Listen and Lead

A Pill to Help People Listen Better

At first, I thought the ad was a joke.

"Stage fight?" was superimposed over a photo of a wide-eyed young boy clutching a microphone in a death grip.

Across the bottom of the photo, it said, "Finally, a natural supplement for public speaking."

The Deephaven Nutraceuticals ad touts Bravina, "our blend of nine natural supplements promotes relaxation and concentrates relaxation."

Why am I surprised? Pills to help us sleep, pills to help us remember, pills to help us calm down or stay awake or still our restless legs. Why not a pill that helps us speak? It's just another kind of performance booster.

You can go to the Web site and take a quiz to see if you need this supplement.

One of the questions on the diagnostic survey is, "Do you envision your speech going poorly prior to your public speaking engagement?" Sometimes that happens to me while I am speaking.

I have an idea for the people at Deephaven. It is the listening pill. It helps people listen.

I would make it in two sizes: golf ball and tennis ball. Just stick one of these pills in your mouth when someone is trying to talk to you and you can't help but listen.

Doodling Seems to Help Listening, Recall

Today's issue of the journal Applied Cognitive Psychology reports on a study that says doodling while listening may improve recall. Subjects were given a doodling task while listening to a dull phone message had a 29% improved recall compared to non-doodlers in the study.

To keep doodlers from becoming self conscious, they were asked to shade in shapes on a piecve of paper, rather than to doodle naturally. All of the participants were asked to listen to 2 1/2-minute tape with several names of people and places. They were then asked to write down the names of people going to a party and the names of eight place names that were mentioned. There were 20 doodlers and 20 non-doodlers. The doodlers recalled on average 7.5 names of people and places compared to only 5.8 by the non-doodlers.

None of the participants were told it was a memory test.

While the study did not cover more intense discussions or those held face to face, it suggests that the mere act of taking notes during a conversation may help one maintain focus.

Clinton Listening Tour II

As the United States tries to remake its global image, it has turned its ear to the world.

Lead listener abroad is Hillary Clinton, who began her quest for the U.S. Senate with a listening tour through New York.

The contrast with the previous administration, which withheld listening as a negotiating tactic, is striking.

Here is the Washington Post on Clinton's visit to China, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia.

While Clinton is talking a lot, to be sure, the Post said she she told students at Tokyo University, "My trip here today is to hear your views, because I believe strongly that we learn from listening to one another, and that is, for me, part of what this first trip of mine as secretary of state is about."

A Listening Culture

One of the preconditions for effective listening is respect for the speaker.

And leaders who buy into listening do not just want to do it themselves. They want their organizations to have a listening culture.

So, it stands to reason that an organization cannot really develop that kind of culture until the foundation is laid with the creation of a trusting, respectful climate.

If people are off in corners or blaming other departments for what goes wrong. Organizational listening cannot occur. The first step, then, is to eliminate the dread that people feel and their need to engage in blame-gaming. The impetus to take that step is going to come from the top -- the leader.

The leader must get out in front of people, be honest about the situation and invite a few questions and even potshots. The leader's response to brave people who ask hard questions will show whether we are going to have a respectful exchange, or whether we should all scurry back to our corners.

Leaders need not be as concerned about the outspoken staff member's question as they are about their response to it. If they concentrate on their answer, rather than the barbs in the question, they take a big step toward opening up new channels and a new culture.

Charismatic Listeners

We've all heard about charismatic leaders. Jaime Richards believes hat listeners can be charismatic, too.

Richards, a 20-year teacher and coach working in Fremont, Calif., espouses what he calls charismatic listening. He says he has learned about listening and success in the broader sense by observing kids and parents who really have their acts together.

So, in addition to coaching basketball and volleyball, Richards coaches people on getting more out of their lives and relationships. One way he recommends is through charismatic listening. Charismatic listening, as Richards defines it, means really getting involved with the speaker. His methods evho what we have heard about other forms of engaged listening.

In one of his bi-weekly columns for the Bay area's Argus newspaper, Richards wrote, "Charismatic listeners relax speakers. Their body language and spontaneous remarks help whoever is talking feel comfortable, secure and encouraged to say more. 'That's so true.' 'I love that.' 'That was really good!' The best listeners practically cheerlead. Tense speakers fall in love with supportive listeners.

 "They've learned to ignore simple stutters and small misspeaks. They don't acknowledge every error or correct every flaw. They've figured out that uptight speakers won't want to talk to them — or anyone else. ... The best listeners don't tune out as soon as they feel tired, lost, confused or bored. They've learned that if they don't give up, they'll be rewarded for listening.

"Charismatic listeners like listening and see the value in it. That's why they're good at it."

The difference Richards brings to the conversation about listening is his background as a coach and teacher. His goal is to draw people out, push them, motivate them to do and be more. Charismatic listening is one tool he uses to get there.

