Communicating Change—The Essentials

The path for organisations undergoing change is a lot smoother if they get their internal communication processes right.

 

Copyright © 2006  The National Learning Institute

This article may be freely published electronically.  It may be reprinted for individual use in hard copy but may not be reprinted in hard copy for commercial purposes.

 

People become less motivated when they are faced with uncertainty—not knowing what is happening and why. In the extreme, a lack of information and feeling of insecurity can take away the natural energy and drive to succeed.

 

Take the case of James, who became plant manager at a bio-tech factory, managing about 400 people. Before he arrived, there was an “Ask Gavin” column on the intranet site where employees could ask the previous manager questions, anonymously if preferred. It seemed like a good idea, although nothing can substitute for face-to-face communication, and people rarely use such vehicles to ask the difficult questions. If they do, they almost never give their names.  From the style of the intranet site, James got the impression that his predecessor had ruled on a “my way is the only way” principle, and, consequently, the communication channel was rarely used. One of the first changes James made was to change its title to “Ask Management”.

 

Two weeks into the job, employees gathered in the cafeteria for the monthly site meeting and briefing by management. When the facilitator turned to James as the new head of the plant and asked if he’d like to do the usual thing and introduce himself, outlining his background, he stood up and said, “Would Francene Dante please stand up”.  There was a hushed silence. Francene sank in her seat, but colleagues started urging her to respond, and eventually she did.  “Francene,” said James, “I would like to thank you very much for giving your name when you asked a question on the intranet’s Ask Management. I know you didn’t have to, but I very much appreciate that you did. I value honesty, integrity and sincerity, and I like to be able to communicate freely with everyone on the site and personally, and they should feel the same about talking with me. So, thank you again.”

 

And James concluded: “That’s who I am.”  Having immediately set himself apart as a leader and good communicator, and having stated and demonstrated his core values, he sat down again. He had made “actions speak louder than words” and emphasised that communication is a two-way process. Merely talking about the process of communication couldn’t have achieved the results of this one, simple action.

 

When people are faced with uncertainty about an organisation’s future and their own, internal communication is far more important than external, even in times of merger or acquisition. Of course, in addition to its motivational impact, communication has an important informing function. For example, when people know what’s happening with an organisation, they are able to answer customer’s questions honestly. If they are informed and feel secure, they are in a better position and frame of mind to provide feedback to management about the impact of strategies on clients.

 

When an organisation is in uncertain times, feedback to management is vital, and an effective communication strategy comes into its own.

 

In working with hundreds of organisations experiencing change, I have identified eight factors that help the more successful ones navigate the uncertainty. They are principles for developing and implementing an effective internal communication strategy

 

Ensure the CEO is the champion of communication and the champion communicator.

Top management’s attitude and behaviour influences the behaviour of other managers. Often top management, and particularly the CEO, is focused on achieving good financial results, which is important. But in many cases, while “communicating with the troops” is described as important, the reality doesn’t match the rhetoric.

 

Can we justify communication as a return on investment? When asked about this, one senior executive said: “Enormous! We can move faster, jump higher, dive deeper and come up drier than anybody else in the business. When we hang a left, everyone goes left. It gives us an enormous ability to work as a team. Other companies in our industry are yet to work that out.”

The rules for the CEO:

· Communicate frequently and in person.

· Be willing to address challenging questions.

· Listen carefully and deal with the concerns.

· Respond quickly to sensitive topics.

 

If you are a CEO, do you have a vision for your organisation that is easily explained? Do you regularly talk to staff about it?

 

People need to feel they belong. They need an icon. The CEO should fill this role.

 

Match actions and words.

People judge the performance of CEOs not on what they say, but what they do. Organisations that spout values such as “our people are our greatest asset”, then lay-off staff at the first major downturn in the economy, are sending very mixed messages.

 

Ensure your communication is two-way.

If an organisation is serious about internal communication, it should devote as much time and resources to upward as it does to downward communication. Staff opinion surveys are one form of upward feedback, but their effectiveness depends on how well the feedback is managed. The most common comment from employees about their lack of faith in surveys is that “nothing ever happens as a result”.

 

Place emphasis on face-to-face communication.

As they say, it’s not what you say, but the way that you say it. An employee said recently, about a CEO’s address to staff: “I didn’t understand a lot of what he said, but it did give me the chance to take the measure of the man, to look him in the eye, ask some questions and see how he responded.”

