Working in a professional services firm for much of my career, and then later as a teacher and instructor, I’ve learnt the power of good questions. But that begs – ironically – the thought: What makes a good question good?
While we’re at it, we might as well discuss what makes bad ones bad.
Good questions …
Are precise. Their words are clear and specific to the respondent, not just to you.
Relate to a specific purpose, goal or intention.
Begin with low cognitive thinking (they ask the respondent to recall information) and lead to high cognitive thinking (they ask the respondent to evaluate or give an opinion about the information they’ve remembered.)
Often have more than one correct answer.
Encourage curiosity, to stimulate more thinking or research.
Encourage reflection after answering the question, so they retain what they know.
Build rapport, trust and asked in the spirit of transparency and honesty.
Click to View
Reduce assumptions between parties to clarify and find common ground.
According to Monash Business School in Victoria, bad questions are any question that distorts the fundamental communication between the questioner and the respondent.
In other words, bad Qs …
Confuse.
Intimidate.
Elicit an inappropriate answer, especially an unwanted or unwelcome emotion.
Are biased, often deliberately influencing the answer.
Are the ones where you (should) already know the answer.
To be more precise, here are the nine types of bad questions with examples.
Vague questions don’t have a purpose or intention. What information are you trying to get? You don’t want the respondent to freeze up, meaning they spend more time thinking ‘What are they really asking me?’ and spend less time answering the question.
Example: What did you think of today’s workshop?
Improved: What are the top three things you enjoyed about today’s workshop?
2. Leading Qs
These type of quesitons have the answer (or a suggestion of the answer) built into the question. Let’s just admit it: these types of questions come across as arrogant.
Example: How great is our new restaurant?
Improved: How would you describe our new restaurant?
3. Loaded Qs
Loaded questions assume everyone feels the same way as the person asking the question. Remove your biases and let the respondent do the thinking.
Example: Are you going to vote for that incompetent misogynist?
Improved: Who are you going to vote for?
4. Double-Barrelled Qs
It’s natural to want to ask two questions at once but they need prioritisation. To be clear, don’t preface your questions before you ask, such as “Now this is a two-part question …” and then ask both questions. Ask one, then the other.
Example: When did you decide to become a mother, and why?
Improved: When did you decide to become a mother?
5. Double Negative Qs
Double negative questions have two negative words which make the opposite meaning true, likely confusing the respondent. Typically, make general questions positive.
Example: Do you oppose not allowing us to have Friday’s drinks downstairs?
Improved: Are you OK with allowing us to have Friday’s drinks downstairs?
6. Absolute Qs
Absolute quesions use an absolute term, such as always, never, only, everyone, no one, etc. They add unnecessary judgement.
Example: Don’t you think only Australians should apply?
Improved: Do you think Australians should apply?
7. Unclear Qs
Anything with poorly chosen words – usually slang, jargon, foreign words – confuse the respondent.
Example: Which URLs do you go to find our products?
Improved: Which websites do you go to find our products?
8. Random Qs
Random questions are irrelevant and out of context.
Example: In the middle of an interview, you ask: “Where do you get your fresh flowers?”
Improved: If you must ask about the flowers, ask after the ‘interview’ is over.
9. Unanswerable Qs
These questions are so broad that there’s likely not an answer, or the answer is incredibly complex.
Example: What is love?
Improved: This is one where I’ll let you decide your own question.
As with any new learning, it’s common for people new to negotiation to not feel 100% confident in their skills or behaviours. But that doesn’t mean they don’t have useful assets to bring to negotiation, experience or not.
First, you can’t wait until you believe you’ll have enough experience because it’s likely you’ll never believe you have enough experience. Below is a good list – but certainly not complete – of assets that anyone might possess which could be a benefit to negotiation.
Click to View
These attributes fall into three categories:
Knowledge
Skills, both hard and soft
Qualities, or general personality traits
While having some of these assets will undoubted help, never forget that the single biggest contributor to success in negotiation is how well you’re prepared.
Any other assets you’d add to the list? Please add your thoughts in the Comments below.
Negotiation and Conflict are two related topics which I’ve written frequently, particularly about the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Here is the general overview of the category, and here is the overview of the TKI tool.
Any other skills, qualities or knowledge that you’d say are key assets you use for negotiation? Please add your thoughts and comments below.
It’s news to no one that negotiation can be a stressful activity, to the point that it’s easy to forget some things are not up for negotiation.
Of course, there are the big points, starting with your(not your position/wants). Interests typically include:
Your bottom line
Facts from legitimate sources
Laws, regulations, legislation
Real deadlines
Below is a broader list of non-negotiables pertaining more to professional qualities and personal attributes. These aren’t up for discussion, and you shouldn’t give airtime to hear their opinions or value judgements.
Click to View
What’s Not Up For Negotiation
Your …
Age
Background
Beliefs
Credibility
Education
Emotions
Ethics
Experiences, both professional and personal
Gender
History
Morals
Past agreements
Principles
Privacy
Professional behaviour
Quality
Race
Religion
Reputation (yours or the organisation’s)
Safety
Sexuality
Standards
Successes
Values (yours or the organisation’s)
It’s also worth noting another non-negotiable: people no longer employed at your organisation.
