Would you like more influence?

Then learn to present your ideas succinctly?

ATTRACT Opportunities Instead of Pursuing Them…

…Using Counter-Intuitive Thinking

This week we’re going to explore Step 2, The Persuasion Myth, in a slightly different light.  As most of you know Step 2 says that we can’t persuade anyone of anything, they have to persuade themselves.  With that in mind our goal, typically, is to ask questions that allow the listener to discover new perspectives on the issue at hand and, in the process, validate their conclusions with their own experiences.

Fortunately, that’s not the only way (is there ever just one way?) to gain influence.  I’m sure that you’ve met people who didn’t say very much, but when they did everyone listened.

What was it about this person that made their words so powerful?  What allowed the person to command so much attention even though, typically, he or she is soft spoken?  One of the keys is brevity.  Most of us have experienced monologues that dragged on and on leaving us wondering “Is there a point to this?”

Why do we do that?  Why do we embark on these endless narrations?  Our natural tendency is to seek recognition.  This pursuit often leads to lengthy explanations of the:

• Situation we faced
• Obstacles we encountered
• Ways in which we overcame those obstacles
• Conclusions we reached
• Reasons why our approach is the best approach

It’s counter-intuitive, but if we take a few seconds to organize our thoughts:

• To provide only relevant information
• Preferably in question form
• To encourage discovery by our listeners

we’ll go a long way in influencing the outcome we desire.  Remember, the approach will be viewed as manipulative unless you keep an open mind.  You must be willing to consider the possibility that your conclusion is wrong.  Your questions should be crafted as explorations of new perspectives, not as leading others to your foregone conclusion.

By retraining our minds to present ideas succinctly we make ourselves more valuable to others.  The more powerful our words become, the more others admire this ability in us.  It’s why they seek our counsel, why they invite us onto their teams, why they want us involved in new initiatives.  That’s how we become INVALUABLE to them.

Attracting opportunities is only the beginning.  Visit www.pricingforprofitbook.com to discover how to get compensated well for the value you provide.  Enjoy!

If you’d like to receive a weekly email reminder with a link to The Invaluable Leader blog or if you’d like me to address specific topics, please send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.  Please share your experience with our readers by posting a comment.

When you don’t have all the facts…

…be very careful what you say.

When asked about Harvard professor Henry Gates’ arrest by Cambridge police, President Obama said, “I don’t have all the facts…”

Subsequent actions indicate he wishes he’d stopped there.  The rest of his answer had people taking sides on the debate over race relations in this country.  Having observed President Obama for some time now, I’ve seen the effort he puts into building bridges between competing factions in every arena in which he operates.  To lob a grenade onto an existing bridge, especially a tenuous structure like race relations in the United States, just isn’t his style.

Each of us can relate to President Obama’s faux pas this past week.  Who among us hasn’t been asked to comment on things about which we have little, if any, information?

Fortunately for us, our missteps don’t happen in front of millions of viewers.  What can we learn from the President’s comments?

Let’s begin with an exploration of why we, human beings, have this natural tendency to comment on things that we know little about.  Here are a few thoughts:

• we enjoy the fact that others value our opinion
• we don’t want to be perceived as dodging difficult issues
• we have opinions and we want to be heard

Let’s be honest, we’re flattered when others seek our opinion.  We sense that they hope to learn something from us.  Human nature being what it is, we don’t like to disappoint people who think highly of us.  So we wade (or jump headlong) into those murky waters of incomplete information.  Unfortunately, our lack of knowledge of all the facts usually prevents us from providing any real value to those who seek our opinion.

The previous scenario assumes that the other party’s interest in our opinion is genuine.  That isn’t always the case.  There are times when we feel trapped by a question.  We sense that no matter what we say, our words are going to come back to haunt us.  “No comment” is going to be as damning as whatever else we might say.  I suspect this was the position in which President Obama found himself during the press conference.

