Simpler may be better

Original post:  Nov 4, 2015

In a fastidious quest for optimal mechanisms to substantiate your intellectual influence, some suppose it proper to larder their prose with flowery and elaborate phrases plucked out of a thesaurus. According to this article in Fast Company, they may be wasting their time.

It might sound counterintuitive, but using four-syllable textbook words to demonstrate your smarts will actually make you appear less capable.

"So often, our intuitions about what will impress others are wrong," says Daniel M. Oppenheimer, professor of psychology at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. He led a series of studies on how the use of language can make one appear more or less intelligent.

In one study, the researchers took essays from online college admissions essays and replaced words using an algorithm to replace shorter words with longer words and asked participants to evaluate the quality of the author. Surprisingly, participants rated the authors as less capable and less confident. Concerned that the replacement strategy used made the essays worse, the researchers took sociology dissertation abstracts, which tend to be dense in long words, and replaced the longer words with shorter words. Participants judged the authors as more capable and intelligent if they were reading shorter words.

He goes on to explain:

The reason for this phenomenon, Oppenheimer explains, is that the ease of processing information is strongly associated with positive qualities such as confidence, intelligence, and capability. "To the extent that you use long words, you make it more disfluent to read your prose, people will judge you disfavorably," says Oppenheimer.

The secret is to be clear and concise in your communications. When your co-workers require less strain to understand you, they are more likely to value what you are saying!

Here is the link to the full article:  The Secret To Sounding Smart? Using Simple Language

Are we clear?

Original post:  Sep 16, 2015

A colleague in Minnesota reached out to me via e-mail looking for some information. Instead of trying to convey complex information in long written missives, we scheduled a small conference call to discuss the issue.

Early on in the call, this colleague used a term I had never heard before. It sounded similar to something else that I remembered from the distant past. In order to avoid any misunderstandings, I asked the other party to explain what they meant when they used the term. "Well, maybe you're not the right person to help me" came the reply. After the initial shock wore off, I tried to calmly explain that I wasn't familiar with the term being discussed and if I could get that clarification, I might then provide the right response.

There are many occasions where something that is called "x" in Mounds View was called "y" in Mansfield. Unfortunately, there are very few people in Mansfield who can speak fluent SAP. It doesn't help when people looking for information aren't willing to explain what "x" means so that we can figure out what the correct "y" was. It's especially difficult when "x" and "y" aren't exactly the same things. Perhaps there might be a combination of several "y" parts to make up an "x" whole (or vice versa).

We eventually retrieved part of an answer. To be fully honest, we actually uncovered another layer of complexity that widened the conversation even further. As we continue forward, I have no doubt that this scene will replay itself out over and over again to a wider audience. I just hope we can remain patient with each other while we work through the transition.

I thought you knew what I meant

Original post:  Sep 1, 2015

I'm sure it's happened to all of us. We are part of an important project with tight deadlines. During one of the sessions, there seems to be a disagreement. The team has a tough time because some of the team members interpreted something differently. The team leader is exasperated and tries to explain again for the umpteenth time exactly what was intended. Or at least tries to....

When we plan things out in our heads, it all works perfectly. Everyone understands exactly what they are supposed to do and when they are supposed to do it. They willingly accept a shared definition of the major objectives and milestones. The team has full knowledge and understanding of all aspects of the project. They are well versed in the history and nuance of how the project came to be and what it will accomplish when it is all over.

In reality, nothing works out quite exactly that way. We are often pressed for time--trying to condense six months of work into six weeks or less. Our projects are just one of the dozens on our team members' plates. It's often difficult enough just finding a common time for everyone to meet while juggling all of the calendars and deadlines that already exist. Whether there is a project manager or not, there can often be disputes (stated or unstated) over what the key objective really is and when it will be done. Some people might have some history with the project, but it often is new territory for many of the team members.

If your project is like many of the ones that I work on, you'll find that communication is not easy. While it might seem that it is one of the most important pieces of any successful project, it is surprisingly underrated. Perhaps it is because good communication is not only time-consuming, it is also quite challenging even for skilled personnel.

As you continue on with your current portfolio or move on to other tasks, it would be wise to see how you can help improve the communication in whatever you are working on. You may be surprised at the gap between what you think everyone understands and what they really do!