On one hand, it’s fair to listen to past issues of former employees to understand the context and effect, but on the other, the issue is moot. It’s also not a good look to bag someone who isn’t there to defend their character or actions. Oftentimes the best response is to genuinely apologise when necessary – but for the action itself, not the person. Remember too that an apology is the most valuable but cheapest thing you can give away.
A critical aspect of authentic negotiation is to understand the fundamental difference between interests versus positions. In every day language, they’re more commonly known as what you want vs. what you need, or even more simply, wants vs. needs.
In conflict or negotiation, Wants (aka ‘Positions’) are things you desire or wish for. They’re elements which are beyond what is necessary (aka your ‘needs’). ‘Wants’ typically cover up or disguise the real truth of what’s most critical to achieve your goal.
Click to View
By starting with a Position/Want, you demand ‘X,’ then end up defending that Position (if not digging in your proverbial heels) until your emotions start to rise and the conflict becomes aggressive and heated. Wants easily tend to become ‘or else!’ situations. Those odds are 50/50, meaning you have an equal chance of winning versus losing.
In contrast, Needs (aka ‘Interests’) are the fundamental aspects which you must receive to support your goals. Needs are very often non-negotiable, but at the same time, offer up more creative options to solve the problem.
An Example of Wants vs. Needs
Here is an example that shows the difference between Positions/Wants and Interests/Needs.
A parent group in the US wants its local high school to change the American history textbook suggested by federal curricula standards. The group feels the book doesn’t adequately represent true US history, particularly of African-Americans, Latinos and Asian-Americans. At a School Committee meeting, the chairman of the parent group says, “The only textbook that works for us is The People of the United States … and that’s final!”
This is a position rather than an interest. By drawing a bottom line at a specific book, the group is stuck to one cemented position. If they can’t convince the School Committee to choose this textbook, they’ll lose the negotiation. In negotiating, you want to avoid ‘either/or’ or ‘or else!’ Positions/Needs. It’s the equivalent of saying you MUST have a pair of Ferragamo shoes to be able to walk home when a pair of sneakers will achieve the same objective.
Needs/Interests Inspire Creativity in Negotiating
Another approach the parent group could have taken is to say, “We’re concerned about the under-representation of racial minorities in the current U.S. history textbook, and we would like teachers to show alternatives.” For example, the parent group and school committee could consider supplementing the history textbook with a packet of articles about minorities, or add mandatory units on slavery, or offer a different course about minorities in America.
This is an interest rather than a position. This states the specific problem, rather than a symptom. (A symptom is often just another way to describe a Position/Want.) By articulating one’s exact Interest/Need, it offers both/all parties in conflict to look for other alternatives, not just debating a specific (and narrow) solution. This allows both sides to be firm and clear about their goals without dismissing potential solutions.
This strategy also points out the necessity of creativity in negotiation skills. By expressing one’s needs, it switches the dialogue from arguing to brainstorming together solutions which allow both sides to reach consensus. Instead of Nothing else! to What else?
Examples of How People Describe Wants vs Needs
The difference between interests versus positions in your own negotiation will vary, but here’s a short list of words or attributes which might help you understand the difference so you can define your own.
A Want (or Position) expressed in everyday language
A desire or wish (or something desired)
A nice to have
A luxury
Alternative
Not realistic or essential
Additional
Something I/we truly don’t need
An ache
Your best case scenario (but not the best case for all parties)
Extra
Bonus
Can live without
Optional
Elective
Something my grandmother used to say: ‘That’s gravy’
A Need (or Interest) expressed in everyday language
The bottom line
A must-have
Critical
Essential
Fundamental
A principle
Basic
Mandatory
Necessary
Crucial
Business critical
Black and white
Make or break
Underlying
Foundation
And, anything that is non-negotiable ( for more detail.)
Finally, you may not know during the conflict or at the negotiation table whether the other party’s demands are Wants or Needs. The best alternative is to recognise what they’ve said, but also ask: “Why is that important to you?” A longer variation of this question is: “I understand you want (this specific thing), but can you tell me what you need (that specific thing) and not (something else)?” The other party’s response will tell you a lot about whether they’re asking for a WANT or a NEED.
You might also try the 5 Whys technique. These questions will help you delve more deeply into their perspective so you understand how essential it is to the resolution, or whether there might be other alternatives not yet uncovered. You might also do the same for yourself, so you don’t limit other solutions to meet your objectives.
Finally, for anyone managing negotiation, I highly recommend this book: . The link goes to the Amazon Australia website, but you should be re-directed to the proper site.
What are some of the ways you’ve heard other parties describe a want vs a need? Please add your thoughts in the Comments below.
No one disagrees on the value of generating trust. Less obvious perhaps are the benefits of trust.
Here’s a list my students and I have outlined over the years.
