Social media has proven to be a powerful tool to reach relevant audiences, uncover new insights and opportunities, and drive deeper, more personalized relationships with customers. Brands recognize this and have steadily increased their budgets to fuel social media initiatives. But they also know they are leaving many benefits on the table as they struggle to deliver on expected ROI, which can limit further investment.
In the face of these challenges, many marketers admit their attribution models still need work and that they need to do a better job integrating social media across the full breadth of their marketing efforts. But the path from today’s largely brand-building use cases to a more sophisticated realization of social media’s potential is not always clear.
Those who dive deeper into social media’s capabilities in both research and direct customer engagement are seeing an increase in performance that creates compounding value across the business.
Meltwater has sponsored research by Harvard Business Review Analytic Services to further examine how brands can capitalize on their social media investments. Through interviews with brand leaders and social media experts, this report shares effective strategies to optimize the use of social media tools, resources, and capabilities across the entire marketing spectrum.
Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks.
Chances are you think you’re a good listener. People’s appraisal of their listening ability is much like their assessment of their driving skills, in that the great bulk of adults think they’re above average.
In our experience, most people think good listening comes down to doing three things:
Not talking when others are speaking
Letting others know you’re listening through facial expressions and verbal sounds (“Mmm-hmm”)
Being able to repeat what others have said, practically word-for-word
In fact, much management advice on listening suggests doing these very things – encouraging listeners to remain quiet, nod and “mm-hmm” encouragingly, and then repeat back to the talker something like, “So, let me make sure I understand. What you’re saying is…” However, recent research that we conducted suggests that these behaviors fall far short of describing good listening skills.
We analyzed data describing the behavior of 3,492 participants in a development program designed to help managers become better coaches. As part of this program, their coaching skills were assessed by others in 360-degree assessments. We identified those who were perceived as being the most effective listeners (the top 5%). We then compared the best listeners to the average of all other people in the data set and identified the 20 items showing the largest significant difference. With those results in hand we identified the differences between great and average listeners and analyzed the data to determine what characteristics their colleagues identified as the behaviors that made them outstanding listeners.
We found some surprising conclusions, along with some qualities we expected to hear. We grouped them into four main findings:
Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks. To the contrary, people perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight. These questions gently challenge old assumptions, but do so in a constructive way. Sitting there silently nodding does not provide sure evidence that a person is listening, but asking a good question tells the speaker the listener has not only heard what was said, but that they comprehended it well enough to want additional information. Good listening was consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way “speaker versus hearer” interaction. The best conversations were active.
Good listening included interactions that build a person’s self-esteem. The best listeners made the conversation a positive experience for the other party, which doesn’t happen when the listener is passive (or, for that matter, critical!). Good listeners made the other person feel supported and conveyed confidence in them. Good listening was characterized by the creation of a safe environment in which issues and differences could be discussed openly.
Good listening was seen as a cooperative conversation. In these interactions, feedback flowed smoothly in both directions with neither party becoming defensive about comments the other made. By contrast, poor listeners were seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn’t make you a good listener. Good listeners may challenge assumptions and disagree, but the person being listened to feels the listener is trying to help, not wanting to win an argument.
Good listeners tended to make suggestions. Good listening invariably included some feedback provided in a way others would accept and that opened up alternative paths to consider. This finding somewhat surprised us, since it’s not uncommon to hear complaints that “So-and-so didn’t listen, he just jumped in and tried to solve the problem.” Perhaps what the data is telling us is that making suggestions is not itself the problem; it may be the skill with which those suggestions are made. Another possibility is that we’re more likely to accept suggestions from people we already think are good listeners. (Someone who is silent for the whole conversation and then jumps in with a suggestion may not be seen as credible. Someone who seems combative or critical and then tries to give advice may not be seen as trustworthy.)
While many of us have thought of being a good listener being like a sponge that accurately absorbs what the other person is saying, instead, what these findings show is that good listeners are like trampolines. They are someone you can bounce ideas off of — and rather than absorbing your ideas and energy, they amplify, energize, and clarify your thinking. They make you feel better not merely passively absorbing, but by actively supporting. This lets you gain energy and height, just like someone jumping on a trampoline.
Of course, there are different levels of listening. Not every conversation requires the highest levels of listening, but many conversations would benefit from greater focus and listening skill. Consider which level of listening you’d like to aim for:
Level 1: The listener creates a safe environment in which difficult, complex, or emotional issues can be discussed.
Level 2: The listener clears away distractions like phones and laptops, focusing attention on the other person and making appropriate eye-contact. (This behavior not only affects how you are perceived as the listener; it immediately influences the listener’s own attitudes and inner feelings. Acting the part changes how you feel inside. This in turn makes you a better listener.)
Level 3: The listener seeks to understand the substance of what the other person is saying. They capture ideas, ask questions, and restate issues to confirm that their understanding is correct.
Level 4: The listener observes nonbverbal cues, such as facial expressions, perspiration, respiration rates, gestures, posture, and numerous other subtle body language signals. It is estimated that 80% of what we communicate comes from these signals. It sounds strange to some, but you listen with your eyes as well as your ears.
Level 5: The listener increasingly understands the other person’s emotions and feelings about the topic at hand, and identifies and acknowledges them. The listener empathizes with and validates those feelings in a supportive, nonjudgmental way.
Level 6: The listener asks questions that clarify assumptions the other person holds and helps the other person to see the issue in a new light. This could include the listener injecting some thoughts and ideas about the topic that could be useful to the other person. However, good listeners never highjack the conversation so that they or their issues become the subject of the discussion.
Each of the levels builds on the others; thus, if you’ve been criticized (for example) for offering solutions rather than listening, it may mean you need to attend to some of the other levels (such as clearing away distractions or empathizing) before your proffered suggestions can be appreciated.
