Home Who We work with how we work Services workshops blog Resources About us Contact

“Working with Eric was a pleasure. We developed a good rapport and established a level of honesty and trust. I valued his counsel and recommendations. I find Eric to be very competent in a variety of disciplines. He is able to correctly diagnose organizational problems and suggest solutions that are on point. I found Eric to be a professional with the highest levels of honesty, integrity, and ethical behavior. I would not hesitate to engage his services again in the future.”

Kathy Lueckert,
former Corporate Services Director,
Department of Planning and Development,
City of Seattle
(Kathy is now Director of Planning and Finance for Advocacy and Communications at World Vision.)

“I've worked closely with Eric on developing and presenting the Leadership Eastside community leadership program. He has that rare blend of extensive real-world experience along with a very strong background in theory and research. He moves easily between big picture strategy and the tactical details. Eric brings a superb ability to plan, execute and follow-through, both as a behind-the-scenes planner and as an upfront instructor and facilitator.”

Annalee Luhman,
founding board member,
Leadership Eastside

 

Conflict and change: The blog

 Subscribe in a reader

 

6 February 2009

The quandary of revolutionary change

Is it better to go after massive, revolutionary change, or to work to modify what you have now and try to move it in the direction you hope for?

 

This is the question surgeon and writer Atul Gawande took up in a recent New Yorker essay on health care reform. It’s a fine piece, and one I heartily recommend.

 

His argument is that massive, revolutionary change may seem attractive, but it rarely works. Why? We tend to downplay the power of current systems and other external constraints to thwart massive change. Furthermore, we rarely get “revolutionary change” right the first time out.

 

Instead, it’s better to work on modifying—even dramatically if necessary—the current system from where it is. Don’t throw it out and plan to start over from scratch.

 

Influence leaders are more effective trying to make “modifications” than trying to bring about massive, revolutionary change.

 

In making modifications, influence leaders provide themselves with multiple opportunities to get it right. They provide for their own learning curve—they get time to think about what they are seeing and how to change their approach.

 

They are not betting the farm on a single, brilliant idea working. Instead, they are planning to be in for the long haul.

 

Of course, there are occasions for revolutionary change. I’m not saying that we never seek big change.

 

What I am saying is that it is probably a mistake for influence leaders to believe they have the one answer and to drive for revolutionary change most of the time. They are much more likely to achieve the same results by focusing on modifying, not destroying, the very system they are working within.

 

4 February 2009

Power of an explanation

What’s one of the easiest and most effective ways to influence someone?

 

Make sure your request includes the word “because.”

 

A classic study by social psychologist Ellen Langer illustrates that people are far more likely to comply with a request if it includes a phrase that begins with “because” and includes an explanation.

 

People are more likely to do things when they have been given a reason. They like to know why something needs to be done now, how what they do fits into the bigger picture, and they just plain want to be treated with respect.

 

Explaining the situation or rationale to someone is a good way to show someone respect. And, being the kind of person who shows people respect increases your influence. People are more likely to be influenced by people who respect them.

 

In addition to explaining a request after it’s made, try giving an explanation before the request. Lay out the situation for them. People really appreciate being briefed this way.

 

Another benefit of giving an explanation is that the person has information that helps them figure out how to make sure the effort achieves results. They know why they are doing something and will be able to adjust and innovate as needed to achieve the results.

 

So, giving people an explanation increases the chances they’ll do what you ask and helps them feel respected. It gets things done, improves relationships, and increases your influence.

 

2 February 2009

Act unilaterally

Ever been in conflict with someone and waited for them to take a step before you would? Ever conditioned a gesture on your part with an expectation of getting something from them in return?

How’s that worked? It can take a pretty long time for those rare, special conditions to be met. In fact, it hardly ever seems to happen. Meanwhile, the two of you remain in conflict and are probably actively perpetuating it.

If this sounds like you, here’s a question for you: Why are you letting the other person control your behavior?

That’s what’s happening, right? You won’t take the step to do the “right thing” because you are waiting for them to do or say something. You’ve placed control of your behavior in the other person, the very person you’re in conflict with.

Doesn’t make much sense, does it? How about taking another approach? Try acting unilaterally. Do the right thing even if you question it will work. In fact, do the right thing because you question whether it will work.

You know the current interaction isn’t working, so try something radically different. Try extending overt courtesy, try paraphrasing what they have to say, seek out their opinion—anything that will break up the current pattern, and do it without expecting anything back from them.

If you try these things because they are the “right thing” to do, you’re much less likely to slip into manipulating them. If you do them because you’re hoping for a favorable response, then you might be tempted to manipulate, and the other person will “smell a rat.”

