Dr John Kenworthy | Tag | Influence

The Three Stages of Equipping | GiANT Impact

Posted on July 2, 2010 by Dr John Kenworthy 0

Good leaders deliberately seek out and find potential leaders. Great leaders not only find them, but also equip them to be great leaders.

Three Stages of Equipping Stage One: PositionGives You a Platform

Adding value is the essence of equipping others, and you can add value in any direction: to your superiors, peers, or followers. Obviously, you have the most authority when you’re the boss. However, even if you aren’t in charge, you have immense capacity to equip others through the ideas and resources you share. When it comes to equipping, proximity matters just as much hierarchy. You’ll naturally influence those closest to you: whether you’re above or below them on the organizational chart.

Stage Two: Respect Gives You Permission

via The Three Stages of Equipping | GiANT Impact.

What is Perusasiveness?

Posted on June 25, 2010 by Dr John Kenworthy

12.00

120
1024×768

Normal
0

false
false
false

EN-GB
X-NONE
X-NONE

/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}

What is persuasiveness?

Persuasive \Per*sua”sive\, n.

That which persuades; an inducement;
an incitement; an exhortation. — Per*sua”sive*ly,
adv. —

Per*sua”sive*ness,
n.

the power to induce the taking of a course of action
or the embracing of a point of view by means of argument or entreaty; “the
strength of his argument settled the matter”

The
literature usually instructs us to follow two parallel streams of logic. First,
we are taught to frame the message based on the other party’s needs and the
specifics of the situation. Sadly, this advice is tantamount to telling an
insomniac that the best cure for his problem is a good night’s sleep. ‘Framing’
your message should be based on the needs and the situation. ADDIN EN.CITE
<EndNote><Cite><Author>Sussman</Author><Year>1999</Year><RecNum>50</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Lyle
Sussman</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1999</YEAR><TITLE>How
to frame a message: the art of persuasion and
negotiation</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>Business Horizons</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>42</VOLUME><NUMBER>4</NUMBER><PAGES>2-7</PAGES><DATE>July-August
1999</DATE><REVIEWED_ITEM>Infotrac Web: General File
ASAPElectronic collection
A55542112</REVIEWED_ITEM><ACCESSION_NUMBER>RN:
A55542112</ACCESSION_NUMBER><KEYWORDS><KEYWORD>Persuaaion</KEYWORD><KEYWORD>Negotiation</KEYWORD></KEYWORDS></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(Sussman 1999).

Secondly,
the message should be constructed such that the recipient perceives it with an
overarching theme, either evaluative or descriptive. For example, we may want
the recipient to interpret the message through a filter of “good-bad”,
“profit-loss”, or “cost-benefit”.

Framing messages

A frame
orients the recipient to examine a message with a certain disposition or
inclination. Framing a message focuses recipient’s attention on data and
premises within the frame – i.e. attempts to reduce ‘noise’ and external
environment influences that may detract from the intended message.

By framing
a message we achieve three interrelated goals. First, we select an evaluative
theme or perspective believed to be the most credible, compelling and
appropriate to our intent. This perspective provides a filter through which we
want the recipient to assess our position and supporting evidence. Secondly, we
select specific evidence that best supports the perspective. Finally, we create
a structure for organizing the evidence. Thus, the frame provides the recipient
with a focus of perspective and rational supporting evidence presented in a
clear sequential pattern.

Sussman
(1999) presents four practical steps to creating a frame.

Determine
your specific objective. What specifically do you want the decision-maker to
do?

Conduct a focused SWOT analysis on the
other party’s current status. This enables you to develop strategies that
either make the most of the recipient’s strengths and external
opportunities or minimize internal weaknesses and external threats.
Sussman’s advice is to focus attention on the most significant element in
each of the four quadrants rather than being exhaustive.
Determine the recipient’s core values. Values
reflect character, motives and behaviour. For some individuals and groups,
the values are implicit and must be inferred. One useful technique for
developing a frame based on analyzing core values is to demonstrate any
inconsistency between what other party’s espouse and how they actually
behave. This technique is an application of Festinger’s ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite
ExcludeAuth="1"><Author>Festinger</Author><Year>1957</Year><RecNum>53</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>1</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>A.
Festinger</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>1957</YEAR><TITLE>Theory
of Cognitive
Dissonance</TITLE><PLACE_PUBLISHED>Stanford</PLACE_PUBLISHED><PUBLISHER>Stnaford
University Press</PUBLISHER></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(1957) cognitive dissonance theory.
If you are able to frame your message by demonstrating a contradiction
between stated values and actual behaviour, you have tapped into a
powerful persuasive technique.
Write a simple, vivid, evaluative
statement that links steps 1 and 2.
The statement should be simple and short
to convey the message quickly. Use of ‘emotional’ words makes the
statement vivid. The frame created by the statement must orient the
decision-maker from the specific perspective that casts the most
favourable light on the proposal. This prepares the recipient to judge the
subsequent arguments and evidence as being on either end of the following
value dichotomies: good-bad, right-wrong, smart-stupid,
risky-conservative.