We suspect that in being a good listener, most of us are more likely to stop short rather than go too far. Our hope is that this research will help by providing a new perspective on listening. We hope those who labor under an illusion of superiority about their listening skills will see where they really stand. We also hope the common perception that good listening is mainly about acting like an absorbent sponge will wane. Finally, we hope all will see that the highest and best form of listening comes in playing the same role for the other person that a trampoline plays for a child. It gives energy, acceleration, height and amplification. These are the hallmarks of great listening.
Authors: Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman
Original Content Published by Harvard Business Review
COVID-19 Terminology All of our vocabularies have been extended with the emergence of the 2019 novel coronavirus so AFM has worked on defining some of these new words for you:
Asymptomatic: Someone who is showing no signs or symptoms of COVID-19. This does not mean they are not infected
Community spread: When the source of someone’s coronavirus infection is unknown and travel is not a factor
Contact tracing: The process of identifying, assessing and managing people who have been exposed to COVID-19 to prevent the spread
COVID-19: The name of the disease that the novel coronavirus causes. It stands for “COronaVIrus Disease 2019.”
Flattening the curve: An attempt to slow the spread of COVID-19 and prevent a dramatic increase of infected individuals to not overwhelm the health care system
Incubation time: The amount of time it takes an infected person to start showing symptoms. For COVID-19, this is between two days and two weeks, with an average of five days
Isolation: A strict 7-10 day period of no contact for people who are sick until they have been symptom-free for at least 72 hours
PCR testing: A testing protocol to identify if you’ve contracted the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. This test works by identifying the virus’ DNA through a process called PCR, or polymerase chain reaction. The PCR test looks for telltale markers distinct to this viral strain. The sample can be obtained through a throat or nasal swab.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE): The medical-grade gear health care workers and first-responders wear to protect themselves from getting infected. This includes goggles, face shields, gowns, gloves and masks or N-95 respirators
Physical (or social) distancing: Keeping physical distance from others to avoid catching and spreading COVID-19
Quarantine: A 14-day period of distancing for people who are not sick, but may have been in contact with someone who was
SARS-CoV-2: The official name for the 2019 novel coronavirus virus
Safer at home order: The next step in Governor Polis’s plan to “open” the Colorado economy. Polis has detailed a phased approach to re-opening non-essential businesses, restaurants, schools and more with social distancing at 60% – 65%. Check it out here.
Shelter-in-place (stay-at-home) order: While this can vary, generally you should stay home except for essential duties like shopping for groceries or prescriptions and minimize contact with others. In Colorado, the recommendation for social distancing was 75% – 80%.
Telehealth/virtual visits: Telehealth, or a virtual visit, is a visit type that is done virtually via a computer, phone or tablet
Viral shedding: The period of time after the virus has replicated in the host and is being emitted
One researcher who has interviewed hundreds of adults who were bullied as teens posits an interesting theory.
In American schools, bullying is like the dark cousin to prom, student elections, or football practice: Maybe you weren’t involved, but you knew that someone, somewhere was. Five years ago, President Obama spoke against this inevitability at the White House Conference on Bullying Prevention. “With big ears and the name that I have, I wasn’t immune. I didn’t emerge unscathed,” he said. “But because it’s something that happens a lot, and it’s something that’s always been around, sometimes we’ve turned a blind eye to the problem.”
We know that we shouldn’t turn a blind eye: Research shows that bullying is corrosive to children’s mental health and well-being, with consequences ranging from trouble sleeping and skipping school to psychiatric problems, such as depression or psychosis, self-harm, and suicide.
But the damage doesn’t stop there. You can’t just close the door on these experiences, says Ellen Walser deLara, a family therapist and professor of social work at Syracuse University, who has interviewed more than 800 people age 18 to 65 about the lasting effects of bullying. Over the years, deLara has seen a distinctive pattern emerge in adults who were intensely bullied. In her new book, Bullying Scars, she introduces a name for the set of symptoms she often encounters: adult post-bullying syndrome, or APBS.
DeLara estimates that more than a third of the adults she’s spoken to who were bullied have this syndrome. She stresses that APBS is a description, not a diagnosis—she isn’t seeking to have APBS classified as a psychiatric disorder. “It needs considerably more research and other researchers to look at it to make sure that this is what we’re seeing,” deLara says.
Roughly 1 in 3 students in the United States are bullied at school (figures on cyberbullying are less certain, because it is newer than other forms of bullying and the technology kids use to carry it out is constantly in flux). This abuse can span exclusion, rumors, name-calling, or physical harm. Some victims are isolated loners while others are bedeviled by their own friends or social rivals.
Years after being mistreated, people with adult post-bullying syndrome commonly struggle with trust and self-esteem, and develop psychiatric problems, deLara’s research found. Some become people-pleasers, or rely on food, alcohol, or drugs to cope.
In some respects, APBS is similar to post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, in which people who have had terrifying experiences develop an impaired fight-or-flight response. Both APBS and PTSD can lead to lasting anger or anxiety, substance abuse, battered self-esteem, and relationship problems. One difference, though, is that people with APBS seem less prone to sudden flares of rage.
“Those with PTSD have internalized their trauma such that it has affected their nervous system,” deLara says. “People with PTSD react immediately because their triggers are basically telling them they need to protect themselves against harm.” Those with APBS seem to have a longer fuse; the damage comes not in an outsized reaction but instead because they ruminate on what happened.
DeLara observed another distinction between sufferers of PTSD and those with APBS: Sometimes, having been bullied seems to have positive outcomes.
About 47 percent of deLara’s interviewees said they had mined something beneficial, like a sense of inner strength or self-reliance, from the experience. Others cultivated empathy or consciously decided to treat others well or make something of their lives. Everyone with APBS had at least one or more of these boons, deLara says.
It’s unclear how much of this silver lining can be traced to genetics, and how much to a supportive family or community. “We don’t know the answer as to why some people who are bullied as children have what they consider to be a beneficial outcome as adults,” deLara says.
She is planning to compare the recovery rates for people with PTSD and with APBS. One difference she saw in people with APBS is that they don’t see the world as a menacing place, as people with PTSD often do.