 

On the other hand, what you say is also important. A CEO addressing staff needs to talk about the big picture, the future and how the organisation is progressing in broad terms. Whereas the specifics of current and projected performance come into it when talking with senior managers.

 

One manager said of face-to-face communication: “You get to be seen as a person who understands what’s happening, who is cognisant of other’s feelings, who doesn’t have all the answers but is willing to listen and learn. Someone who has a vision so that their people will say, ‘I’ll give this person a go. They seem to have an interest in me.”

 

Face-to-face communication does not obviate the need for other forms of communication, but other forms can’t substitute for face-to-face.

 

Ensure responsibility for communication is shared.

Communication—downward, horizontal and upward—must be the responsibility of all managers, not just the CEO. Staff need to be encouraged and supported to accept the responsibility for upward and horizontal communication.

 

For example, a manager’s responsibility is not to be an expert in all aspects of every corporate issue, but to be able to explain why decisions have been made and how they will affect people.

To test the communication responsibility level in your organisation, can you answer the following questions positively?

· Do all your position or role descriptions have ‘communication’ as a key responsibility?

· Do your managerial performance agreements or contracts include ‘communication’ as a key result area?

· Are managers recognised for communicating well and counselled or penalised for not communicating?

· Are staff at all levels encouraged and supported to give critical upward feedback?

· Does your organisation see training as one of your key communication channels?

 

Deal with the bad news as well as the good.

We often communicate only the good news in an organisation, but it is equally important to communicate the bad. Bad news comes in many forms—service or quality problems, delays, customer complaints, criticism from external sources and so on.

 

In a 1993 study of 10 organisations selected for survey because of their records of excellent internal communication, the one with the highest bad news/good news ratio also had the highest staff satisfaction levels and very good economic performance.

 

The results can be explained by two psychological phenomena: reciprocity and disclosure. Reciprocity suggests that if you do something for me, then I’ll do something for you. Disclosure from one person encourages openness from the other—people are prepared to discuss both their successes and failures. Management being equally candid about good and bad news sets the example for staff to do likewise.

 

In the leading organisation, staff were held responsible for telling management about problems. Communicating bad news was culturally valued and institutionally supported. “When bad news is candidly reported, an environment is created in which good news is more believable,” added one manager.

 

Serve the audience’s needs as well as your own.

We often think of the message as “Now hear this! We want you to know…” From a sender’s perspective, this is important. However, if communication is to be effective, we also need to answer the receiver’s request, “This is what we need to know…“

 

Design your communication strategy to suit your organisation.

Communication is a process, not a product. Newsletters, memos, videos, publications, meetings, team briefings and the intranet may all have an important part to play in your organisation’s communication strategy. Be sure that you understand why each is being used―what it will cover and achieve.

In designing your strategy, apply these ground rules:

· Ensure all communication includes not only what’s happening, but also why and how.

· Be timely. Communicate what can be communicated immediately. Don’t wait to cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s.

· Link the big picture with the little picture. Ensure that people understand how the big picture affects them and their jobs.

· Don’t tell people how they should feel about the news. Avoid statements such as “This is exciting for us all.” Communicate the “who, what, when, why and how” and let people make up their own minds about how they feel.

· Match the message to the medium. Face-to-face is good for people issues, for which the intranet and email are totally inappropriate. If the message is likely to affect people emotionally, the only medium should be face-to-face. If this is impossible, a fallback is the phone or a video-audio hook-up. Never email or intranet.

· Build a feedback loop into your strategy. Actively encourage people to provide upward and horizontal feedback.

 

Effective communication practices should be consistent under all organisational circumstances. Every manager is a communicator. Every staff member is a communicator.

 

 

Email Etiquette – What’s The Missing Link ?

 

Copyright © 2006  The National Learning Institute

This article may be freely published electronically.  It may be reprinted for individual use in hard copy but may not be reprinted in hard copy for commercial purposes.

 

I looked up the web on email ettiquete and found many sites, yet only one of the 10 sites on the first page of Google, dealt with the real issue around email etiquette.  However, I did find that there’s even a new word for it now – Netiquette.  One site had 32 rules (of course with links to other pages for a fuller description) for email etiquette and yet they still missed the main point!

 

What is the REAL issue on email etiquette?  Well, before I answer that, read the following statement:

 

“I did not say she stole the money”

 

Now read it aloud to yourself (doesn’t matter if anyone else is around, they won’t know what you’re doing).

 

The key question!  What is the meaning of this statement? What did you interpret from this written statement?

