Black Belt Dojo

What would you do?

I have a challenge for you. I need some assistance and I think you are the best people to offer me some advice.

In a nutshell, the aviation industry is a tough place to be at the moment. Oil price is at an all-time high which means our fuel bill is also astronomical. It’s a competitive environment and we have to be the smartest and the strongest to survive.

We’ve been asked by our Chief Executive to come up with a campaign to raise awareness of the high price of fuel and also our need to keep our costs and spending to a minimum.

So, do you have any ideas? We have recently launched a campaign called ‘Ideas Pay’ which is a web portal for our staff to submit money-making or money-saving ideas. Depending on the viability of their ideas, they get a financial reward for it.

We have the option of posters, intranet news and email. We will also consider some social media as we have blogs built in to our Sharepoint-based intranet. So, what would you do?

In other news, I mentioned in my previous post about how the employees love Fresh magazine, but the Chief Executive doesn’t. It looks now as though one of the first cost-cutting measures will be the printing and posting of the magazine. It is likely to become exclusively available online. This in itself throws up some challenges, as most of our people spend the majority of their time in the air and without access to online content. Is it even worth continuing with it as an online publication? Should I fight back and try to keep it?

Intrigued to hear your thoughts…

Steve

Generation Y - great summaries

Thanks to the change masterclass crew for recommending a trawl around the Deloittes website for some top notch information about Generation Y.

If you're not familiar with Generation Y, this is the youngest generation coming to a workplace near you now. Generation Y-ers have very definite communication preferences, not least because they've never experienced life without computers.

This is a very good, simple summary of the Generation Y characteristics and here is an explanation of what they look for in a job, the types of leaders they respect and a bit about their communication preferences. Interestingly their 'preferred method of communication with their employer' is 'a combination of email and personal interaction' (70%) whilst only 25% chose 'personal interaction' alone as their preferred method.

Very accessible, well-laid out summaries and they won't take you long to read. Well worth a look.

Sue

One to watch

Terry MacKenzie is guest-blogging over on the Melcrum blog. Terry heads up internal communications at Sun Microsystems and I've mentioned her on here before because I find her an entertaining and thought-provoking conference speaker and I'm always interested to hear what she has to say.

I also think Sun are doing good things on the social media front. Even if you're fed up of the general hype, here's an example of a company using social media tools for real and having some good results.  See this article about CEO Jonathan Schwartz talking about his blog. And see Terry's own blog - she's one of around 10% of Sun's workforce who have one.

And by the way, if you're still in the 'what the heck is RSS and I know what wikipedia is but I still don't really understand what a wiki is' camp, do try these short videos from the CommonCraft blog. Yes, it's the second time I've mentioned them recently and no, I'm not on commission, but we showed them at Black Belt last week and people found them incredibly useful.

Sue

PS And no, I really didn't post this at 5am. I'm back overseas for another workshop. I shudder to think about my carbon footprint. Holidays in the UK for the next ten years for me, I think. 

Remembering who we're talking to

I opened up last week's session on messaging by asking people to imagine they were in a clothes shop. They'd spotted a jacket and weren't quite sure if they liked it or could afford it.  What would they say to persuade themselves they should buy it?  How might their friends persuade them?

Someone said "I'd imagine all the outfits I could wear it with". Someone else said "My friends would tell me how fantastic I'd look in it, or maybe that the colour really suited me" One person suggested "I'd justify the price by thinking how many times I'd wear it - that way it might actually seem like really good value". Someone said "I'd imagine how great I'd feel wearing it". "My friend might say 'come on, you deserve a treat - you've worked really hard this month'."

Then I asked people to imagine the sales assistant had joined in to persuade them to hand over the credit card.  Here's what the sales assistant says: "We're operating in a very competitive environment right now and our revenues are under pressure, so we really need you to buy the jacket to help us increase sales."  Not convinced yet?  How about "We need to improve our cashflow, and we have to show quarter on quarter improvements to the markets. If you buy this jacket, you'll really help us improve our profits."

Ever heard a sales assistant try and persuade you to buy that way? Me neither. They go for the things they know you'll care about.  But quite often inside organisations, we try to persuade people to buy in by talking about what's in it for the company - not what's in it for them.  It's easy to throw together key messages. But if you really think about the people you're trying to connect with and try and look for an angle they'll actually care about, it gets a lot more tricky.