Some people have an inborn sense of optimism, or ability to focus on how lucky they are to have left bullying behind them. These people might have a head start in bouncing back, but resilience can also be learned. For people with APBS, deLara recommends family and cognitive behavioral therapies, particularly those focused on trauma.
Of course, the damage wrought by bullying handily outweighs any benefits. “Because people can make lemonade out of lemons, it doesn’t mean that bullying is a good thing,” deLara says. Even those who are able to see the positive side of having been bullied often had other negative ramifications.
DeLara hopes that giving a name to these experiences will make it easier for people to find effective treatment. “In order to help someone you have to be able to clearly name what’s going on,” she says. Moreover, people who live with the symptoms of adult post-bullying syndrome don’t realize that they’re not the only ones to respond this way. One man told deLara that the idea of APBS helped him realize his reaction was normal and not another personality flaw.
DeLara plans to continue studying the long-term consequences of bullying and which therapies can help people overcome them.
Dieter Wolke, whohasstudied the psychiatric impacts of bullying in adults at the University of Warwick in Coventry, England, agrees that bullying can leave devastating, long-lasting psychological damage. He’s hesitant, however, about using a new term for these symptoms based on their cause. “I see not much value in inventing a new name,” he says. It’s more important, he says, for doctors to be trained to broach the subject of bullying with their patients.
What is clear is that while some adults have overcome the bullying they endured as kids, others continue to suffer. The research on what forms this suffering takes is still preliminary. Whether or not the label of APBS sticks around, people who live with its symptoms will benefit from any research into how to resolve them.
New teams are critical for developing policies and providing information
Learn COVID-19 protocols and business contingency plans
Monitor impact and conduct assessments to sustain business function
Gallup Managing Director Larry Emondgathered the strategies and policies of 100members
of the CHRO Roundtable, an organization that includes the CHROs of more
than 650 of the world’s largest companies, for their responses to the
COVID-19 pandemic. The companies in this sampling average $27 billion in
revenue with 80,000 employees and most are global organizations. This
is what Emond found.
Crisis Management Teams
Most organizations have created crisis management teams, task forces
or committees with a response tailored to specific geographic regions.
These task forces meet regularly to develop policies and provide
information to leaders, managers and front-line employees regarding
COVID-19 awareness, prevention, management and hygiene practices.
These teams are also focused on management protocols and business
continuity plans to guide current actions and forecast possible
responses to future events. In general, their protocols and plans
include:
developing succession contingencies for all major executives
conducting business using virtual, video or audio capabilities
restricting travel
reducing to business-critical operations only
moving critical operations to unaffected regions
cross-training team members to perform critical functions in the
event of an unexpected absence or quarantine of another team member
documenting business-critical functions, processes or procedures in
the event of an unexpected absence or quarantine of a team member
distributing call center scripts and agent communications
If an employee is diagnosed with COVID-19, many companies have established protocols like these:
Require employees to report confirmed cases — either of self or
family member — of COVID-19 to HR or management. The affected are
typically required to stay home for 14 days and/or until cleared by a
doctor to return to work with confirmation that there is no diagnosis of
COVID-19.
Isolate employees diagnosed at work; immediately disinfect objects
they’ve touched; trace their contact with other employees, customers,
and clients; and notify those who may have been exposed without
releasing the diagnosed employee’s name.
Ask employees to log all contact with other employees or visitors in
case they become symptomatic so that others can be informed of
potential exposure.
Travel Requirements
Most companies have recommended limiting personal and professional
travel, and some have assured workers they could decline professional
invitations without penalty. Generally called soft bans, these partial
travel restrictions have been issued with requests to inform HR of
travel and avoid air travel, public transportation and large gatherings,
as well as 14-day self-quarantines following travel to affected areas.
However, hard bans are in effect in many companies, and travel to
China, Italy, South Korea, Iran, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan has been
prohibited. Indeed, most intercontinental travel — and, more recently,
even travel in general — has stopped for the time being, unless it’s
mission-critical.
Business Impact
Leaders are holding additional meetings to monitor business impact in
efforts to protect or sustain business functions. Many companies with
facilities in affected areas have closed them and are canceling their
own — or their employees’ presence at — conferences, events and
face-to-face meetings. Some have been able to move operations to
unaffected locations.
Simultaneously, CHROs are:
monitoring supply chains or providers for potential impacts
conducting ongoing supply chain risk assessment and operation impact assessment
considering alternative suppliers
preparing for shortages, transportation delays or communication delays
approving additional budget for supplies or additional paid time off
reducing or suspending bonuses for top earners
analyzing and forecasting potential market impacts
instituting mandatory work-from-home or remote work policies where possible
closing on-site facilities such as gyms, cafeterias and common areas
making revisions to employee compensation and benefits policies
granting paid time off for symptomatic employees, employees who must
care for family members who are diagnosed with COVID-19, and/or
employees with diagnosed cases of COVID-19
using standing sick leave, extended sick leave, vacation time, paid time off or flex-time policies
increasing sick leave or paid time off for all or on a case-by-case basis
utilizing short-term disability, family leave (FMLA) or other existing benefits
recommending available Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs)
reminding employees about mental health services for stress management
using back-up care programs, childcare subsidies or other dependent care benefits
refraining from penalizing time off of any kind
permitting unlimited unpaid time off without penalty
providing travel/international SOS (medical and travel security) services
communicating employer-sponsored insurance and other relevant benefits
advising employees to avoid public transportation
staggering shifts to help employees avoid busy commutes
advising employees to avoid visiting high-traffic events or locations on personal time
reconfiguring meeting rooms, break rooms and other common areas to promote social distancing
expanding the time of meal service to avoid congestion, and asking employees to consider alternate meal times to reduce crowds
Technology
These companies are testing technological (e.g., remote work)
capabilities, emergency notification systems and updating employee
contact information. They’re advising employees to take their laptops or
other portable equipment home each night, and they are devoting IT
staff to help employees set up remote connections at home, sometimes on
employees’ personal computers.