Finally, despite the fact that we don’t have complete information on the question posed, we often have thoughts on related issues and we want those opinions heard.  All too often these opinions are dismissed because they’re not relevant to the question being posed.  Not only are our efforts for naught, we risk being viewed as someone who either isn’t paying attention or is a little slow on the uptake.  Either way we lose credibility in the sight of those involved in the discussion.

So what’s the solution?  None of the outcomes in the three scenarios outlined above does us or our listeners any good.  So how do we avoid these pitfalls?

It’s counter-intuitive, but refusing to comment when you have incomplete information is the most effective way to protect yourself and others.  You’ll gain respect and enhance your credibility with those who truly value your opinion by saying “I don’t have enough information to add value to this discussion.”

You’ll also minimize the damage that those who are trying to trap you can inflict upon you.  It’s much easier to defend a claim that you’re dodging a difficult question when you can honestly say “I don’t know how I can be expected to form a judgment when I don’t have all the facts.”  Again, this kind of response enhances your credibility at a time when others seek to diminish it.

Your ideas are also likely to get a better hearing if you say “I don’t have enough information to comment on this particular situation, but I’d be happy to share my thoughts on the broader issue of…”  If the listener(s) take you up on this offer, feel free to share your thoughts with them.  If they don’t, let them continue the discussion.  Either way your integrity and credibility remain intact.

The 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE program is designed to help you see more effective ways of doing business – ways that dramatically improve your bottom line while making your life easier.  In today’s blog I used Step 1, Contributory Negligence, to show you how our natural human tendencies create problems for us.  I also used Step 4, See Similarities, to show how President Obama’s misstep is one that each of us has made from time to time.  Finally, I’m using Step 5, Contrarian Mindset, to show how we can protect ourselves from the dangers of incomplete information.  For more information on the 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE visit www.furtwengler.com/7steps.htm.

If you’d like to receive a weekly email reminder with a link to The Invaluable Leader blog or if you’d like me to address specific topics, please send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.  Please share your experience with our readers by posting a comment.

Each of us has a natural propensity for discovering solutions to problems…

…what’s yours?

In his book, The Cerebral Symphony, William Calvin notes that in the scientific community there are experimenters and synthesizers.  Experimenters are people who exploit new techniques for looking deeper into whatever question they’re investigating. 

Conversely, synthesizers take the vast array of discoveries from a variety of disciplines to piece together a holistic view of the way things work.  Calvin goes on to say that, while both approaches contribute to scientific progress, few scientists employ both.

What does that have to do with you?  First it affords new insights into the way you prefer to work – your natural style.  Here’s a quick question to gauge your preference.  Given a choice of projects would you prefer to tear apart a process to discover ways to improve it or would you rather gather information from someone who has done that analysis and use it to establish new procedures? 

Some people enjoy the investigative intrigue problem-solving affords.  Others prefer to learn from others and use that knowledge to get ahead of the curve by establishing new policies and procedures to avoid the problem in the future.

It’s counter-intuitive, but awareness of your natural style (experimenter or synthesizer) and the style of your colleagues prefer, can help you, your boss and your team enjoy greater success.  Helping guide the delegation of tasks based on natural preferences can increase job enjoyment, reduce cycle times and dramatically improve results now and in the future.

The 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE program I offer is designed to help you see more effective ways of doing business – ways that dramatically improve your bottom line while making your life easier.  In today’s blog I used Step 6, Eclectic Education, to demonstrate how to import insights and ideas from other disciplines.  In this case I drew from the field of neurophysiology.  I also employed Step 4, Seeing Similarities, to apply those insights to business.

As you share these insights at work don’t forget Step 2, The Persuasion Myth.  Your natural tendency will be to try to convince your colleagues and boss how valuable this approach is.  The more you try to persuade them the more resistance you’ll get. 

Step 2, The Persuasion Myth, suggests that you share the concept with your colleagues, then ask them how they think this approach could be used in your organization.  You’ll find that they’re more likely to embrace the concept once they’ve had a chance to do their own evaluation of it.

