' to the drivers question puts you, the trusting passenger, at an immediate and costly disadvantage. Why? Because the driver can take you wherever he or she wants, clock up the price on the meter, and you're none the wiser. When you reach your destination, you just pay up, possibly tip him or her (especially if they delay giving you change as it can feel somewhat awkward) and find out later in the bar you've paid way over the odds. Who's scarcity of local knowledge cost them dearly? You! I've had this dishonest trick played on me in Florida, Bahrain and Dubai. It's reached the point where I let the driver take me on a tour and only upon safe arrival at my destination (usually a good quality hotel), grab my bags and refuse to pay the fare. Not just the fare shown on the meter, but ANY fare. After all, when you've written down their licence number and contact telephone number for complaints, the driver is always happy to move on and find a more willing victim. I love Bahrain and the behaviour of some (not all) taxi drivers really dilutes my experience of the beautiful Kingdom.

Please Enjoy Your Stay - And Show Me The Money

The Radisson BLU hotel in Nice, France has cornered the market in pressuring paying guests to give them more money, by force rather than choice. How so? Easy, to enjoy the sunshine sat by or swimming in their hotel pool will cost each guest £20 per day. Imagine the cost of your enjoyment if you are a family of 2 adults and 2 children. Sure, you'd likely attempt to get the children to share a sunbed together - but that's against the rules apparently. Ok, you say, we'll go to the beach instead and save our money. No it won't. That too will cost you £20 per person per bed per day. And, as you pay in advance (remember you're a guest at the hotel), if it rains, there's no possibility of a refund. Selling on scarcity and the first hotel I've ever heard of which charges guests to use their pool.

Be very aware of how the scarcity rule is used against you. It could cost you dearly, not just in money but trust too. And when trust is lost, it's often very difficult to win recover.

http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

http://ScottWatson.co.uk/

http://GreatManagementTraining.co.uk/

The Customer Satisfaction Journey - Forget Customer Service

2010-04-13T08:07:00.000-07:00

As a birthday gift for my wife I rather stupidly purchased tickets for her and a friend to enjoy a music concert. Well, 'enjoy' might not be the most appropriate term as the event was with Whitney Houston!

So, bearing in mind the health challenges she has experienced in the past, together with pretty awful concert reviews in Australia and 'fans' leaving the concert early as they viewed her performance as below par, I should have guessed that her UK gigs would be at least postponed if not completely cancelled.

24 hours prior to the scheduled concert, it was indeed announced that the concert was cancelled. Apparently, Whitney had a sore throat. No problem, apart from me having to come up with an unscheduled Plan B - how to fill the void left by the cancelled concert.

Aha, a nice meal in a nice restaurant in Leeds. I chose Gaucho, an Argentinian steak house. And, a rather good choice it was too if you look at the experience the company provided for my wife and myself, even before we arrived. Here's how it went.

I call to enquire about a reservation. But rather than delivering the usual 'So that's a table for two at 7.15pm tomorrow', I was on the receiving end of something pretty special. 'Are you visiting to celebrate any special occasion?' was the wonderful question Amy, the rather helpful and exceedingly professional employee asked me. 'Yes, it's my wife's birthday and as Whitney Houston isn't well, bringing her to Gaucho is my Plan B'.

Now, many restaurant staff would finish the call with a standard 'We look forward to seeing you tomorrow', but not Amy. Oh no, she led seamlessly into evolving the customer experience, and quite understandably, generating potential additional income for Gaucho too. And I'm absolutely ok with this if I'm enjoying the experience.

'So may I make a recommendation?' she asked. 'Of course' was my response. She then proceeded to recommend that upon our arrival we should enjoy a birthday cocktail in the bar as a surprise for my wife. She would think up something - after all, it was a pretty safe bet she would satisfy my wife's tastes as she asked me what kinds of drinks my wife enjoys most. Cool or what? 'And how about if you both have a dessert, I can arrange for a small lit candle to be placed in your wife's dessert as a birthday wish.' ABSOLUTELY!

And this is all prior to our visit. On the night, the cocktails did indeed arrive. Gorgeous they were too. And mine was alcohol free as I was driving. Aren't they two words which if you just change their order, the night takes a very different turn? 'Alcohol free' versus 'Free alcohol'!

At our table, the waiter introduced himself, gave us a few minutes to explore the menu and then - with a heavy wooden board in hand, and at least 8 pieces of meat on it, proceeded to explain in brief but fine detail, the different cuts and types of meat, their recommended cooking style and the different textures the meat had. And I thought up til then that meat - was meat!

The food was outstanding, the friendly, professional and subtle service was first-class. The wine that my wife enjoyed was refreshing, as was the small card she was given by Amy as we retreated to the bar for post-dinner drinks. The card contained details of the wine, a description 'acidic, aromatic, with hints of pineapple', the vintage 2008/9, the grape variety and altitude at which the grapes were grown as well as the region.

Now, neither you nor I would likely need or use this information. But, it was a little bonus which helped our evening be even more enjoyable. I never comply with restaurants which include 'for your convenience' at set gratuity, which is usually between 10% and 15% of the total bill value. My thoughts are 'If you've earned it, you're welcome to it'. But so many cafe's and restaurants just don't earn it. They rely on blind compliance from customers to just accept this fee as part of the transaction. Thankfully, there was the option to leave a gratuity either with the waiter who served us so well or on the total bill, which we did.

Have a think, do you focus on delivering customer service - what you think the customers want or indeed, what you want to deliver to customers. Or, do you focus on delivering customer satisfaction - making the whole experience something the customer will enjoy, value and talk about to others? The difference between customer service and customer satisfaction can have a significant impact on bottom line financial performance and your ability to retain existing and attract, new customers to your organisation. Perhaps now is a good time to take a lesson from Gaucho?

How to curse effectively, part 2

2010-04-08T03:55:00.000-07:00

I like fairy tales.

If you have read enough of them, you will know that very often there is an evil witch or a wicked stepmother who curses the poor, unfortunate hero or heroine.

It goes like this: "From now on, you are a frog (or beast, or sheep, or tea cup)!," and the hapless victim turns into that thing and is cursed to stay that way for all eternity - or until a prince comes along who can lift the curse.

And you know what? We curse ourselves on a regular basis!

Whenever we say to ourselves "I can't do this", we basically cut ourselves off from any chance of ever being able to do this thing - we cursed ourselves as effctively as any witch could do.

Think about it: we don't say that we might in future attempt it, we don't say that maybe we will succeed if we show enough persistence. No, we stopped ourselves from even attempting it.

"Can't" is the end of action.

The way to free ourselves (or others, who have put themselves in the same position) is to challenge this curse.

"I can't do it!"

"What would you do if you could?"
"You can't or you won't?"
"If there was a way to do it, what might it be?"

Same with ourselves: If we notice that we have stopped ourselves from taking action, we could ask empowering questions like "I wonder how somebody else might look at this?", "If I could do it, how would I?".

We have to be very careful with how we use language to empower and disempower ourselves.

Yes, we can!

How to curse effectively, part 1

2010-04-07T09:31:00.000-07:00

Since I just watched a documentary on the curse of Tutankhamun, I thought I’d write a bit about how we often “curse” ourselves and others.

One of the easiest ways is to use a certain, magical word that instantly disempowers people.
Drum roll, please!

That word is "try".

Little smartassy proof: Try to click your left mouse button. No, don't click it - try to click it!

We either do things or we don't. As soon as we say that we will try something, we have this in-built excuse that we didn't really go for it, we just had a try...

Studies have actually shown that if you ask someone to lift as much weight as they can and then ask them to try to lift as much as they can, they tend to be about 25% weaker when somebody used the word "try" on them.

A friend of mine is a Karate Champion and he shared with me that he always talks to his opponents before a bout and tells them to try their best. Quite sneaky, and quite effective!

Force yourself to say "I will do it" and if you hear someone else say that they are going to give something a try, ask them nicely if they are going to do it, or not.

Business Leaders Are Wasting Money on Training That Just Doesn't Work

2010-03-08T00:39:00.000-08:00

Many business executives are unwittingly wasting their money when it comes to procuring employee training and development initiatives. That’s the result of research undertaken by Scott Watson, Managing Director of UK and Bahrain based Summit Consulting and Training.

Watson, whose supporters include some of the world’s leading companies and eminent academics recently polled one-hundred human resources executives to identify how they measured their return on investment from their training and development initiatives.

And after analysing the responses Watson said, “There is significant room for improvement in procurement procedures, establishing precise success criteria before commencing training projects and developing greater responsibility for the delivery of enhanced results from the training provider.”

But with corporate training budgets being cut or even slashed entirely during the current economic climate, many under pressure human resources directors are finding that the goals they have been set by company executives before the downturn, are still expected to be delivered, even though funding is scarce.

So what can business leaders do to achieve a better return on their investment in time and of course, budget? Watson recommends that time invested at the outset to identify and select potential training partners can pay big dividends. “There is a big difference between hiring a training provider who will deliver a few days training, and appointing a trusted training partner who will collaborate fully and share ownership for the results you achieve,” he said. “The focus must be as much on what benefits will be realised in terms of measurable improvements in effectiveness as it is on the cost of the training programme.’

The research also identified that 74% of those polled who opted for an off-the-shelf soft-skills training package were less than satisfied with the level of value added to their organisation. “These two factors speak volumes when linked to quality and value for money,” continues Watson.

“An off-the-shelf package is focused largely on what the provider wants to teach your organisation rather than on what matters most, which is what your organisation needs to learn so it can improve its effectiveness” And in regards to the perceived low value in terms of value added to the organisation, Watson takes a very clear stance. “If a training programme is to add genuine value to an organisation, it is vital that the buyer and provider collaborate openly and honestly to establish how the learning will benefit the client, not just in terms of short-term boosts in performance, but longer-term, sustainable improvements. He continues, “Without a clear goal in mind from the start, and responsibilities allocated for embedding the learning back in the real world of work, virtually any well-intended training programme will fail to deliver any value or return on investment.”

But what steps can busy business leaders take to reduce the risk of wasting their hard-earned budget and maximise their potential for achieving something worthwhile from their investment? Watson’s advice is straightforward, “Stop looking at colourful brochures and start looking for proof of competence, a strong track record of high client satisfaction and willingness to be held accountable for delivering business benefits rather than just training.”

- Ends -

Editor’s Notes: -

Summit Consulting & Training is one of the UK’s preferred choices for human resources consulting, specialising in leadership, management and team development training and coaching on all levels.

Clients include DHL Express, DHL Aviation, GE Capital, Radisson SAS hotels, Denplan, Her Majesty’s Royal Air Force amongst many others.

Scott Watson is author of ‘Win Every Time – Essential lessons for existing and emerging leaders’ which is endorsed by Professor John Thompson, Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Huddersfield.

More information is available on the Summit Consulting and Training web site at http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Beware of Time Bound Offers - You'll Be Disappointed

2010-03-06T06:40:00.000-08:00

Driving home today I was listening to a commercial radio station. You know the one's. In between a bundle of adverts you'll occasionally get some music.

The recession has brought significant challenges for commercial radio stations. The main challenge being revenue falling through the floor. Yes, in the good times, they were rolling in cash. The high pressure, target and financial bonus focused advertising sales reps didn't really have to sell - they just took orders!

But the current economic climate brings with it tighter budgets from potential advertisers whose businesses, business to business, business to consumers are struggling and financial targets from radio station bosses who need the advertising revenue to survive. So what happens? The tone and urgency of the adverts change massively.

Whereas during the good times, the carpet store may politely, even seductively invite you to 'visit our showroom where you're guaranteed to find just what you're looking for.' Right now, the same company has forgotten seduction and replaced it with a shreeking, fast-talking loud-mouth lout shouting'GET DOWN TO OUR STORE TODAY...THESE AMAZING DISCOUNTS CAN'T LAST FOREVER...THIS CLEARANCE SALE MUST END SOON.'

Now, do you notice the use of time bound language here? 'Today', 'Can't last forever', 'Must end soon'. They all imply that if YOU don't get your skates on and give them your money, you'll lose out. How cool, if not misleading, is that?

Whether you're shopping or working with colleagues, be very aware of how time bound language can be used against you. Even unwittingly, time bound language can cause problems. For example, when someone says 'I'll get the report to you by the close of play today', when do you expect it? You may finish work at 5pm but they don't finish til 8pm - their personal 'end of the day'.

When someone says 'I'll be with you in five minutes', and it's now 8 minutes (and you're scowling under your breath about their bad manners), notice how some people, perhaps even you, use time bound language without considering the consequences.

Have a think about some other language patterns or words that can ultimately cause frustration and disappointment.

See you soon.....whenever that might be!?

You can find out more about influencing training courses and negotiations skills training courses at http://www.SummitTraining.co.uk/

Please Just Answer the Question

2010-03-06T06:19:00.001-08:00

For those of you based in the UK, you will be familiar with the BBC's popular mid-week politics programme 'Question Time' presented by an highly respected journalist.

For those of you not familiar with the show, in brief, it's a live studio audience (always a good thing - checking that the audience is 'a live') who put questions and allegations to an 'expert' panel. The panel may consist of politicians from the 3 major parties, an independent, such as an economist or leading charity figure and many others.

Now on this occasion, the show was to be broadcast from the city of Blackburn, and the audience wasn't the usual mix of frustrated adults, it consisted entirely of teenage school children from Blackburn. And one member of the audience was a 15 year old girl whose family I have known for many years. And she had a question. A pretty good one too.