Williams
and Miller ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite
ExcludeAuth="1"><Author>Williams</Author><Year>2002</Year><RecNum>54</RecNum><MDL><REFERENCE_TYPE>0</REFERENCE_TYPE><AUTHORS><AUTHOR>Gary
A. Williams</AUTHOR><AUTHOR>Robert B. Miller</AUTHOR></AUTHORS><YEAR>2002</YEAR><TITLE>Change
the way you persuade</TITLE><SECONDARY_TITLE>Harvard Business
Review</SECONDARY_TITLE><VOLUME>May
2002</VOLUME><KEYWORDS><KEYWORD>Persuasion</KEYWORD><KEYWORD>Persusiveness</KEYWORD></KEYWORDS></MDL></Cite></EndNote>(2002) identify five styles of
decision-making and the ways to influence each. Their study of over 1600
executives across a wide range of industries identified the different styles of
decision-making exhibited by senior executives in a purchasing decision. Whilst
recognizing that executives may not exhibit only one style exclusively, they
suggest that they will typically show a default style. The five styles are:

1. Charismatics – enthusiastic, captivating,
talkative and dominant characteristics – they are easily intrigued by a new
idea but experience has taught them to decide based on balanced information.

2. Thinkers – cerebral, intelligent, logical and academic
characteristics – impressed with arguments supported by data, tending to be
risk averse.

3. Skeptics – demanding, disruptive, disagreeable and
rebellious characteristics – tend to be highly suspicious of every data
especially anything challenging their own worldview – often aggressive and
combative.

4. Followers – responsible, cautious,
brand-driven and bargain conscious characteristics – make decisions based on
similar choices in the past or how others have made them.

5. Controllers – logical, unemotional, sensible,
detail-oriented, accurate and analytical characteristics – abhor uncertainty
and ambiguity – tend to focus on the pure facts of an argument.

Williams
and Miller suggest tactics for dealing with each style fitting with the way in
which decisions are made.

In
practice, the styles are useful guides but it is especially difficult to
pigeonhole a decision-maker in a short period of time. Questioning and probing
skills may reveal underlying characteristics as discussions unfold, though this
may be too late to change tactics mid-stream or indeed prepare for a different
decision-making style. However, preparing in advance for each of the different
styles makes for thorough preparation and the persuader’s art is in choosing
the approach that instinctively feels right given their current understanding.

ADDIN EN.REFLIST Festinger, A. (1957). Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, Stanford
University Press.

Heiman, S.
E. and D. Sanchez (1998). The New Strategic Selling. London, Kogan Page.

Selling
techniques

Sussman, L.
(1999). “How to frame a message: the art of persuasion and
negotiation.” Business Horizons 42(4): 2-7.

Williams,
G. A. and R. B. Miller (2002). “Change the way you persuade.” Harvard
Business Review May 2002.

Is leadership more than management? Or is just an aspiration?

Posted on November 25, 2009 by Dr John Kenworthy 0

There is a debate we need to address, and that is the distinction between leadership and management.

Chris Mabey suggests that seperating the qualities of leaders and managers is traced back to Zaleznick (1977). Kotter (1990) reinforced this distinction, that:
good management brings order, consistency and quality to otherwise chaotic organisations
Contrasting this with leadership which is preparing the organisation for change and helping employees cope with the struggle of changing it.

But now

Organisations are ‘de-layered’ – the defined functions of “management” are less absolute and a manager‘s power base of influence has had to shift from positional power to personal.

The traditional theories (theory X etc) and frameworks are seen to be lacking and more emergent leadership rather than prescribed.

Management and leadership has been greatly studies form a western, male perspective – this is changing

The split may simply be part of the aspirational values attached to leadership over management. Though it appears that effective and successful leaders, according to our research demonstrate five competency areas that go beyond ‘management’. They:
1. Use the exchange principle
2. Take responsibility
3. Earn the right to lead
4. Communicate a shared vision
5. Show flexibility in their leadership

Mapping the ‘traditional’ managerial competencies shows how ‘agile’ leaders go beyond the expected managerial standards:

Is there a difference bewteen leadership and management?