The more a (*fill in the blank*) trusts you, the more than will:
* Client, decision maker, colleague, supervisor, team members … or, with some adaptation, friends, family, spouse
Reach out to you for advice
Be inclined to accept and act on your recommendations
Come to you with more advanced, complex and strategic issues
Reward you with more business (and repeat business)
Share more information with you which, in turn, helps you to improve the quality of service you provide others
Pay your bills on time and without question
Introduce you to colleagues, team members, business acquaintances, their friends, and other key people to build your network
Lower the level of stress in your interactions, if not minimise future potential conflicts
Give you the benefit of the doubt
Forgive you when you make a mistake
Protect you when you need it … even from their own organisation
Warn you of dangers that you might avoid
Be comfortable and allow you to be comfortable
Involve you early on when issues begin to form, rather than later in the process
Trust your instincts and judgments, including those about other people
Perhaps most of all, respect you … and if so, you will feel more confident about yourself and your work.
If the topic of trust is of interest to you, please pick up the book The Trusted Advisor, written by David Maister,Charles Green and Robert Galford. It’s one of the few business books I keep in my bookcase, and frankly I’m a fan of any book written by Maister in general.
Also, I’ve written about the Trust Equation in another post. The simple chart below describes its four basic elements:
The three positive ones …
Credibility: convincing and believing
Reliability: doing or performing consistently well, dependable
Intimate: understanding, being aware of others emotions, feelings and perspectives
The one negative component
Self-orientation: putting yourself ahead of or demonstrating you’re more important than the other party
Click to View
Any other benefits of trust to add? Please add your thoughts and comments below.
The word NO is the simplest form of negativity. We’ve heard the word countless times growing up, working in business, dealing with personal issues. Despite how many times we get that reaction – even if we expect it – we may not know what to do if they say NO.
In its defence, NO might be a blessing. As painful as it may be, NO could be exactly what we need to hear to re-think our strategy or change messages. Perhaps re-position the argument overall.
Just as likely, NO could be the next step in the conversation. Often real negotiations don’t begin until both parties reach an impasse.
If nothing else, NO does not mean NO OPTIONS. The next time they say NO, you might consider this list of common actions and responses.
These strategies are deliberately general because no matter which option you choose, always consider the entirety of the situation: the people involved, the issue, its context and history, and most important, the consequences of your actions.
At the very least, remember to respond to NO with professionalism and grace. Both attitudes could pay in dividends the next time you’re trying to persuade someone when or if they say no.
Click to View
Or, as my Nana Eklund used to say, there is no reason to burn a bridge before you come to it.
Here’s What You Might do if They Say NO
1. Anticipate the NO.
Regardless of your topic, you should always properly prepare by thinking in advance how you’ll handle NO.
Learn about the other party in advance. What’s their POV of the current business situation? What are their hot buttons or priorities? How have they made decisions in the past, and on what criteria? What’s their personality like? Do they make decisions on the spot, or do they prefer to reflect before deciding?
Do they have a profile online, such as on LinkedIn or Facebook? You may find clues here about their background or skills to help you decide how to approach them with your proposal.
Pick apart your argument before they do. What are the holes in your proposal? How would you answer each criticism? You might ask an objective (and constructive) person for their feedback if you’re too close to your argument.
Talk to someone who’s already been in your shoes. Sometimes, the other party is inaccessible by hierarchy or distance. It’s never a bad idea to use your network to find someone who’s negotiated with them in the past. What worked? What didn’t work? Get their insight and counsel on your strategy.
Focus on rapport before you jump into your argument. Rapport helps build bridges before you start. In fact, in cases of culture, age or status, a mutual relationship is just as important as – if not, more important than – the argument or outcome itself. For example, you might identify a shared contact in your network who can not only give you a proper introduction, but they might also give you a gloss of credibility, which could be vital if your proposal initially sounds irrelevant, expensive or provocative.
2. Be assertive.
Focus on ‘what is right’ versus ‘being right.’ Consider the reasoning behind the NO. Don’t attach your emotions to their decision. Good managers make decisions based on the business overall, not one individual. If you were in their shoes, would you have made the same decision? If so, try thinking of alternative solutions from their POV which support the good of the group, not you alone.
Look for common ground. Are there aspects of the situation where you both agree? It’s easier to persuade when the other party genuinely believes there is mutual agreement. If so, consider brainstorming solutions together which address the issues. The other party is less likely to back away from solutions which they helped create.
Use this as an opportunity to learn – about them, the problem, their solutions. This is particularly important if you’re reporting to a new manager. Use their NO to learn about how they make decisions. For example, you may be too green to understand the complexities of the problem or the situation. By asking the right questions, you could learn something which can be translated into an alternative solution. If nothing else, by showing you are open and receptive, you set the stage for a better persuasion next time.
Ask for their help and feedback. Some NO people are exceptional at poking holes in arguments. Take this opportunity to learn from their critical analysis. If possible, ask for their feedback in advance of the actual discussion. And, if you take the time to improve your argument based on their initial assessment, you could turn the rejection into an approval.
Talk face-to-face. Or, pick up the phone. Distance allows people to say NO at a safe distance. With Skype, FaceTime and similar apps available on most smartphones, there is no excuse for having a less-than honest conversation live. However, if you’re using distance to hide because of a lack of confidence or a lack of preparation, it may become quickly evident to your manager they were right to answer NO in the first place.
3. Re-position the argument.
Be sensitive with how you implement these strategies as they can make you look manipulative and backfire on your desired result.