What happens next is something that, if you experience, I expect you don't enjoy or appreciate. Personally I find it rude and disrespectful. Here's what happened.

Her point related to what she perceived as an imbalance in caring for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan who, were fighting a war which, perhaps they don't support, but are legally obligated to fight. Here's the point she made to the panel after being advised of the funds a friend of hers received for her private education.

'Why is it that a child receives over £6,000 for private education when soldiers are dying because they haven't got the correct protective clothing and equipment?'

A straightforward, pointed question deserving of an answer from at least one panel member. A question that, having been answered honestly and fully, could have provided some context regarding the benefits certain soldiers have due to their rank or length of service. Yes, somehow linking private education with the loss of a human life would be difficult, but perhaps a link worth exploring - especially to an audience who in future years will decide who they trust the most (or mis-trust the least) to lead Britain.

The response from the presenter/facilitator was brief. An acknowledgement of the question....and then on to the next subject.

What is it like for you when you ask a question and the person decides to evade, talk fluff or refuse to answer the question altogether? Does this happen at work? Why do some people say that they welcome your views/opinion and thoughts and then simply by-pass the very point they made?

When this happens in the workplace, people become dis-engaged, mis-trusting and to some extent, not caring anymore. It's time to lead by example and answer honestly the tough questions that sometime pop up.

If you type Jeremny Paxman and Michael Howard into YouTube you'll see this standard at its very best. Just look what happens when the politician evades the question....and the pit bull terrier of a journalist won't let him escape.

Beneath Lazy Language - Podcast

2010-01-28T04:10:00.000-08:00

Are Too Many Arabian Gulf Companies Over Managed But Under-Led?

2010-01-04T01:45:00.000-08:00

One of the UK’s top management experts has warned corporate managers that a lack of “emotional intelligence” in their leadership styles could spell financial disaster during the economic downturn.

Scott Watson, the founder and managing director of Summit Consulting and Training, which has trained more than 10,000 business people in the UK, Europe and Arabian Gulf region, claims that managers without emotional intelligence risk ending up with under-motivated, disengaged staff who lack commitment and whose productivity nosedives.

Unfortunately, emotionally intelligent managers are rare, Watson says. Most highly qualified business managers lack the mature interpersonal skills required to motivate staff through hard times. They often make the false assumption that their technical skills, or dazzling academic records, will make them strong managers.

“Academic institutions and most corporate training programmes don’t promote or teach personal qualities such as resilience, optimism and empathy,” Watson said. “Managers are expected to find their own way, and they can go badly wrong. Academic prowess will not guarantee success. Technical competence needs to be partnered with personal character,” he said.

So what is “emotional intelligence” in a leader and how can it be acquired?

“Our research over 10 years with over 10,000 people shows that nearly all employees value high levels of trust, collaboration, credibility and empathy in their managers,” Watson said.

The survey demonstrates how much employees are motivated towards better performance by credible and engaging bosses. From a manager’s point of view, too, the benefits of emotionally intelligent leadership are enormous.

“Striving to achieve a higher level of personal, team and company effectiveness is far more worthwhile than thinking success or failure is at the mercy of external forces so it’s not worth doing anything but drift into oblivion, or bankruptcy,” Watson said.

While a mature level of emotional intelligence in leaders is always valuable, it is crucial in a downturn when employee motivation tends to flag without regular encouragement.

“Feel-good factors naturally develop when profits are growing and costs are reducing,” Watson said. “But when times are tough, employees are full of fears and anxieties that they won’t meet targets, or that their job is on the line, making it harder to stay focused.”

Strategy aside, companies who have managers with high levels of emotional intelligence are far better equipped to survive the downturn, Watson said.

“When times are hard, that’s when you really find out how effective or ineffective your leaders and managers are,” he said.

Emotional Intelligence - A Major Factor for UAE Companies Competing In a Downturn Claims Leading Management Expert

2010-01-04T01:42:00.000-08:00

Arabian Business Leaders Must Realise That Command and Control Management Will Ultimately Result In Failure -Warns Leadership Expert

2010-01-04T01:33:00.000-08:00

Under pressure managers in our region are more likely to use a “command and control” style of leadership during a recession, but a leadership expert claims that whatever the economic climate, it is the wrong way to go about improving corporate performance.

Scott Watson, managing director of UK and Bahrain-based Summit Consulting and Training, which has trained and supported more than 10,000 executives and managers in the UK and Arabian Gulf, says autocratic management styles stifle creativity, undermine staff morale, destroy trust and ruin the potential for any worthwhile collaboration to maximise organisational effectiveness.

“Some management gurus might say the days of command and control are numbered, but our experience is that it continues to flourish,” Watson said. “During such an economic climate, it becomes even more common as executives eager to satisfy impatient investors and managers attempting to keep demanding customers at bay become even more focused on getting the job done more quickly, efficiently and often with fewer resources,” he said.

Watson, author of the book ‘Win Every Time - essential lessons for existing and emerging leaders’ stated that there is evidence that command control thrives in some cultures more than others. He suggested it was prevalent in the Middle East region. Watson, said it is so common mainly because managers don’t know any better as they haven’t been educated about how to manage people and performance effectively. It is based, he argued, on a misunderstanding of human nature - which craves autonomy and resists coercion. While some commentators may claim that cultural differences are the main reason for such an approach to management, Watson says that this is simply an excuse some executives use to avoid taking the intelligent action needed to maximise effectiveness of their organisation.

“Command and control is simply about forcing people to comply with a demand or instruction. The opportunity for a subordinate to request clarification, challenge a seemingly impossible imposed deadline or suggest a better way of working is viewed as obstructive by the manager. The underlying message a command and control focused manager sends to their staff is ‘I’m more senior in the hierarchy and have greater status and power, so do as I tell you’. But there are a number of significant problems with this ego based management style.

“Firstly, our brains respond much better to requests and invitations than they do demands. Most people resent individuals who demonstrate self-serving, ego-driven managerial styles. They don’t want to be told what to do; they want to have an opportunity to think for themselves, and more importantly, have a high level of trust for their manager,” Watson said.

A second problem is that it forces subordinates into blind compliance, which provides them with a convenient excuse for producing inferior quality work, which increases costs. “People will tend to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the production of poor quality and are more likely to provide the excuse that they only followed their managers instructions,” Watson said.

Workers tend to thrive on having the freedom and time to be creative, Watson said. A boss demanding an immediate response or compliance inspires slipshod work and results in what is commonly termed ‘fire fighting’. But it is the executives and managers who use command and control as their normal approach who are actually starting many of the fires.

“Command and control doesn’t give people time to think. They are told this deadline is urgent, so feel compelled to take immediate action to appease their boss. But this action is often poorly thought out, without focus and potentially damaging to the quality of output achieved which then results in blame being apportioned by all parties and no-one taking responsibility for the failure.

“The performance of a whole team or organisation can be dragged down because of managers persistently demanding ‘now now, now’. But now is not always the best time to get things done. If quality standards are to be achieved, there needs to be time invested up-front for sharing and challenging ideas, developing clarity of purpose and shared ownership for getting the job done right first time, on time, every time.

But Watson states that there are situations when command and control is essential. Even in business, there are rare instances when command and control is required and works well. “It’s good in short bursts. If there’s a pressing deadline and all resources need to be got together in a hurry to deliver the solution. If everybody understands this style is a short-term approach and they trust their manager, it can work well.” It should, however, be used sparingly. A less dictatorial style can produce far superior results.

“Managers should remember that, just like the successes they achieve and enjoy, failure is rarely achieved alone. It is the managers who need to reflect on just how effective or ineffective they are performing and understand that they will get higher productivity, efficiency, quality and profitability for less when people collaborate effectively,” Watson said.

“The boss is not always the best person to make a decision alone. The best-quality decisions are usually made by a group operating in a high-trust environment. Open disagreement is welcome as it helps the team to collaborate well,” Watson continued.

According to Watson, “A collaborative management style is the exception rather than the rule in the Middle East region. Government officials and company executives need to change their approach to recruiting to identifying the best managers if the ultimate goal is to employ more nationals to take on management roles in the coming years. Without this focus their attempts could be futile at best,” he concluded.

Can't Sell - Won't Sell

2009-09-24T04:49:00.000-07:00

This morning I visited electrical retail store Currys to view their range of HD televisions. I had done my research on the quality of different TV's on the internet, reviewing the customer reviews as well as independent professional reviews. I had settles on a 42 inch screen Toshiba. And I was ready to buy!

Consider this. Three males 'sales professionals' are stood in a group within 15 feet of me. I am attempting to find the specific TV I am interested in. If they pay attention, they will be able to see that I am actually looking at the labels on each 42 inch Toshiba - to find the one I want. But no, a full 5 minutes in to my search, instead of a 'sales professional' approaching me to see how (not if) he could help me spend my money, I have to approach them. I decided to speak with the one person who separated himself from the other 2....as last nights match must have been so good that it was far more valuable continuing to discuss it rather than generating a sale.

I advised the sales professional (sorry, it sounds a little sarcastic - BECAUSE they just weren't professional) of the model I wanted and he took me to it. Now, here is where it goes from bad (sales presentation to even worse. I had with me details of prices of the TV set from Amazon and another internet based company. They were retailing at £529 including delivery. Currys were retailing the same TV at £569. Upon being advised of the price difference, the sales bloke (not very professional now, at least in my eyes), said 'Oh, well, they're nearly always cheaper', shrugged his shoulders and then continued 'Sorry I can't help you'. How ridiculous is that? What is a sales professional paid for? To generate sales by helping people want to buy. To help the company create a profit so it can trade. But isn't the time to really hone your skill and competence when there is a recession going on and the opportunities to sell are far fewer?

If the bloke had helped me understand some of the risks of buying off the internet such as returns policy and inconvenience of dealing with a faceless company I may have been open to paying the price difference. But this either wasn't his way of thinking or operating - or the football match really was amazing and he wanted to continue that dialogue with his pals.

The lesson to consider:

When the economy is healthy and strong, virtually anyone can 'take a customer order'. When the economy is struggling and people are taking better care of their budgets - that's when you need to be able to sell. Many sales people get great bonuses for exceeding their targets, but many of them are simply taking an order, not selling.

Beware of complacency, it could destroy your business. And look at Amazon.co.uk - their prices are really good and their returns policy is really easy!

Vendor & Client Relationships

2009-08-19T07:37:00.000-07:00

It's vital in any client/customer relationship that integrity, aside from competence, rules the day. I've experienced it many times during the past 11 years with Summit where a potential client focuses more on undervaluing our offering, going purely for lowest price, while being dead against losing any potential value and ultimately, stealing our intellectual property rights and copyrighted material. Understandably, these aren't the people we enter client relationships with. The toxic waste these people project serve to destroy trust and make the supposed relationship more of a 'transaction'.

So, it's a light hearted, but very valid video clip which should serve as a reminder that win-win is always best.

Enjoy!

No Consequences? Why Should I Care?

2009-08-14T03:10:00.000-07:00

Why is it that nearly 7 MILLION people chose not to keep the appointments they made with their medical doctor during 2007 and 2008? The decision to not turn up was at great cost to you and me, the taxpayer - £600 million per year. That's enough to run two mid-size hospitals.

But the patients who chose not to keep their appointments won't think about or even care about the statistics. Why should they? When we make an appointment with our GP or hospital, it's about us - not anybody else isn't it?

Why might you not show up for an appointment?

There are many reasons which may include:

-I forgot about it
-I felt better so didn't need the appointment anymore
-I was stuck in traffic
-My pals invited me to the pub/the match (and I forgot to be ill because I was having fun)
My young child/elderly mother needed me more than I needed the appointment

But whatever the excuse or reason for not showing up, why could it be that you don't take a few minutes to call and cancel or postpone your appointment? Well, it might slip your mind, but really isn't it more a case of placing so little value on the appointment itself, that it's not worth calling? After all, it won't be inconvenient for anyone so why bother?

How can the problem be effectively tackled?

We human beings generally need to understand the consequences of us either doing, or not doing something if any emotional response is to be generated. It's rather like your doctor saying 'Please give up smoking for the good of your health' versus 'If you continue smoking cigarettes, you are likely to suffer lung cancer and you won't be around to walk your daughter down the aisle when she gets married.' Both statements have an impact, both have consequences, but which do you feel would be more likely to get the patient to stop, think and then take some intelligent action? Possibly the second.

CONSEQUENCES, CONSEQUENCES

Some practical, but potentially non-pc ways of helping people to keep appointments.

When the patient calls to ask for an appointment, the receptionist agrees the date and time and asks a simple question. 'Will you please store this appointment in your mobile phone and/or calendar at home, just so you remember it?'

When the patient calls to ask for an appointment and the date and time are confirmed, the receptionist asks 'Are you ABSOLUTELY SURE that you will be able to keep this appointment? And then awaits a positive response and asks the patient to store it as above. This is about a gentle reminder and double checking the value they place on the appointment.

When a patient calls to ask for an appointment, the receptionist politely states 'Just to let you know, if you are unable to keep, or don't need to keep this appointment, we do require you to call us and let us know by (date/time) so that we can offer it to someone in need. Will you please do that for us?' This is about a gentle reminder and reciprocity.