Is it just aspirational?

Or is there something important that is missing here?

Influence

Posted on May 18, 2009 by Dr John Kenworthy 0

Image by gainmoregolf via Flickr

Influence is a two-way street. Everything you do and say has some influence on others – you are part of their external environment. You even exert a small degree of gravitational force on others, indeed, you exert gravitational force on the planet! Not a lot admittedly, but your mass does attract other mass. You knew that you should have paid attention in science class now. Just as aside, it’s quite a useful factoid for use when you have gained a few pounds of weight – you do so in order to become more attractive! That’s put paid to the glamour magazines.

The same is trues for other people exerting their influence over you. Everything that other people say or do is a part of your external environment and that exerts an influence in turn over your behaviour.

The external environment beyond other human beings, also has some influence over you. The weather for example – when it is raining, it is quite likely that you would alter your ‘normal’ behaviour by carrying an umbrella, or wearing a rain-proof coat. You know for sure that the weather can have a major influence over your golf. When there is lightening, you would wisely move away from the fairways under the trees or into the clubhouse. Being struck by lightening is one influence that everyone can do without.

The problem with influence is that human beings have a tendency to assume that there is little you can do to change the way something influences you. Well, let me put this straight. You can and you do.
Let us take an example of something that influences us and we do something about it – almost fight its influence on our lives. One that affects us all and that is our friend gravity. You see, gravity is ever present in our lives – there are a few exceptions but since that involves travelling into space I think I can safely assume that does not include you. If, by chance you have travelled into space – my question is – how far can you hit a drive out there? Must be awesome.

Back to earth. Gravity is a pretty constant force acting on our bodies – in order to combat the effects of gravity we develop muscles and utilise energy to stand against it. Only when we are physically damaged – break a leg, twist an ankle, suffer paralysis and so on, do we truly appreciate how much effort is involved in keeping our body upright and moving. When we are reasonably fit and well, we think little or nothing of getting up from a chair and walking, and most of the time, we do all this unconsciously. We have programmed our brain to take care of operating the correct muscles, keeping balance, walking, and all the while supplying those muscles and cells with energy through breathing and circulating our blood. Now, if you had to consciously work out how to do all this stuff that we simply take for granted, you’d not have a great deal of time to think about much else – at least, not consciously.

What’s the point of this? Well, it’s simple really – there are many many things occurring in your life, including when you practice and play golf, that influence your behaviour. Some things we cannot change – gravity, weather, daylight, animals etc. and we can choose to what extent we allow such to affect us and our behaviours. We can choose to be at cause for ourselves or at the effect of the environment and others. In other words, I’m disabling your potential for ‘excuses’.

Raising your level

Posted on July 14, 2008 by Dr John Kenworthy 0

In an earlier post, we looked at the 5 levels of Influence. Now, where would you like to be with yourself? That’s right, level 3, 4 or 5

I’ll guess that this is one level beyond your current level. So how? Well, that’s the seed planted. If you are at level 1 – struggling to attain level 2 – I recommend that you seek professional help. I don’t mean a psychiatrist – I mean a coach. If you are at level 1, chances are very high that there is no-one in your life currently at level 4 – i.e. no-one that you respect for how they have developed you as an individual. This is the person you want as a coach ideally. Short of that, ask around – or get onto our website, we’ll happily point you to someone we’ve worked with in the past who might be suitable.

Those of you at level 2, wanting to get to level 3 – production or results…

You could start with your instructor ,or your regular playing partners. Tell them to help you push yourself. It’s amazing once you start to get the results you want – then you’ll respect yourself for it and rely less and less on others influencing you.

Level 3 to level 4 – this, I believe, is about the love to learn for the sake of it. You can start with learning something you have thought till now as being ‘impossible’. Right-handed players learning to play left-handed. Shoot targets. Play games like ‘bag grab’. Best of all, start someone new on golf – help them learn.

Level 4 to level 5, I believe that this is when you find yourself and what you really really believe in. It’s a higher calling, beyond self. It is, for me, ridding myself of the self-righteousness, the ego if you will and knowing that you have a purpose in this life.

There are other aspects of influence in this game as well. It is not entirely self-focussed.

The way we play, the confidence that we exude, the way we allow our character to come out – all of these have an influence on those around us.

Page 2 of 3123