Make your idea theirs. I don’t recommend using this strategy subliminally. (It’s misleading, it takes time, lots of room for errors.) Instead, try being open and honest. In fact, this transparent approach is a variation on the manager’s cry: ‘Don’t come to me with a problem, come to me with a solution.’
Recently, a friend used this method with her manager. She told her manager what she wanted, saying she knew he’d deny her request (he agreed). In turn, she asked if she could challenge his thinking with an alternative idea (again, he agreed). A week later, she gifted him with a fully mapped-out idea, adding that she was more than happy if he wanted to present the idea to senior management as his idea. In the end, she got part of what she wanted, but was more happy with her manager’s response. “I got a lot of credit for stepping up and being proactive,” she said. “Also, once I took my ego out of it, I realised it shouldn’t matter who comes up with the best idea.”
Appeal to the hero complex. Some managers enjoy being the Good Samaritan. Their DNA is to help. To make this strategy work, you need to demonstrate that you alone cannot solve the problem, or that you’ve tried to solved the issue but you need their help with a problem beyond your scope. Whether it’s tapping into their higher authority or knowledge, your appeal for their help may give you the persuasive edge.
Take your argument elsewhere. Some proposals or arguments have multiple decision makers. Others have different levels of clearance. Look around the situation and see if there’s a way to adapt your needs, even if it’s testing it in a smaller form.
4. Take aggressive action … but know too there could be consequences.
Put it in writing. In the end, after gracefully and patiently trying to win over the other party, you realise they aren’t going to do as you want. Depending upon the situation, you may need to put your request formally in writing, copying key people.
But, even in these cases, I’d suggest you have a conversation with mentors as there’s nothing like publicly shaming someone into action to turn an ember into a fire.
Don’t bother to ask. As the cliché goes, sometimes it’s better to ask for forgiveness after the fact. Given your level of experience, the responsibilities in your role, sound gut instinct and the flexibility of your manager or team, you may find that the best decision is simply to make the decision, get on with the task, and work like hell to prove your decision was right.
Start looking around for a new job. After you’ve admirably tried everything on this list and more, you may find this strategy is your last recourse if your work and reasoning are continually knocked back without merit or explanation.
This is not the strategy to start with, nor to try on a whim. But at the same time, I know of lots of people who finally ended up in this group – myself included – and it turned out to be the best thing they (and I) ever did.
5. Sometimes it’s simply best to move on.
Yes, you should always look for alternatives, by preparing well and being pro-actively assertive when they say NO. However, you also can’t win every single argument. In the end, there’s a difference between a battle and a war. Is the energy worth it? Are there bigger battles looming on the horizon? If you can’t decide, perhaps the best advice is to sleep on the NO and decide with a clearer head in the morning.
Many moons ago, tips for improving on-camera presentations were exclusive to people giving media interviews. But thanks to new technologies – hello Zoom, Webex, Teams, Meet, Slack, not to mention podcasts and the like – many of us have become on-camera personalities as part of our job descriptions.
Before I list the tips and suggestions for on-camera presentations, one single aspect is mandatory, regardless of your communications:
Prepare!
Know your …
Goals – What’s your purpose? Why are you speaking? What do you hope to accomplish? How can you convey that objective to your audience in a natural way?
Audience – Who will be listening to you? Will it be live? Recorded? (If you’re recording, are you in some way including the audience? Do you have their penmission?) Why are they tuning in? What do they want to accomplish? What’s their current mindset?
Messages – What are you going to say that aligns your purpose for speaking with their goals for listening?
Call-to-Action – What do you want people to do?
If you want some advice and suggestions before we go further, try this article on the Message House – The Rule of 3s.
This may sound obvious, but don’t put more time and emphasis on how you look over what comes out of your mouth and how you can help the audience remember what you’ve said.
Click to View
One final caveat before I get started on tips for on-camera presentations of any type …
If your on-camera presentation is a media interview, get a qualified trainer to help you prepare, not only your answers to the journalists’ questions but also how to look and respond. That said, some of these tips may be relevant to media interviews, such as where to look, focus and talk to the interviewer (don’t talk to the camera lens). If you can, talk to the interviewer in advance to build a bit of rapport before the interview begins. If you can.
How to Work with the Camera
Invest in good equipment.
A good camera and microphone are everything. Personally, I don’t like surprises, so I usually have a back-up of everything.
Know how all of your technology works. Given how dodgy my home broadband can be, I also have a back-up hotspot. Know how your microphone and speakers are managed by your computer or similar. (You don’t want to look like the technology is leading you.) And, once everything is in place and working order, ignore it. Focus on the audience beyond the lens.
Warm-up your voice.
The first thing we hear shouldn’t be you clearing your throat to speak. I know it sounds trite but try vocal exercises beforehand. Avoid any beverage with milk; otherwise, you’ll be clearing your throat during the entire conversation.
Think like a TV news reader.
They are alone (except for the crew who aren’t really listening). There is no studio audience, meaning no reactions to sustain their energy. Good TV news anchors think of their performance as a part of a conversation with another (silent) person, not a one-sided dialogue. They are lively and enthusiastic, but at the same time, relaxed and natural. Speak as if you’re talking to a friend.