Call it what you like, effective listening takes work but is worth it because it surfaces and draws out that reward -- information that couldn't get to on their own.

Richards' Web site is at www.what-it-takes.com.

Active Listening and the Disconnect

Psychotherapist Carl Rogers, who founded person-centered therapy in the middle of the 20th Century, might also be called the father of active listening. For Rogers, the attitudes behind active listening are every bit as important as the techniques.

Some managers have learned the right moves for active listening but not the underlying philosophy. Their efforts may be doomed by that disconnect.

Rogers and colleague Richard E. Farson wrote that we cannot use active listening, "if our fundamental attitudes are in conflict with its basic concepts. If we try, our behavior will be empty and sterile, and our associates will be quick to recognize this."

In other words, you have to have both the theory and the practice or your efforts can be self-defeating, even destructive. Instead of eliciting information and building trust and engagement, you could destroy it all.

You have seen this disconnect. "Faux listeners" are people who use the behaviors of active listening but who really aren't invested in the process. They may have learned the techniques, but have not embraced the principles.

As a leader, ask yourself:

* Do I respect the speaker's value?
* Do I believe that the person can make valid observations?
* Do I trust this person's capacity for self-direction?

If you have to honestly answer no to any of these things, you can't really be a good active listener with that person and shouldn't pretend.

Rogers worked at the University of Chicago in the 1940s and 1950s. He produced a tremendous body of lectures, writing and tapes developing what has variously been called a "nondirective," "client-centered," or "person-centered" approach.

Although he was one of the most influential psychotherapists of the century, Rogers has his detractors. Many said his humanistic approach was simplistic or old hat. Some said that he trusted the individual too much. Criticism diminished his legacy but did not erase it. One part that survives and transcended psychotherapy is active listening.

It is too bad that knowledge of the conepts behind active listening are not as widespread as knowledge of the techniques. You can find countless references to the techniques. Some are maintaining eye contact, responding with questions or reflecting the speaker's comments, not interrupting and paying attention to body language.

Some coaches and trainers describe these behaviors without any reference at all to the principles behind them or to Rogers, who wrote that superficial active listening, even if well intentioned, won't work.

True active listening, Rogers wrote, is not just intended to elicit information, but to actually lead to a change in the person. Now, remember, Rogers was a psychotherapist and most business leaders are not therapists. Nor should they be. Leaders may still be looking for a change in people -- greater engagement, confidence and participation -- but not the type of change a psychotherapist is going for.

Still, if leaders are going to use the active listening techniques that Rogers outlined, we need to come from the same wellspring of intentions.

Rogers and Farson wrote about two primary commitments we must make before we can effectively engage in active listening:

* A sincere interest in the speaker. Don't try to feign interest. They'll pick up on that.

* A willingness to see the world as they see it and to be changed by the speaker. Do you have the security and courage to take that risk?

One more point to take away from Rogers. He wrote that active listening is hard work. It takes time and it takes practice. Be patient with your progress. Start with people for whom you have sincere interest and respect. Build from there.

Miami Herald's Listening Channel

In a recent post, leadership coach Dan Mulhern said that many managers simply feel that listening's cost -- their time -- is too dear when the pressure is on for them to do, do, do.

At the Miami Herald, managers are acting counterintuitively. Dealing with immense budget pressure, they are trying listening as one of the few important tools they still have.

Attrition, buyouts and layoffs have whittled the Herald from 1,500 employees to about 1,000 in two years.

Everyone who remains has to do more.

Elissa Vanaver, VP of human resources and assistant to the publisher, said, "We realized we were in for a period of contraction and we wouldn't be able to hire for a really long time. We became so concerned about retention and a brain drain, so we engaged the executives in succession planning for the top two tiers of leadership in each division. Using that as a guide, we created a group of next-generation leaders and began to build a retention program around them.

What did they do to keep key people in a contracting environment? They decided to consult more with them.

The Herald brought in Larry Olmstead of Leading Edge Associates and held a training and brainstorming session for the Herald's next generation of leaders. Olmstead had been a top editor at the paper and knows the issues and players well.

Vanaver said, "the training was focused on leading change. The brainstorming was about what the leadership of the paper -- this group included -- could do to better engage our employees in the change we thought we needed. We thought this group would play a key role in doing this, but we didn’t really know how."

So, they threw thequestion open to these high-value employees.

Vanaver said, "what they told us was that we were missing the boat on listening to people on the front line, especially younger members of the staff. We weren’t engaging employees in the urgent work of changing the business model, developing new products. You can’t engage if you feel you’re sitting on the sidelines, is what we heard from them.”

How often have we seen that tough times make top managers retreat into silos and bunkers, meeting in smaller and smaller groups with more and more secrecy as the rest of the staff feels more isolated and powerless? The Herald ran the other way.