You can learn more about the 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE program and how it can help you deal with the business challenges you face by clicking on http://www.furtwengler.com/7steps.htm

Please share your thoughts, whether you agree or not, by posting a comment.  If there are topics you’d like me to address, send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.

We’ve reached bottom…

…what do we do next? 

In the March 2^nd Invaluable Leader blog, Will Stimulus Package Work?, I said that there were three signs that would let us know when the economy reached bottom.

1. We achieve price stability
2. We achieve employment stability
3. The banking community finds a bold leader

Two of the three have occurred.  News reports no longer carry announcements of huge price cuts or massive layoffs.  These are strong signs that the economy has reached bottom.  Once price stability is achieved people resume spending.  When spending rebounds, employment stabilizes then rises modestly as confidence in the economy returns. 

The one missing element, based on news stories and Obama administration reports is that we haven’t yet found that bold banking leader.  Indeed, I attend a meeting last week in which a panel of bankers admitted to having been to aggressive in their lending practices, so much so that many of them wouldn’t renew their own customers’ loans.  That attitude does not indicate the strength of leadership we need in the banking community.

• Step 1 of the 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE is to understand and acknowledge your contribution to the problem; then change your behavior to eliminate the problem.  I implore the banking community to take that final step.  They’ve already admitted their contribution to problem, now it’s time to become part of the solution.  How?

1. Work with the borrower to identify a loan program that is economically sound
2. Agree on a plan to move them from the current loan arrangement to the economically sound version over the course of 12 to 18 months
3. Jointly set milestones for the borrower to achieve every 90 days
4. Renew their loan for 90 days; assuming they achieve the agreed upon milestones, renew the loan for another 90 days at terms that are closer to the economically sound version, but still affordable for the borrower
5. Within 12 to 18 months, the bank will have a fiscally sound customer who appreciates the bank that helped them survive bad decisions made by both the banker and borrower

In addition, this program will prevent or minimize further losses in employment, spending and economic stability.

It’s counter-intuitive, but when banks just walk away from a difficult situation they not only irreversibly damage the borrower, they slow their own economic recovery. 

If the leaders at the major banks don’t adopt this approach, I recommend that the Obama administration stop giving TARP type money to these banks and, instead, offer it to the smaller local and regional banks at a rate that allows them to refinance the problem loans using the approach outlined above.  It’ll be a more effective use of the money.

Please share your thoughts with our readers by posting a comment.  If there are topics you’d like me to address, send me a note at dale@furtwengler.com.

The 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE program is now available in print and electronic formats.  Click on http://www.furtwengler.com/7steps.htm to learn more. 

Are they appropriate?

If so, when? 

Recently President Obama set salary caps for executives in organizations getting bailout money.  I’m not a fan of salary caps.  My theory is that if I agree to allow caps on others’ salaries I have to be prepared to accept them myself.  I’m not willing to do that.

Having said that, sometimes it takes a slap upside the head to get peoples’ attention.  I think that’s where we are now.  It’s appropriate to send a reminder to business “leaders” who have lost sight of the fact that:

1. They contributed to the problems they and we face
2. They don’t have right to be exempt from the pain and suffering their actions cause
3. Economic rebounds and revenue growth rely heavily on large numbers of people being employed
4. That compassion is not only its own reward, it lays the groundwork for a brighter future for both those showing and receiving compassion

Salary caps are a way to send that message.  It’s not, and should not be, a permanent solution; but it is a powerful wake up call.

As managers and leaders our natural tendency is to set expectations for others and hold them accountable to those expectations, then forget to subject ourselves to those same standards and same scrutiny. 

It’s counter-intuitive, but each of us needs someone with authority or influence to remind us when we’ve lost sight of reality – when we’re applying different standards to those around us than we are to ourselves.  That’s what I believe President Obama is doing with the salary caps.  I applaud his action.