Adjust the camera lens so it is the same height as your eye line.
Whether mobile/cell phone, laptop or camera, raise the lens so that your eyes are the same height. We must see you full-faced, not slightly higher or lower than your head. We don’t want to see your neck waddle or your dining room ceiling. It’s up to you how far the camera is from you, but it’s best to focus on your upper torso.
Keep your background and lighting simple.
Get rid of things behind you which might look like they’re sprouting from your head. Light rings are great, but check the wattage as some are very bright and give headaches.
Gestures are incredibly important.
Whether it’s your facial expressions or your hand/arm movements, gestures are your personality coming out in body action. Because the eye loves movement, gestures also help keep the audience attentive. In fact, the audience will watch your hands as much as they watch your face. Why? Because your hands add depth to your words through visual punctuation.
The best gestures when standing are mid-chest, never broader than your body, never higher than your neck.
The best gestures when seated are slightly above the table. Skip what your Grandma told you, you can put your elbows on the desk or table.
Keep your appearance simple and neat.
Simple? Yes, you don’t want any part of how you look to distract. If they’re distracted, they aren’t listening. You are there to make a point, give information or advice, tell a story, etc. If anything about you causes them to stop listening, you’ve created your own problem yourself.
Hair, clothing and jewellery should be uncomplicated. None of it should become a musical instrument. If they make any noise, remove. Clothes should be comfortable, so I suggest you do not wear a new outfit for the first time on camera. If nothing else, make sure you can raise your arms a bit. If you’re in a studio, wear something light because it can be hot, and/or you’ll sweat if you’re nervous.
Yes, the camera adds pounds.
It’s because of the focal point on the camera. To compensate, wear dark solid colours. Try not to dress in all one colour – particularly in all white, black, red or green. Avoid neons, stripes and prints – again, anything that’s distracting.
Do a test run of your clothing.
Watch the playback. Have your colour choices given your skin an odd glow or turn you ashen? Do the colours clash with the background? Or, are they so close in colour, you look like a floating head? Yes, I’m old fashioned. Iron your clothes so you don’t look like you just rolled out of bed.
Men
Take everything out of your trouser pockets, especially things that jingle (like coins) or add strange bumps (like a cell/mobile or a wallet).
Get a haircut a few days before the interview.
Shave that morning, or if you have a beard, get it trimmed or shaped.
If it’s a production, sorry guys – use powder. It removes the glistening from sweat and oiliness which can make you look uncomfortable even if you’re not.
If you’re wearing a tie, gently tuck it into the waist-band of your trousers (under your coat, of course) so it remains straight.
Women
Straighten your jewelry so it’s not wrapped awkwardly around one breast or both.
Never try a new hair-style for the camera.
If you’re particularly nervous, don’t wear high heels if you stand.
It’s OK for a bit of your personality to shine through, but whatever you wear that says “you” – a tie, a shirt, a piece of jewelry – should be discrete. It should speak softly for itself, not announce itself with a scream.
Eye contact establishs your credibility, even more when close-up.
If you do lots of work on camera, get non-reflective coating on your lens. If nothing else, clean your lens before the camera goes on.
It’s OK to look away.
When you do, look down, never up. A glance upward looks like you’re searching for what you want to say in the heavens. More so, it gives the impression you’re unprepared or you’re lying. Or worse, both.
Looking confident starts with standing/sitting up straight.
To look confident while standing, your feet should be a bit less than shoulder-width apart. Stand flat on your feet, never on the balls of your feet. Your hands should be in front of you, never locked behind you.
To look confident while seated, sit slightly forward. If you’re sitting at a table, you should be forward enough that your back doesn’t touch the chair. Sit up straight. Don’t swivel in the chair.
For those who may know or remember the 1987 film Broadcast News, my favourite tip (courtesy of William Hurt) is sit on your coat or jacket so it brings down the fabric so it lies flat upon your shoulders.
Enunciation is making sure every word can be heard.
We must be able to understand what you say. The key to enunciation is to put the final syllable or each consonant of each word.
Speed is the next most important aspect.
To test yourself, ask a friend or colleague to listen to you but not look directly at you from a distance of 3-5 meters or 10-15 feet. If they can’t understand you without looking at you, you’re too fast.
Finally, a pause about pauses.
Even now and then, it’s OK (if not preferable) to stop talking and simply breathe. Silence can not only be very powerful, but it should be used at key spots when you want the audience to think about what you just said. That said, on camera, there’s nothing worse than too much silence. Pause for 1-2 beats and keep going.
Listening – to understand, to reply or even to accept – is arguably one of the most difficult skills in communications, and we’re getting worse at it.
In 2006, Dr. Ralph Nichols – who established the first study in the field of listening nearly 40 years ago at the University of Minnesota – quantified that we spend 40 percent of our day listening to others, but retain just 25 percent of what we hear.
By 2011, sound expert Julian Treasure, in his TED talk “5 Ways To Listen Better,” found in his own research that we now spent as much as 60 percent of our day listening to others, perhaps because “it’s a louder and louder world.”
Treasure is probably on to something, but the real issue is a combination of two other innate issues involving the human brain.