I was reminded of this when I flicked through the airline magazine on my way home. There was a message from their CEO telling me about their new strategy.  Here's an exceprt from it: "Increased customer focus and the courage to change will permeate our business much more than before. We will work intensively to further increase customer confidence by being perceptive and flexible in all areas of operation. This customer focus will form the basis for a work culture that will generate success - we call it "cultural turnaround."   

Now I'm sure their strategy is excellent, and it has 'customer' written all the way through it. But I couldn't figure what any of it meant for me and put it firmly in the 'high level corporate wibble' category.  The language looked depressingly like the kind of stuff that gets churned out to employees though ...

Sue

PS On a personal note, someone went on a spending spree with my credit card details last week. If anyone from the Nationwide Building Society is reading this, your special investigations team was absolutely superb.  From now on I'll be shredding all my receipts and statements, not just tearing them up as I did before - I never realised easy it was for this kind of thing to happen.   

Are we thinking global?

I'm typing this at Korea airport, en route to Melcrum's summit in Sydney.  Very appropriately, i'm clutching a pile of case studies from the latest research report I'm working on about communicating effectively with globally dispersed audiences. 

The research forum members asked us to look particularly at communicating in parts of the world where business is growing rapidly and work is being outsourced - China and India, in particular. It's been fascinating to understand the different styles of leadership communication people want to see, what they expect in terms of involvement (a good thing? Or actually a sign of weakness on the leader's part?), the extent to which people will speak up and give honest answers in feedback and research exercises, and the way things get done in the workplace.

As my Asiana Airlines plane was taxiing along the runway here in Korea, I was looking out at the planes we passed - Korea airlines, China air, totally unfamiliar names. I walked into an airport where I don't even understand the letters words are written in, never mind the language. I marvelled at all the gadgets (the loos have heated seats and little control panels with tiny showers and dryers!). And the service culture amongst the flight attendants was totally different from a UK crew.  (For the record, absolutely excellent.)

It dawned on me that there are parts of the world I have next to no understanding of at all. Here am I worrying about getting myself up to speed with social media to save being left behind as an 'old school' comms person when the whole topic about what's happening to global demographics has largely passed me by.

The message from many of the case studies I've been reading is 'get yourself up to speed'.  The world's becoming a much smaller place. Countries like India, China, Japan are becoming increasingly important.

That's the great thing about internal comms. Just when you think you're starting to get the bases covered, there's always something else to learn. Anyone else had any 'aha moments' or learnt something new from working with national cultures you've not interacted with before?

Sue

Control or influence (not a social media posting)

Years ago, my sister-in-law had a boyfriend who was a producer on a music radio station and he was launching a new show with a new presenter.  One night he was writing all the letters from listeners that they would use in the first week of the show, which rather surprised me. 

He explained that he wanted to set a particular tone and that if you didn't you'd just attract lots of boring "can you play something by Daniel O'Donnell for my auntie who has a cold..." sorts of messages. 

His ploy worked and he's gone on to far greater things, like owning his own radio station for a while.

I remembered this the other day when thinking about the issue of control and social media.  I don't think it's new - it's been around for as long as we've had things like intranet fora and in quite a few places you can still see an official censor's stamp on postings on staff noticeboards.

And I think the control issue is one of the biggest barriers to the growth of social media in the workplace

There is in many organisations an entirely understandable concern that a disaffected but vocal minority could poison a whole workforce.  Assuming that there is little legitimacy behind the complaints, the logic goes that if you deny them access to the means of communication they won't spread and multiply.

I have a degree of sympathy with this view.  The internal communications team would be unwise to act as a convenor for mutinous debates.  Why put your credibility on the line so that the same old group of moaners and complainers can exercise their imaginary right to workplace free speech? 

However, I also think that you can't stop people having negative thoughts at work - denying people access to media doesn't remove the cause of dissatisfaction.  And organisations need some sort of safety value to allow people to vent steam from time to time.  As I saw Shel Holtz write somewhere, just because you're not listening, it doesn't mean they're not saying it.

But what interests me more is how do you encourage people to have the sort of debate on social media at work that is profitable for everyone?