The mouth is mightier than the pen

Original post:  June 29, 2015

When you really need a favor, what is your preferred method of asking? Would you lean towards an e-mail or a direct conversation?

If you answered a direct conversation, it seems that you would be much more likely to succeed. This article in the NY Times discusses some recent research into the topic.

It seems that even phone conversations are more powerful than letters or e-mails. Professor Nicholas Epley is a co-author of a recent paper "The Sound of Intellect". Here is a summary of some of their research:

In the first of a series of experiments presented in the paper, the researchers recruited 18 M.B.A. candidates from Booth. The students were asked to prepare a brief pitch to a prospective employer — a roughly two-minute proposal that the researchers recorded on video.

Separately, the researchers recruited 162 people who were visiting the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago to evaluate these pitches. Some of these museumgoers watched the video, a second group listened to the audio without watching the video, and a third group read a transcript of the pitch.

What the researchers found was that the evaluators who heard the pitches — whether in the audio or video version — “rated the candidates’ intellect more highly” than those who read the transcript, the paper reported. Those who listened or watched also rated the candidates more likable and, critically, more employable.

Why would the oral presentations be received so well? Here is Epley's theory:

....Rather, he says, the results validate and expand upon previous research showing that the cadence and intonation of voice allows listeners to do a better job of gauging a person’s thoughts than the same information communicated in writing.

Here is a link to the full article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/business/the-mouth-is-mightier-than-the-pen.html?ref=business

You just don't understand me

Original post:  Apr 29, 2015

We've all done it, whether we want to or not. It probably happened several times yesterday and you didn't even realize it. At some point in your day (unless you were completely alone), you had an interaction with someone else. You may have thought you understood exactly what that person said or meant. Chances are, you were not entirely correct.

This article in the Atlantic helps explain why. Here is the opening:

In her new book No One Understands You and What To Do About It, Heidi Grant Halvorson tells readers a story about her friend, Tim. When Tim started a new job as a manager, one of his top priorities was communicating to his team that he valued each member’s input. So at team meetings, as each member spoke up about whatever project they were working on, Tim made sure he put on his “active-listening face” to signal that he cared about what each person was saying.

But after meeting with him a few times, Tim’s team got a very different message from the one he intended to send. “After a few weeks of meetings,” Halvorson explains, “one team member finally summoned up the courage to ask him the question that had been on everyone’s mind.” That question was: “Tim, are you angry with us right now?” When Tim explained that he wasn’t at all angry—that he was just putting on his “active-listening face”—his colleague gently explained that his active-listening face looked a lot like his angry face.

To Halvorson, a social psychologist at Columbia Business School who has extensively researched how people perceive one another, Tim’s story captures one of the primary problems of being a human being: Try though you might to come across in a certain way to others, people often perceive you in an altogether different way.

One person may think, for example, that by offering help to a colleague, she is coming across as generous. But her colleague may interpret her offer as a lack of faith in his abilities. Just as he misunderstands her, she misunderstands him: She offered him help because she thought he was overworked and stressed. He has, after all, been showing up early to work and going home late every day. But that’s not why he’s keeping strange hours; he just works best when the office is less crowded.

The article continues by discussing how often we are not understood even by those we think know us best!

Most of the time, Halvorson says, people don’t realize they are not coming across the way they think they are. “If I ask you,” Halvorson told me, “about how you see yourself—what traits you would say describe you—and I ask someone who knows you well to list your traits, the correlation between what you say and what your friend says will be somewhere between 0.2 and 0.5. There’s a big gap between how other people see us and how we see ourselves.”

This gap arises, as Halvorson explains in her book, from some quirks of human psychology. First, most people suffer from what psychologists call “the transparency illusion”—the belief that what they feel, desire, and intend is crystal clear to others, even though they have done very little to communicate clearly what is going on inside their minds.

Because the perceived assume they are transparent, they might not spend the time or effort to be as clear and forthcoming about their intentions or emotional states as they could be, giving the perceiver very little information with which to make an accurate judgment.

