|
Sponsored by: |
| March 2010 | Chamber Home | Calendar | Contact Us |
|
In this issue:
Management
• A Failure to Communicate Trends • Uncovering secrets of search engine users • Media favorites of today's bargain hunters • Is word-of-mouth advertising dead? News • IRS cracks down on contractor use Tips • How to figure out what differentiates your company • A fun way to load up on customer testimonials • Help salespeople avoid this common mistake • Make sure you are sending the right emails to customers • Social strategies for nervous networkers • Why you should be happy to hear employee complaints • Much more... |
|
|
A Failure to Communicate Discover why 75% of employees may not relate to what you say. HOW HAS YOUR organization responded to the current economic climate? If yours is like most, you’ve probably experienced a variety of cost-cutting measures. While these kinds of changes have been necessary, they can impact overall performance with day-to-day stress from an uncertain and changing work environment. This stress shows up in relationship tension with colleagues and unless addressed, will breed conflicts, misunderstandings and overall failures to communicate that weaken performance just when the company needs it most. Yet, there is a powerful tool available that can reduce these barriers to productivity — and therefore profitability — versatility. Versatility: The Answer to Relationship Tension and Stress at Work Versatility is defined as the ability to understand differences in communication preferences and to adapt to make others more open and receptive — creating more effective and productive relationships. Versatility is a skill that can be learned, and people who have it find it far easier to work together with others toward shared organizational goals. To understand versatility and how it can affect relationships, consider people with whom you have regular contact. Do you know someone who is “too reserved” for your taste? Is there a manager, co-worker or family member who seems to you to be “too emotional” or “too willing (or unwilling) to compromise?” Chances are your reactions to these people are an indicator of differences in Social Style — how we habitually communicate and interact with others. When you find it easy to communicate and work with someone, there’s a high probability you share the same social style. When your communication is difficult, it is often because of unrecognized social style differences. Social Styles and the 75% Problem The social styles model defines four primary communication styles — Driver, Expressive, Amiable and Analytical.  As the model shows, the four styles vary in terms of behaviors reflecting the dimensions of assertiveness (Tell) versus responsiveness (Ask) and People versus Task orientation. Drivers and Expressives tend to be more Tell oriented, while Amiables and Analyticals are more Ask oriented. Analyticals and Drivers are more Task oriented, while Amiables and Expressives are more People oriented. Because about 25% of people fall into each of these four categories, you likely share a social style with only about 25% of the people you meet. What are the consequences when we can’t adapt to the other 75%? Consider the communication challenges faced by a nonversatile manager who has a different social style than three-fourths of her employees. An Amiable employee will not be comfortable with a Driver manager who seems too focused on tasks and unconcerned with personal relationships. Analytical employees don’t like to be told things they already know — but at the same time they don’t want gaps in information a manager could have provided. These kinds of misalignments create the potential for friction, misunderstanding and lowered productivity. Increasing Versatility For most of us, interpersonal behaviors and preferences are habitual and largely out of awareness. Consider this scenario: a Driver, who has a more “tell” oriented style, may want to “cut to the chase” quickly. He may not even realize the source of his impatience with an Analytical who needs to ask more questions before taking action. As the situation progresses, the Driver may push harder for action while the Analytical employee goes into “back up” for her style — withdrawing and becoming less and less responsive. Versatility comes with the recognition that people do have different styles and that each has unique strengths. Once people know their own style and understand style differences, they can learn how to modify behaviors to make it easier to work together in a way that is more effective for the whole team. When making decisions, managers can adapt to different expectations and needs based on their recognition of employees’ styles. Expressives want managers to involve them in a decision when it affects the whole group, and Amiables like to have the group involved in brainstorming and problem solving. On the other hand, Analyticals are not as interested in group decision making and typically prefer to be involved only when decisions or actions affect them directly. Key to Improved Business Results Companies can experience dramatic, measurable improvements in performance when their people learn how to adapt to others’ social styles. In one study, building versatility skills yielded a 52% improvement in the ability to identify styles and recognize back-up behavior — the “fall back” behavior of each style when the individual is stressed. In the same organization, 46% of employees reported a moderate to large improvement in work productivity. As one manager reported, “I’ve been more sensitive to my driver/driver style and the style of others during [coaching] sessions and as a result, I believe the sessions have been more productive and conversation/feedback has been freer flowing.” While there are many ways to improve communication in a given situation, the single most important factor for enhancing communication effectiveness across the board is versatility. As more leaders are required to take on greater responsibilities for more employees in today’s business environment, and companies are fighting to retain customers and grow market share in the face of ever tougher competition, building this kind of capability provides a real competitive advantage for the individual and the company.