Leaders are holding additional meetings to monitor business impact in efforts to protect or sustain business functions.
Many companies have required or are encouraging video or
audio-conferencing meetings (e.g., Skype, Zoom, Microsoft Teams) or
phone calls in lieu of face-to-face meetings. They also recommend
conducting collaborative projects by video or audio-conferencing, Google
Docs, emails or other online channels.
Communications
Corporate leadership is communicating frequently — daily, weekly or
as available — to address their organization’s COVID-19 response,
advice, policies and protocols. Many are issuing FAQ guides, and many
are including links to authorities and external organizations such as
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), The World Health
Organization (WHO), Johns Hopkins University, local governments and
outbreak maps.
Along with expert advice, these messages often include a genuinely
personal element, i.e., reminding workers to get information from
credible organizations, assuring them that none of their fellow
employees have tested positive for the virus (where applicable) and
urging employees not to panic or spread rumors. They will also often
encourage employees to obtain enough food, water, medicines and other
essentials for their families in case of quarantine or scarcity.
Corporate leadership is communicating frequently — daily, weekly or
as available — to address their organization’s COVID-19 response,
advice, policies and protocols.
Communications are usually tailored to the recipients — whether
leaders, managers, employees or clients/customers, respectively — and
methods include:
social media for public messages
email, mail, text messages, hotlines and internal systems (i.e., intranet) to propagate pertinent information
signage to reinforce hygiene, screening and other organizational policies
Members of the CHRO Roundtable are conscious of the effects of their
communication, particularly on customers. To that end, many have:
Proscribed responses from managers/leaders if contacted by the
media. Many have designated media relations personnel who address all
questions from the media.
Asked employees not to violate the privacy of diagnosed employees or clients/customers in social media messages.
Deployed social media and marketing messaging about customer policies and alternative commerce/services.
Training
Businesses are rapidly expanding training opportunities. Much of it
concerns managers, who are being tasked with assisting in coronavirus
containment, responding to employee needs or concerns, and communicating
disease-management policies and preventative measures, such as hygiene
practices. But CHROs are also creating COVID-19-specific training
programs for security professionals, cleaning crews, maintenance and
groundskeeping staff.
These protocols and responses, we’re told, will be operational as
long as is needed — the end of May is the current long-term projection
— and all are subject to revision. Gallup will continue to report on
our findings as the situation evolves.
Adapt quickly to COVID-19.
Watch our live webinar “COVID-19: Managing Your Workforce Through
Disruption” to get everything Gallup knows about disruption and other
crises. Join us on Thursday, March 19, at 2:30 p.m. CT.
Dr. Jim Harter, Gallup’s chief workplace scientist, and other experts
will share what we’ve learned through research, hands-on experience and
our connections with leaders around the world.
Larry Emond is Managing Director of Global Leadership Advisory at Gallup.
Ellyn Maese is a Research Associate at Gallup. Jennifer Robison contributed to this article.
Individualization, expectations, communication are key for remote workers
Managers need their leaders’ support more than ever during this time
Going fully remote may be your organization’s new way to work
The novel coronavirus outbreak has put Italy on lockdown, closed
schools in Madrid, shuttered the Securities and Exchange Commission’s
D.C. headquarters, turned New Rochelle into a containment zone — and
prompted business leaders everywhere to tell employees to take their
laptops home at night in case a COVID-19 diagnosis suddenly turns the
company remote.
If so, they’ll join what Time calls “the World’s Largest Work-From-Home Experiment,”
but without the preparation other companies have had. If your company
is one of them — or you think it will be — this is what Gallup analytics reveals about managing remote workers.
Individualization is key. The best managers have always individualized their coaching to the worker, but doing so at a distance requires greater intentionality. Managers need to ask each team member to describe the conditions under which they perform best, their concerns about their workflow and their emotional response to the situation.
Managers in strengths-based businesses have a huge asset — they can
predict employees’ reactions. Whether that means a driving need to
complete projects, keep promises, maintain relationships or any other
motivator, those traits are powerful … and different for everyone.
Managers will need to individualize to the person to get the best performance. A one-size-fits-all response never fits anyone very well.
Set expectations early and clearly. About half of
all U.S. employees — remote or not — don’t know what’s expected of
them at work. That’s a bad beginning, and it’ll get worse for employees
sent home without good guidance. So managers must make expectations
crystal clear: X is the work you should do, Y is the quality standard, Z
is the deadline. Executives should provide higher-level expectations
aligned with the company’s purpose: We’ll keep our customers engaged by
doing X, we’ll maintain our standards by doing Y, we’ll fulfill our mission by doing Z. The more detail, the better.
But remember, fulfilling expectations requires equipment and information. Research from University of California Irvine professor Judith Olson found that the most successful remote work situations are those in which workers have similar work styles, know and like each other, have technology that allows them to collaborate, and know how to use that technology. You may not have time to create great working relationships — though you should try — but now’s the time to explore your digital options. That’s how people will meet the expectations you set.
Communication. Employees who are accustomed to
working in-house may feel cut off from the resources, information or
relationships they need to do their jobs well, so plan for more
conference calls. It’s OK to pad socializing into the timeframe; indeed,
it may be vital for people who need lots of interaction to keep their
energy up. Managers will have to be diligent about communicating productively — coaching high performance requires frequent conversations, and there won’t be chance conversations in the hall.
But your staff needs to hear from you too, especially as
economic fears worsen, to maintain their trust in leadership. Keep the
lines of communication open, honest and broad. Send emails or post
videos about your reasoning, intentions and expectations. Make it easy
for managers to know your thoughts and contribute their own.
Support your managers: A sudden change in the
practice of management can be hard on managers. They may worry about
disruptions to the workflow they’re accountable for. Some may feel they
have to be physically present to be good coaches, unsure that they can
engage workers from a distance. Rather more negatively, there are still
some managers who don’t trust workers they can’t see. All of them will
have to manage workers in a new way, and fast.