When a patient calls to ask for an appointment, the receptionist politely states 'Just to make you aware, if you fail to keep this appointment without providing prior notice by telephone by (date/time), the next time you request an appointment with the doctor, other patients will be given priority over you.' This is about developing responsibility and a potentially sever consequence for not keeping their commitment.

Remember that people need to understand the consequences, both positive and negative of their action/inaction or compliance or failure with a standard/instruction or guideline.

Always Search for the Positive Intent - Don't Panic

2009-08-12T06:22:00.000-07:00

How to take the first step to change unproductive habits

Have you ever wondered why some people demonstrate patterns of behaviour or habits that make absolutely no sense to us as observers? Behaviours and habits such as being stubborn, panicking, being terrified of flying or even smoking tobacco five, ten maybe even twenty times each day for year after year?

What is it that drives these habits that often times, don’t really support us in leading a healthy, fulfilling life but we continue to do them anyway? Before we get in to understanding why finding the ‘positive intent’ is so valuable to us as human beings, take a moment to consider this much-publicised example that took place on an internal American Airlines flight in February 2004.

With all 180 passengers on board, the air traffic controller cleared the pilot for take-off. But this flight was about to become interesting, if not terrifying for many, if not all of the passengers. Surprise soon turned to fear when over the communication system, the pilot said (quote from CNN News), ‘I’d like every Christian to put their hands in the air for just a moment’. Panic! Remember that the passengers were locked in the plane and couldn’t get off, and since the events of September 11 2001, unauthorised access to the flight deck was virtually impossible due to reinforced doors. Long story short, the plane landed safely, without incident after a 90-minute flight.

So, what caused panic in the passengers? Some passengers said they thought they were being hijacked by extremists and identified as the first to be killed by their hijackers because of their religious faith. Others had fears of a repeat of September 11th and tried to phone their loved ones. After all, an American Airlines internal flight was involved in the events of that fateful day. But, the pilot, who was suspended from duty pending an enquiry, says he didn’t mean to frighten anyone. A statement issued by his employer states that he ‘intended’ to compliment the Christian passengers for having a strong faith. That, in basic terms, is ‘positive intent’.

One key point that could be so worthwhile to consider, as it can really improve the quality of your life is ‘positive intent’. Without the psychobabble, please take on this belief for the next couple of hours and start to notice your thinking patterns becoming more flexible and maybe, even more open to new habitual possibilities. Here it is, it’s really simple and also really powerful if we apply it in our daily lives.

‘EVERY BEHAVIOUR WE DEMONSTRATE HAS A POSITIVE INTENT AND SUPPORTS US AT SOME DEEP EMOTIONAL LEVEL’

Well, does this belief make sense to you? If so, wonderful, you can now start to make even better choices in your thinking, relationships and ultimately, behaviour from this moment forward. If it doesn’t yet strike a chord with you,try another real-life example from just a few weeks ago about what is commonly labelled a ‘panic attack’.

Picture the scene, 7.00am on a freezing, dark, wet Saturday morning. I had just arrived at the radio station for a ‘live’ telephone interview with a well-known breakfast show host based in London. The studio technician who was charged with taking care of me, let’s call him Rob, was very polite, helpful and somehow we managed to have a bit of a giggle, even at this early hour!

The interview was scheduled for 7.50am precisely. I like to arrive early to give people plenty of time to arrange whatever they need to plan so we can relax before I do my piece. Anyway, Rob had to telephone the London studio technician to set up a digital phone connection that apparently enhances sound quality ten-fold. He was finding it quite a challenge to get through as the line was constantly engaged. At 7.25am he was still unable to get through. And he didn’t appear happy about it.

As I sat there, in the tiny, cold studio watching him become more and more frustrated I noticed that every twenty or so seconds he would glance at the clock on the studio wall. Being the nosey bloke that I am, I wondered how Rob was processing this event internally. I said little and let him focus on his task. As time continued to pass by, 7.50am precisely was getting pretty close. It’s now 7.40am and we are just ten minutes away from the interview time slot, but still had little success (or lots of failure) in getting through to his colleague in London to put the right phone line in place.

And then, it happened! Rob’s breathing became shallow, faster and his eyes moved around so rapidly it was like he had walked straight on to a right hook from Muhammed Ali. His face quickly changed from a pale white to beetroot red and he couldn’t stand still for even a second. Although we had only known each other for less than an hour, virtually every rapidly spoken sentence included at least one swear word. And with the room temperature still pretty cold, Rob, still swearing, angrily took off his jacket, then his jumper, threw them to the floor and started to sweat profusely. Yuk! Looking at the clock yet again and still without a connection with just minutes to go, this situation was about to get much worse.

In between repeatedly punching in the London number on the phone, staring at the clock, sweating and swearing (now that’s multi-skilling), Rob apologised to me for ‘****ing up’. He shouted, ‘I don’t know what’s ****ing wrong with this phone line’. At this point it seemed appropriate for me to join in and get a bit crazy. After all, there’s no point in being shy at a time like this is there? So, without warning I jumped up out of my seat, started to shout about how ‘punctuality is vital to me in order to operate properly’ (whatever that means) and repeatedly pointed to the clock in between swearing, using the same shocking words as he did and flitting around the room. Standing less than three feet away from Rob and staring at him with a very angry look on my usually friendly face I shouted to him, ‘You’ve got me bloody panicking now mate, you should be a therapist…I can’t believe it YOU’VE GIVEN ME YOUR BLOODY PANIC ATTACK….I ONLY CAME TO HAVE A CHAT WITH THIS WOMAN IN LONDON AND NOW THIS (pointing at myself in a panic state) IS HAPPENING TO ME…OOOHHHH….WHY IS THIS HAPPENING TO ME?….THANK YOU VERY BLOODY MUCH’

This brief but dramatic tirade stopped Rob dead in his tracks. In less than ten seconds, he was deeply confused, very surprised, maybe even shocked. But there was no panic. He forgot about the clock, the constantly engaged telephone line and everything else he had been focusing on. Well, I suppose he had to. If you had a guy you’d never met before going crazy in front of you (in a very confined space and blocking your exit from the room) what would you be thinking?

Now, at this very moment, the best choice available to Rob at the deepest unconscious level was to pay attention to me. Still standing, I held my head in my hands, took a deep breath, rolled my head as if to release tension and took a step backwards (still blocking the exit).

Now, with both of us in a state of calm, I smiled at Rob and said, ‘now then mister, please tell me about what just happened to you when you had that panic thingy a few minutes ago’. In a quiet voice he replied, ‘this always happens…all my life I’ve had panic attacks, I’ve even had two years of therapy but that didn’t help at all’ He continued, ‘It ruined my last birthday when I was trying to organise a coach trip to the races for my mates, at job interviews, I just crumble and now, It’s happening all over again and I couldn’t stop it.’

In a calming voice I asked Rob if he wanted to get rid of this automatic response before we left the studio and learn to become consciously aware of ‘how’ these panic thingy’s are created and be able to deal with the situation we were in far more effectively and confidently. His response was a definite ‘YES’.

I joked that it wasn’t really him I wanted to help, I just wanted to get on the radio because I’m an interesting guy, Rob laughed loudly. I said, ‘Oh, and by the way mate, you’ve spent two years talking about your panic attacks and how bad you feel, but did you ever invest time in finding how you’d fill the panic time when you get rid of it?' Big confusion on Rob’s face. I continued ‘after all, if you’re stopping panicking, you’ve got to start doing something else with the time haven’t you?’

‘Anyway Rob tell me, what’s the positive intent that your ‘panic thingamiwhotsit’ is trying to communicate to you? He responded, ‘There’s nothing positive about this happening to me, it just happens’.

‘Well, if it wasn’t ‘HELPING YOU’ in some way, your brain wouldn’t keep making you do it to yourself…would it now’? Confused even more, Rob’s eyes rolled about for a few moments and then, the penny dropped.

Rob replied, ‘I just want to get things right for people, I don’t want to let anybody down or mess up, there’s a lot of people relying on me’.

Brilliant, a breakthrough that took him just a couple of minutes. We did a couple of really quick emotional intelligence and NLP patterns to remove the negative, panic feelings and replace them with absolute confidence and certainty that he could do his best for me, take control of his thinking and, even if the phone line was still busy the next time we attempted to get through, he would respond far more positively and in complete control of himself.

The changes in Rob’s breathing, body language and thinking was instant. ‘Now, me being the helpful chap that I am Rob, will you do me a favour as I’ve done you a favour’? ‘Yeh, no problem’. ‘Thank you Rob, what I’d like you to do is remember that ‘thingywhotsit’ experience you had a few minutes ago and start to re-live it in your own mind and body right now as if it was happening again right now’.

His response? A very polite, light – hearted, ‘get stuffed I’m sticking with what I’ve got now’. My response? ‘Yeh but we’re now a full FIVE MINUTES LATE for MY interview and I had all this really good stuff to talk about, insult a few therapists, consultants, coaches and be generally quite an interesting guy.’

Both laughing loudly, an unexpected knock at the studio door and a colleague of Rob’s wanting to pass on a message from the London studio technician. ‘There’s a problem with their telephone systems, they’re sorry for the delay and they’ll call your studio as soon as they can…but don’t panic’. Rob thanked his colleague for the information then turned to me and said confidently, and rather cheekily, ‘Me…Panic’?…not a chance’.

The interview took place and it was a really enjoyable experience for me. Rob listened in and when I was being politely, and rightly challenged by the broadcaster on ‘this stuff you do is so unbelievable, I don’t believe it’.
My response? ‘Well, perhaps you’ve never had such a powerful learning experience that has worked for you or maybe your consultant, doctor, therapist or coach is so shockingly poor at their job that they just keep taking your money each week so don’t want you to overcome your own challenges too quickly’.

So, there is a real-life example for you, now think about the examples below and make some sense of what is happening and how you can support yourself or a colleagues to make some positive changes that, first of all, they want to do and secondly, the support you give them is without ego or judgement but with lots of love, and maybe even some acknowledgment of their efforts thrown in to the bargain too.

‘POSITIVE INTENT’

1. People generally don’t smoke cigarettes to inhale poisonous carcinogens, reduce their lung capability, actively shorten their life span and emotionally hurt their family. They generally live the habit to maybe relax, relieve stress, unwind with friends and much more. There lays the ‘positive intent’.

2. People aren’t generally scared of flying, as our culture would have you believe. They are generally terrified of crashing, being out of control, feeling unsafe and much more. There lays the ‘positive intent’.

3. Alcoholics don’t generally stay drunk because they want to feel physically sick, out of control and sad. But they often do this behaviour as to them; it changes their perception of their reality and provides an escape, at least for a few hours. And then, the more they repeat their drinking behaviour, the more they ‘escape’.

So, there you have it. Always search for the positive intent. I do hope this article has started to paint a picture that can open up your mind to developing some new, more empowering approaches to searching for the underlying root of some of the habits we have. Maybe you could find it rewarding to make a note of a habit you have that you really want to change and then take a few moments to relax and allow your mind to generate three or four positive alternatives that would support you better in living a happy, fulfilling career and life?

Something to Think About

2009-08-12T05:50:00.000-07:00

I've been asked by a number of people to post some of the principles and nuggets that I share with audiences. Apparently, the simple principles are thought-provoking, so here are a few to be going along with.

When we label another human being, we don't define them. We define ourselves. (Blame & Ownership)

It's not the snakes bite that kills you, it's the venom. (Relationships)

You learn to swim by getting wet, not by just talking about swimming. (Apply your learning)

A bad relationship cannot exist without your permission and your input. (Responsibility/Stop moaning/sort things out)

If you have a problem, one that appears so difficult it can't be overcome, ask yourself this question 'What am I doing or believing about this problem which allows it to be maintained?' (Ownership for problem solving/Stop blaming others)

Every time you point a finger at someone, three fingers point right back to you. (Stop blaming/Take responsibility for your problems)

You teach people HOW to treat you. (Stop being a victim/Find your voice/Stop being submissive based on your personal history)

Getting Past the Negative Talk of Problems

2009-08-12T01:05:00.000-07:00

How demoralizing can it be when you are in a meeting with colleagues, full of brilliant ideas with your 'blue sky' and 'out of the box' thinking and someone puts a sharp stop to your creative genius? You know who I mean, you've met them at some point. I'll write separately about optimists and pessimists, but for now, here are a few approaches you can apply to help a perceived negative colleague/thinker to move beyond being so apparently negative.

So, here's how it goes for some. 'That won't work because...', 'That's a good idea, but the problem with it is....(reasons).

Some people seem to be so focused on anticipating and spotting potential and real problems, that they don't take the opportunity to consider any solutions before they speak. This can be quite frustrating when done one to one or especially as part of a meeting packed with 'solutions people'. So how can you tackle this situation effectively AND keep rapport, focus while appreciating the contribution the supposed negative person is making to the dialogue - and they really are aiming to contribute, just not in the way you'd like them to.

PRE-FRAME

Please remember to set a clear context for your dialogue, whether one to one or as part of a meeting with many participants. Context creates meaning for human beings and the bonus is, when we have some parameters to work within, we know what is and isn't acceptable. Send a properly titled email or agenda for your meeting at least 48 hours in advance of meeting...and try this approach, designed to your own needs:

'The purpose of our discussion/meeting is to develop a structured way forward to ensure the smooth implementation of the new computer system to be launched on 1st October 2009. It is important that concerns re potential pitfalls are raised, and also, that each of us takes responsibility for developing practical solutions in/at this forum.'