First, a study at Princeton University (“Speaker-Listener Neural Coupling Underlies Successful Communication,” by Charles G. Gross, June 19, 2010) found that there is a lag between what you hear and what you understand.
Click to View
Depending upon the individual, it could be between a few seconds to up to a minute. This is where the trouble starts. During that lag-time, we start to listen to ourselves and not to the other person. As a result, our comprehension plummets.
What causes this lag time? It might be something as simple as our physical and emotional state. But more likely, it’s our own thoughts and opinions, which is specifically known as confirmation bias, which is our tendency to pick out facts or aspects of a conversation that support our pre-existing beliefs, values or perceptions. Grandma Eklund said it more concisely: “You’re only listening for what you want to hear.”
Confirmation bias is arguably connected to how slow people speak vs. how fast we listen. The Harvard Business Review (“7 Tips for Effective Listening” by Tom D. Lewis and Gerald Graham) cites research which says most individuals speak at a rate of 175 to 200 words per minute, where people are very capable of listening and processing words at a rate of 600 to 1,000 per minute. Because the brain isn’t using its full capacity when listening, the brain drifts off to other questions.
This phenomenon is called Miller’s Law, after psychologist George Miller who said in 1980 that “In order to understand what another person is saying, you have to assume that (their answer) is true and try to imagine what it could be true of.” Miller found that many people apply this principle in reverse, or what’s known as competitive listening. They hear something and have a negative reaction, because they believe what the other person said is false. Listening stops, and communications breaks down.
Of course, there are other culprits. The speaker can also cause the delay in listening, because of the volume, pace, tone or accent of their voice, their non-verbal communications (gestures, eye contact, among others). Then there’s outside interruptions too, either technical (phones, gadgets, emails, squawk boxes used for conference calls) or physical (noise, an uncomfortable or too-comfortable chair).
Listening Requires a Type of Passivity
My own exploration of listening began when I was asked to teach a workshop on listening. I had a curricula on listening, but it seemed too lecture-ish, so I began to look for ways to make it more conversational (oh, the irony!).
The thing that struck me then, as now, is that the single trick to listening better is in the word concentration.
I used to think it was about forcing yourself to listen better, but in fact, it’s about allowing yourself to listen better. What’s the difference? A lot.
Concentration is a hard task for more people, basically because it’s tiring. If you force yourself to concentrate, your brain will work to a point, then become exhausted, then shut down, if not switch to autopilot. Scientists call it “neural decoupling.” My Grandma would tell me my brain has gone to lunch.
To allow yourself to listen better, you need to think and work in a different way. Instead of forcing yourself, become more passive.
Get rid of outside distractions.
Put everything down, and shut out everything. Breathe slowly and deeply. Physically relax and get comfortable.
What about notes? Do you really need to take notes? Ask the person to follow-up with their points in writing, if necessary. If you must, make short punchy notes. Stop immediately if you find yourself clarifying your notes instead of listening.
If you’re not ready to listen – you’ve been caught unawares in the lift, a topic comes up as a tangent during another conversation – say you’re not ready to listen, but immediately give a deadline that’s sooner than later.
There are times when it’s OK to avoid. Go to .
Open your mind.
Don’t judge. Only listen. If you have a problem focusing, repeat what the person is saying in your head.
Listen for the big picture, not the details.
Think of it this way. You walk midway into a lecture. You may immediately understand the words and sentences, but you will not immediately understand the overall purpose. Until you get the overall point, it’s easy to misconstrue the facts or put them into the wrong context. Facts – especially when they differ from yours – will immediately cause you to listen competitively.
Note – but don’t judge – non-verbal communications.
How are they sitting? How’s the eye contact? Is their speech fast or slow, smooth or broken? What aren’t they saying? Also, be aware of the vividness effect – that you become more drawn to sensational, vivid or memorable aspects of the speech instead of the substance of the speech. Again, if needed, repeat their words in your head to give you focus.
Do not jump to conclusions or interrupt.
Until they’ve finished speaking, don’t talk. That said, you can gently ask the speaker to repeat themselves, but always do that between their sentences.
Once they finished their point-of-view, you’ll notice that you respond less quickly. You’ll need a minute or two to compose a considered response in your head. This may be both a bonus and a shock to the speaker. Few people expect the listener to be contemplative, so they might be genuinely surprised they were actually heard and understood. This may also change their initial perception of the conversation to come. At the same time, they might be distrustful, so you may also need to tell them, genuinely of course, that you’re thinking about what they said.
A common objection to this style of listening is that reflecting slows down the conversation and gets in the way of decision making. Maybe. Reflecting definitely takes more time, but by listening to understand accurately means you can save time too, because you won’t have errors in communications.
Paraphrase the big picture, then add in details.
This stage allows you to demonstrate you have listened. Or, if you’ve missed a point, you can demonstrate you want to hear their points more exactly. Begin with the overall point, then add the details. (For tips on paraphrasing, go here.) Another trick: speak from their point-of-view, not yours. Don’t add emotion.
Challenge yourself first.
It’s very possible you will disagree with the speaker. If so, ask yourself Why might this speaker’s message be true? Under what circumstance might this be true? (These two questions are part of Miller’s Law.)