I think this is quite legitimate to follow the lead of the radio producer and seed the debate with examples of the sort of thing you want.  From time to time perhaps encourage people you know to hold an interesting opinion to post comments if they will help the tone of debate or maybe open up new topics as a diversion if an existing strand is failing.

You won't kill a debate if it is real and people care about it - but it may provide enough of a diversion if it's the pet rant of only a couple of people.

With one proviso, I think it is acceptable to set out the parameters of the debate you expect on certain channels.  If you want a forum for questions about business strategy does it help people to have to wade through dozens of questions about the price of potato chips in the canteen or the allocation of parking spaces?

Clearly, unless you have a vehicle for these sorts of issues they will come up where you don't want them.  And you have to be wary of the impression you give if you attempt to suppress inappropriate or misdirected comment.

However, someone recently likened the role of internal communicators to that of a good dinner party host.  Finding enough topics of conversation that everyone can join in and making sure that the bore at the end of the table doesn't ruin it for everyone.

Liam

Story-telling...

...is another one of those vague concepts IC people worry about.  It comes up more and more on the Black Belt and I've always found it rather problematic.

I say problematic, not because I don't like stories.  In fact the reverse is true and I even had negative feedback from a Black Belter who couldn't bear any more of my anecdotes!  Maybe it's my Irish blood.

No, I mean I struggle with the concept because much of what is written is actually quite vague when it comes to the practicalities.  I get the idea that people connect more to a narrative than they do to dry facts - seems pretty obvious to me.  But what does that mean in practice?  Do we have story-telling sessions at 3 pm?  Should the CEO talk about their personal life?  Does the legal department have to approve official tales?

Many of the write-ups of story-telling are connected to specific products that someone is trying to sell.  So the literature tends to be of the "this stuff is really important and if you want to do something, call our sales team on..." variety.  Not very useful if you just want a bit of inspiration about how to work into next year's strategy.

If it's not linked to videos/learning maps/CEO speech writing services the companies I respect are naturally loathe to give away the secrets of processes they have spent years developing!

One recent insight I got into this world came in the form of an HBR article that a friend (Thanks Jack) sent me.

It's an interview with Hollywood screenwriter Robert McKee who makes me stop and think.  You'll need to buy the article for yourself but I was struck by the following points:

• a compelling story has drama; a struggle against opposing forces
• the protagonist has clear human desires and human emotions
• a credible story needs to acknowledge frailty, uncertainty and even ignoble motives
• great stories are born out of self knowledge.

As I read it I ran a mental slide rule over presentations I've done or encouraged others to do containing cold and dry data and started to feel uncomfortable.  I found it a really challenging read and would urge people involved in coaching leaders on speeches or presentations to take a look...  Investor relations might not like it but...

Liam

Trust - what's our role?

Reading through the latest issue of SCM, I came across an interesting article from Pam Hurley and Dr Johan Siebers of TOSCA.  It talks about a three year study from the Future of Work Consortium, which says trust has gone out of the window in a lot of workplaces, making basic communication and co-operation more difficult and leading to poorer business performance.

To build trust, they suggest following four principles when you communicate:

• Quantity - give people as the right information, but don't go overboard
• Quality - don't say things you don't believe or can't back up
• Relevance - keep your communication relevant to the topic
• Manner - don't fudge it, and get to the point

It sounds pretty obvious stuff, but they reckon a lot of communicators either try to avoid the principles (oh come on - don't tell me you've never done a spot of fudging in your time!),or try and look as if they're following them when they're absolutely not ... which is where the dreaded spin creeps in.

Which leads me to the next article that caught my eye. Ben Page, MD of Ipsos MORI, writing in PR Week. He's talking about the accusation often levelled at the British government to date that they've been too focused on spin over substance. (Yep, guilty in my book. I don't think they've done the reputation of comms people any favours.) Fallen over themselves to make announcements and 'manage the media', and ended up with a general public that trusts them less as a result.

His solution to building trust?  Stop communicating. Act. No more promises of jam tomorrow. Sort out the policies and actions first, wait until they're working, things are starting to improve and people are starting to notice, and then tell them what you've done.

It reminded me of Jim Schaffer's say/do matrix.  What leaders/the company say and what they do have to match, or the actions will undermine the words.

It also reminded me of the time I was working out the comms plan for a project that had been promised to staff for five years.  I was given it at the point it was actually going to materialise. It even appeared on the business plan as 'project we really mean it this time'. I think that's what's called a poison chalice ...!