Invaluable Leader readers would love to hear your thoughts on this topic; please share your wisdom with us by posting a comment.  If there are topics you’d like me to address, send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.

What’s the cost of group think?

A trillion dollars

This past week Congress passed a $700 billion dollar “recovery” plan designed to renew confidence in the banking system and among bankers themselves.  Add that to previous bailouts and we’re rapidly approaching a trillion dollars.  My guess is that we’ll exceed that number.

I won’t go into a lengthy diatribe about how we got here.  Placing blame is always an expensive activity – one that slows the progress on fixing the problem.  From the news reports and analysis by various Washington journalists, it seems that the plan to make home ownership possible for a greater number of citizens (a worthy goal) began in the Clinton administration and has been perpetuated through the two Bush administrations.

Unfortunately, everyone thought this was a good idea and no one asked “What will happen if…?  The executive branch didn’t ask, nor did Congress, the Federal Reserve Board, SEC or any number of other regulatory agencies.  There was a complete failure in the system of checks and balances that should have prevented this debacle.

The question is “Will Congress, once again, trust the executive branch and these regulatory bodies to implement this recovery plan well or will they set parameters to protect the American taxpayer?” 

I hope that they will be the first to establish some checks and balances into the system rather than trusting that others will do so.  It’s counter-intuitive, but trusting others to do things we’re not is a prescription for disaster.  If Congress doesn’t want to contend with more emergency actions, it needs to set guidelines for the implementation of the recovery plan.

If there are topics you’d like me to address, send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.

Is Dickens about to rival Nostradamus? 

Not likely.

Charlotte and I came back from vacation just in time to hear of yet another bailout.  Neither of us reads a newspaper or listens to the news while on vacation.  Quirky? Maybe, but vacation is a lot more fun that way.

Upon hearing the news, the Charles Dickens quote “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…” came to mind.  The second thought was – how prophetic!  Was Dickens a prophet?  Not really; he’s simply a student of human nature.

We always live in the best of times and the worst of times.  Life is beset with both great joy and great challenge.  This time is no different.  Yet, one thing remains the same – the indomitable human spirit. 

It’s counter-intuitive, but during these trying times we’ll find people:

• helping one another weather the challenges they face
• returning to values overlooked because we’ve been moving too fast
• enjoying simpler pleasures of days past
• dealing with today’s economic challenges as we have in the past – effectively

Yes, we’re going to experience some pain with these economic challenges.  We’re also going to discover ways to deal with them that will allow us to recover more quickly than the press might lead us to believe.  It’s our nature to thrive in the face of adversity. 

As we look ahead, let’s look with the eyes of belief – belief that we will not only survive, we will thrive.  We will thrive because we possess the will, knowledge, intelligence and creativity to overcome any challenge life presents.  We will thrive, because we have an indomitable human spirit.

If there are topics you’d like me to address, send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.

No one denies that experience is valuable…

…but what role does it play in future success?

At the risk of being labeled a political pundit (this is the third blog in a row based on the current presidential election), I’m struck by the enormity of the debate over who has relevant experience.

Personally, I think experience is overrated.  Certainly it has value, but experience doesn’t necessarily prepare us to deal with the future.  I could bore you with countless tales of experiences I’ve had in which I learned valuable lessons only to repeat the same mistake. 

There is no pride in that admission, simply recognition of the fact that I’m human and, as is the fate of all human beings, I occasionally need to learn a lesson more than once for it to stick. 

If not experience, what then should we be looking for in our presidential and vice-presidential candidates?  The ability to think! 

It never ceases to amaze me how some people can be successful in any arena in which they choose to operate.  General Electric is a fine example of what I mean.  To rise to the top echelons in General Electric, leaders must demonstrate the ability to be successful – to continuously improve results – in diverse businesses, in varying market conditions with very different technologies at work.

