865 1500 word + chart

This week we focus on two subjects that very much relate to the communication practices we discussed last week.

First, the role of leaders in communicating strategic messages to both internal and external audiences.

And second, reviewing the approach to crafting a strategic message outlined in Matha & Boehm. Even though their focus is on communicating to an internal audience – employees -- you will note that their communication philosophy mirrors the communication practices highlighted by John Finney and also the planning and assessment mindset.

1

Leaders at all levels in an organization have a huge impact on communication practices, both internal and external.

Some leaders are ‘natural’ communicators – many others can benefit from training and coaching to become better communicators.

As the manager of communication function in a large corporation, I was keenly aware of the impact my CEO was having on employee morale. What messages should he deliver and which channels were most effective? We constantly grappled with these questions.

Moreover, the leadership role is evolving rapidly. The CEO of Cisco was recently quoted as saying “today’s world requires a different leadership style – more collaboration and teamwork, including using Web 2.0 technologies.”

2

In their article, In Praise of the Incomplete Leader, Ancona et al. chart the decline of the command-and-control model of leadership for all of the reasons listed on this slide.

Organizational decentralization and flattening of hierarchies, the pressures of globalization and the complexity of issues facing leaders – combined with the need to respond quickly have all contributed to a new model of leadership.

Another factor is what I call the activism of stakeholder groups – fueled by new digital technologies – that require a more responsive style of leadership.

The work of MIT’s Leadership Center underscores the need for leaders to share p power, to share responsibilities, to rely on others to supplement their own skills.

Ancona et al. have identified a set of four capabilities that leaders must cultivate within their teams and organizations in this ‘new’ model of distributed leadership.

I won’t repeat here the descriptions of the four capabilities described in the article by Ancona et al.

I think the sidebars (example on page 95: “Engage in Sensemaking”) bring a concreteness to each capability.

I also recommend the list on page 99 titled “Examining Your Leadership Capabilities” – where do you stand in relation to each of the four capabilities?

And consider the role of communication in exercising each of the these capabilities.

On this slide, Victoria Mellor suggests how these leadership capabilities translate into very tactical communication practices.

Leaders need to communicate where the organization is going and why, they need to express a genuine interest in employees and listen to feedback.

You’ll note how these tactics also relate back to the effective communication practices identified in the Towers Watson study.

Matha & Boehm also have a very good brief chapter on “the top leader’sMatha & Boehm also have a very good brief chapter on the top leader s role” in strategic communication.

When we use the term ‘communication,’ we often think of the message, the story, a description, information.

And the ability to craft a message that we can then convey through a communication network using the most effective medium is a core skill of anyone who aspires to communicate with impact.

Now, using Matha & Boehm’s framework, we will focus on the how-to’s. This is why I selected Matha & Boehm. They do an excellent job of explaining how to articulate strategy, relate it to key stakeholders, and engage stakeholders in ongoing conversation about strategy.

I agree with their central argument: “In the end, it’s not what you say, but what your audience hears – and, we argue, what your audience does – that counts.”

Once upon a time – say 15 years ago – we cared much more about what y y g was said. The digital revolution, the rise of social media, the change in stakeholder expectations has changed all that.

You’ll note that we could easily substitute the term ‘stakeholders’ for ‘employees’ because this approach works with both internal and external audiences.

The premise of the Action Equation is that the message should help theThe premise of the Action Equation is that the message should help the audience understand what they are supposed to do.

And also that to motivate behavior, we must incorporate both a factual (the know) and an emotional (the feel) element.

John Kotter and others who have studied the change process have come to the same conclusion. Since change is difficult and involves people changing their behaviors, communication about the change process must help peopletheir behaviors, communication about the change process must help people understand why change is necessary and evoke the feeling that change is necessary as well.

Matha & Boehm (M&B) argue that the first step in strategic communication is for leaders to determine what they want the organization to accomplish and what employees (or stakeholders) need to do to make it happen.

Once they’ve decided on the strategic goals leaders must then connect theOnce they ve decided on the strategic goals, leaders must then connect the dots, the ‘why’ behind the goals.

As M&B note “these connections enable employees to evaluate activities against overall goals and ensure that they focus on the right activities. It also helps them coordinate with other departments” – thereby addressing the silo mentality which is such a deterrent to change. The why also answers ‘what’s in it for me.’

The Action Equation concept, I believe, can be incorporated in messages to both internal and external audiences.

M&B argue that strong strategic messages that generate discussion – a dialogue between senders and receivers -- have four characteristics.