So, find some productive and positive behavior and do it only because it’s the right thing to do. Don’t announce it; just do it. Act unilaterally and take back control of your own behavior.

 

21 January 2009

Crime, sports and weather

A local TV news story of a young girl being kidnapped (and released without being harmed, thankfully) reminds me how single, stand-out events like this change our perceptions of safety.

We hear of a story like this and start keeping a closer eye on our kids, and warn other parents—all because we take this single event and conclude that there is now a greater danger of this happening again. These events occur pretty infrequently, and not very often for a community of millions of people.

 

When an event stands out like this, we tend to overestimate the likelihood and frequency of it happening again. And, that means that we might overreact and make changes in behavior that might ultimately go against our interests.

What does this mean for the influence leader? We need to guard against overreacting to events around us.

For example, if an executive shoots down someone’s idea in a meeting, we should not conclude that it’s a bad idea to share new ideas with that executive. Worse yet, if we hear stories of people failing in an effort to exercise influence, we shouldn’t assume that it’s not worth trying ourselves. Each of those other situations is unique; the circumstances vary.

You aren’t necessarily going to hear about all the successful influencing going on around you in your company. Those stories are not told again and again like the failures and shootings are.

Don’t talk yourself out of trying to influence by overestimating the possibility of a setback, based on anecdotal information.

One abduction in a community of 2+ million people doesn’t mean you should keep your kid inside all the time.

 

12 January 2009

What Bernard Madoff can teach influencers

We’ve all heard by now of the fraud, deception and outright theft of tens of millions of dollars that was allegedly committed by the highly esteemed investment manager Bernard Madoff.

What’s interesting to me about the Madoff racket is how nicely it illustrates at least two principles of influence—principles that can foul up your influence strategy or, if used ethically, can advance it.

Those principles are the bandwagon effect (aka “social proof”) and the authority principle.

The bandwagon effect comes into play in ambiguous or confusing situations where we don’t feel comfortable making our own decisions and let ourselves be guided by others’ decisions.

It seems that many, many of Madoff’s clients invested money with him because so many other, reputable people had. In effect, rather than examine how on earth he was getting these kinds of returns, these folks assumed that since others were OK with it, they’d be, too. That’s the bandwagon effect.

The authority principle comes into play when we assume that someone is an expert and has access to special skills and knowledge—resources we don’t have. We rely on these experts’ opinions to guide our decision making. People thought Madoff was a particularly gifted investment manager, so they trusted his expertise without understanding what he was doing.

The Madoff investor shouldn’t be blamed for letting themselves be influenced by the bandwagon effect and authority. We are all influenced this way all the time. We need these kinds of shortcuts in order to function in daily life. We cannot take the time to check everything out to the nth degree. It’s impossible.

Still, the influence leader needs to guard against the bandwagon effect and the authority principle. In much more mundane, daily, situations, we allow other folks’ opinions—about people, the likelihood of something happening, what’s “feasible”—to affect us. That thinking can become very constraining. It can stunt our imagination and vision. It can cause us to act against our own goals and interests (by, say, giving up) and even lead to disastrous results—like Madoff’s clients are seeing.

On the other hand, the influence leader can use the bandwagon effect and the authority principle to help create and bolster support for their proposals and plans. Show the people you are trying to influence that others are doing what you propose. Make sure that your authority is apparent to people. Whether it’s formal education, board certifications, or “school of hard knocks,” let them know you know what you’re talking about.

As with any strategy, make sure that you are using influence ethically to achieve something that serves the interests of both people. Never use manipulation. It’s wrong, and it never works in the long-run. Just ask Bernie Madoff.

 

7 January 2009

Blog post 50: Having a lot of ideas

This is my 50th entry in the blog. As I look over my earlier entries, I am reminded of one of my favorite quotes:

“To have a good idea, you’ve got to have a lot of ideas.”

That phrase is attributed to Linus Pauling, the Nobel Prize-winning chemist who also won the Nobel Peace Prize for his early opposition to nuclear testing.

Pauling’s quote reminds me that to successfully influence, you need to have a lot of ideas at your disposal: different perspectives and insights, different tools and techniques to try, different mental models that describe what’s going on under the surface.

If ever you feel you don't have a good idea about how to proceed (you're stuck), then by all means get some more ideas.

Each influence situation, whether big or small, requires creativity, innovation and flexibility in order to achieve the ultimate goal and get results. And, each situation is different, calling on a different mix of tools and techniques.

My goal in writing these blog entries is to provide some of those ideas, perspectives, and tools. Not all of them work in every situation, but I’ve seen each of them work in some situations.