In summary, we aren't as clear with others as we think we are. Without full clarity, others will take mental shortcuts to fill in the gaps. Many of these shortcuts can be inaccurate or wildly wrong, but we are all so busy that we just don't have enough focus or energy to make the full commitment necessary to interpret the situation correctly!

There is an old adage that says that there can never be too much communication. Perhaps some of the reason why that is true is because there are so many mistakes made in the original communication that subsequent repetition helps iron out the errors!

Here is the link to the full article:  Mixed Signals: Why People Misunderstand Each Other - The Atlantic

Starting off the New Year

Original post:  Jan 5, 2015

Over the holidays, I was reading an article on sports analytics. While it may seem as if the use of statistics to improve the performance of sports teams has no bearing whatsoever on the production of medical devices, I would challenge you to think about this excerpt:

At the end of the day, it boils down to this. The information is only as good as it is to the person receiving it. I’ll take a C+ piece of analysis communicated perfectly over an A+ piece of analysis that’s not communicated well. Only a small portion of the work is the analytics itself. The rest is putting it in a practical format so the salary-cap person and the coach can appreciate it and use it. Instead of trying to go overboard with analytics, focus on the practical: Focus on the things that have the highest impact on your organization.

Full text of the article here:  NFL Teams Are Analyzing Everything From The Salary Cap To Fan Loyalty | FiveThirtyEight

This one paragraph really highlights my own personal goal for 2015. I'll be searching for those few great pieces of analysis and insight that can truly impact our organization. I will then challenge myself to communicate it as perfectly as humanly possible.

What's your goal for the New Year?

How to be a better writer

Original post:  Nov 17, 2014

No matter how well you think you write, there are always ways that you can improve. Whether it's reports or e-mail, we are likely to receive tremendous amounts of the information that we need in our lives through the written word. This article covers some important tips from Steven Pinker. Here is an introduction to him from the article:

Steven is a cognitive scientist and linguist at Harvard. He’s also on the Usage Panel of the American Heritage Dictionary.

Steven was recently ranked as one of the top 100 most eminent psychologists of the modern era.

His latest book is The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century. And it’s great.

I think the most important lesson is to take the time to incorporate these rules into a system that can help you convey your message to your target audience as quickly and efficiently as possible. Transferring ideas to others can often be one of the hardest things we attempt to do on a regular basis! Do your best to make that task as effective as you can.

Here is a quick summary of the article:

1. Be visual and conversational. Be concrete, make your reader see and stop trying to impress.
2. Beware “the curse of knowledge.” Have someone read your work and tell you if it makes sense. Your own brain cannot be trusted.
3. Don’t bury the lead. Clarity beats suspense. If they don’t know what it’s about they can’t follow along.
4. You don’t have to play by the rules, but try. If you play it straight 99% of the time, that 1% will really shine.
5. Read Read Read. The English language is too complex to learn from one book. Never stop learning.
6. Good writing means revising. Never hit “send” or “print” without reviewing your work — preferably multiple times.

Here is the link to the full article:  How To Be A Better Writer: 6 Tips From Harvard’s Steven Pinker

Like the very first time

Original post:  Mar 13, 2014

Recently, I had the chance to attend two different sessions of the same meeting. There was a speaker who presented at both of the meetings. While the exact words were different, the basic story was similar in each session. I remembered the general idea as the speaker went through their pitch. I also recalled that there were certain phrases worded in exactly the same way in both speeches.

Given the role this person plays, I am not surprised that there is repetition in the presentation. It is much easier to present honestly if you know the overall substance of your talk. You can fill in little details here and there to customize it to an audience. As long as there is enough energy and fire in the presentation, your audience will respond.

It is tremendously difficult to speak convincingly to an audience. It is even more difficult to give a similar speech over and over again without losing focus. If the speaker is tired of saying the same thing repeatedly, the audience can easily sense the difference and will be much less likely to receive the message favorably. The best speakers find a way to infuse their talks with energy levels similar to the first time they speak on the subject. That ability helps to separate the good from the great.

There are some studies that talk about how little we remember when we hear it. I can't find the exact reference, but I read somewhere that we need to hear something at least seven times for us to remember it. Our minds are also surprisingly clever about making subtle changes to the message and then convincing us that these altered memories were the way that the event actually happened!