So give them your support, both practical and emotional, during what
may be a tough transition. Invest in management development and coaching
ahead of the budget plan, and be affirming about the situation and
understanding about altered deadlines. Just remember, your managers
always need to know you have their back — but never more so than when
they feel insecure.
Looking Ahead
Gallup finds that 43% of U.S. employees
work remotely some or all of the time, and many, many studies show
remote workers are more productive and profitable than in-house
employees. So don’t worry — telework can succeed spectacularly.
Although your company will have to learn quickly, your people may
perform at levels that surprise you.
But don’t be surprised if they don’t want to come back to the office.
Gallup research shows that 53%
of employees say greater work-life balance and personal wellbeing are
“very important” to them when considering a new job — as do 60% of women, of whom 48% are actively looking for a new employer — and that 51% of U.S. workers say they would quit their current job for one that allows flextime.
A huge proportion of workers already have. Gallup found that the
number of remote workers grew by four percentage points — representing
millions of employees — between 2012 and 2016, that workers are
spending more time off-site than ever before, and that more and more industries
are putting remote work policies in place (primarily finance, insurance
and real estate, followed by transportation, retail, manufacturing and
construction). “Remote work is no longer a privilege,” Forbes recently reported. “It’s become the standard operating mode for at least 50% of the U.S. population.”
That percentage is about to explode, whether companies are prepared
for it or not. So if you have to send people home to keep them safe,
individualize, communicate and set expectations so your managers can
coach effectively during a crisis. But keep this in mind: While COVID-19
won’t be an issue forever, remote work will be. What you learn about
leading a remote workforce now will likely become best practice for your
company later on.
Adapt quickly to COVID-19.
Watch our live webinar “COVID-19: Managing Your Workforce Through
Disruption” to get everything Gallup knows about disruption and other
crises. Join us on Thursday, March 19, at 2:30 p.m. CT.
Dr. Jim Harter, Gallup’s chief workplace scientist, and other experts
will share what we’ve learned through research, hands-on experience and
our connections with leaders around the world.
Jennifer Robison is a Senior Editor at Gallup. Adam Hickman, Ph.D., contributed to this article.
Loneliness is emotional and isolation is structural
Managers need to know the difference to help remote workers thrive
A strategy of engagement can help managers keep remote workers connected
Despite the productivity gains and cost savings associated with
remote work, many leaders worry that those advantages come at the
expense of remote workers’ emotional health — in particular, that
remote work causes loneliness and isolation. Ultimately, it’s feared,
remote workers’ engagement and productivity will suffer.
Gallup finds that remote workers can feel lonely and isolated — but it’s not typical and it is
preventable. In fact, a recent Buffer study of 1,900 remote workers
around the world found that 90% intend to work remotely for the rest of
their lives and 94% recommend off-site careers. And when asked to name
the biggest struggle with working remotely, just 21% named “loneliness.”
Still, one-fifth of a workforce is a lot of people, and leaders need
measures in place to fix that problem before it damages engagement and
performance. Gallup research shows that managers are best positioned to
implement the strategies that make the biggest difference for their
teams — but first, they have to know the difference between loneliness
and isolation.
Loneliness is emotional.Isolation is structural.
First, it helps to understand that loneliness is an emotional
response to lack of connection — and people can feel just as lonely in
the office as outside of it. One quasi-field experiment conducted at a
global headquarters that was transitioning to open office workstations
documented an interesting phenomenon. Instead of the open floorplan
encouraging collaboration, the study found the volume of face-to-face
interaction between employees decreased by approximately 70%,
while electronic communication increased. Employees appeared to react to
the workspace by socially withdrawing from peers and partners to
interact over email and IM instead.
Isolation, on the other hand, is related to access — or lack of it.
The isolated can’t get the materials or information they need, they
think their achievements or development are ignored, they feel cut off
from the business. That isn’t an emotional issue, it’s a technical one.
This is a manager’s top priority — having the materials and
equipment you need to do your work right is fundamental to engagement.
Loneliness can contribute to isolation and isolation can contribute
to loneliness, but managers can address both by talking about the issues
that cause them. Gallup workplace research recommends frequent, ongoing
conversations — in fact, we recommend five distinct types of conversations that drive performance,
each timed for maximum impact — but with specific language framed for
remote workers: “I need to know how you’re getting along. So tell me, is
it too quiet at home? Do you miss having people around? Do you feel
left out?”
Direct questions get direct answers, and managers should be prepared
with appropriate solutions. Here’s what Gallup recommends, geared toward
the individual and the issue.
Only the Lonely: How to Help Your Remote Workers
If the worker’s answers indicate loneliness, the manager’s strategy
must reflect the worker’s personality. If he’s lonely because he’s shy,
trying to turn him into a social butterfly is a waste of the manager’s
time and the worker’s patience. A better bet is creating low-stakes
opportunities for meaningful connections, but the manager should take
the lead — making formal introductions to colleagues, accepting the
emotional labor of pre-meeting small talk, linking him with partners for
projects.
If the worker is more outgoing, his manager just needs to help him
open his office door, metaphorically, to visitors. Online group chats
allow teams a kind of ongoing hallway chatter. Managers can set up
weekly “phone trees” for remote workers organized around a workplace
topic. Managers can even send remote workers a list of local coffee
shops along with a small gift card: “You need to be around people to
keep your energy up. Get a cup of coffee and have a great workday.”
In any case, managers who ask lonely employees for their opinions can
gain some valuable insight. Opinions are especially fruitful
post-project or at the achievement of a milestone — reflection helps
workers process learning opportunities — yet remote workers may feel
their perspective is so narrow that their opinion isn’t needed.
When managers can meet the basics needs of engagement, even casual,
friendly conversations turn into innovative discussions that help the
team and organization thrive.
In fact, remote workers’ perspectives can provide rare insights into
the organization. Shy, lonely workers need to hear they offer unique
value — it can ease social anxiety — and outgoing, lonely workers need
more contact. Either way, their insights on the work environment can
bring to light connections they ought to make, as well as show managers
new ways to improve processes.