The main message here is, if you anticipate a problem, share it BUT share YOUR SOLUTION too. Other ways to overcome negatives on why something can't happen or won't work are:

Objection -'This won't work because of.....'
Response - 'Good, now we know what won't work, please share with us 3 of your ideas on HOW IT COULD WORK'

Objection - 'It's impossible to do this by the timescale stated'
Response - 'What's impossible? To deliver any of the project successfully, all of it successfully or something else?'

Objection - 'Each time I've been involved in a project like this, they've failed. This will be no different.'
Response - 'It's good that you've had such experience in similar projects. Help me understand, what steps did YOU repeat in each project that contributed to the failure to deliver the outcome/s required?'

When we invite someone to share 3 ideas on how something COULD work, this can feel alien to them because it's the exact opposite to how they were thinking just moments ago. I always ask for a minimum of 3, firstly to interrupt the thinking pattern, secondly, because they may say 'I can only come up with two', which is brilliant anyway as it's 2 more than they had a moment ago, and thirdly, they may just want someone to shut up and listen to them......WHILE THEY THINK FOR THEMSELVES.

Put our own mark on questions such as these, use them ethically and see for yourself how thinking can change in a few minutes.

Softening the Influencing Journey

2009-08-12T00:36:00.000-07:00

It's all too easy when attempting to influence another human being or a situation to just jump straight in and race after our own most important outcome. Remember that our education system, both at school and higher education, even MBA programmes, rarely if ever demonstrate the need for and value of influencing. Sure, they may cover 'why to' influence and review some case studies but the 'how to' seems to have been lost somewhere along the line.

A few key points to bear in mind when preparing for, or while involved in a situation you wish to influence are these: ALWAYS be honest - it develops trust, reflects authenticity...and is far easier to remember than a pack of lies. Take time to understand and appreciate what might be most important to the other party rather than just considering your own needs and wants. And finally, close your mouth and open your ears....and keep them open BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU MIGHT HEAR AND LEARN.

Not all influencing situations are to help already good things get even better. Some are the exact opposite - a tough talk or crucial conversation as I call them. And these conversations need to happen more often in organisations. All too often inadequate performance is tolerated, partly because it's not that bad it's impacting the rest of the team that much and also because bosses either daren't or don't know how to facilitate a conversation that will not only address the issue/s effectively, but also restore trust and faith in the relationship. That's for another time, but for now, let me share some starting points (or softeners as I like to call them) which you can use to introduce an idea/point of view/facts/data and to help the other party want to listen and be involved in the dialogue. Remember, you're speaking with them NOT AT THEM!

I'll let you generate your own sentences on where use these phrases. They must make sense though and have the intention behind them to help, you can't just say the words and hope for the best. The other party is likely to see straight through you and not engage with your dialogue. All of these approaches are collaborative, not directive.

Please could you help me understand.....?

May I just check a point with you to ensure that I've really understood your point/what you've said/recommended?

I just want to check my understanding...Please do feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood any point. Would you do that for me?

May I just check with you that my understanding is accurate or inaccurate?

I'm sure that you understand the importance of (a) being achieved/undertaken. I'd really appreciate getting your thoughts on how it could work and what needs to be in place to ensure a successful delivery.

I'm sure that you recall YOU AND I (we) agreed that (b) would help us to deliver (c) and that any challenges or obstacles were to be shared in person immediately. To be used when commitments haven't been kept and responsibility for not sharing information needs to be addressed.

I'm interested to know....

I'm curious about what/how...

Please will you share with me your thoughts/ideas concerns on...?

What are your thoughts on how (a) should commence/be delivered/potential obstacles we should anticipate?

May I just check with you, is there information that you possess that I don't know which could/will impact the direction of my focus/attention/the project?

Shall we both commit to resolving the issue/making a considered decision on (a) within the next 60 minutes? This doesn't allow decision-making to drag along for what can seem like forever. It focuses attention and has a time based deadline.

Prior to agreeing to take on this project/achieve the deadline you mentioned, I want to really ensure that I understand the resources you are to make available. It's dangerous agreeing to virtually anything simply because an authority figure says you must. Dialogue and understanding is key.

Use these phrases as part of a worthwhile dialogue and you are likely to get fare more value from conversations, and accelerate the pace at which intelligent action is taken and decisions made.

Just This Once? - Asking With Purpose

2009-07-30T22:41:00.000-07:00

Language is a funny subject. So many things can be misinterpreted or misunderstood because the language used isn't particularly clear or precise. My thoughts revolve around the greater the clarity, the clearer the understanding. Here's a quick tip on how to ask someone for something and enhance your possibility of your request being successful. As always, this technique needs to be used with a genuine win-win outcome in mind.

The example - Last Saturday evening I visited Manchester on a 'Stag Do' with 11 friends in the group. I had anticipated that some of bouncers (or security associates as they call themselves these days...in court) at the nicer, less rough bars may not be keen to let a dozen blokes in to their establishment. Why not? Potentially, they may view a group of males as high risk of causing trouble, perhaps they feel that, if trouble did break out in the bar, it could be difficult to influence or control a group of men - whether or not they had consumed alcohol or some other reason altogether. With this in mind, I took the opportunity of phoning several bars on the afternoon prior to our visit. The reason for my call was to establish whether we would be welcome to visit their bar. Long story short, I advised the staff member at each bar of the purpose of our visit and asked if we could visit. The answer from the 3 bars I called was a very positive 'YES'. At this point I asked for the name of the Manager who had authorised our visit and was promptly advised of each name. Advance planning is always a good thing in any influencing situation.

Bouncer at the first bar - 'You can't come in, there's too many lads.' My response, 'Oh, I understand what you're saying. The Manager, Christine has approved our visit earlier today. Please feel free to check with her.'The use of referring to a higher authority is a good step when aiming to influence. This principle was also successfully applied at the second bar we visited.

But, it called for a different approach entirely when we were advised by a fellow reveller,to visit a nice bar not on our list. So, no prior invitation or approval, where do we go from here if we get the same initial response from the 'security associates' at this bar? Well, here's an approach that worked, and can also work wonderfully well in any one-off situation.

The phrase is 'JUST THIS ONCE'. You can't though just say the words. It has to be congruent, genuine and supported by a positive and friendly personal impact. The bouncers had a host with them at the entrance, a lady who may add a softer side to 'negotiations'. So here goes!

Host - 'Good evening lads, how many of you is there?'. SW - 'Well, even though we're walking in 3's to help us all get in, there's actually 12 of us.' Host smiling responds 'There's too many of you, I'm sorry but you won't be able to come in tonight...There's 2 private parties going on at the moment.' Think about it, the justification for us not being allowed entry (at present) is the number of males in our party and the 'fact' there are 2 private parties enjoying themselves.

SW -'Oh, that's a shame, we're only in Manchester for this evening and as this place was highly recommended as a bar which rarely has trouble (looking at the bouncers) we just wanted to enjoy a quick drink here.' Notice the safety and time bound comments which pre-suppose we want to avoid trouble, not cause it and 'quick' implies we don't intend to stay for long. Host is now off script as her normal pattern of thinking has been heavily interrupted. SW - 'Oh come on, just this once'. Host looks to 2 bouncers for approval and then replies 'OK, go on then - JUST THIS ONCE.'

We proceeded in to the bar, each thanking the host and her colleagues for their kindness - which is really what it was. We enjoyed our visit and noticed that the alleged 'private parties' were so private that nobody knew about them. It appeared to be a technique the host used to justify her decision to refuse entry. So, 'Just This Once' can be used to help the other party understand that you are not going to repeatedly return to them badgering them for something. It implies that it is a one-time-only request and this can help the other party be more open to accepting your invitation or offer. 'Just This Once' sounds manageable, doable and not too much effort. You can apply this approach with sales reps attempting to sell you something, with a boss when negotiating resources, with someone performing poorly who needs to change their approach. Try it and let me know your results.

Scott Watson on BBC Radio

2009-07-30T04:56:00.000-07:00

Here is a very interesting and inspiring BBC interview with Scott Watson about how to turn challenges into opportunities during times of uncertainty:

Clarify, Clarify, Clarify - Stop Communication Getting Fuzzy

2009-07-30T03:33:00.000-07:00

We probably all agree that we could all communicate more effectively, don't we? Yes, I thought so...Great minds think alike (and fools seldom differ - as my mother used to say). But seriously, many of the projects that my company are invited to contribute to are little to do with corporate stratedy, vision, mission and such like. They are more to do with enhancing trust, collaboration, joined up thinking and that old chestnut - communication.

Get it wrong and problems galore are likely to occur. Get it right, and problems still appear, but far fewer than could be expected and they are often far easier to overcome. An absence of clarity in any dialogue can cause problems and misunderstanding. Think about this one. If I say to you 'Speaking to you as an intelligent person.....' who is the supposed 'intelligent person'? Oh, sorry, you thought I meant you! No, no no, I meant me all along. OK, this is a light hearted example, but do you see how the words we use either help us or hinder us?

Just yesterday I was at the golf range disappointing myself yet again with a few poor shots one after the other, when a well-meaning golf instructor from the club stopped and said 'What you need to do is stop snapping at the ball. He continued 'The angle of your right arm is out of kilter with where it should be, so try to get it aligned.'

Righty, me being an information detective (but only because I wish to learn, not to be a pain in the neck, or other body part), politely thanked him for his 'help' and asked the following questions in quick succession.

Could you help me understand what you mean by 'snapping at the ball'? He replied that my angle of approach from the top of my swing made it likely that 'the club would have to recover too much ground' for it to hit the ball 'sweetly'. What the heck is 'sweetly'? I can guess, but in the workplace, guessing can get us in to lots of trouble - as you may know already.

He went on to describe in fine detail (having taken my club from me) what HE MEANT. Not that I was understanding much of it. My own instructor gives me a few pieces of information, asks me to clarify my understanding of his instruction and then invites me to have a go at applying the learning. It works for me, it's how I like to learn. And this well meaning instructor was clouding my understanding rather than helping me. I guessed that what he meant by 'out of kilter' was that my arms or body or club position weren't where they really should be to hit a good shot...what is a 'good shot'? Anyway, we never got on to define 'sweetly' and I doubt we'll keep in touch. But can you see how language gets lost all too easily in any situation?

Here are a few questions you can ask to clarify your understanding. I call it the precision model, and it's extremely effective when applied with the right personal impact and the questions are asked as part of a discussion - rather than as part of an interrogation. The purpose of the questions is to help the other party really think more deeply about their communication, beliefs and generalisations. In communication, close isn't always close enough. We need to be right on the button, not somewhere nearby.

Questions:

How do you know that? (to be true/accurate/the right way to go)

This questions asks for FACTS and removes the possibility of making a decision based on a belief. For example, 'Children have no respect for their parents these days'. 'Oh, how do you know that to be true? Do you mean ALL children, or just some?' They may respond with something like 'Of course I didn't mean ALL children. It's just the kid next door.' See how this has changed from a global belief to an individual?

According to whom? This question asks for names to support a statement, comparison or judgement. For example 'This is the right/besy way to go on this project.' 'According to whom? Who has made the decision that THIS is the BEST/RIGHT way to go on this project?' This can then then develop understanding from which you can continue the dialogue with more clarity.

Compared to what? This question helps when dealing with comparisons. This is best/worst. I'll let you think about where you can use this question and what information you can gather with it.

What precisely do you mean when you say (This is a disaster/is unacceptable)?
The other party will be compelled and possibly obliged to start sharing specific information with you about specific points of contention, upset and annoyance. And when they've provided the specifics, you are then able to respond to them one at a time with clarity, rather than guessing and not addressing the key points they value most.

May I just clarify my understanding of what you just stated/said? This question is self-explanatory and provides you with the opportunity to demonstrate you have not only listened, but also understood the other person. It can't end there though by simply repeating words and understanding back to them - it needs to evolve in to what actions will be taken to fix the problem/move the project on in a worthwhile manner.

Use these questions for 10 days in the workplace and let me know your results.

Questions to help someone make a decision

2009-07-27T08:19:00.000-07:00

If you haven't already encountered this, you will do at some point in your management career. Indeed, you might be doing this already - not making a decision on important matters. We all procrastinate on some occasions, but it is important not to confuse procrastination with thinking time.

Whereas thinking time is the gap we create for ourselves to reflect quietly, consider options, benefits and drawbacks prior to making a decision (and the best decisions are usually made following a period of quiet contemplation), procrastination is more related to our personal fear of something either happening or not happening. It's the 'Oh, it's only a small job so I'll do it later' and 'Oh my god, If I screw up this decision, I'll be in for an ear bashing' syndrome.

At work, there is likely to be an occasion or two when we want to get a decision from someone, it could be a commitment from a person who is performing below par and needs to raise their game or your boss who has a hundred different decisions to make and bosses to please, so the decision you require keeps getting delayed. So here are a few questions you can ask to help someone make a good decision.

What information do you require (from me or from elsewhere) to make a decision now/today? - This helps the person think about what they need, not what you are offering and helps them be more response-able for their thinking.

If you had already made the most appropriate decision on this (subject) what information, data and other factors would you have considered to reach your decision? - This puts them in the position of having already made the decision and takes a different thinking position. Acting 'AS IF' is a very effective thinking technique.

Could you please help me understand what stops you from making a decision/approving my decision? - This helps to unblock thinking and may draw out sensitive information or even a blind spot.