Michael Leimbach, Ph.D., is Vice President of Global
Research and Design for Wilson Learning Worldwide. With over 25 years of
experience, Dr. Leimbach provides leadership for research and design of
Wilson Learning’s performance improvement capabilities. He serves as a
research consultant for global client organizations and serves in a
leadership role for the ISO technical committee TC232: Standards for
Learning Service Providers. To learn more, contact Wilson Learning at
1.800.328.7937 or visit
www.wilsonlearning-americas.com.
Uncovering secrets of search engine users It appears that which search engine you use says a lot about you. For example, if it’s Bing, you’re probably an early adopter, but you also shop at Walmart more than other search-engine users. Google searchers, on the other hand, are partial to Target and Amazon, and Yahoo searchers have a strong preference for wireless service from AT&T and Sprint. Those are just a few of the tidbits uncovered by a study conducted by Wunderman (an agency partner of Microsoft), along with BrandAsset Consulting, Zaaz and Compete. The findings indicate that the search engine consumers use to find a brand’s website may influence not only the perception they have of that brand but, more important for marketers, the decisions they make while on those sites. Among the findings: Googlers tend to be the average Internet Joe. They are conventional people yet open to trying new things, believe in following rules and don’t consider themselves any smarter or less intelligent than the person next to them. Yahoo users tend to be 55-plus, reserved and a less-independent group with little faith in imagination. They feel they have little control over their future and are skeptical and cautious of new or untried ideas.
Source: Advertising Age, February 5, 2010
Media favorites of today’s bargain hunters How and where do consumers believe they can find the best bargains? Almost one-quarter of adult Americans believe that newspaper and magazine advertisements are where they can find the best bargains, according to a new Adweek Media/ Harris Poll. Just under one in five (18%) believe online advertisements are most likely to help them find the best bargains, followed by direct mail and catalogs (12%) and television commercials (11%). When looking for bargains, different age groups have different ideas of where to look. Those 18-34 years old are more likely to say online ads (22%) and television commercials (17%) are the best places to go, while those 35-44 years old go online (26%). The older people are, the more likely they are to use newspaper and magazine advertisements, as 24% of those 44-54 and 33% of those 55 and older look to those media for bargains. Education also plays a part as 25% of those with a high school education or less say newspaper and magazine advertisements are helpful when bargain hunting, compared with 20% of those with at least a college degree. Furthermore, 29% of those with at least a college degree believe online advertisements are more likely to help them find a bargain compared with 12% of those with a high school education or less who say the same.
Source: Harris Interactive, January 22, 2010
Is word-of-mouth advertising dead? Peer recommendations have traditionally been thought of as one of the most powerful forms of advertising — until now. This year’s Edelman Trust Barometer report dropped a bombshell about peer-to-peer marketing: The number of people who view peers as credible sources of information about a company dropped by almost half, from 45% to 25%, since 2008. So what’s going on? According to Gail Becker, Edelman’s Western regional president, consumers are rebelling against all the noise and reflecting the effects of uncertain times. A few years ago, when peer-to-peer trust was at a peak, social media was still relatively new and its circles were manageable. But since then, the number of friend networks has exploded and every kind of business has sought to harness them for their gain. That, according to Becker, has made people more skeptical of peer recommendations. So who do we trust? The report points to academics and experts, along with industry analysts as the most credible voices for company information. Reports from industry analysts and articles in business magazines remain the most credible sources of information about a company.
Sources: Edelman; Los Angeles Times, February 15, 2010
IRS cracks down on contractor use Companies that misclassify workers as independent contractors instead of employees could face scrutiny and penalties in Internal Revenue Service audits. Over the next three years, the IRS will audit 6,000 randomly selected businesses nationwide, including small and tax-exempt employers, on their compliance to pay employment tax, or FICA and Medicare. Among the most often misclassified workers are truck drivers, construction workers, home health aides and high-tech engineers. The audits, likely of 2007 and 2008 tax years, will focus on whether companies misclassify workers to avoid their tax obligations. Such misclassifications contribute to 82% of uncollected taxes, according to the IRS. Misclassifications can be costly. Along with back taxes and penalties owed for the three-year statute of limitations on audits, workers reclassified as employees may make demands on employers for benefits such as retirement, medical, paid time off and other fringe benefits. Workers are generally considered employees when someone else controls how and when they perform their work. In contrast, independent contractors are generally in business for themselves, obtain customers on their own and control how they perform services. For guidance from the IRS, go to http://bit.ly/czTgfS.
Sources: NewsOK, February 7, 2010; New York Times,
February 17, 2010
Business Intelligence Report
(ISSN 1091-9597) is published 12 times a
year by DBH Communications, Inc. PO Box
22337 Kansas City, MO 64113, email:
4info@bizintellreport.com.
Subscriptions are $89 per year. |
|