Out of Sight, but Not Out of Mind
The isolated need a more tactical approach, but it requires a
judicious balance. Remember, some people choose remote work because
isolation boosts their productivity. IBM learned this the hard way. In
2009, IBM reported that 40% of its workforce (386,000 employees in 173
countries) worked remotely. In 2017, after 20 straight quarters of
losses IBM’s leadership decided that it needed to generate more
serendipitous ideas from its employees. So “Big Blue” called in its
remote workers to boost collaboration and innovation.
It didn’t work. Those remote employees who loved to work remotely immediately began searching for new jobs that would continue to allow them to work from home. Those who did return to an office deliberately isolated themselves, possibly to recreate the environment that had best suited them — research has demonstrated as much in other workplaces. It’s a cautionary tale for managers: The isolated aren’t sad, they’re cut off. Managers can fix that by integrating remote workers deeper into the organization, despite their distance.
For instance, managers can bring a list of their remote workers to strategic meetings, annotated with their CliftonStrengths if available,
to help the manager’s recall when projects are being planned. That
keeps remote workers visible and their advancement, development, and
recognition top of mind. Managers can make time with their own managers
to specifically discuss the engagement of remote workers and ways to
help them learn and grow.
If remote workers can’t access the materials and equipment they need,
managers should work with departments that can solve the problem, such
as IT or legal. Cybersecurity can be an obstacle, but tech is
increasingly capable of keeping employees in the loop on secure
channels. This is a manager’s top priority — having the materials and
equipment you need to do your work right is fundamental to engagement.
And remote workers who simply feel left out can really benefit from
being brought in, physically. And as one Gallup manager of remote
workers says, there’s always a business case to be made for in-person meetings at HQ,
even if the purpose is as much social as practical. Or borrow a page
from university alumni chapters’ regional meetups and organize
remote-worker get-togethers somewhere central to them. It’s a
cost-effective way to keep relationships alive and far-flung teams
engaged, as any alumni director can tell you.
Employee Engagement as an Organizing Principle
Supporting the unique needs of remote workers may seem like a lot of
work for a manager. It can be. Though the best managers are masters of
individualization, staying on top of the psychological welfare and work
environments of remote employees takes time and concern.
It helps to use the elements of engagement as an organizing
principle. The five conversations that drive performance are oriented
toward engagement, and they keep managers focused where their attention
most helps performance. Those conversations also give managers time and
opportunity to really understand remote employees. To consider their
unique contributions. To watch how they like to communicate. To discover
how they respond to workplace situations. To understand loneliness when
they see it or isolation for what it is.
When managers can meet the basics needs of engagement, even casual,
friendly conversations turn into innovative discussions that help the
team and organization thrive. That’s what leaders want from remote
workers, of course, and they’re right to worry that loneliness and
isolation may get in the way.
They can — but they don’t have to. Not if managers know the
difference between loneliness and isolation and have the tools they need
to solve for both.
Explore more resources for supporting remote workers:
Read about “The Changing Place and Space of Work” in Gallup’s State of the American Workplace report which includes research on remote work trends and best practices.
Learn strategies for adapting to the future of work including new demands for flexibility with Gallup’s latest book, It’s the Manager.
Attend the free webinar “Managing Your Remote Workers” and learn more about the intentionality and deliberate communication that managing remote workers requires.
Adam Hickman, Ph.D., is Content Manager at Gallup. Jennifer Robison contributed to this article.
Original Article appears here with additional tips: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/268076/manage-loneliness-isolation-remote-workers.aspx?utm_source=workplace-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WorkplaceNewsletter_March_03172020&utm_content=howtomanageremoteworkers-CTA-3&elqTrackId=d32e757e608e45adb6f99b65dfe34e9e&elq=c7db8c639bfa4d5bbe2551a4f67d607b&elqaid=3589&elqat=1&elqCampaignId=787
No one thinks much about this leadership quality—until the you-know-what hits the fan.
It’s crisis management.
Thankfully, crises are rare occurrences—the black swans of leadership.
We’ve done nearly 70 million assessments of executives, so we know what makes a great leader—the best-in-class who are among the top 20 percent. Our research shows that three of the four qualities of a great CEO are largely intuitive: (1) sets vision and strategy; (2) drives growth; and (3) displays financial acumen. The fourth, which no one mentions, is managing crises. It’s underappreciated, overlooked, and often not even one of the top requirements—until a crisis hits.
This is one of those times. A month ago, when the stock market was making all-time highs, only the rare few could have predicted universities would close, companies would tell employees to work from home en masse, and the NBA season would abruptly be suspended, followed by museums, cathedrals, and Broadway darkening.
While it’s natural in uncertain times for people to turn to the leader for definitive answers, sometimes the authentic answer is “I don’t know right now”—quickly followed by, “And here’s what we are going to do.” In a crisis such as today, leaders need a Plan B—and a Plan C and Plan D as well.
Leaders always deal with ambiguity—it’s timeless and comes with the job. During crises, ambiguity becomes exponential. As fear becomes contagious across organizations, leaders must manage their own responses to ambiguity.
How do they do that? By following our six steps of leadership:
Anticipate – predicting what lies ahead Navigate – course correcting in real time Communicate – continually Listen – to what you don’t want to hear Learn – learning from experience to apply in the future Lead – improve yourself to elevate others Let me provide some color commentary on what leaders can do to put crisis management in action.
Start at the Bottom of Maslow’s Hierarchy: In a crisis, you first need to meet people where they are. Their most basic needs must be met first and they need to feel safe. Naturally, no one is interested in talking about the company’s strategic plan when they are out buying hand sanitizer and toilet paper. Once their essential needs are addressed, then the focus can shift to alignment, common purpose, elevating others and even opportunities for growth.