If your boss was advising you of what decision to make that was good for all stakeholders, what would s/he recommend to you? - This gets the person to consider what their boss would appreciate and disapprove of. Bear in mind, people often comply with authority, so it's essential the decision is not made purely on position in a structure chart.

An unwillingness to make a decision is a decision in itself. If we are to help people make better quality decisions, we must provide them with the time and space to think for themselves.

Why won't the bosses change their decision?

2009-07-27T07:59:00.000-07:00

You must know how frustrating it can be when you know that a decision has been made, a path to follow decided and all steam ahead for you and your colleagues to meet a very challenging deadline.

When a top team within an organisation make a decision on a new strategy, for some, it can create a level of excitement, eager anticipation - and for others, fear, apathy and disengagement. The problems begin to appear when managers and front-line employees don't have a clear understanding or appreciation of the decision to choose a new path, to market, to serve customers or to enhance profitability while reducing costs. This absence of understanding can cause rumours to abound and B.S. (belief systems) about what is right and what is wrong to become embedded within a culture.

I have seen numerous examples of well considered, well defined strategic plans fall apart, partly because the communication around them lacks context and didn't consider communicating from the recipients perspective - this is 'telling them what we think they need to know' versus 'What information would be valuable for employees to know and how can we share it'?

Why is it so difficult for a top team to change their mind?

There are many reasons, far too many to mention in this forum. But the reasons include:

We have made and communicated and we are paid and trusted to make such decisions - so we reserve the right not to change it.

We have made a decision and must stick with it so we are not perceived to lack competence and lacking in decision-making capability.

The decision/s we have made are fit for purpose, accurate bearing in mind the information we have so there is no need to change it.

If I (individual) state my disagreement with the rest of the top team, I may be viewed as a trouble-maker or negative member of the team, so I'll keep quiet.

One thing that is often not appreciated by managers and front-line employees is that it is terribly difficult for a top team to change or do a U-Turn on a major strategy or policy decision. It can be viewed as incompetent leadership - and in some cases it might be just that. In other instances it could be that the decision made is the best decision when all things are considered, it's just that employees don't fully understand why things are or aren't happening as they would like or see fit. Managers should always bear in mind - The bosses are likely to possess information which you are not privy to. Thoughts of poor leadership or decision-making are often just that - thoughts! But it is essential to separate FACTS from FICTION in these situations. And this is best done through the sharing timely, factual information from the top down, and back up again.

Powercuts change people

2009-07-09T03:00:00.000-07:00

My part of town suffered a massive powercut the other night and all the traffic lights were off. Instead of driving more carefully, many drivers went berserk and sped through town like maniacs, because they knew that the speed cameras were also off. This led to several accidents over a short period of time.

Why is it that people don’t know what to do or how to behave when there are no obvious rules to follow? If you look at the current banking crisis and other deregulated industries, it seems that many people will turn into crazed egomaniacs that would make Adam Smith recant.

What happened to decency and accountability?

I always liked Stephen Covey’s ideas, especially his insistence that we should first establish and live according to our principles, then go for the “sexy” stuff like techniques, tools, methods.

As trainers, we sometimes need to stand up up to clients who ask for quick fixes and give them an honest assessment that they won’t obtain any long-term benefits if they are not willing to address issues of character, values and principles.

I am very proud to say that Summit has done this in the past and continues to value principles over fixes.

“Rules are not necessarily sacred - principles are.” (Franklin D. Roosevelt)

What's the Point of Feedback Like This?

2009-06-25T05:16:00.000-07:00

Why do well-meaning bosses initiate 360 degree and other feedback processes? Well, there are many reasons from protecting their territory and standing in a company - when the person or people on the receiving end of feedback are enemies, or at the very least, not trusted or respected, right through to genuinely wanting to help individuals and groups of people work together as effectively as they possibly can. Succession Planning programmes often have a full circle feedback mechanism in place so that the assessor/s can take a quick snapshot about how the subject of the feedback is doing in their day to day work.

But there are several key problems with well-intended feedback processes.

Firstly, even in this, the 21st century, some company bosses wish to impose the point that all feedback elicited from employees should remain anonymous, supposedly to protect the individual providing the feedback. What's the use of this? Well, apart from scaring the heck out of the subject of the process, there is little if any use to it - but it still happens this way. Let me share a true story which I do have permission to mention.

A middle manager in public service had been invited to participate in an assessment centre to identify their readiness (or unreadiness) to be promoted in to a higher ranking and higher salary role. A 360 degree feedback mechanism formed part of the assessment process. Ten immediate colleagues of higher, same and more junior ranks were invited to provide specific feedback via a computer system. They did. And while 80% of the feedback provided was deemed by the subject to be valuable in terms of learning and enhanced self-awareness - and this includes the non complimentary comments (harsh but perhaps accurate comments), the remaining 20% was felt to be wholly inaccurate and without foundation. One comment provided reflected that the subject was 'An autocratic, self-centred dictator'. Perhaps true for the person writing the feedback? The trouble started when, after listening to and understanding the whole feedback, he asked if he could find out more about the comment mentioned above, plus another comment from another colleague which is too sensitive to mention. The facilitator quickly stated that as the feedback was anonymous, he would have to accept the comments for what they were - OPINIONS!

The Problem?
The key problems were these. The subject was advised that he should not approach any of his colleagues to find out who made the rather severe comments. Indeed, wishing to undertake such an activity did not reflect 'leadership'. Catch 22 situation is now in place.

Neither was he able to learn more about what the intent was of the two individuals who felt it appropriate and relevant to write such damning comments. And despite his initial shock and a little upset, he really wanted to know what was behind such comments. In short, he was not allowed the opportunity to resolve any perceived problem or restore any trust that had been damaged. Clearly the other parties were in a low or no trust relationship with the subject, at least from their perspective.

Toxic Waste

During the days and weeks following completion of the feedback process, unwittingly, and perhaps not aware of the toxic comments, the other 8 colleagues who provided feedback formally started joking with the subject as to whether they had made him look great and when he got promoted he would owe them a beer or two. See what's happening? The 2 individuals who wrote the toxic comments are being identified without any effort? And no, the subject didn't start asking questions of them. What did happen though was that the relationships became strained, frustrating and then toxic. Defending their territory, watching their backs came very much in to play. And why? Largely because the feedback was anonymous and the subject was not given an opportunity to understand why such comments had been made or what he could learn from them. Ridiculous for an organisation to endorse such an approach? I think so.

Are these people working at or near their best together? Not a chance? Will they trust each other in the future? Probably not - because mud sticks even more when things aren't discussed. While tough talks can be very tough, even when what we want to say comes out wrong, if our intention is honourable rather than toxic, they often, not always, but often get worked out in the end for everyone's benefit.

It's Only Words - So Be Very Careful

2009-06-18T09:50:00.000-07:00

Have you ever considered the impact that our language has on ourselves and also on other people? OK, you have probably had one or two occasions when you have said something in the heat of the moment that you've later regretted. Ouch! But what about everyday language, phrases that don't sound like they are harmful, but really can be.

Think about these little nuggets:

'I've spoken to him til I'm blue in the face'...No you haven't. A blue face usually means you're either choking or your body is freezing. Nothing more. Have you ever seen someone's face go blue just because they're a little peeved at someone?

'He's too long in the tooth to learn anything new'. What have long teeth got to do with someone's ability and/or willingness to learn?

'You can't teach an old dog new tricks'. Well, unless you work in a zoo or for the RSPCA, there's unlikely to be any dogs or tricks. Yet again, a few carefully selected words can cause problems.

During my very early years in executive and management development, some one to one coaching sessions could become rather heated. The key reason was the client had something on his or her mind and this forum was the only or safest place to be really open and genuine - which is always a nice experience. One such instance which I do have permission to share with you is when a very demanding boss who felt he was CONSTANTLY being LET DOWN by his 4 direct reports had reached THE END OF THE LINE (what line?) and was intent on taking these individuals OFF LINE (nice way of saying a real rollocking) and a PIECE OF MY MIND. He had been KICKED IN THE TEETH and STABBED IN THE BACK so many times that enough was enough.

This client was usually very assertive in his approach but not aggressive. Thankfully, our brief relationship had developed in to a high level trust relationship and we had permission to question, challenge and disagree with each other, but only on the condition that such behaviour would help him develop and grow. So here's what happened. After listening to a full 7 minutes of profanities mixed in with a table leg being kicked, profuse perspiring and my ears losing their feeling, I politely asked 'May I see your teeth?'. 'What?' he replied, somewhat shocked by my unusual request. 'May I see your teeth, just for a moment. I'd really like to see your gnashers', posturing with a big smile and clattering my teeth for full effect. His anger turned to shock, his shock turned to confusion, all in a matter of seconds. I continued, 'OK, you won't show me your teeth, I understand....so please take off your shirt.' This was a risky step. What reaction would I receive? Well, if you've been watching the tv series 'Ashes to Ashes' and picture the chief cop, Gene Hunt, the response wouldn't have looked out of place coming from his mouth. 'PROFANITY, no way pal', was followed a second or two later with a smile and a laugh when he pointed to me and said 'I know what you're up to Scott. You want to see all of the knife scars on my back don't you?'. 'Absolutely, and I'm sure there are many, aren't there?' I replied.

From this moment on, the coaching session returned to a calm, thinking environment where the things that mattered most to him and his company were thought through, talked through and solutions to each of the problems generated. And all in less than 2 hours. During the following 3 months, 3 of his managers began to perform better than they had ever done, while 1 other left the organisation by mutual agreement.

Just think what the possible outcome could have been if this really decent, hard-working and caring man had handled the situation in the manner he initially had intended. Managers could have been the walking wounded (oh, there I go, I'm doing it now), and their brains would have counted this latest verbal assault as the norm.

So remember, be very careful about the language you use and also, check understanding of what other people actually mean when they use old cliches to express how they are feeling at any given moment. It could save you many headaches and a few heartaches too.

Hear My Voice- Time To Take A Stand and Be Heard?

2009-06-18T09:19:00.000-07:00

Many people I meet want to say something to their boss but daren't. The main reason why they choose not to speak up? Self Preservation! They don't want to 'rock the boat - not that there is a boat usually. The possibility of appearing to be awkward or perceived as a trouble-maker also score highly on the reasons for keeping quiet.

And there are times of course that we should keep quiet and say little if anything at all. It would be simply inappropriate to say something to intentionally inflict emotional harm on another person, even though some people take this as their norm rather than the exception. I guess that we have all encountered these people who prefer to attack, attack and attack again to impose their will on those around them.

The Superiority Complex

But there is a far more positive and human side to this too. Are you aware of Rosa Parks? Rosa, who died recently was the quiet lady who some may say actually started the human rights and equal rights movement in the USA. During the days when whites were perceived (by themselves of course) to be a superior race, Ms Parks was sat on a bus in her home town of Birmingham, Alabama. When instructed to vacate her seat so that a white person could use it, Ms Parks quietly declined to follow the instruction. She was promptly arrested, some reports stated that she was physically assaulted and she then became a 'criminal'. In short, Ms Parks didn't so much 'stand up' for her human rights, she actually 'sat down' for them. And a good thing she did too.

The Boss Doesn't Hold The Power

Many people believe that their boss, and then their bosses boss, hold the power within their organisation. The kind of organisation is not important, but people tend to comply with those in authority, whether they agree with them or not. But let's take a moment to reflect the real source of some major changes in the UK and globally. They weren't changes that were introduced by people in what is often called 'positions of power'. Or perhaps they were, as the people chose to use their personal power, their right to have a voice, their right to be heard to create something pretty special. Have a look at these.

Airlines globally introduce a NO SMOKING policy on flights following repeated requests from some passengers.

Gurkha soldiers who retired to the UK win the right to remain in the UK following many years of battling with the British Government. How did this happen? An actress named Joanna Lumley, whose father was an officer in the Gurkha regiment spoke up for them. And they won!

MP's Expenses - A four year challenge to the Freedom of Information Act results in UK residents finding out that their elected member of parliament had been claiming expenses on everything from new, expensive furniture (not needed to help them undertake their role in Government) to a duck island in a moat. The lady's name escapes me for the moment.

Iranian Election - Nearly 2 million people take to the streets of Tehran to protest that they believe the supposedly democratic election has been rigged to keep the present, anti-West President in power. The last time 2 million people took to the streets of Tehran, the Shah was overthrown.

Iran National Football Team - 8 members of the national football team chose to wear green wristbands, and their team captain, a green armband to show support for the pro-democracy movement during their match with South Korea. Why didn't the other players wear the same? Well, democracy and the freedom to choose is a good thing isn't it? Remember that these guys will have to return home at some point and could face severe punishment for their actions. But, they took their message to the masses - to the world!

Remember that in your organisation, whatever kind it is. You do reserve the right to have a voice. You would benefit from considering deeply, how you could help people want to listen to what you want to say. This will potentially strengthen greatly the impact of your message and also authenticity. Always speak up with a positive intention of either eradicating a problem, enhancing something or helping someone. NEVER speak up just for the sake of being heard or to impose your authority or will on another human being. After all, if the law of reciprocity turns up - the same thing will come back to haunt you at some point.

Government help for jobless executives ?

2009-06-11T04:05:00.000-07:00

I came across this article in the Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jobless-executives-to-get-special-help-1640147.html .