Sue

New UK research

I've just been looking at the latest research from the UK's Work Foundation into the shape of IC.  And quite interesting reading it makes too.

Having moaned before about reports without any rigour I have to say that this one seems to fit the bill quite well - they conducted interviews under test conditions and from what they say, I think you can assume that the data collection element was robust.

However, I do wish that they'd included the questionnaire...then perhaps I wouldn't feel slightly uncomfortable with the findings.

Let me explain - the report goes into quite a lot of detail about the variety of channels in use, the size of IC teams and budgets.  It also attempts to explore if there is a relationship between high performing organisations and particular approaches to IC.  But it doesn't really reach any conclusions that shed new light on the issue for me.

OK, it reinforces the messages that there are an awful lot of channels in use in most organisations (apparently they proliferate more in the public sector).  And it includes some input from CEO's to the effect that IC is important.

Yet the three main conclusions are:

• CEO's and Boards should embrace the strategic value of IC
• We should look at all the tools in use and keep an eye on what works
• It would be interesting to research further where IC is best located in organisations and what evaluation methods are useful.

There are some gems hidden away in there - there seems to be a relationship between weak business performance and traditional approaches to team briefing (now that IS interesting!) so I do strongly suggest that people take a look at the report.

But overall, it rather left me flat.  It didn't say much that anyone who's worked in IC for a few years would know to be true.  The call to CEO's to communicate has been on the agenda of the Financial Times, the Economist, The HBR, the Wall Street Journal etc for as long as I can remember - and I can't believe there are many leaders out there who would say "You know what? I think all this stuff about communications is over-hyped".

So I have two thoughts.

Firstly, is this the state that IC is in in the UK?  Are we really people that are tactically obsessed bemoaning the lack of attention from senior managers?  Is the reality that most IC people do spend their time fretting about  better channels?

For me, I just wished it had challenged that and looked at some of the advisory and consulting work that is being done in organisations.  It would have felt more like a rounded picture to me.

Secondly, wouldn't it be brilliant if someone could spend a few years looking at exactly the questions that the study starts to ask at the end?  In particular, they ask "How can IC teams ensure that communications is seen as an investment rather than an overhead?".  Getting an answer to that one would be worth the sponsors' cash!

Liam

More on principles

The recent post on the role of principles & integrity in internal comms prompted a fair bit of debate, so you might be interested to see Terry McKenzie's thoughts on the subject.

Terry heads up internal comms at Sun Microsystems and she's an amazing conference speaker - witty, pacey, frank, practical, thought-provoking. If she pops up on a conference programme near you, go see!

Sue

Fame at last

I'm rather excited that we're getting famous.  Publishers Melcrum issued a press release to promote the report Sue and I wrote on core competencies and...someone has used it.  In fact two people!  One is a blogger called Stuart Hall and the other is the PR Institute of Australia.  All I need is for it to appear on the front page of Road Cycling for my happiness and ego to be complete....

Liam

Picture Power

I've just been reading an article about elearning and the power of images on the training zone. It quotes research that shows people learn and remember things better if you use images, not just words.

Apparently Generation Y'ers prefer graphics to text. This piece from Jessica Morgan at California State University has a good summary of the Gen Y characteristics, and one of them is that a 'picture paints a thousand words'.

Sonya Hamlin's book How to Talk so People Listen makes the same point.  She says turning messages into visuals makes them clear and succinct, grabs people's attention, gives credibility (seeing is believing), makes them memorable, adds emotion and impact, simplifies complex facts and ideas and provides easy contrasts and comparisons. For three quick ways to make messages visual, she suggests:

1. Showing AND telling, to be clear and memorable
2. Showing THEN telling, to capture people's interest and give context
3. Showing and NOT telling - visuals can be enough by themselves

At Melcrum's US summit last year, Steve King from the Institute for the Future talked about how video is the next best thing, and warned that if we're not looking at how to use it already, we're behind the times. A WeeWorld survey of Generation Yers found You Tube was their number one regularly-used site.