Earthquakes and Aftershocks: In Los Angeles, where our firm is based, we’re accustomed to earthquakes—knowing that, when one occurs, the aftershocks are coming. In the same way, in a crisis, you have to anticipate the aftershocks—the unintended consequences of the initial shock to the system. Too often, people don’t consider all the possibilities. Anticipation becomes a Monte Carlo simulation in action. For example, what if travel bans expand, commerce slows, or a liquidity crisis develops, etc.? What is the impact on all aspects of my business? What are the implications for all stakeholders—employees, customers, and investors? Strategy is making a bet, and the skill of anticipating improves one’s odds.
Urgent vs. Important: Day to day, leaders face a multitude of issues—both urgent and important. In the normal course of business, I’ve found that many leaders have difficulty distinguishing between the two. When a crisis hits, though, everything blurs as events and their implications constantly change. What’s important often becomes urgent, and the urgent becomes critical. Leaders must delegate the urgent by empowering others to lead around a common purpose.
Leave No One Behind: In a crisis, leaders must connect with, motivate, and inspire others—and show genuine compassion. In the military, for example, leaders put the safety and well-being of others before themselves. I’ve met a number of military leaders who led during periods of conflict, and many have voluntarily told me, “I’ve never lost a soldier.” This reveals a deep mindset of humility and accountability, rather than hubris and bravado.
Know What to Do When You Don’t Know What to Do: There’s nothing like a crisis or a complex problem to accelerate learning. This is learning agility to the “Nth” degree—applying past lessons to new and unfamiliar situations. It really is knowing what to do when you don’t know what to do. In a crisis, this has never been more profound. Amid uncertainty, leaders need to be hyper-focused on past experiences and synthesize and apply them to real-time, fluid conditions. Clarity comes from finding a close comparison. Is it like the Great Recession? The 1987 stock market crash? The outbreaks of SARS or MERS? By running the “unknown” of the current crisis against the “known” of previous ones, leaders gain perspective, identify patterns, connect the dots, and determine appropriate and timely responses. The eventual recovery may be a V or a U or some other alphabet letter, but there will be a new normal—thanks, ultimately, to the scientists, innovators, and dreamers. The natural inclination in a crisis may be to go into command-and-control. That’s not leadership! It’s creating a “bottom-up” culture of world-class observers to accurately perceive today in order to predict tomorrow.
In uncertain times, the leader is the message, says Korn Ferry CEO Gary Burnison.
Published: Mar 12, 2020
When we face fear—whether personally or of the more existential
variety— the natural inclination for any of us is to be paralyzed. But
taking no action is an action – often, an ill-advised action.
If knowledge is power, then people need to be empowered by information.
As a CEO, I’ve always compared the leader’s role to that of a
shepherd: occasionally in front, sometimes beside, and often behind.
These days, however, the leader must be in front.
Sharing information is critical, but far less than half the battle.
Of course, people need to know about strategy, speed, direction, and
results. But it can’t stop there.
Language is an art to express ideas—but the messenger is the message. “Actions speak louder than words” is true for everyone—and twice as true for leaders. It’s not just what you say, but how you say it. It’s not just what you say, but how you say it.
Verbally and non-verbally, the way in which communication occurs—humbly, passionately, confidently—has more impact than merely the words chosen.
Communication is where leadership lives and breathes. It informs, persuades, guides, assures, and inspires. Here’s how:
Listen for the truth. If leaders want to hear the truth, they must
welcome it. That won’t happen, though, unless people feel it’s safe to
say what they really think without fear of retribution and not just what
they think leadership wants to hear. Leaders need to ensure a culture of world-class observers,
where information doesn’t just cascade down—it bubbles up. Observation
needs to be a “team sport” as people throughout the organization are
empowered to speak up and share their views about what they see.
Perspectives will differ, but that only enriches the discussion. And,
when perspectives are shared, people learn.
The information highway. Communication
is far more than a transmission of information. Communication needs to
be the “information highway,” flowing freely in both directions and in
every circumstance. Important in good times—crucial in challenging ones.
More assurance, less authority. Communication is connecting and engaging with others. Messages must be delivered frequently and consistently,
with candor and honesty. That means speaking with more assurance than
authority—and being concerned with tone as well as content. Passionate,
confident words motivate. Although information is crucial, if the
message lacks authenticity, the team’s follow-through may be
lackluster—or even lacking.
People would rather know the truth. In bull markets, people look to the leader for validation. In
bear markets, they look to the leader for assurance. When faced with a
challenge, people would rather know the truth than dwell in the
worst-case scenarios residing in their imaginations. Leaders who don’t
communicate will become the subject of others’ communication—and not in a
flattering way.
Beware the vacuum. If not addressed, a lack of information can lead to hazardous
uncertainty. People will spend their time speculating, because there’s
an information vacuum that needs to be filled. Uncertainty breeds
conjecture, escalating fear and causing chaos. No matter how serious the
news, people prefer certainty. To predict tomorrow, people have to
accurately perceive the reality of today. Then you can plot a course for
tomorrow.
No shortcuts allowed. Communication takes time—and lots of it. The temptation,
therefore, is to take shortcuts such as assuming that people already
know certain information or else glossing over a message from an
employee or passing it along to someone else. Take time to acknowledge
messages—and the messengers. Show others that they matter.
Remember, for a leader in uncertain times—and, in particular, these times—it’s not simply about staying on message. The leader is the message.
In our era of globalization, your job performance may depend on your “CQ”. So what is it?
David Robson
Imagine meeting someone for the first time who
comes from a distant country but is fluent in your language. There may
appear to be no immediate communication barrier, so would you adapt the
tone and cadence of your voice, or the spacing of pauses in your speech?
How about altering your body language,
mannerisms and facial expressions, depending on the background of the
person in front of you? Would you sit or stand differently and pay
attention to your hand gestures?
“The number one predictor of your success in
today’s borderless world is not your IQ, not your resume (CV), and not
even your expertise,” writes social scientist David Livermore in his
book The Cultural Intelligence Difference. “It’s your CQ.”