The gist of it is that the UK Government has earmarked £40 m to be used for recently released executives to receive training to brush up their job-hunting skills and obtain advice on changing careers.
The Government will also pay specialist recruitment agencies to help people seeking executive posts.

It was interesting to see that several dozen people had commented on the article and after reading the first 20 or so, I noticed that all the responses were negative. Some of them violently so.

A quick poll among friends and family members revealed the same result: nobody thinks that those unemployed managers and executives deserve to receive support from the Government.

The whole debate about whether the Government should invest in such an endeavour or whether these managers should pay for it themselves might be a topic for another day, but do these executives actually NEED training in interview and CV skills?

Shouldn't they have spent the last few years communicating effectively, whether orally or in writing?

Granted, a good course in interview and CV skills will give you an edge. Even though it should not matter, your chances of being considered for a position will improve if you spell "leadership" correctly.

Still, unless I massively underestimate the UK Government's intention with this scheme, the most useful part will not be the interview or CV skills that the executives will learn, but something more important: they will have to learn humility.

And that will benefit us all.

Inside the Dragon's Den

2009-06-03T08:56:00.000-07:00

In case you have not heard about “Dragons’ Den”, it is a British TV series showcasing the efforts of several entrepreneurs to convince investors (the Dragons) to fund their ideas. Think “American Idol” with business ideas rather than songs. Same amount of abuse, too.

Last month I was invited to participate in a jury at a French Business School that evaluated “mock” investement funds that were based on financial, but also environmental, social, societal and sustainability aspects. Twenty-three teams of students presented their ideas about which companies they thought had the greatest potential to do well, while adhering to stringent non-financial criteria.

It was an eye-opener!

Even while taking the current financial crisis into account, funds that focused on companies with high ethical standards of internal and external behaviour did and are expected to do better than those only focused on financial criteria. It really warmed my heart to hear that and I thought that if students learn such lessons before starting their careers, they might focus on those important ethical issues that are often overlooked when you are in the thick of the daily business grind. This might lead to a gentler invisible hand guiding the markets in future.

And the nicest bit of information was that those companies that are expected to do well and do so on a higher ethical level than other companies, also had the highest training budget! :-)

Counterintuitive? Maybe, but very much in line with the findings of Boston Consulting Group, as publishes in People Management magazine in April 2009 (page 9).

In that report, executives were asked which cost-cutting measures worked during the last recession. Cutting back on training did not! On the contrary, it led to a decline in employee engagement.

We have to keep in mind that training is not just a way to enhance employees' skills, but also their motivation levels. If we don't invest in their development, what kind of message that does that send about how much we value them?

Why The Long Face? Feedback - It's Bound To Be Negative!

2009-06-03T07:25:00.000-07:00

So many consultants, trainers and facilitators espouse the value of giving people open, honest feedback in the workplace. They sing from the hymn sheet 'Just do it, it'll be ok' or 'Don't worry, you're not doing a firewalk'. As if these kinds of statements, however well-intended, are really of any help or value!

What stops us from giving feedback?

In the workplace, if you want to give some candid feedback to your boss, how likely are you to actually do it? Well, if the relationship is one based on high-trust (there's that trust thing again) and the level of rapport is high and there's a track record of speaking openly with everyone's best interests at heart, chances are you will speak up and say what you feel needs to be said. On the other side of the coin, in such an authentic relationship, the recipient of your feedback, even if it is your immediate boss, is far more likely to be open enough and feel safe enough to listen to what you feel you want or have to say? By feeling safe enough, what I mean is, your communication will be private, specific, help them learn or become aware of something and....help your relationship to blossom rather than destroy it.

But what if the recipient of your intended feedback is your boss and you are not enjoying very much the low-trust relationship? You know, you're just tolerating each other because after all, you have to work together. Is it likely that you would speak up in the manner or spirit I mentioned above? Unlikely. Why?

Toxic Relationships and Self-Preservation

In a low-trust, low tolerance relationship, who wants to be the one to tell their boss that their approach to motivation matches that of David Brent of 'The Office' fame and that they are about as trustworthy as a pyromaniac with a box of matches? By the way, this comment was made by an employee to a manager in a heated argument in the workplace.

All too often in the workplace, the feedback that needs to be heard, and needs to be given, never materialises because the person wanting to provide feedback is subordinate, either in the organisation structure or informal hierarchy to the recipient. They fear being viewed as a trouble-maker or obstruction to the effective running and performance of the team. The 'It's better to keep quiet' approach rarely serves to improve matters so important as effective communication...but so many people continue to subscribe to this draining and toxic approach.

Can I have a word with you in my office?

Ouch, this sound pretty painful and the boss has only asked a question. But the impact of such a question can be quite frightening when it lacks any context - or our relationship with the person is not in a good place. I remember being asked this very question by a boss of mine nearly 20 years ago. We weren't getting on at all, we rarely agreed on anything (well, my ego wouldn't let me agree with her because we were scoring points against each other - a subject for another time). As I walked to her office which was only 30 yards away, I quickly started to recount all of the petty squabbling, arguments and 'spirited discussions' we had enjoyed during the previous 12 months. Oh, and there were many hum dingers! I was ready for a verbal slanging match, after all, I had reached the level of conscious competence at least as I had practiced so often with her. Sorry, conscious competence is my current justification for being 'rather stupid' at that point and it's not something I was proud of.

The rather unexpected surprise was that my boss had recommended me for a promotion and the Managing Director had approved her recommendation. I was to start my new role, with a new pay rise (and even my own parking space - result!) in 4 weeks time.

The ego had landed
What happened to my 'fighting my corner'?, well, it fell away. Apparently, when done properly, my boss actually appreciated my candid feedback. While my intention was to help, she stated that my impact was sometimes poor at best...and that was something I should work on improving in the future. What happened? I accepted her feedback BECAUSE she was in her own way, trying to help me - not beat or punish me. One major problem with giving and receiving feedback in the workplace is getting the ego out of the way. Switching off for a few minutes from the 'I'm right and you're wrong' and 'I'm the boss and you'll do as you're told' toxic rubbish that kills authentic, candid, well-intentioned dialogue. As Thomas Moore wrote 'We need people in our lives with whom we can be as open as possible. To have real conversations with people may seem like a simple, obvious suggestion but it involves courage and risk.'

May I speak with your manager for a moment please?

During a recent trip to the Kingdom of Bahrain I decided to visit a shopping mall which hosted an abundance of eateries for lunch. Each outlet had a female 'greeter' standing just inside and in view of passing shoppers. One person I notice immediately was a lady named Elisabeth. Her smile appeared genuine, her welcome was warm and she invited me to choose where I would like to 'enjoy lunch'. She subtly invited her colleague Mary to come to my table and take a drinks order. Again, smiling, both ladies just started guessing with each other which country I was from. This is right in front of me, within hearing distance. 'Oh no, he's not American, he's too skinny'. 'He can't be French, his skin is sooo pale'. All very strange but also very entertaining for me as a customer. They eventually guessed correctly and from this moment on, when they returned to my table, it was like a chat with friends rather than lunch with waiting staff. While 'enjoying' my lunch I noticed that a rather stern faced and official looking gentleman, who appeared to be their boss circled like a vulture around the restaurant, picking and picking at tiny bits of detail that his very low-paid and rather wonderful waiting staff needed to fix. When he appeared, there was a very quick and very noticeable shift in the emotional temperature of the waiting staff. So, me being me - I took this as a learning opportunity to share some feedback with the manager. Rather worryingly, when I asked Elisabeth if she would be so kind as to ask her manager to visit me she responded sharply 'Have I done something wrong sir?''No, just come back with him and Mary and we can have a chat.' I responded.

A few minutes later, the manager, straightening his already straight tie and smoothing down his already smooth suit approached my table. I was about to introduce myself and launch into my feedback but he beat me to it. 'Sir, I am sorry that you are not satisfied with your visit today. It is not acceptable that..(I interject) May I interrupt you, as Elisabeth and Mary are looking really worried behind you and I'd like you personally as manager to hear my feedback. Is this ok with you? Fear now began to grow in his face too. Is this the law of reciprocity returning to bite him on the behind?? 'Look, I want you to know that Elisabeth and Mary have done a wonderful job of first of all, getting me to visit your outlet and secondly, they have looked after me so well I wanted to let you, the manager know. (Now, his fear is disappearing but he's still a little/or a lot, confused). These two ladies are a real credit to you and your company. Please bring me two customer feedback forms and I will send them to your head office.' By this point he has offered me a complimentary drink, and given me his business card so that maybe I can mention him to his head office (not a chance).

So, when you wish to give someone feedback, get your intention right, focus on what is the outcome you wish to achieve - hopefully win-win to strengthen your relationship, and don't think automatically it will go badly wrong. Just as the manager of the restaurant seemed to expect a verbal slap from a customer, he wasn't open to achieving a very positive outcome. Make sure that you are!

If You Want To Learn More - Fail More

2009-06-02T02:22:00.000-07:00

It is all too easy to forget just how easy, enjoyable and fulfilling learning can be. When we commit to learning something new, or even refreshing an old skill, it can be a fun and thought-provoking experience. When we enter in to the learning with an open mind and a willingness to take the little failures that are very likely to appear occasionally, overcoming them can be really quite straightforward. At least if we choose to think this way.

OK, now it may not be very motivational for you to read that, if you try something new, or even not so new, you should expect that you won't get everything right, first time or every time. Sometimes you might not realise 'why' you are failing, but you just are. It can seem like however hard you try, progress is minimal or non-existent. But that thought itself, is part of the problem. When we think that we aren't making any progress, or the progress we are making is really insignificant, it doesn't motivate us to focus on persisting. It can focus us more on generating justifications for giving up. You may have heard some of the following:

-It's not worth it anyway, I've got other things I need to do.

-Well, I've tried everything to make it work but still can't do it.

-S/he (someone who can do it successfully) must have some special ability that I don't possess. That's why they can do it.

-I was never serious about learning it anyway.

-It isn't worth the hassle or effort.

Any of these sound familiar? Not that I'm suggesting for one moment that you would use any of these justifications.

Who struggles most with failing?

The people that tend to struggle most with failure are those people who succeed so frequently that 'failure' appears foreign to them. Why don't they tend to handle failure well? Because they are so damned brilliant that they haven't learned how to manage themselves, their thinking and emotions through the turmoil that failure to achieve a goal can bring. You see, even the most brilliant amongst us has challenges to face and obstacles to overcome.

Failure as a learning opportunity

Let me put some context around this. If you are a trainee pilot attempting to land a passenger jet with 300 passengers on board, it wouldn't be wise to simply think positively to yourself 'I can do this, I can do this' when the technical competence hasn't reached the level required to confidently make an attempt. My preferred approach is small, regular and manageable steps on a daily basis. This way we exercise our self-confidence, self-awareness, motivation and resilience muscles. This way, any 'failure' is small and usually, more quickly overcome so you can get back on track.

If you want to learn more, fail more. But don't keep repeating the same thinking, communication and behavioural patterns over and over again. Persistence is a good thing when used wisely. But if you keep persisting at repeating the failure pattern, all you'll get really successful at failing miserably.

We continue to see how failure, either on a small or massive scale can bring about new learning. An airline crash can bring about a new or enhanced awareness of the need for specific pre-flight checks just as in business, failing to hit an agreed deadline for your boss can help you to realise that you shouldn't simply comply with a boss's demand or request when you truly know that you can't hit the deadline or achieve the required quality standard. The trick is to learn BEFORE the significant learning failure can occur - and this requires clarity of thought as well as a willingness to trust yourself to take appropriate and intelligent action.

Help me to learn to walk

Think of it this way. If you are the parent of a new born child, when it reaches 18 months old would you expect him or her to be learning to walk on their own? If so, when would you stop helping your child to learn to walk? Would you really have a tough talk with him or her stating that 'I've tried everything I know to get you to walk and you're not. So, either it's you can't be bothered or you're just not designed to walk or you're just being silly.' You'd never have such a conversation would you? Firstly, the kid wouldn't understand a word you are saying, never mind the significance of your communication. But more importantly, you place such a high value on your relationship with your child, and it with you, that you are going to persist and persist UNTIL your child learns to walk by itself, unaided. What an experience that would be eh? How proud would you be when those first unaided steps were walked?

So, why use the metaphor of learning to walk as a guide for yourself? What do you want to learn that you're not finding time or energy for? What do you need to learn if you are to achieve the goals you set yourself, or those set by your organisation?

You've already learned to walk, possibly drive a motor vehicle, speak at least one, if not more languages, program a computer, use the internet and so much more. Why not make your next learning something so important and exciting that you actually stick with it, even during the tough times?

Top Ten Tips for Honest Influencing and Negotiating

2009-05-16T02:44:00.000-07:00

When I ask groups, 'How often do you negotiate?', they generally respond with answers like 'occasionally' or 'not very often'. But the accurate answer is we are always negotiating. We can't not negotiate. Whether it is asking for additional resources, revised deadlines or even whose turn it is to make the team coffees - life is one big negotiation.

But if we are to become effective negotiators, it really helps if we are already good at influencing other people. I'm sure you know of someone who is a 'good' influencer but leaves a trail of destruction and broken relationships in their wake. That isn't what this post or my approach is about. My approach is strictly honest and absolutely win-win or no deal.

So, here are some tips for you to consider and apply in your workplace. Remember that it wouldn't be a great strategy to simply take the words I write and use them as such. These are just my words and my preferred approaches. I invite you to think of some of your own. And remember, high trust relationships have a massive influence on whether another human being is both open and willing to be influenced by you.