On p.47, see the simplicity/clarity test: Does this make sense? What actions would you take based on this direction? Try this out when you craft strategic messages! And beware of “complexity creep.”

“If you can’t tell people what the organization has to achieve, how it will achieve it, and what you want the general employee population to do in five hundred words or less, your “Do” message needs work.

The strategic story also explains how employees (or stakeholders) can achieve the goals in “very concrete, physical, actionable terms.” Observable actions versus abstract metrics.

The third point is that leaders should make the tough strategic choices, the tough business of prioritizing – because if leaders don’t, then employees will g g y make the choices – and will often follow the path of least resistance to do so.

Finally, it’s critical that the actions of leaders matches their words – here’s where trust comes into play, where leaders demonstrate that they understand the emotional elements of change.

I like the ‘bookend’ approach to leadership communication: explain what needs to be done, point to actions underway, and then revisit actions that p y have been completed (we often forget that last one!).

M&B also argue that employees need to know the reasoning behind goals and strategies – because if they don’t hear it from leadership, they will construct their own understanding of the rationale.

See pp. 64-68 for an elaboration of the case for ‘why.’

How do you decide who needs to know and how much? “Leaders need to prioritize their … audiences based on their relative importance to successful strategy execution.” Consider how this applies to Dean Evelyn Wilson and her wide array of audiences.

When M&B argue that “leaders throughout the company – from executives to frontline supervisors – should know strategy,” you can relate that to several of the strategic and behavioral communication practices described in the Watson Wyatt study.

And taking it further, establishing a ‘line of sight’ between leaders and key g g g y stakeholders. Answering the question: what’s it mean to me?

This should remind you of the top communication practices uncovered in the research conducted by Towers Watson.

And finally, this part of the Action Equation should generate a two-way conversation about why the strategic initiative is necessary – and will uncover additional points that need to be clarified in order to strengthen the p g ‘know’ part of the equation.

“Information creates understanding; emotion drives action.” Strategic communication must tap emotion – that’s why typically strategic planning documents are so useless as communication vehicles!

M&B give you concrete examples of how to make the translation from strategic planning terminology to language that receivers in the target audience can relate to.

Take a look, for example, at the ‘motivational triggers’ described on page 80. In your organization, which of these triggers is the most relevant?

In the search for an understanding of motivational triggers, the sensemaking and relating leadership behaviors become critical.

Too often leaders begin with the visioning – but there’s so much groundwork that must be completed first!

Take a look at how M&B “bring the feel into the Equation” on page 86Take a look at how M&B bring the feel into the Equation on page 86.

To effectively harness the people channel, M&B introduce the idea of a conversation platform to package strategic messages.

This becomes your strategic ‘elevator speech’ – a clear message with a storyline that can engage stakeholders in conversation about the strategy.

Why strategic stories rather than lists? Memorability!

M&B: “The story starts with where the organization is going, which we call the cause because it identifies an outcome that employees want to achievethe cause, because it identifies an outcome that employees want to achieve. Then it articulates no more than four themes that outline how the organization will get there…” In 500 words!

The point of crafting a strategic message like this is to facilitate discussion, which M&B believe will mitigate some of the source of inertia, the kinds of resistance that can block change.

So this is the thought process: first decide what your receivers need to doSo this is the thought process: first, decide what your receivers need to do when they receive your message. Based on the desired behavior, then think about what they need to know and how they need to feel in order to be motivated to do what you want them to do.

M&B do a good job outlining the steps to develop a Conversation Platform on pages 106-107.

They suggest getting started by using the simple five-box template you see on this slide and on page 107. Here you define the Cause and the 4 key Do’s.

Th t’ t ti i tThat’s your starting point.

12

For each building block (the ‘Do’), you work out what your audience needs to know and feel in order to translate the message into action.

M&B emphasize that the Conversation Platform is not a brochure or white paper – it’s the basis for a dynamic conversation with your target audience.

In Table 7.1 on page 109, you’ll see a detailed example of a Conversation Platform.

On this slide, you can see an example for the advertising agency Ogilvy & Mather.

13

To recap:

We’ve considered the changing role of leaders in today’s organizations – a change driven by many forces, including the revolution in communication technologies.

We look to leaders to set strategic direction for the organization – but what is the best way for them to do it?

The Matha & Boehm framework calls for leaders and communicators to avoid corporate babble and craft messages that target audiences can relate tocorporate babble and craft messages that target audiences can relate to.

This framework includes three elements: the Do, the Know, and the Feel.

These can be translated into our communication objectives!

14