Some interesting examples of using visuals in IC I've heard recently:

• Getting a cartoonist to capture key points being made in a workshop
• Painting the strategy at a conference as the CEO talks about it
• Painting a mural on a factory wall to show the stages of a change
• Giving people cameras to shoot video diaries to bring the brand to life

Years ago my Barclays team decided it would be fun to act out our team day action plan in a video instead of writing it down. The best was 'making sure we deliver the little things' - shown by Paula screaming her head off in supposed maternity delivery suite whilst Dr Richard reminded us of the action!

Anyone got other examples of things you've tried or seen?

Sue

Is there a future in print...?

Sorry - I'm not starting THAT argument...

It's just that someone showed me some research data compiled by the Larkins which suggested that when students are given web resources they learn less effectively than when they are given simple paper notes.  The theory is that the web is great for investigation and exploration but the natural desire to keep exploring stops you taking things in or committing them to your long-term memory.

The pay off was that if you want people to learn stuff - go easy on the weblinks in the document.  Intranets may allow people to choose the information they want but they may not be the best way of getting that information to stick.

Liam

All about change..

It's a long one...

We’re at Cranfield again running another Black Belt course. The people who run this place are very good – they may not have the beautiful scenery of Henley, but it’s a pretty slick operation. I’d certainly recommend it as a venue if you’re looking for an alternative to the same boring hotels and you want to get people into a learning frame of mind.

In one of the sessions yesterday, as a prelude to the input on change that we do on the final day, Sue gets delegates to discuss examples of change that they have seen done well (and some they have seen done less well). I thought I’d share some of the thoughts that came out of that. There was a lot of talk about the value of really thorough briefing packs for managers.

People remembered the usefulness of providing detailed scripts, Q&A documents and responsive feedback channels which gave managers access to more information if they asked for it. One large UK public sector body has just made some announcements and provided “champions” – experience communications advisors who gave practical (and importantly, moral) support to managers breaking the news to their staff.

Other people include a discussion guide for handling one to one conversations which also include a checklist to help people prepare. The checklist even went into the detail of making sure managers had water or tissues to hand if they were likely to be breaking bad news to someone. The key strength of this approach is that it goes some way towards ensuring consistency of messaging.

This organisation also ran a single question survey after the announcement of change. All it asked was whether people had been told about the planned change. This allowed them to be quick (rather than bogged down with process or analysis) and to give a very clear picture to the board of management how communications had performed. Someone pointed out the importance of making materials “translatable” – not just into different languages.

They said that you have to think about the level of customisation or adaptation they should permit line managers. Too much and the messages is lost – too little and they won’t use it. There was quite a bit of talk about making change feel like business as usual. One guy said “we know that we’re in a business that needs to adapt continuously so we’re very conscious of the need to make each change into a good experience – otherwise it will affect how people react to the next one”. Others talked about not making things seem unnecessarily scary.

We also discussed what to do in the event of announcements leaking and there was general agreement of the need to have some contingency plans in place. In the days before an announcement, knowing how to contact senior leaders in the event of an emergency is important if approval for a quick message is needed (and those leaders need to know that you might contact them).

People also warned of the importance of being ‘joined up’. We heard a tale of one division in a company getting different messages about change which caused confusion in other teams when people started comparing what they had been told. The lesson is to have oversight of everything that was being said so that IC can check for consistency.

Someone else also highlighted the importance of checking the authority for a decision. They gave the example of a senior manager who gave undertakings about an office relocation – undertakings he wasn’t in a position to deliver on. The result was considerable disruption when the Board subsequently over-ruled his decision.

However, this also underlined the role of very senior managers in announcing change and their value. Although there was general agreement on the central importance of line managers people said seeing a senior leader talking about change has an important impact.

Although we talked a lot about the moment of an announcement, we heard one very positive story about spending time preparing people for the news and then bringing them together to discuss it when they have had time to digest the implications. This meant that people had a much more productive discussion about than they might have had if they were asked to debate something immediately after being told about it.

Someone also said you have to think about pacing the news – change is not normally instant so avoid making a big announcement and then having nothing to say. If it’s going to take a year, plan communications to keep rumbling along and be clear about the timescales in your messaging. People also talked about the problems of timetable slippage. Things rarely happen entirely as planned and sometimes that leads to a communication vacuum – a space that is filled with rumour and leaks.

Getting senior managers to understand the need to say something even if it’s “there’s nothing to report” is clearly important. In the absence of news, people make up their own views which results in productivity drops and unwanted resignations. Messaging should also illustrate that the personal cost of the change is less than the benefits wherever possible.