The group's next step was a little surprising. These up-and-coming leaders, working in a shrinking world, created their own group. They self-affiliated. They struck an anti-traditional attitude. They talked across divisions. And they called themselves the Las Vegas Group as in, "What happens here, stays here." This allowed them to brainstorm freely but to, as so many coaches and seminar leaders have directed, "keep it in this room."

One of Vanaver's hopes was that the Herald could involve more of its remaining employees. But that seemed difficult, given the resource question.

"How can you get a lot of people involved if you can't run a big program?" she asked.

The Las Vegas Group came up with an idea, and a different kind of listening channel was at its core.

It led to "What the H!" an in-house social network.

"The techies and the interactive people came up with an off-the-shelf blog software that we customized. It probably took a good six months to get the work done. It was nobody's full-time job; everyone was doing it on the side.

"In order for it to work, it had to be a free-for-all kind of thing that the executives couldn't crush."

The blog’s creators wanted anonymous comments, but Publisher David Landsberg wanted people to sign their remarks. Staff members can lurk and read anonymously, but need to register to comment.

They launched with contests and in-house publicity and had close to 200 members in the first week.  Remember, some of those members were key, emerging leaders who had dreamed up the project.  After six weeks there were more than 350 people registered, well over a third of the total employees.

Vanaver has found no shortage of content to pour into the site. "There are a million things that come across my desk that are worth sharing with a larger group. Instead of doing everything piecemeal, let's aggregate it." If there is news, a staff-wide e-mail will announce it but tease people to "What the H!" for further information.

The site has news and reports on the company's performance, training, classified ads, a calendar, a photo gallery, and a forum for  "everything from why don't the vending machines work to it's too hot/cold in my building," she said.

The listening tracks are still developing.

There is an "Ask the executives" section and "I have a great idea." A digital listening channel -- essentially digital suggestion boxes -- are good ways to reach people who expect to find or express anything they like online.

Ali Hernandez is senior manager for diversity and development and a member of the cross-divisional team of advocates that check the incoming messages. She says that the form for submitting ideas asks people to connect their suggestions with a company goal, such as increasing efficiency, controlling expenses or growing diversity and development. Submissions receive an automatic reply and then a personal reply that the idea has been received.

 "Each idea is assigned an advocate," Hernandez said. "That advocate is responsible for contacting the contributor and keeping him or her apprised of the progress of the idea through the pipeline.” Someone with an idea may get four responses -- even if the ultimate answer is a no. "If you submit an idea, we're going to try to connect the person to the idea, even if it's just sitting in on a planning session," she said.  At least you will know that you've been heard."

Like everything else, there were glitches at the start. Ideas posted on the site appeared to languish as the dialog about them went offline, with the individual. That’s about to be changed, Vanaver said, and the status of the idea will be tracked more visibly on the site. In addition, The Herald has linked this informal suggestion box to a formal innovation/product development process being launched and led by two senior vice presidents.

The goal is to give the process a higher profile and, ultimately, to attract more participation.

Recommended Reading

Barbara Shelly, a member of the editorial board at the Kansas City Star, illustrated in her Christmas Day column how multi-tasking gets in the way of listening.

It starts like this:

<i>My left hand held the phone. My right hand pecked at the computer keyboard.

On the phone, my mom was talking about her weekend, the elections, the family, the usual. On the computer, I was looking up MapQuest directions to get to an evening activity.

I meant to respond to something my mother said. Instead, I muttered part of the directions.

“What?” she asked.

Yeah, what? I thought.

What was I doing? My mom is 84 years old and lives half a continent away. I can’t do as much for her as I would like, but the least I can give her is my full attention when we talk on the telephone.

Publilius Syrus, a Roman slave-turned-sage, observed in the 1st century B.C. that “to do two things at once is to do neither.”

Her column goes on to say that research backs up the sage and that we do not do either task well when we try to listen while doing something else.

We'll have some comments by one of the researchers in a future post.

 

Device Tames Discussion Hogs

Do you dominate discussions> If so, a little device might one day remind you to shut up and listen to others.

The New York Times describes a new gadget that monitors conversation -- including tone, turn-taking and nods -- to provide feedback on how egalitarian a conversationalist one is.

The system is being developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Times article is here.

Careful Listening in Business

A usability expert pays close attention to how people and computers get along together. A lot of the feedback comes back through sight -- watching -- rather than through listening.

Arthur Fink has been mediating the computer-human relationship as a systems designer for more than 30 years and clearly has paid a lot of attention to listening. There is a feature about him in the Oct. 14 Portland (Maine) Press Herald.

He gives several tips. The one that caught me was, "Move slowly! Some people are quick verbally, will process your words instantly, and respond right away. Others need time to take in a question or statement, then must cogitate, and will continue thinking as they respond. Either the speaker, or the listener -– whoever is slower -– can set the pace."

Check out his advice.