GE’s leaders succeed because they’ve trained their minds to see similarities in diverse situations, not because they’ve had “relevant” experience.  Indeed, people who have spent the majority of their careers in one field, often lack the ability to see anything but normal industry practices, while those who move beyond their specialty are able to craft new and exciting approaches to whatever challenges they face.

How does all of this relate to you?  Whether you’re choosing a person to lead this great country or filling a position in your organization, look first to the person’s demonstrated ability think, then at their experience.  You’ll make better choices.

It’s counter-intuitive, but critical thinking will trump experience every time.

If you’re getting tired of political commentary and would like me to address a different topic, send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.

Was the law of attraction at work at the Democratic convention?

If so, how did it manifest itself?

Christy Beckmann, founder of The Reputation Builder, asks “How do Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s actions personify the law of attraction?”

Rarely am I at a loss for words, but I must confess that this question has given me pause.  As you’ll see from the length of this response the words came roaring back. 

This insightful question has challenged me to go deeper into the law of attraction than I’ve ever gone.  Hopefully, Christy, what I’ve discovered will answer your question.

The law of attraction basically says that we attract what we think about.  That’s the 30,000 foot view.  In reality, it’s more complicated than that.  We not only have to be able to focus our thoughts on our goal, we must believe with every fiber of our being that it will happen and we have to take action that moves us in the direction of that goal. 

At least that’s what I thought until Christy’s question.  Since then I’ve come to realize that there is another critical element – motivation.  The motivation must be balanced; it must blend the desire of the individual with the welfare of the masses. 

When motives are purely self-serving the individual rarely enjoys success.  The reason is simple.  We are not inclined to help those who don’t care about us.  How does this relate to Senators Clinton and Obama and the Democratic convention?

I have no doubt that both senators have the welfare of the United States at heart.  The question then becomes “Why was Senator Obama able to attract what he needed to win the nomination when Senator Clinton was not?” 

Before I answer that question I’d like to remind you that Step 3 in 7 Steps to Becoming INVALUABLE is to learn to suspend judgment.  With that in mind, I will not judge the motivations of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.  I will not judge because I cannot know with certainty what their motives are.  Yet, like you, I have to make a choice and, yes, I realize that the Republicans offer a choice as well so we’ll add John McCain to the discussion knowing that he too cares about the welfare of the United States.

Our choices will be formed by the impressions we have of the candidates’ motivations.  In my opinion, and it is only an opinion, that the reason that Senator Obama won the nomination over Senator Clinton is that the balance between his personal goal and the welfare of the masses was tilted in favor of the masses to a greater degree than was demonstrated by Senator Clinton.

I believe that Senator Obama confirmed that perception when he said “…this election has never been about me; it’s about you.”  I believe that’s the sense that the majority of voters in the primaries and caucuses felt and that’s the reason why he won the nomination.

What’s John McCain’s “karma” in light of the law of attraction?  I get the sense that Senator McCain is struggling.  I can’t put my finger on the source of the struggle; it’s something that he alone will know when he sees it. 

The reason that I say that he’s struggling is that he seems to be spending a great deal of time reacting to Senator Obama’s actions rather than moving forward with his vision of the future.  If he were to voice his vision of the future as forcefully as Senator Obama, to provide us with enough detail to be able to see that vision ourselves, John McCain would demonstrate more clearly just how much he cares about us as United States citizens.

We gain a sense that others care about us when they take the time to educate us.  They realize that we may not always agree with them, but they respect our intelligence enough to educate us to their perspective.  This is what Barack Obama has done so effectively.  This is what John McCain needs to do if he hopes to attract the votes he needs to win the election in November.

It’s counter-intuitive, but the law of attraction works best when we strike a balance, possibly with a slight tilt to the masses, between our goals and the welfare of those we serve.  Christy, hopefully, you’ll found an answer in this lengthy response.  Thank you for the insightful question.

If there are topics you’d like addressed, do as Christy did; send me an email at dale@furtwengler.com.