The dream scenario for IC people is to be involved early in the planning process which underlined the importance of having a good intelligence network in the organisation. If you find out in enough time you can add more value than simply making sure the intranet notice has the right wording. Being able to test the assumptions of the planners at the very beginning of their thinking brings an employee perspective into the process at the point when mistakes can be avoided.

It also enables you to test the assumptions being made by the guys planning a transformation – after all it's communications that has to deal with a sceptical audience when a mad idea is inflicted on the organisation!

Finally someone talked about finding simple ways that people can get involved in practical actions. We were given an example of a safety programme that got people involved in clearing up their workplaces under the banner “a tidy place is a safe place”. Given the mess we made of the room I thought this was rather funny!

I hope these thoughts are a useful reminder of the sorts of things we have to do to support change – it would be interesting to see what else people would add to this list (take a look at Nicholas Ranken’s blog for more tips!).

And we had snow here this morning – so we took some photos inside  (Sue was really pleased because someone said she was obscuring them in the photo – that must be a first!) And as soon as Alex gets down to SnappySnaps we’ll post some pictures of the January gang (I promise Jeroen!). Liam

Induction / Brain Washing

I've been on company induction for the last 3 days. I thought this was a little strange as I've been at Visa for 6 months now - but it's actually a damn good course.   It turns out that you're not allowed on straight away - as it tests what you've picked up on the job.
It also refreshed my mind about a number of internal communication ABCs too. 

1.  Face to Face is best as long as it engages.   I now know what happens between using my Visa card in a store, and the money coming out of my account.  I learnt this from a Dilbert lookalike, who had every delegate blu-taking credit cards and arrows and pictures of banks on the wall.   Only at the end of an hour did he use a powerpoint slide.  Our sales guys (who pitch to customers almost every day), took us through 60 slides over 90 mins in a "our world is so tough, but we are awesome fighter pilots" tone of voice.  I learnt precisely nothing, but did get my highest ever score on tetris on my phone.   
I cannot be too critical of the sales guys - because how many times have I put together a pack of slides for a board member and been proud that I have got it down to say 10 slides?  I understand it because I've been engaged by working on it.  I bet you my audience isn't engaged at all.  Mouth to mouth, not face to face, is needed - because both groups need to be able to talk.

2.  Competition is not always healthy.    The 4 teams on induction gained points throughout the 3 days.  We got a little competitive to say the least and stopped working/speaking with the other teams.  It was like being part of Lord of the Flies. 

3.  Get to know your audience.   I assumed legal, finance, and IT would have the most dull presentations.  They were the most interactive.  I assumed the views of delegates about internal communications.  I was very wrong.  I need to spend more time with my audiences.

4. Messages, messages, messages.   There were some very entertaining and engaging presentations - from identifying fake bank cards, to naming typical British proverbs.  Question is - did I learn something that I can use in my job? And am I going to do anything different? 
I just looked at my strategy document which I am showing someone on Monday.  I want them to pick out the messages that impact them most, select a key channel, and sign-off the document.  So why do I only have these actions at the very end?   I need to think about my own messages too.

Has anyone else recently been reminded about a communication ABC? 

Mark

Is it home time yet?

The Trade Union Congress in the UK have released findings that the avergage UK worker does an average of £4,800 of unpaid overtime a year, or 7 hours a week.   

The TUC are encouraging everyone to work their set hours more, and taken a good lunchbreak.  This I support completely - as there is nothing worse than eating your sandwich at your desk whilst still working, and it's a real buzz to get home before Hollyoaks starts (6.30pm C4 - I call it my youth education).  But how many of us actually have set hours these days?  I know that Sue's normal working week is all of it, and would do overtime if quantum physics alllowed her.   Some weeks I will do 40 hours, others 60 - and it's a personal choice.   I think it helps my career development because I want to do the best I can, but I am fortunate to have a boss who has children and encourages us to have a balanced life as she does.

I've had this argument before, but friends and colleagues complain about the hours they have to do. My stance is always the same - say something or leave. I know there are issues around commitments such as family and mortgages and the like -  but the balance has to be right.   Life simply is too short.

Could be opening up a can of worms here.