This is why it is so incredibly important to work on your communication constantly. There is a reason why you are speaking. You have to help to convey that message convincingly in whatever time you are given. Many times, you will have to repeat that message over and over again before it is really understood. That persistence and the ability to present with authenticity will help you tremendously in just about any situation.

100% of nothing

Original post:  Nov 6, 2013

My boys like math. Even though the youngest is in kindergarten, there are still simple things we've discussed that he has retained. One example is multiplication. They both know that anything times one is itself. They also know that anything times zero is zero. Whether you are talking one or a billion, if you multiply it by zero you will still end up with nothing. I checked over the weekend and they still remember this concept.

The next lesson will have to be that something is better than nothing. It's a lesson that I try to take into the projects that I work on.

There are many projects that stretch for elaborate goals. They want to make sure that everything is perfect right at the beginning. The reality is that no matter how well you plan, there are still going to be unforeseen obstacles that get in the way. It's often best to start small and tinker with the prototype in a production environment. Scaling up is much easier than trying to fix known defects once the product is fully live!

I once had a pen pal who maintained regular correspondence with over 100 people. I was shocked and amazed. This was back in the day when being a pen pal meant that you actually had to write real letters and put them in the mail. I asked him his secret. He responded that it is more important to write short stories than novels. His reasoning was that the regular communication kept the conversation going. If you tried to save everything up to write long letters, you often ended up distracted. You would never really find the time to finish and your long missive would never be sent.

I think that is solid advice in most situations. What do you think?

I thought you knew....

Original post:  Aug 23, 2013

At the gym this morning, I asked a colleague how he was doing. He replied that he was fine. After a quick exchange, he admitted that he was a little frustrated because it felt like he wasn't being told much of anything. There was a great deal of activity swirling around and everyone seemed to assume that he knew.

I must admit that I get that feeling often. I think we all fall into similar traps. We tend to think that what we are working on is so important to the overall company that of course everyone knows exactly why what I am working on is so important! We tend to forget that we are only a very tiny portion of anyone's day. While some people may know a bit more about what we do than others, for the most part no one knows our jobs like we do.

Communication will always be difficult. Even when the words are exactly the same, the emphasis on certain words in a sentence can completely change the meaning. Technology can help, but it just can't replace a real effort between two (or more) people to talk to each other and understand exactly what the other side meant.

Now, what was it that you were trying to tell me?

We're not having the same conversation

Original post:  Aug 9, 2013

I'm sure we all have our differences from time to time with our co-workers. What's most important is to figure out the best way to settle our issues as quickly as possible so that we can collaborate effectively.

This article from HBR offers some insight into these very situations. Here is a quick excerpt:

I was running late. My wife Eleanor and I had agreed to meet at the restaurant at seven o'clock and it was already half past. I had a good excuse in the form of a client meeting that ran over and I wasted no time getting to the dinner as fast as possible.

When I arrived at the restaurant, I apologized and told her I didn't mean to be late.

She answered: "You never mean to be late." Uh oh, she was mad.

"Sorry," I retorted, "but it was unavoidable." I told her about the client meeting. Not only did my explanations not soothe her, they seemed to make things worse. That started to make me angry.

That dinner didn't turn out to be our best.

Several weeks later, when I was describing the situation to a friend of mine, Ken Hardy, a professor of family therapy, he smiled.

"You made a classic mistake," he told me.

"Me? I made the mistake?" I was only half joking.

"Yes. And you just made it again," he said. "You're stuck in your perspective: You didn't mean to be late. But that's not the point. The point is that you werelate. The point — and what's important in your communication — is how your lateness impacted Eleanor."

In other words, I was focused on my intention while Eleanor was focused on the consequences. We were having two different conversations. In the end, we both felt unacknowledged, misunderstood, and angry.

The author also offers some advice:

What should I have said to Eleanor?

"I see you're angry. You've been sitting here for 30 minutes and that's got to be frustrating. And it's not the first time. Also, I can see how it seems like I think being with a client gives me permission to be late. I'm sorry you had to sit here waiting for so long."

All of that is true. Your job is to acknowledge their reality — which is critical to maintaining the relationship. As Ken described it to me: "If someone's reality, as they see it, is negated, what motivation do they have to stay in the relationship?"