1. If/Then can be effectively used to agree a reciprocal trade-off. In plain English this means that when someone is seeking to impose (not agree-impose) an instruction or deadline on you, your immediate attention should be to obtain something back in return, and quickly. For example 'I understand that you want this report completing by Monday 12pm and you realise how packed my schedule is with other high priority commitments. So, IF I were to agree to complete the report and achieve this very challenging deadline THEN would you be prepared to (x,y or z) for me in return?'

2. Help your boss realise the implications of their/your action or inaction. For example, your boss demands that yet another report or project needs to be got underway, and it's you who will be doing it. It is dangerous and perhaps a little foolish for someone to take on yet another commitment they really deep down know just can't be hit without sacrificing quality or other project outputs. For example to your manager, 'I am committed to doing my best to achieve all of the outputs you have set me and require of me. As you are aware, there are many tight timescales on many projects to achieve. Just so I can understand which takes top priority, please will you share with me which of the other projects you wish to set aside until this new project is completed?' Bear in mind that bosses are perhaps not open to setting something aside - they just want it doing! This is rarely because they are not very nice people, they just have pressures at a higher level to deal with, so this is where your integrity and assertiveness need to shine through. 'If I do spend the time required on completing this new project, THE IMPLICATIONS for (a) project is....THE KNOCK ON EFFECT for (b) project will be ......and THE IMPLICATIONS FOR (c) project will likely be......

3. Help them understand what it means - All too often the willingness to comply with a request or demand kicks in. In some situations it is a very good thing to comply, while in others, all it does is cause stress, anxiety and frustration. And we can't perform anywhere near our best when we are experiencing these kinds of emotions. Help the other party/parties truly understand the impact and potential consequences of their decision/s, actions/inactions so that the dialogue can progress positively. When people genuinely understand, they are far more likely to be open to your honest and professional dialogue. Think of the medical doctor example to his heavy smoking patient. 'You need to stop smoking' versus 'You need to stop smoking because if you choose to continue this means you will not be around to walk your beautiful daughter down the aisle when she marries.' Notice the very different understanding.

4. Use softeners to help higher value dialogue - In a spirited discussion, or even a stand-off, the question 'AND WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?' has a very different impact to 'Please will you help me understand exactly what is meant by that?' The very tone associated with the first question can put your colleague/client on the back foot in a heartbeat. It can also make influencing and negotiating so much harder as they can feel bullied or stone-walled. Good softeners include 'Just so I can be clear....May I just ask you a question about...If you could help me understand (a,b or c) in more detail, I would be grateful/I'd really appreciate it...Bearing in mind/remembering our agreement about (a), what are your thoughts on how it can be achieved?...Do we all agree that.....? Softeners are like a medical doctor having a wonderful bedside manner. Consider your bedside manner carefully - or there could be severe implications!

5. Keep your commitments - If you say you will do something, just do it. If you say you won't do something, don't do it. Simple as a standard and it has the added benefit of building trust. People trust people who make good things happen. And as well as keeping commitments to other people, remember that self-trust is where it all starts from. Trust your self to speak up when you need to. Trust your self to allow other people the space to think and the right to have their own ideas and opinions.

6. The power of WE - Often, but not always, two or more heads are better than one. If you have a colleague who is refusing to change their idea, first of all work on understanding how and why they have reached their decision. Then you can smoothly move on to understanding why they are not open to changing their decision. Often it is either because they don't particularly care for the person/people inviting them to change their mind (as it can be perceived as one-up manship), they have a very personal, personal value on a subject that has driven their decision, they may not have access to the data that you have access to - and that's why sharing is a good thing, or it may be that they have advised their boss of their decision and the boss agreed with them, or their boss has told them what decision to make. Now, remember that people generally comply with an authority figure, whether or not they agree with them. If you have a colleague or two who have challenged your thinking and they genuinely agree with your research and facts, you can return to your manager and state something like 'Name, name and name have reviewed my data independently and they all believe that the decision/recommendation is the most appropriate for this matter. Remember to stay away from 'They all agreed with me so I'm right and you're clearly wrong'. This isn't helpful to anyone. Honestly applying the power of WE may help your colleague to be a little more open to a different way of thinking or at the very least, positioned with integrity, your polite persistance may reflect that you are a committed and helpful worker.

I can't believe we're only on number 7. I've been writing for ages!

7. Separate Facts from Opinions - Dialogue can become fraught with anger, frustration and disappointment when we have what seems to be a great idea only for it to be rejected by a boss or a peer group. Be aware that opinions are just that. They are simply beliefs that an individual or a group believe about something. A fact though has indisputable evidence to support it. Always, always, always ask a question to clarify whether a statement is a fact or opinion.

8. Use effective tag questions - A tag question is a bundle of words at the end of a sentence that is leading the other party to respond. Tag questions can be highly effective when used sparingly in a negotiation or meeting. Examples of tag questions are...Do we both agree? I have understood correctly, haven't I? We agree, do we not? I'm correct in remember we did agree the deadline, aren't I? That is your understanding too, is it not? This is my understanding of the problem, is this correct? Don't use too many in quick succession as the other party may feel like they are being interrogated. Remember that tag questions along with every other technique I share with you must be applied with a genuine win-win outcome in mind.

9. Say NO and stick to it - This may at first sound like a tough position to stick with, especially when you are negotiating or having a dialogue with your boss or a high income value client. But, my position here is to stick to your NO position UNTIL both parties agree to collaborate openly and honestly to explore and hopefully reach an agreement that works for both parties, plus, as a bonus, for any third party too. Saying NO is not digging your heels in, being obstructive or childish. It is a starting point on which to start negotiating. After all, would you like me to make a commitment to you and then not keep my commitment? What about if I knew all along I either couldn't or wouldn't keep it and I never told you? With this approach you can move forward to 'Because of the negative implications (for both you and I) we spoke about earlier, I do need to say NO to your request as a whole. BUT, perhaps what we can agree to work on is a,b and c as they are most important to you and your stakeholder. Perhaps we can get these pieces completed fully and to the required standard before starting on d,e,f,....z. Do we agree this is a good step forward?'

10. Clarify, Clarify, Clarify - When our schedule is packed full with meetings and telephone calls it is easy to forget things. Our brain is the most powerful computer known to mankind - but sometimes the programming gets a little messed up. Our memory is not the most accurate tool to rely on to remember important facts, figures and commitments. Always clarify your understanding, always clarify your perceived agreements on the spot when any misunderstandings can be resolved, not later when your head is elsewhere. When you have clarified all that is required, only then should you move forward. Only when you have complete agreement on understanding should you then move on to the next steps.

11. More tips will follow next week. In the meantime, please honestly and ethically apply these tips and let me know how you get along.

Best wishes

Scott

A Quick Lesson in Developing Trust

2009-05-15T08:32:00.000-07:00

In 2005, the Italia Masters Tennis Championship brought together Fernando Verdasco of Spain and Andy Roddick of the USA. The battle had reached match point in favour of Roddick and Verdasco was to serve. Verdasco did serve, it was judged as a fault. He served for a second time - and once again, the umpire called Verdasco's serve as a fault. Match Roddick!

Well, it didn't quite work out that way. Roddick had just been awarded the match and by default, the cheers of the crowd. As Verdasco started the traditional walk to the net to shake hands with his opponent, Roddick remained still. Why would the victor remain still? Was he injured, shocked or was something else happening? It was indeed something very special and deeply human happening. Roddick was about to challenge the umpire's decision. A decision that was not only in his own favour, but one which had awarded him the match and safe passage to the next round.

Roddick politely and assertively stated his view that the ball was actually 'in' and not 'out'. He stated that the proof of his own call was that a slight indentation had formed on the clay court where Verdasco's second serve had impacted. As the ball had landed on the line and not outside the line, the match umpire allowed Roddick to overrule him.

As history shows, Verdasco went on to win the match and progress to the next round. But while Roddick may have lost the match, he won in so many other ways. He demonstrated strength of character, deeply held personal values relating to trust, honour and integrity, and if you were umpiring his next match and Roddick challenged your decision, might you just be a little more open to listening and understanding his viewpoint than you would of other sports men and women who moan, groan, complain and downright cheat to get their own way?

As my wonderful mother used to say to me 'Scott, always be honest. It's really easy to remember.'

Spying or Simply Positive Performance Management?

2009-05-15T08:15:00.000-07:00

Airbus are in the news due to a supposed 'spying scandal' . A previous management board allegedly spied on staff between 2005 and 2007 in what was deemed to be a positive step to identify and deal with instances of corruption amongst its ranks. The BBC reported that the checks were to see if any employees bank accounts had any links to those of the company's suppliers.

But is this a bad thing or a good thing? Corporate surveillance can be perceived as a distinct absence of trust for employees but on the other side of the coin, isn't it also a very positive step the company's former bosses took to ensure that their company's business was being run honestly and transparently? Not that it is an act of transparency to secretly 'spy' on staff - but I suppose that informing everyone in advance of such a project would defeat the whole object of the exercise!

In the instances of the Enron, Worldcom, Parmalat scandals, if the cameras have been focused firmly on the leaders of the organisations the fall-out would have been reduced significantly. But, as it is on most occasions the leader/s who authorise such a practice, they are unlikely to promote such a practice for themselves.

A certain Mr Madoff is also in the news. His alleged multi-million dollar fraud could have and some commentators say, should have been avoided if his company's accounts had been audited by a genuinely independent accountancy practice.

We may have to accept that in some situations, actively observing and indeed investigating employee behaviour (from the very top downwards) is a very good thing. Moving away from the old adage 'if you've nothing to hide, there's nothing to be concerned about' to 'it's in everyone's best interests that we all demonstrate transparency'. Remember in the UK in the 1970's where a car manufacturer British Leyland identified that some of its assembly line workers were stealing car parts from their employer - not to sell or indeed use the parts individually. At the expense of British Leyland, they were building their own cars at home!

Is there a difference between 'spying' and 'managing quality'? Is it the intention on which the action is based? If you don't trust your boss, isn't it likely we will view it as spying or micro management, whereas if we do trust our boss, we are more likely to view it as a genuine corporate requirement?

How do you perform when you feel you aren't being trusted? How would you respond if your employer was found to have been watching your every move?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7978713.stm

Showing Two Fingers To Bad Behaviour - Football's Shameful Leaders

2009-05-15T08:14:00.000-07:00

Many companies have a clause in their employment contracts which states something along the lines of 'the employee agrees to behave themselves, not be stupid, silly or get into trouble with the police - basically...BEHAVE YOURSELF'. Is it fair for a company to impose such a stipulation on its employees when they are outside of the workplace and outside their working hours? There is after all this growing awareness of human rights - we should be free to do as we please when away from work. Well, such a general statement could cause chaos in a world where social ills such as violence, illegal drug use and booze culture are growing fast.

But what about when a professional sportsperson/footballer (or two of them in this case) choose to break the rules set by their national team manager by allegedly going on a heavy drinking session when they should have been tucked up in bed in preparation for representing their county 24 hours later? Some people may challenge 'Well, as long as they perform on the pitch, why is it a problem?' while others may claim 'They get paid enough to behave themselves, how stupid can they be?'.

But while national team manager George Burley and Walter Smith, Rangers' Manager thought they had effectively resolved the matter of 'drinking on duty', what made matters worse, much worse in fact was the two players' two finger hand gestures to the television cameras during the Scotland v Iceland match when they were both on the bench and not selected to play due to their manager suspending them.

Whichever way we look at the situation that Barry Ferguson and Allan MacGregor currently find themselves in, the facts of the matter are:

The Scottish Football Association has decided that both players cannot represent their country again.
Both players have been suspended by their club for 2 weeks and have been fined 2 weeks' wages. Perhaps this isn't a big deal in itself as Ferguson reportedly earns £25,000 per week and MacGregor £15,000.
Barry Ferguson has been stripped of his club captaincy role and both players transfer listed by Rangers. They are unlikely to play for their club again, even though the Scottish league championship is rather tight this year and Rangers would benefit from having their best players available.

So what does this mean in a corporate sense?

How do you tackle those team members who choose to flout the rules and standards that your organisation set and you are paid to implement? Do you turn a blind eye if the rules are being broken by a high performing team member because you can't afford to upset them in case their performance drops?

How about, if as in Rangers case, you have a good chance of 'winning the championship' and you feel you can't afford to take your best player/s out of the team? Either way, whether they remain in the team or are suspended/fired, what messages do you send to other team members who behave impeccably well on a consistent basis?

If a member of your team behaves in such a manner that s/he is ultimately removed from your organisation, would you still provide a job reference saying they were a model employee/committed/dedicated, not mentioning the reason they left your organisation - even if the prospective employer asked you?

How many times do you give a team member 'another chance' to behave within the boundaries set by your organisation? When is enough, really enough?

What situations have you faced, or are facing where someone's behaviour is being tolerated even though it is destructive?

When have you procrastinated on taking action on a poor performer and it has got worse?

Have you had a time when you procrastinated on taking action on a performance/behaviour issue and the matter seemed to resolve itself?

Why do some people choose to let their ego get in the way of doing what they are paid (and hopefully, trusted) to do?