I invite you to keep reading. There is much more to come.

 

2 January 2009

Got your scaffolding in place?

Today, I heard a radio program about new year’s resolutions. One commentator urged people to have their “scaffolding” in place to support them in fulfilling their resolutions. If you want to lose weight, then stock your kitchen with healthy foods and get yourself a weight loss buddy.

In other words, don’t aim for dropping 10 pounds without indentifying the support and steps you need to be successful. Before you start, make sure your scaffolding is in place.

This advice applies just as well to the influence leader. Before you start trying to change your company or influence someone, prepare yourself to be successful.

Is your support system in place? Whose political support do you need? Who will be your kitchen cabinet of advisors? Who will be your coach or mentor?

What’s your business case for the change? Does it really make sense? Is it persuasive?

What is your plan of action? What do you most need to focus on? What are the steps you will take? What order should you take them in?

What do you need to be on the lookout for? What will you do when you encounter a roadblock? Who might resist your efforts?

Whenever I work on my house, I’m always tempted to stand on a chair and do it with a pocket knife, rather than go downstairs and get the stepladder and proper tools.

Whenever I take the extra effort to “build my scaffolding,” I am more likely to get the results I want—often faster and easier than I expected.

 

31 December 2008

Watch out for the riptides!

Ever try to do something in your organization only to be surprised by the pushback? It happens all the time.

When this happens, it’s another sign that you might still be too far into the weeds. There are larger forces at work here, and if you don’t recognize and deal with those forces, you’ll probably remain stuck.

It’s sort of like walking in the surf at the beach and getting pulled off your feet by a riptide under the surface. You can’t see it, but you know it’s there because you’re down on your hands and knees crawling back to dry land.

For the influence leader, these hidden forces often involve an entrenched organizational dilemma—a values conflict—like individual autonomy versus consistency, or quality versus cost.

No matter how hard you or anyone else tries, these dilemmas cannot be “solved” and put to rest. They’ll never go away. They can only be “managed” to get the benefits of each value and to reduce the downsides.

In my experience, most folks are surrounded by dilemmas that haven’t been identified and dealt with. If, as an influence leader, you are trying to “solve” one of these dilemmas, you will forever be stuck in the weeds and your struggle will never end. In fact, any gains you make are very likely to get reversed.

Instead, look for the larger dilemma you and others are stuck in. Stop trying to slay it and instead work on managing it. You’ll get better results—and you’ll live to tell about it.

 

29 December 2008

Get out of the weeds

Have you ever felt stuck, out of options and unable to make a move? As an influence leader this is deadly. It drains away initiative and confidence, which further ensnares you.

Feeling stuck is pretty common. You’ve taken action, made some decisions, and find yourself at a dead end. Everyone’s been there. It means you’ve tried stuff, you’ve made an effort. In a way, it’s a badge of honor.

But that doesn’t mean you want to stay there. You want to keep moving, no?

Fortunately, there is a common solution: Pull up and out. When we are stuck, we are usually down in the weeds—the details of our project or effort.

To get into the weeds, we’ve had to make a series of assumptions and conclusions, say, about what is possible or about what we are trying to achieve.

It’s those assumptions and conclusions that have us trapped. As long as we see only one way forward, and that way is blocked, we’ll feel stuck.

Happily, there is almost always another route, another option. If only we could see it.

That other option may be right there in front of you. The way to see it is to pull up and out (back up, step back, etc.) and see the big picture. Take a break, breathe, consult with a trusted advisor, take another look at your overall objective: What are the other ways of looking at this situation?

The answer usually doesn’t come right away, but asking the question always helps open up your thinking.

 

18 December 2008

It's better NOT to know

Are you a clever person? Got a solid grip on what’s going on? Got your ear to the ground?

What if I told you you’re kidding yourself? What if reality is actually much more complicated and mysterious than you think?

Many folks get to be thinking that they really understand what’s going on around them. More often than not, they rely a lot on other people’s perceptions. Your perceptions and theirs start to meld into “conventional wisdom.”

Once conventional wisdom establishes a beachhead, our confidence increases. We feel we have a grip on things and take actions in accord with our understanding.

A great example right now is that most people feel that the economy is still crashing, and they are curbing their spending as a result. It’s conventional wisdom that this recession will drag well into 2009.

That may be true, or it may not be. I don’t know myself.

The hard part is remembering “I don’t know.” Once conventional wisdom takes hold, you have to make a concerted effort to get free of it.

If you can remember you don’t know, you can stay open to “unconventional” ideas and disconfirming information. You might even stumble upon an unexpected opportunity that advances your cause.