While it may seem difficult at first to take this approach, I am sure it will yield dividends. I am planning to see if I can incorporate it more often into my own experiences.

Here is the link to the full article:  http://blogs.hbr.org/bregman/2013/04/what-to-do-when-youve-angered.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-bregman-_-what_to_do_when_youve_angered

The art of irresistible e-mail

Original post:  Aug 1, 2013

From HBR, here is a short article that discusses how you can create e-mail that people will actually open and read.

Katie Smith Milway has some basic plans for every e-mail:

Before you start typing, consider:

The objective. What do you want to achieve with this email? Is your purpose to inform? Request input? Ask for help?

What-who-when. Your objective will inform the message, including what to write, who should receive it and when to send it. Also think about whether it should come from you, or someone with more seniority.

Visual logic. Clear structure and typographical signalling will boost the odds that your reader will get your message quickly and respond in ways that meet your goal.

She then adds six specific tips:

1. Put the subject line to work. Most of us already use our subject line to predict the "what," e.g. "Re monthly financials." But it's also the place to build a personal bridge: "Re monthly financials, per Peter's request," and to indicate urgency: "Re monthly financials, per Peter's request. Need feedback by Tuesday."
2. Visually highlight the key message. Structure your email so the most important request or information is at the top, then put it in bold. This may seem like a, "duh," but people often "bury the lede", as journalists like to say, several paragraphs down. If you are sending to multiple readers, also bold the names of anyone you address directly, so they immediately connect to content that's relevant to them. If you're making multiple points, use indentations and numbers or bullets.
3. Use links to go deep; voting buttons to get answers. If you want someone to act on your email then make it concise and jargon-free. Use links to let readers go deeper or access forms, and voting buttons to get folks to sign up.
4. Time the delivery for maximum impact. Never send an email at the end of the day or the start of a weekend. Make sure people are opening it at a time when they're at their desks and have time to read it.
5. Add clout by having a superior co-sign. We may be moving into a less hierarchical work world, but the boss's name still gets attention. If you need help, ask for it.
6. Leave the ball in the reader's court. If you want people to get back to you or take action, make sure you put the request in bold as well. Make clear what you need from them.

There is a "before and after" example that helps clarify these points.

Here is the link to the full article:  http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/07/the_art_of_irresistible_email.html

To your point

Original post:  Feb. 13, 2012

Three little words. Such a short phrase with a disproportionately large impact.

I learned this rhetorical flourish fairly recently. An acquaintance with a consulting background used it consistently in conversation. After some reflection, I began to realize that those three little words were devastatingly effective.

Every communications expert will stress the importance of listening. We often pay lip service to the ideal of listening more than we speak. Many times I have to catch myself to keep from plotting out what I will try to say next when the other person is making their case.

I personally find the phrase "to your point" effective because it establishes a number of facts. First, it means that you have listened to the previous speaker. Second, it confirms that you have accepted the speaker's point as valid. This means that (at some level) you have built an agreement with that person. Finally, it gives you the possibility of pivoting the discussion into a new way while still maintaining unity with the previous topic.

Subtle and concise. Quite the combination. In three words.

Why communication is so difficult

Original post:  August 10, 2011

One of my key responsibilities involves data standards. If you have ever scanned products at a grocery store, you've used one of those standards. There is an active movement to modify the standards to meet the needs of healthcare.

There is an old communication adage that goes something like this:

     "What you say may not be what the other person hears. 

      What you hear may not be what the other person means."

In order to be useful, standards must be universally accepted and understood. That is much harder than it seems. In a multi-lingual world, there are enormous challenges with interpretation and nuance. Communication is difficult even when you are speaking the same language. Even though English is spoken in both the US and UK, a "boot" or a "lift" hold two very different meanings. We even have major regional differences in the US.

The addition of computers to this equation adds yet another layer of complexity. Unlike a face-to-face encounter, computers are unable to detect contextual clues to help interpret what you really meant to say.

The good news is that the industry has recognized that this topic is important. Many major players have devoted time and resource to come up with potential solutions. It will be interesting to see how these initiatives develop through the years.