Mark D

Patting yourself on the back

I am off work sick today (killer man flu of course), but are you ever really off work? All it means is I work from home with the duvet wrapped round me. I'm sure we've all done it - and sometimes you are more productive without the disturbance of people and phones. Although I must admit I did enjoy Mary Poppins on TV yesterday afternoon.

It has given me time though to go through Visa's entries into the Communicators in Business ( CIB )awards.  We're entering into 3 categories - e-newsletter, intranet and relaunched e-newslettter. There is only one reason why I am entering, and that is to get recognition for the work my team has put in and for them to realise that they are producing best in class stuff.  The problem I have with awards ceremonies is whether they recognise what is important in IC?   Yes we have great newsletters focused on the business strategy, yes our intranet is highly interactive, but that doesn't mean that we are adding enough value to the company.    Maybe what I would like to see are awards based on change.  A Bravery Award "We measured our internal comms, and it was rubbish - so this is what we did about it."   A Middle Managers Award "Yes, I know the bulk of communications responsibility rests with me, and this is what I do."   

Are there other award ceremonies apart from CIB, IABC, or the CIPR that recognise the value that IC can add?

Oh, and if anyone sits on the panel - please let us win a award because it helps protect our budget and keeps the bosses happy....

Mark Darby

Life, the universe and ...

I'm feeling all Christmassy and philosophical today. It's sending out the Christmas Black belt e-mail and getting such nice messages back that's done it. That, and looking again at the website for I CAN, the organisation that helps children with communication difficulties that Liam and I are making our Christmas donation to.

It's times like this that remind me why I do what I do, and why I came into internal comms in the first place oh-so-long ago.

Basically I'm a people person. I find something fascinating about most people. I like it when there's a chance to make a connection with someone, and I like it that we can make a difference to how it is for people to come to work every day.  I'm not really a corporate being. The idea of helping companies making more profit doesn't do it for me. I get motivated when I work with leaders I respect so much that I really want to help them succeed.

Sometimes I lose sight of all that. Which is when I can get dragged down into the treacle which is every IC managers' territory from time to time and think 'sod it, if they want to pay me to send out e-mails, I'll send out e-mails.' The best way to pull myself out again is to get back to the picture of why I'm in this in the first place and stay focused on moving towards it, no matter how much I might be gritting my teeth and counting to ten at times.

In this somewhat pensive state (don't worry, when Liam gets back I'll snap out of it and revert to being the stroppy female he knows and, erm, puts up with), I've finally dug out the application form for Volunteer Reading Help. You can sign up for a few hours a week to sit with kids in school and help them learn to read. It's been sitting in a cupboard for good few months whilst I kept telling myself that I was too busy working to spare the time. So now I've reminded myself why I actually do this whole work thing in the first place, I thought it was time to fill it in. I'm just off to post it, and I'm telling you so you can hold me to it if I forget myself and start back-trackling wildly when they get in touch.

The question for you in all this I guess is, forget the elevator pitch for the CEO for a minute, why exactly DO you do what you do? What brought you into it in the first place? What are the things that make you feel great when you get to do them? What's the difference you want to make?  And how can you remember all that when you forget?

Sue

Scary stats

I heard Monika Stafford, who heads up IC for Lloyds TSB, speak at a meeting last week. She quoted some statistics from a report that I hadn't seen before. Namely, that:

• UK companies 'lose' the equivalent of 36 days per employee, per year
• The estimated cost of poor UK productivity in 2005 was £70bn
• And here's the best bit ..'executives say poor Internal Communication is the prime cause'

It's from a document called the 2006 Productivity Report, by Proudfoot Consulting. I have to say, the summary is pretty sketchy about the detail. There's no mention of HOW exactly internal comms is apparently the cause of so much trouble, or what companies should do about it. Or indeed, what they mean by 'internal communication', which, let's face it, can encompass whatever you'd like it to. I've sent off for a copy of the full report to see if it's any more illuminating.

In any case, however they reached this conclusion, they HAVE reached the conclusion that poor internal comms is marking companies inefficient.  So the two worrying things are that, a) this is what the 'executives' interviewed for the report actually believed and b), as Monika pointed out, this report could well end up landing on your CEO's desk. Not the best thing for them to be reading before the annual budget round, maybe.

What do you think?  One to file under 'unsubstantiated high level statements', or no smoke without fire ...?

Sue