They force you to put yourself in the shoes of the person in front of you, and it becomes much more difficult to argue with this person. Remember, you can understand a person, but not agree with them. The best way to handle this approach (to yourself, to others) is to ask non-confrontational questions.
Typically at this point, depending upon the situation, the speaker has two options: to coach or to counsel. The differences are nicely outlined in this article: How Do Coaching, Mentoring and Counselling Differ?
Any thoughts on proactive listening? What techniques have you used to listen better or more efficiently? Please add your thoughts or comments below.
Just as I was starting to write this post, I came across an article providing the definitive answer to whether or not I should use one or two spaces after a period – or full stop as they call it here in Australia. The article has changed: go here now.
Writer Farhad Manjoo (then at Slate before moving on to The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times) provides the aggressively definitive answer to whether or not you put one or two spaces between sentences.
I’ll cut his lofty writing short for you: one space only, ever.
His rationale is compelling and fascinating, because it’s not just a story of aesthetics and readability, but of the convergence between old technology (typewriters) and new technology (proportional typesetting.)
Click to View
And yet …
Despite all his (mostly good) arguments from typography experts, there’s one point where his argument trips itself up. Is it more readable to have two spaces instead of one? As he admits, there are no studies to prove single or double spaces are better.
When I was younger, I always used one space. It’s what Kay Amert, my typography teacher at University of Iowa, taught us.
As I get older, I am constantly searching for a pair of reading glasses to help. In other words, I prefer two spaces because it’s easier to read.
So which should you use?
Like everything else on the planet, do what’s preferable to you.
If you prefer one space after a period, by all means, make yourself happy.
Two spaces? That’s your choice.
But, like all communication, you should also remember to think about WHO you are writing for. If you know the other party will go full-on BONKERS if you use two spaces, why make a situation worse to be “right”?
Phew, I’m glad that important issue is settled. Or not.
Now on to more important things, such as the Oxford comma.
Every success – and problem – between a client and its agency can be directly traced to its relationship, specifically at the point when it began and the expectations set between the two parties.
Relationships of course are based on trust, and a significant portion of trust is established and built on one’s ability to communicate to and with each other.
For people working in the marketing or communications industries, this makes for an ironic topic, particularly when things go wrong.
I experienced this first-hand in 1992, when I moved from the agency side (at Weber Shandwick) to the client side (at MasterCard).
It was more than just a new person inside the client organization getting to know its agency and vice versa. In fact, it was downright sticky. Less than three short weeks, I went from being the agency account director on the MasterCard account to leading internally the same business I used to run externally … and with the same team of people at both client and agency. In short, neither side trusted me, and frankly, I didn’t trust myself for nearly six months into the new job.
Out of frustration, I turned to my mentor at the time. (She still is, in fact. Hi Susan G!) After some soul-searching, she suggested I stop for a moment and ask myself what I was expecting: from the client, from the agency and from the relationship between client and agency overall.
It wasn’t the most creatively titled document – “The Expectations Agreement” – but still, it became a helpful starting point for me to better manage both sides for maximum results.
What goes around, comes around.
Last month, I was helping one of my clients in Asia begin a new relationship with their social marketing agency. Like two new dance partners, the two parties – senior people from both the company and its agency – were off to a rocky beginning at the start of a three-day planning meeting that I’d been hired to facilitate.
I could see the same problems bubble up, so much so that by the start of Day Three, I brought in my original document and started the day with a discussion and debate about setting right the expectations between the two parties from the start. To be specific:
I had the client side (just three of them) articulate exactly what they expected from their new agency.
In a separate room, I had the agency (seven of them) articulate exactly what they expected from their new client.
After each party had its list, they presented their expectations to the other partner. No one was allowed to say anything until both parties finished.
Afterward, we talked about …
What was realistic vs wasn’t realistic
What were more important vs less important
How to bring up problems and solutions
How to treat each other
As it had been for me, the client and its agency found it invaluable to slow for a moment to talk about this new and important relationship, so that virtually any discussion afterward would be built on these principles and values.
Here is a simplified version of their discussion on that conversation. The fact that it was written for clients and agencies shouldn’t dissuade you from having an open conversation with whatever new partner you have.
Laying out your expectations from the beginning, including the values and expectations you’ll both bring to this relationship, will undoubtedly help all parties creating a lasting, trusting relationship.
What the Client Should Expect From Its Agency
Honest counsel
You should expect a fresh, truthful and objective point-of-view. You should expect your agency team to give you their honest opinions and counsel. For example, if they consider an action you’re about to undertake may be risky or inappropriate, it is their responsibility to bring it up for a respectful discussion.
Quality
Your agency should have the highest standards for quality because their reputation depends on it, if not their reputation with all of its clients. If ever you feel you aren’t receiving top quality, let them know immediately, by being explicit, constructive and candid.
Stimulating Discussion
Your agency should challenge your assumptions and recommendations, and you should challenge theirs. The discussions are honest, but never personal. They should lead to a strong, collaborative working relationship and to the best results.
Confidentiality
Your agency helps you in highly sensitive situations. All agency employees should sign a stringent confidentiality agreement. They must understand the obligations imposed by becoming “insiders.”
