Email miscommunication

Are we getting lazy with our emails? Do we treat the electronic communication with a cavalier attitude which we would never consider employing with other media? For example:

• how many emails have you received where the sender didn’t fully explain the point or question, disappointingly leaving you to fill in the blanks or piece together the meaning of the message?
• how often do you get an email which is simply forwarded with ‘FYI’?

We seem to consider this behaviour socially acceptable – but would we think it reasonable to send a letter which said:

“Please find attached several letters between other people.  One of them has asked a question based on the details sprinkled amongst their correspondence.  I don’t know the answer. Would you read all of the pages, pick out the details, and work out the answer. I’m too busy or important to summarise for you.”

Perhaps not.

This might be an extreme example, but I suspect that most people are guilty of forwarding email without adequate explanation.

So tomorrow try a step change in email communication: help the recipient understand the message.  You might even be surprised at the results.

Happy thoughts #5 – and a bit more philosophy

“Procrastination is the thief of time.”

For a long time I didn’t understand exactly how putting something off to another day could actually cost me time, but once I understood the meaning I started to look at it more deeply:

• if I put something off until tomorrow, or next week, or some future date, then I’ve spent time today in thinking about it and making a decision to postpone the action.  In reality this (and the time I’ll spend thinking about the delayed matter) is time which I could have used towards the task (even if I couldn’t have finished it); or
• if someone else delays dealing with a task from which I require the output then my time is stolen in chasing, remediating, explaining, or even just managing the delay.  (There is the deeper question of managing expectations, but perhaps that is for another day.)

Outside of work this can range from simply tedious to deeply frustrating; overall – work included – time thefts can directly be related to financial costs, and can even affect the bottom line.

Is the message, therefore, not to put off until tomorrow what we can reasonably do today?  I think that’s an entirely reasonable position, and it’s directly related to my happy thought for the week.

My diary got crunched at both ends this week and so yesterday I ended up going for a run at lunchtime (hard intervals) and another in the afternoon (slower and longer, but with a powerful finish).  I had thought about postponing one or the other but I’m glad I didn’t: I felt really good after the second, both mentally and physically. And so my happy thought is all about my running – and the fact that I didn’t succumb to the subtle lure of procrastination.

And the thought to ponder: what will you now do today that you would otherwise have put off?

Perceptions – and management behaviours

A few posts ago I wrote about not judging books by their covers, and today I’m thinking again about the same sort of thing – but this time in the workplace.

As managers it is incumbent upon us to demonstrate those leadership and managerial qualities that we wish to develop and engender in those around us, but how many times have we all seen others act in a way which they would not tolerate from their reports?  This shows a lack of respect in one direction, and a creates loss of it in the other.

The hit comedy “Yes, Minister” made fun of this type of double standards behaviour by referring to it as an irregular verb, for example:

1. I have an independent mind; you are an eccentric; he is round the twist.
2. I give confidential press briefings; you leak; he’s being charged under section 2A of the Official Secrets Act.

Whilst this is in the context of a television sitcom, it shouldn’t detract from the important characteristic being lampooned, and one of the aphorisms we all learned as children: “do to others as you would be done by”. 

Not everyone is born as a natural leader, and some only have people follow them out of a sense of morbid curiosity.  Leadership can be learned and encouraged, and people will want to follow a leader who has their respect – this time neither a carrot nor a stick are required!

So my question to ponder for the day is: what positive behaviour trait do you most admire from your leaders, and how can you emulate that to achieve similar respect?

Work smarter not harder

It’s one of the cliches which has been bandied about by management gurus for as long as I can remember: work smarter not harder.  The same idea is also expressed as “don’t reinvent the wheel” and “a stitch in time saves nine” – all good conventional wisdom. 

These are excellent ideas, but some people find abstract ideas hard to contextualise.  Today I saw a perfect example of the concept in action from both sides: one person trying to do the right thing, and another (hopefully unintentionally) thwarting her at every step. 

So consider this very simple situaltion which, I am sure, is played out every day in offices worldwide:

Mr X wants to do something for which there are instructions made available. However, Mr X is too busy (or too important or too arrogant or too whatever) to waste his time reading instructions, so every time he gets stuck he calls Mr Y for help.

Most people want to get their point across; but whilst some are fabulous communicators, and others would make a game of “snap” sound complicated.  Some people will figure out what they should be doing even with a little ambiguity and others have developed the habit of failing to read even the simplest instruction (probably a learned behavioural trait). Sadly, members of the latter group won’t read this blog post. 

Mr Y wanted to explain to everyone how to do the action and wrote the guidance.  Write once, file once, and point people at the file.  Mr Y works smart and doesn’t repeat his effort. The same cannot be said for Mr X who is consuming two people’s time in every call to Mr Y.

It’s a no-win situation for Mr Y: refuse to help on the grounds that the information is available and he’s not a team player, but help and he’ll get everyone calling in the future.  And all because Mr X undermined the “smarter” ethic.

I’m reminded of a rather more blunt response prevalent in the IT community years ago: RTFM (google it if you don’t like my link).

So how will you work smarter today – and help others who are doing the same?

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst

I was chatting to my boss today and asked for an update on an email trail.  We had a conversation and then he asked why it mattered as the subject probably wouldn’t crop up again, to which my response was that I’d rather be prepared in case it did recur rather than be fighting a rearguard action.

This brought to mind a phrase which my mentor had used in the past: hope for the best, prepare for the worst.  It’s also one which I have played back to others and which seems to resonate with most people.

But the concept isn’t new, it’s not even recent.  My favourite quote on the subject comes from Sun Tzu:

The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy’s not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.

How often have I sat through a presentation only to watch it derail as a predictable question causes the presenter to flounder? Perhaps Sun Tzu is cautioning against the complacency which suggests that some questions are therefore unexpected?

There are many techniques to prepare for the worst, but I think that two of them will cover just about any situation:

• PPPPPPP: I first saw this abbreviation thirty years ago and it’s still as relevant.  It means: Proper Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance
• always have an escape route: I don’t mean literally, but a couple of phrases which will buy you time are invaluable. For example
  • “that’s a very interesting point, but it could take longer to address than I should spend on one subject. If you’d like to chat afterwards I’d be happy to go through it with you.”
  • “I’m not certain and I don’t want to give you an inaccurate answer, but if you leave me your contact details I’ll be sure to double check and drop you an email.”

Do you have some helpful, back-pocket phrases for use in case of emergency? And what techniques do you employ to prepare for the worst?

The art of leadership (according to Dilbert)

Today I had an epiphany.

I have a tear-off, one sheet a day, Dilbert calendar on my desk.  I enjoy the humour and the cynical accuracy, and I pretend that I have never met people like the cartoon nor found some of the situations to be uncannily accurate.

And reading today’s strip I wondered how much we fall for the confidence trick: leadership is the art of trading imaginary things in the future for real things today.

In this context perhaps there are two sorts of manager: those who will develop and encourage their people, and those who exploit the staff to better serve their own careers – the latter being the more likely to use Dilbert’s art.

Maybe, then, Lewis Carroll also understood the lure of the dangled carrot – with the Queen of Hearts proclaiming to Alice [in Wonderland]: “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam today“.

Knowing that there is no jam tomorrow, why do we chase the dangling carrot? Because even though our rational brain says “no”, there’s still a worm of hope which says “maybe” – a gambler who wants te believe.

Now knowing the art, I know which leader I want to be (and it’s not as evidenced by Catbert!).