There is a big difference between 'making an example' of someone and leading by example. In my view, Walter Smith has set a standard which as well has having potential serious repercussions for both players future career prospects, sends a clear message to his current and future players - behave, or else. Perhaps Mr Smith is leading by example as football is supposed to be a family game and he may not want to promote the possibility of young, impressionable children accepting the behaviour of their role model/s as the norm.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/apr/03/barry-ferguson-allan-mcgregor-banned-scotland-rangers

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7983283.stm

Personal Impact - Getting Below The Surface to Shared Understanding

2009-05-15T08:13:00.000-07:00

We all have an impact. Whether we know it or not, whether we care or not, we all impact other human beings with our gestures, communication and even our personal values. Have a think, if you and I work together and in the early stages of the relationship, we both agree that 'honesty' is of great importance to us, should this agreement and shared value make working together less stressful, more enjoyable and even more fulfilling? Nope, not at all! Unless that is we both understand what exactly 'honesty' means to each of us. For example, many moons ago, I was invited to facilitate an open and honest discussion between a senior manager and a subordinate. They had completed such a discussion at interview stage and the senior manager (also the recruiter) stated that one of the main reasons he selected the applicant for the job was that he 'felt on the same page'. Very dangerous - especially when just 3 months into the working relationship, their relationship had become toxic, information that should have been shared wasn't being shared and both individuals had founded their own little 'gang' to bad mouth their colleague and reinforce the supposed 'fact' that they were right and the other person was wrong. Gangs can be very powerful in helping our ego be stroked, they won't though dig us out of the very deep hole we will eventually find ourselves in when gang members leave, change allegiance or simply get fed up of listening to us bad mouth someone or persistently moan on.

How could this happen after such a positive and enjoyable selection interview? Quite easily actually! Following discussions with both parties I established that the word 'honesty' had a very different meaning for each person. For the new staff member, honesty meant that there was open, honest dialogue and information was shared in a timely manner with everyone's best interests at heart. There was to be no personal or hidden agenda overriding the needs of the team or business. To do such things would amount to 'being dishonest'. On the other hand, the manager stated that for him 'honesty' meant 'telling people how it is', 'letting people know where they stand' and also included ' and 'giving feedback that makes people listen'.

Let's bear in mind that in the real world (not our own little world) in the absence of indisputable facts we can only tell people how we see it, not how it actually is. We can only provide our opinion about a subject or situation. While it may not be what we can accurately call 'the truth', it is nonetheless 'our truth'. Letting people know where they stand can be extremely useful if it is designed to agree roles, responsibilities and boundaries within which someone is to operate. This clear context can stop individuals and teams going off track and missing deadlines and quality standards. When it is used though to set a command and control, ego based relationship, it can serve to destroy trust, loyalty and employee engagement. And why wouldn't we want to provide feedback that makes people listen? The word 'makes' in this instance reflected a 'I'm right so don't dare to speak back to me' approach rather than 'helping' someone want to listen - and really appreciate the feedback being provided. Indeed, helping someone want to listen is more focused on win-win, collaboration, supportive and even motivational, simply because it is said with a positive intention that will probably help the relationship grow and prosper rather than fall apart and cause toxicity.

As it turned out, when both parties shared their definition of 'honesty' and what it meant to them, the relationship got on to an even keel. Both parties gave each other permission to provide candid feedback but only if it was with an intention of improving a situation - backstabbing was no longer to be the order of the day. A wonderful demonstration of integrity - which is another personal value that they shared. I only hope they got some shared clarity on what this actually meant to each other as this too could cause problems that wouldn't be spoken about for many months, just like honesty.

One powerful lesson I learned from my mother was 'Always be honest with me, it's a high standard to hold, and it's far easier to remember'. If only business leaders would demonstrate such a standard wouldn't our world be a little bit more enjoyable?

The Lewis Hamilton/McLaren Approach to Winning - Is It Worth It?

2009-05-15T08:12:00.000-07:00

Today, Formula One's governing body, the FIA have announced a suspended 3 race ban for McLaren race team and their reigning world formula one champion Lewis Hamilton. Good news or bad news?

A quick review tells us that during the Australian Grand Prix, both McLaren and Hamilton collaborated to withhold information from race officials when Hailton finished the race in fourth position behind Toyota's Jarno Trulli. The incident which caused the McLaren team to appeal against Trulli's 3rd placing was that he had illegally overtaken Hamilton while the race was under the control of the track safety car. This means that no overtaking is allowed until the safety car has left the track and normal competition recommences. McLaren stated that they had not intentionally allowed Trulli to overtake Hamilton, but (and this is the really clever bit), Hamilton's communication with his team officials was recorded. And when the recording was played back, it contradicted what the team had told race officials, perhaps to elevate their team and driver to a place on the podium. More can be read about the details of this incident at http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8024661.stm

Transferring this sporting situation to the business arena, have a think about the following:

Hamilton is currently world champion and has become something of a hero for being a 'good guy' who persevered through personal challenges during his childhood years to pursue his passion and has developed a very powerful reputation for youngsters and adults alike. He seems a quite likeable chap.

Did Hamilton choose to be misleading/dishonest and willingly collaborated with his team-mates to mislead officials in order to gain a better placing in the race? Hamilton stated that his boss, Dave Ryan had instructed him to 'withhold information'. Doesn't this reflect Dr Robert Cialdini's point that subordinates often feel compelled to comply with an authority figure, even if they don't agree with the boss's decision? This principle, in another way, helps Hamilton to abdicate any personal responsibility for his (choosing) to comply and (choosing) to be allegedly misleading/dishonest. Relate this back to the workplace and this is where a junior employee will say 'I was just following the boss's orders' when a problem appears or quality has suffered. For schoolchildren when caught stealing or mis-behaving it's something like 'Johnny MADE ME do it.'

When officials heard the radio communication between Hamilton and his team-mates (the game was now over), Hamilton quickly made an emotional, and possibly, genuine apology for his part in the scandal. Is this because he had been found out, because his personal brand, and potentially the brand of each of his sponsors would be damaged to some degree? Just thank of how his sponsorship negotiation power has diminished for his next renewal discussion! I invite you to learn more about 'guilt by association' in the corporate arena. Perhaps Hamilton has learned that honesty is the best policy - as it's really easy to remember, and hopefully, that 'doing the right thing' is just as important as 'doing things right' in a high-speed motor vehicle.

It's true that we can learn from mistakes - at least if we choose to. But what do you think the initial response of Formula One's governing body, the FIA might be if McLaren/Hamilton complain or appeal a decision mid-race in the future? Might they be more interested in ensuring they aren't being duped than ensuring that they are applying the rules and regulations of the race itself? Will an element of suspicion, unfounded or otherwise exist towards McLaren, even though the team now has a new boss who has implemented 'a complete culture change'? WOW, he's managed to achieve this in just a few weeks? Management Consultant's appear to take years, if not decades to achieve this in the corporate arena!

The decision by the FIA to impose a 3 race ban which will only be imposed if 'further facts emerge' about the incident or if there are 'further breaches of the rules'. Prior to the FIA hearing, news media were reporting that McLaren could be suspended, if not thrown out of Formula One forever. Perhaps a little sensationalist? Well, when in the grasp of a global recession, team sponsors such as Royal Bank of Scotland amongst others not being in a position to continue with multi-million pound sponsorship deals and F1 enthusiasts perhaps watching their pennies a little more - the last thing the FIA would do was to ban a team. It wouldn't be good for the F1 brand or keep money in the sport.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8016611.stm

In terms of Hamilton's previously unblemished record in terms of appearing to be a decent bloke, remember, we human beings keep score. We tend to remember when someone has deceived us, and trust, while it can be restored, it can take a long time to forgive - not so much forget.

The danger with blaming. An important point to bear in mind for the viewing public and Hamilton and F1 enthusiasts is this. When we label another human being, we don't define them - we define ourselves.

I hope that you win each and every day, but please don't allow it to be at the expense of your character and integrity.

Thoughts? Please do share.

Is Customer Service Only for Existing Customers?

2009-05-15T08:11:00.000-07:00

The email below demonstrates how even when times are tough, some companies just don't appear to appreciate that keeping commitments is so vital to them attracting and also potentially retaining customers (income).

Lots has been written about customer care and much of it is really good stuff. Really simple stuff - perhaps too simple for some people within companies to comprehend. The context is this. My friend visited a car showroom to explore a 3 year rental on a new vehicle (rrp £22,500). A commitment was made by the sales executive regarding producing and submitting monthly rental costs, but they never appeared. What impact does this have on the potential customer? I can't or won't trust you. They have told me of course, and now I'm sharing it with you. Good news travels fast - bad news, even faster!

In the UK several car manufacturers have either reduced car production, and one or two have stopped altogether for at least 2 months. There is a stockpile of vehicles waiting to be sold, possibly at knock-down prices because of the economic climate, and on this occasion, perhaps the sales executive didn't want to sell/lease a vehicle for reasons best known to herself.

If you are the chief executive of a company with 100 employees, whether it is in sales, production, quality control, customer care or health and safety and just 10% of these employees demonstrates such a blase approach to their work, what do you think the impacts could be for you and the future of your company?

How can managers put a positive stop on such behaviours/attitudes? How do you hold each employee personally responsible for their actions or inactions? When does poor performance become a formal disciplinary matter? How do you actually know when a company actually truly cares about you, your well-being, your results and value for money?

Email is below.

Dear Mr ......

I wanted to share some feedback with you regarding the experience my fiancée and I had recently at your showroom.

We enquired about a new VW Tiguan and were advised that we would receive quotes by email within 48 hours. This is now 2 ½ weeks ago and despite my partner and I phoning your sales rep on 4 separate occasions and leaving messages for her, we have received no response. While we initially asked for a 3 year lease, we have now agreed to actually purchase the vehicle outright from another dealer. This dealer kept their commitment and offered a deal which is good for us and they say it is good for them too.

While I feel it is reasonable to receive a high quality of service at any time, at a time when the economy is on a slippery slope, I’d expect a car dealership to do its best to make the most of turning prospects into customers. As we have now agreed to purchase the vehicle, I'm sure you can figure out how much income your outlet could have attracted, and how much it has now lost. Here’s to hoping that our experience was an isolated incident.

Regards

Don't Get Too Excited Too Soon - You Could Lose Out

2009-05-15T08:09:00.000-07:00

Negotiation is a wonderful thing. When two or more human beings agree to speak openly, honestly and with everyone's best interests in mind, it can lead to an abundance of authentic, collaborative problem-solving and genuinely win-win relationships can be developed.

Using a car purchase as an analogy, have a think about the following scenario:

Car dealers are having a really tough time and you decide that it's time to make the purchase for your new vehicle. But, as you already know that the car sales industry is on it's last legs, at least for the forseeable future, you decide that you are in a very powerful negotiating position. You think, 'He will want to sell me the car more than I want to buy it'. A rather innocent, yet possibly misguided view perhaps?

The brand new, shiny, sexy looking car will bring you adulation, a few 'wows' from colleagues and friends the first time they see you in it. But remember, you only ever get one 'wow' from anyone - and the cars value has already lost a few thousand pounds within seconds - not minutes of your purchase. Watch out, there are more shocks to come!

The car is priced at £20,000. It's the very car you had set your heart on. But you already know, the dealer doesn't really expect you to pay £20,000. They've gone up in order to come down in price. This is the negotiation about to commence.

But, with your insider knowledge of the car market, you decide to be really cheeky, even a little mischievous and offer over the telephone a paltry £14,000 or it's no deal. Your expectation is that the dealer will return with a counter offer which will reach somewhere in the region of splitting the deal 50/50. You expect it, the phone rings and it's the dealer.

As you are the lucky customer this week and they appreciate your business, they have decided to accept your offer of £14,000 for the car (which retails at £20,000 remember). Tell me, what are your first thoughts about their acceptance - without a fight?

I could have done better.
I should have started with a lower offer.
What's wrong with the car because they gave in too quickly/easily?
Ouch - how do I get a lower price without appearing too greedy?
Something else???

What you didn't know, and the dealer wasn't about to tell you was this. Their profit doesn't only come from the profit made on each car, it is also generated from the volume of cars sold each month. They don't even have to sell all of their stock at a profit, they can sell one or two at a loss or break-even. And because you didn't know this, your initial negotiating power has all but disappeared.

When there is a high level of trust in a relationship, both parties are often willing to negotiating a genuinely win-win deal. A deal where the seller can still make a profit and where the buyer can know or at least expect that their needs and wants will be taken care of as agreed. When there is low trust, it's everyone for themselves - self-serving, self-defeating attitudes, behaviour and communication. See my previous article about buying a car and relating the tactics back to the workplace.

The moral of this story for the workplace? Don't get excited too soon, remain calm and seek to understand as much of the detail as possible. Always keep a win-win mentality very much in mind, help set a context so that all parties can negotiate openly and honestly to achieve what needs to be achieved and to deliver what needs to be delivered - to the standards required. Get the best deal you can, but not at the expense of losing trust and causing toxic relationships.

The long-term challenges faced by nationals of Northern Ireland were eventually progressed because the concept of win-win, letting go of the past upset/anger and resentment and focusing on how to negotiate for the future benefit of its people won over blaming each other and living in the past. Remember, the good thing about the past is, it's over. The bad thing about the future is, many people just expect it to be something other than brilliant. It's that very thought that stops it from being as wonderful as it can be.

How are the levels of collaboration and trust in your team? What steps can you take to improve relationships so that when you do need to negotiate, the relationship is solid and based on mutual respect and integrity? Do share.