Responsiveness
As a client of this agency, you deserve their attention, ongoing interest and responsiveness against a fair and just budget. On critical matters, this means doing all that is humanly possible to assist you. On less time-sensitive assignments, this means reaching a clear understanding on the real deadlines. In either situation, both parties should listen carefully, meet those deadlines, and let the other know ASAP when they can’t be met. Their aim should be to return your phone calls and e-mails as soon as possible, and always within the same day they’re received. For appropriate staff members, you should have mobile telephone numbers and a willingness to take calls outside of the office.
Budget Stewardship
They should be as responsible for your budget as you are, using it as efficiently and effectively as possible. You should expect them to match assignments with their account people with the most appropriate rates for that assignment. They should provide estimates in advance. Because assignments sometimes change, they should let you know as soon as possible if the budget may be exceeded. Or, you should expect them to provide recommendations on how best to use the remaining budget to still achieve your goals.
Senior Counsel When and If You Need it
A good agency should have a large pool of experienced practitioners – not just full-time staff, but those with whom they’ve worked as consultants or within their professional network. You should have access to those people, their experiences and their knowledge for a reasonable fee. You should expect your agency to draw upon those resources on your behalf, as needed.
Timeliness
Two words: no surprises. You should keep your most senior account leader fully up to speed, particularly on upcoming or potential issues. Your agency should keep you up-to-date about assignments, budgets and deadlines, either in status updates or regular meetings. Neither side should believe in meetings for meeting’s sake, but for significant assignments, both parties should encourage quarterly meetings with the entire team. Used productively, such meetings go a long way toward keeping each other informed and up-to-date.
An Informed Team
Expect them to ask lots of good questions. It’s their responsibility to get to know your industry, its trends and its media.
Integrity
While they are willing to carry out your assignments, they should never violate their professional or personal code of ethics.
Fresh Ideas
You should expect their best ideas, continually. You should help make their creative sessions most productive by expressing the decisive outcome that the idea should achieve, give them what you believe are the success criteria to judge the ideas, and help them know or understand the areas or issues which should be addressed in the brainstorm. At the same time, these sessions are meant to break out of your existing circle of plans and programs. That means you should expect something to challenge you and your thinking, and more often than not, you should collaborate to find ways to turn these problems into opportunities, if not tactics.
What the Agency Should Expect from Its Client
Lead Time
You understand that it’s not always possible to get advance notice on certain projects. But you can provide better counsel and execution if given enough time to consider and prepare. Hearing about a major issue or announcement at the last minute, or after the attorneys have given you their (communications) advice, puts everyone at a disadvantage.
Reasonable Budget
You are not a non-profit organization. Your work has value, and thus, a reasonable cost. Your point-of-view is not to take all of the client’s budget, but to help them be so successful, they make more money.
Candor
You should expect the complete picture, including both the good news and the “warts.” You juggle a difficult role: you must be both insiders and outsiders to provide the best, objective recommendation.
Clarity
You should expect clear direction. Again, you understand that’s not always possible. But in lieu of a confident, thought-out strategy, you still need a few choice items: a clear objective, an agreement on the desired results, the most current information available (or a reasonable amount of leeway to contact others to help get information or understand it better), and a suitable budget.
Access
When necessary, you need access to key people, to relevant and appropriate information, to top management in issues and crises, and to people generally within the client organization who can help you best understand the current situation. Certainly the materials, plans, research reports and other documents you expect from the client will be helpful. But, they are not a substitute for occasional dialogues with the “right people” on direction, developments and key issues. This can be done judiciously and cost effectively, but on certain kinds of assignments implemented on the client’s behalf, it is mandatory, not a chance to build your reputation internally.
Sponsorship Within Client
You are an extension of the internal team. Others in the organization should know who you are, and more so, know that you have your client’s support. This is more than just getting your phone calls returned or emails answered. It helps get speedier approvals, better decisions, and generally makes for a more productive relationship with everyone, not just the immediate client team.
Honest Feedback
You should know how you’re doing. There should be no misunderstanding when your efforts are of quality and “on the mark” – or, at the same time, when you are not living up to the client’s expectations. You should also speak up in constructive ways when you don’t think things are going as well as they should. The problem is never the other side’s.
Integrity
You should never be put into situations that involve unethical behavior. It hurts not only your professional reputation, but you as an individual as well.
What We Should Expect From Each Other
Trust and Respect, Fairness
We value the relationship we are beginning, and want it to be a mutually satisfying agreement, regardless of whether it’s short- or long-term.
Each party deserves the other’s best efforts, ongoing top-of-mind attention, honesty and respect.
We want to be treated as a partner and an ally so that all of us can do our best work.
It’s unlikely either of us is perfect, will never make mistakes, or always meet the other’s expectations.
The important thing is to treat each other as colleagues who communicate honestly as we both work together toward our common goals.
Here’s another article in a similar vein from the Harvard Business Review: How to Build Business Relationships. (You might need a subscription to read.)
Have a forgotten anything in these expectations between agencies and clients? Would you add or amend it in any way? Please add your thoughts and comments below.
