#76-10/14/08: Context and Communication.
Context and Communication.
“Context-Static questionnaires don’t work.”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Hello everyone!
I was teaching a management class at the University of California, Santa Barbara, this last Friday.
I was talking to the class about the way in which each of us is “programmed” to behave in certain ways.
I gave the students a questionnaire and one of the categories surveyed by the questionnaire had to do with being oriented toward “details” or toward “big picture”. Those people who prefer to focus on the “big picture” have a tendency to detest details and vice versa. Some people prefer a balance and some people prefer one extreme or the other.
In response to the questionnaire, some of the students displayed preferences for details or big picture, while others displayed a balance.
They got the very clear message that their preferences are real and strong. Students were acknowledging that they either had no real preference or they had strong preferences and they were able to give examples of how these preferences showed up in their lives.
As our discussion progressed, one of the students asked if the scores recorded by the questionnaire ever changed. Essentially, “Do they remain constant or do they change?”
Now here is the very interesting part. Once the students clearly understood that every human being has these “internal programs” that run, often outside of our conscious awareness, my answer to the question was that not only do the preferences change over time, they actually are different depending upon the situation; different depending upon the “context”.
I’ll take myself as an example. When I take my own questionnaire, the survey comes back indicating that I have a very high preference for “big picture” and I have a very low tolerance for details.
Don’t give me details! My eyes glaze over. I want to focus on the big picture. I’ll let someone else attend to the details.... That’s how I answered the questionnaire. And it’s TRUE....
Unless, I’m being creative. If I’m designing a rocket engine, or designing a new training, essentially doing something I consider to be very creative… then I’m all over the details.
So our internal programs actually shift depending upon the context.
Now not everyone has such a strong shift depending upon the context as I have. But most people will display some shift based on context.
This is why I don’t use Myers-Briggs, Disc, or Enneagram. They are context independent. They are great to convince people that people have programs, but then there are a lot of questionnaires that do that. The issue with most systems out there is that they set the internal programs in place assuming that the context is static.
We all know that the context shifts. We all know that situations change.
I’ve developed communication, influence, and leadership processes that allow for a real-time shift in the context, which is exactly what happens in real life. The communicator can actually determine what the context is that is “driving” the interaction and alter the messages so that they can take into account the internal programs of the people listening. It’s a real-time, context-sensitive, communication and leadership process that allows the communicator to adjust the communication process to match the context.
Now I know this sounds like a blatant marketing piece… sorry. But I don’t know how else to talk about what I consider to be a fundamental issue in human communication. And that is that people and the communication and leadership processes are dynamic. They are not static and if we are going to be highly effective in communication, management, and leadership we have to understand that we must engage with people in a real-time “dance”. A real-time give and take that takes attention and awareness and an understanding of all the levels of communication that are taking place simultaneously.
How else can effective communication, influence, and leadership be accomplished?
Be well,
Steven Cerri
By the way. If you’d like to leave a comment, and I’d sure be interested if you did, I’ve changed the comments software. Only your comment and your name will show up at the end of the comment. I have modified the software so that your email address will not show up anywhere.
“What would it be like to be as successful with people as you are with your technology?” Steven trains, coaches, and facilitates engineers and technical managers to BE the answer to that question. More information can be found at the:http://stevencerri.com/index.php/Home/index/
Copyright©2008 STCerri International and Steven Cerri. You are free to pass this information on to others and to reproduce it. If you reproduce it in whole or part please give attribution to Steven Cerri. Thank you.
Posted by Steven Cerri on 10/14 at 09:32 PM Inter-Personal People Skills • Communication for engineers • (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
#75-10/6/08: Good Work Won’t Get You Influence.
Good Work Won’t Get You Influence.
“It takes more than exceptional work to get you there.”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, October 6, 2008
Hello everyone!
I recently read another article in BusinessWeek. It was in their special issue called Business@Work, dated August 25-September 1, 2008.
I often use BusinessWeek as fodder for my blogs because it is filled with what I consider to be weak management information. It either presents articles that are naive regarding management or it contains research about management that is conducted by people who seem never to have managed a team.
So, as I was saying, I read an article titled “Good To Great Expectations”. It was a summary of the ideas put forth by Jim Collins in his books “Built to Last” and “Good to Great”.
Now, as indicated in the article, Jim has a good cadre of students doing the research for his books. I’m assuming they know what to look for in their executive interviews even though they haven’t managed anyone before. But that’s another matter.
That’s not what caught my eye. What caught my eye was a statement that is attributed to Jim.
The statement is, “If you produce exceptional work, your ability for influence is very high”.
Now that’s a pretty interesting statement. I guess the managers and executives who have sent me their direct reports to coach wouldn’t agree with Jim. Because, while I coach engineers as well as executives, much of the coaching work I do with engineers and technical professionals is because these people produce exceptional work and yet they can’t get along with their colleagues. They produce exceptional work and they are just about ready to be “shown the door”. In the worlds in which most of my technical clients live, both engineers and technical managers, exceptional work doesn’t automatically lead to increased influence.
It’s a mistake to believe that good work is all that is necessary to achieve influence.
Influence is made up of two components; content and context.
Content is the information. It’s what most people “believe” is necessary for success. Especially here in the United States. People think that content rules. Even Jim Collins seems to believe it.
But it doesn’t work that way. Influence also requires “context”. Context is the structure of the communication of that content, of that exceptional work, that allows influence to complete the process.
Just answer this question: Have you ever known or worked for a boss who didn’t know what he or she was doing and still they were the boss and had influence?
Probably everyone who is reading this blog has had someone like that they’ve known at some time. So that means that exceptional work is not what is necessary for influence. I know, sooner or later it catches up with them, but the point is that the statement equating exceptional work and influence just isn’t correct. Influence is not dependent only on “exceptional work”.
Influence is dependent on content, the exceptional work, and on context, the way in which the content and influence are structured. I am regularly called upon to coach really, really good engineers, scientists, and technical professionals who not only don’t have any influence, but they are slowly being moved out of the organization because they don’t know how to use their knowledge to influence the success of the organization. My job as their coach is to show them how to structure a context in which they can effectively deliver their content, their “exceptional work”, so they can influence and contribute to their organization.
In January of 2009, I’m going to present a workshop titled “Influencing Without Authority”. This will be a two-day workshop and it will answer the question, “How do you structure the context and the content so that you can influence others when you have no authority over them?” Stay tuned!
Be well,
Steven Cerri
By the way. If you’d like to leave a comment, and I’d sure be interested if you did, I’ve changed the comments software. Only your comment and your name will show up at the end of the comment. I have modified the software so that your email address will not show up anywhere.
“What would it be like to be as successful with people as you are with your technology?” Steven trains, coaches, and facilitates engineers and technical managers to BE the answer to that question. More information can be found at the:http://stevencerri.com/index.php/Home/index/
Copyright©2008 STCerri International and Steven Cerri. You are free to pass this information on to others and to reproduce it. If you reproduce it in whole or part please give attribution to Steven Cerri. Thank you.
Posted by Steven Cerri on 10/06 at 09:38 PM (0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