 

Did you think that:

“I” did not say she.., or that

I did “NOT” say she .., or that

I did not “SAY” she …, or that

I did not say that “SHE” stole …, or that

I did not say that she “STOLE” the money, or that

I did not say she stole the “MONEY”. 

 

Starting to get the picture?  You see, whenever we put words on paper (or in this case in emails) they can be interpreted in many different ways – and often are!  In fact the legal profession (with apologies to anyone of a legal nature reading this) have built an entire industry on the interpretation of the written words.  Signed any contracts lately?  Notice that they almost never have punctuations and even when they do, they can still be interpreted by two independent people, quite differently.

 

By now you may have guessed what the golden rule of email etiquette should be:

 

“If the message has any emotional intent or is likely to have an impact on the receiver’s emotions, look for another way other than email to send it.” 

 

Generally, this will mean face to face, or failing that over the phone or by video hook up, video cam etc.

 

Emails should only be for fact, logic and reason. I have seen so many innocent (on the surface) emails start a war of words between consenting adults that if it wasn’t so serious, would almost be laughable.  In fact, I have seen a situation where two colleagues who once had a very good relationship, eventually deteriorate to the point of legal action over each other’s interpretation of a simple email message.

 

Emails are unlike any other written word – they are not books, newspapers or such where a great deal of thought has gone into the written word (and which is often accompanied by a visual image).  Nor are they read that way, but keep in mind, that  they can be re-read by the receiver many times over!

 

Often they are written quickly and sometimes without review, yet they have replaced much of the face to face communication and phone communication that once made up so much of our interpersonal relationships.  For example, how often do you see people sending emails to one another when they are in the office next door to one another or at the next desk or cubicle, rather than speaking with the person directly?

 

But emails also lack all of the nonverbal communication that is going on all the time as we talk face to face with one another and which helps us understand each other.  Numerous studies have revealed that in face to face communication, in terms of interpreting the message that is being sent by one person to another:

· 55-60% is through the non verbal signals that are being picked up

· 35-40% is through the tone of voice being used

· 7-10% is via the actual words that are spoken

 

Another recent survey disclosed that up to 37% of a first impression is based upon the speaker's tone of voice.  On the telephone, that number rises to 80% or higher.

 

So, if we have a message that is meant to be motivational, confrontational or in any way intended to impact the behaviour or feeling of the receiver, where does that leave us with emails as our means of communication if we can assume that only 7-10% of our real message is getting through?  As one writer put it “This makes email a unique medium.  The lack of nonverbal clues makes it easy to misinterpret something, but we're not careful enough to avoid these misinterpretations because email feels so instant, easy and accessible, just like talking.”

 

As I said earlier, if you want to truly influence someone’s thinking or impact their behaviour, my suggestion is to see the person face to face, or as a fallback by some means of voice/video connection.

 

That’s ok when we KNOW that we want to impact the other person’s feelings.  But how do we avoid unintentionally impacting their feelings?  (By the way, using any amount of “smilies” or similar at the bottom of your email, or as is creeping into emails at the moment, at the end of sentences, will have no positive affect – they may even work against you).

 

Other than being as courteous as possible and re-reading the message carefully before sending it, the main word to avoid in your message is “You” – particularly used in the past tense.  When used in the past tense, often “You” infers blame for something that the receiver has or has not done.  Perhaps we do not intend it to be inferred this way, but that’s what happens.  Moving away from emails for a moment. think about the last time you had a really heated argument with someone.  Often what triggers such arguments is one person inferring blame by using “You”.   “You never do that for me”, or “You always miss my appointments”.  Pretty soon the other person joins in with their own “Yous” and what started out as a genuine and positive conversation, deteriorates into an argument.  My bet is that when you really think about your last argument you had, the word that was used more than any other, was “You” – and it was used in the past tense!

 

Those of you who have done any assertiveness training will know that replacing “You” with “I” can be very powerful and without offending the other person.  As a simple and quick exercise, I’ll leave you with the task of rewriting the two “You” statements I used earlier - “You never do that for me”, and “You always miss my appointments” as “I” statements.  This technique takes a little practise, but can improve the effectiveness of your email communications dramatically.

 

So, I would suggest that we can have as much etiquette around things like “salutations”, “cc’s” etc, and we can add as many “smilies” as possible, but unless the real meaning of the email is going to be received in the same way it was intended, then think again before sending it.

 

 

 

The National Learning Institute™