According to the latest findings, a high CQ
could be crucial in a wide range of careers, from bankers to soldiers and scientists and teachers – anyone, in fact, who regularly interacts with people from different backgrounds.
So what is CQ? Why do some people have a higher CQ than others? And how can we nurture these abilities?
Cultural Differences
Much of the research on CQ has been done by Soon Ang,
a professor of management at the Nanyang Technological University in
Singapore. In the late 1990s, her job was updating computer systems in
Singapore to tackle the “Y2K bug” – a software glitch that was feared
would bring down the world’s computer networks at the turn of the
millennium. Ang put together an international team of programmers to solve the problem.
They were some of the brightest minds in the
business, yet she soon found that they just couldn’t work together. The
groups were ineffectual and failed to gel. Often, individual members
would appear to agree on a solution, but then implement it in completely
different ways.
Clearly, it wasn’t a question of expertise or
motivation. Instead, she saw that these highly capable employees were
stumbling over each other’s cultural differences, leading to a breakdown
in communication and understanding.
These insights would lead Ang to collaborate
with the organisational psychologist P. Christopher Earley, then at the
London Business School but now dean of the school of business and
economics at the University of Tasmania, Australia. Together they built a
comprehensive theory of CQ, which they defined as “the capability to
function effectively in a variety of cultural contexts”.
Typically CQ is measured through a series of questions that assess four distinct components.
The first is “CQ Drive” – the motivation to learn about other cultures.
Then there is “CQ Knowledge”, which is an understanding of some of the
general cultural differences you may face. “CQ Strategy”, examines how
you make sense of those difficult confrontations and learn from them
while “CQ Action”, involves your behavioural flexibility – whether you
are able to adapt your conduct like a cultural chameleon.
Someone with low CQ might have a tendency to
view everyone else’s behaviour through his own cultural lens. If he
comes from a more gregarious environment, for instance, and notices that
his Japanese or Korean colleagues are very quiet in a meeting, he may
assume that they are being hostile or bored. In aviation, such cultural
differences have sometimes caused a breakdown in communication between pilots and air traffic controllers, leading to fatal crashes.
A person at the top of the scale, meanwhile,
might realise that silence is a sign of respect and that feedback won’t
be given unless it is explicitly invited. As a result, she’ll make sure
to offer suitable opportunities within the meeting for others to provide
their opinions.
One study from 2011 measured the IQ, emotional
intelligence, or EQ, and CQ of 126 officers studying at the Swiss
Military Academy as they engaged in various assignments supporting the
United Nations in foreign territories and on international training
exercises. Although all three forms of intelligence appeared to
contribute to their overall performance, CQ turned out to be the best
predictor – accounting for around 25 percent of the variation in the officers’ success on the international missions. IQ, by contrast, only predicted around 9.5 percent of the differences, while EQ predicted 3.5 percent.
While people with a high CQ might naturally
gravitate to international jobs, these studies suggest differences in CQ
can also predict their performance once they’re hired.
This evaluation is leading many companies to
consider testing CQ and find out how they can boost their employees’
scores. Organisations such as Starbucks, Bloomberg and the University of
Michigan have used the services of the Cultural Intelligence Center in Michigan, which offers intercultural assessments and a range of courses.
Crucially, Livermore, who is president of the Centre, says that CQ can be learned. There’s no replacement for direct, personal experience in another country, though it seems that people mostly benefit from having tasted a variety of different cultures if they want to learn those generalization skills. “While understanding a specific culture can be useful, it may not predict at all your ability to engage effectively in a new place,” he says. “In fact, our research finds that individuals who have spent extended time in multiple locations are more likely to have higher CQ Knowledge than those who have lived multiple decades in one overseas setting.”
But explicitly teaching some of the key concepts
seems to ease that process. Employees may take a CQ test and then work
with a coach to identify potential challenges. Afterwards, they discuss
those experiences and the ways they could adapt their behaviour in the
future. Using this strategy, expat bankers moving to the Middle East and
Asia appeared to have fully adjusted to their new life in just three
months, while without the training, it normally took expat employees
nine months to become fully functional.
Mindset
But not everyone’s CQ grows with experience.
Even after years of living abroad, some people’s understanding of other
cultures appear to plateau, and they may also be resistant to training.
Now researchers are trying to discover the
reasons for these differences. Melody Chao, a social psychologist at the
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology believes one answer lies
in an individual’s mindset.
She has been inspired by the work of the educational psychologist Carol Dweck,
who has shown that people’s beliefs of their own capabilities often
become self-fulfilling prophecies. On one hand, some people view their
abilities as “fixed” and unchangeable. Others may have a “growth
mindset”, meaning that they see their abilities as being more fluid, and
so they are likely to persevere through hardship and embrace new
challenges.
These differences soon add up, meaning someone
with the fixed mindset may start out with greater natural talent, only
to quickly fall behind someone with a growth mindset.
Dweck’s work considered traditional concepts of intelligence, but Chao has shown that a similar process underlies changes in CQ too.
If someone believes that cultural attributes are fixed, for instance,
they may face greater anxiety during their interactions with local
people, and may crumble after a confusing or difficult encounter without
thinking of ways to adapt in the future. As a result, those cultural
differences may come to feel like insurmountable boundaries.
Savvy business leaders adapt their body language as a mark of respect.
“Individuals’ beliefs create a reality for
themselves,” says Chao. She argues that businesses could measure these
underlying beliefs in addition to their employees’ raw CQ scores, and
adjust their training to address those anxious, fixed beliefs.
Despite these new ways of thinking about CQ, research in this area is still in its infancy, warns Chao.
“As international and intercultural dynamics
have been changing very rapidly, there is still much for us to learn
about how to enhance cultural competence of individuals,” she says. In a
world where our global connections grow ever tighter, that new
understanding can’t come quickly enough.
David Robson is a freelance writer. He is @d_a_robson on Twitter.
This article was originally published on October
13, 2017, by BBC Worklife, and is republished here with permission.
