 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
As we previously reported, Oracle’s salesforce has been in the midst of big changes, not all of them good. 
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Scoop.it!
When power relies on networks, rather than on size, the game changes.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
There are some extraordinary lessons for less confrontational, business & community stakeholder engagement from the Ukraine Crisis and other recent examples of new, 'connected power' in action.
Firstly, it's the intent that makes the difference, not the digital tools. It's easy to say "oh, now there's Twitter to share with, evil despots are over!" I believe it actually starts with the belief, and need, in ordinary people, that change is needed, and they can make a difference. Because once people buy in to a good, or great reason for acting, they can be unstoppable. www.startwithwhy.com/
Second, old, heavy handed tactics in politics, negotiations, or stakeholder engagement, are becoming less and less effective. Sure they still work in the short term. But if the situation involves people with a memory of what has been down to them and their family & friends and neighbours, then living with the consequences is less certain for the autocratic bullies.
Third, what the new digital tools do is make the connections easier, but perhaps even more important, larger, broader, deeper - almost infinitely so. I've been a member of Amnesty International for decades - written a lot of letters - but the new social campaign and petition tools are so fast, and so effective, I find myself wondering if technology really might save this crazy tribe called the human race.
Think about it it. How many of these three aspects have you factored into your next change management program, big negotiation, or contentious stakeholder engagement program?
1. What will it take to craft a compelling WHY? 2. Think long term and avoid rash actions 3. How to leverage digital tools
Scoop.it!
![the impact of performance recognition [infographic] | Negotiation, Influence & Engagement | Scoop.it](https://img.scoop.it/hPHteCb2vjEzoDWKSdZ9MDl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9)
provided by: octanner.com What do organizations need? Great work from their employees. What do employees need to deliver that great work? • d
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
So, here's a fun question for those responsible for HR & finance matters around your organisation's overall wages bill.
Think about how many staff you have? And write down your annual wages bill.
Next... - Think about what it would cost to have their managers regularly (and genuinely) say thank you for good work during the year. - Write that down - Consider the cost of having teams & members recognised with regular (genuine again) awards each month. - Write that down - and add this to the 'thank-you' cost.
- Now calculate these two as a percentage of your wages bill.
If it's LESS than 5%, you've just created the business case for better employee stakeholder management!
Better, that is, than simply giving staff more money - WITHOUT the recognition.
Negotiation, Influence & Engagement is best when you really, really understand the unstated, sometimes hidden or less obvious needs of the other party.
Good manners does have a monetary value - add it into your next salary planning preparation.
Scoop.it!
When the inventory was to be delivered for auction, the client came by with his watches and said he couldn’t abide the starting price we had agreed upon. He had changed his mind and decided that he needed the starting price to be 50 percent off retail.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Many of the great books on negotiation - often written for a US readership - highlight examples like this story to illustrate the difference between negotiation styles in different cultures. "hey, this sure isn't how we do it back home..."
My caution is that this thinking, by definition, might over-simplify how to understand and properly prepare for a negotiation.
Why? Because really professional preparation requires the perspective of having a broader framework for Negotiation & Influence, than just a few categories to think about - such as country/culture.
A multi-dimensional framework covers factors such as Time, full research into Needs, Content Vs Process, Style, Climate - before even getting to the obvious and often overdone/less effective issue of Tactics.
And in a complex, multi-party negotiation, ALL of these dimensions might need to be understood, and the differences to US or European or Korean to Japanese or Australian mapped and managed.
Not just culture.
Bottom line? Over-prepare? Impossible!
Scoop.it!
Have you ever told a little white lie, slightly exaggerated or completely made up your CV to help you get a job? If you haven’t, your colleague has and possibly your boss too.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
While companies attempt to de-risk interactions with others, and maximise outcomes by investing in buidling process, practices & employee skills in Negotiation & Influence - negotiations are all around us, everyday.
And for the average employee, or potential employeee, both parties might be better off remembering this key principle of great negotiation process, as defined by ENS International co-founder Michael Hudson - it all starts waaaaay before the formal sit-down.
So the CV attached to an application for a new job is actually a crucial aspect of the negotiation for securing that job. So why do people 'fudge' them? With the knowledge that "40% reported having employees lie about their experience" how do applications think CV misrepresentation is an effective aspect of their strategy, or a tactic that helps get the result they aspire to?
Sadly, it gets worse. In the Shipley Asia Pacific world of planning & preparing influencing written materials to win deals - customer focus (understanding the needs of the other party in ENS language) is vital.
Without this quality, proposals, and CVs, end up being irrelevant, time wasting and ineffective - "32.08% of employers found job applicants’ CVs were not appropriately tailored to the role" acording to this post by Yolandra Redrup citing research by job matchmaking site OneShift.
So start with the basics. Understand the basic requested requiremnts and provide a view of your experience that shows how you best have done and can support these. Be compliant !
Yes, it's a bit of work, but isn't having the best chance of getting the job worth it?
Scoop.it!
This entrepreneur reveals what he learned watching the Apple CEO negotiate a blockbuster deal with AT&T several years ago.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Steve Jobs & Apple didn't get to where they did by accident. Jobs followed smart Negotiation & Influence practices.
Firstly, Jobs understood deals are all about the planning, and relationships. ENS International founder Michael Hudson suggests the acronym MEMO - Meet Early Meet Often - and Jobs was super consistent at this. Critical deals were personally researched, not delegated.
Second, Jobs understood the need to get people past current blinkered beliefs & barriers by reframing perceptions - building a joint vision of new, common ground. In this article Jobs dangled a massive bonus in front of AT&T to get them to think about a different future and de-risk the journey there.
Third, we always suggest being very, very aspirational in your demands - almost to the point of making the other party gasp - and Steve Jobs knew and worked this aspect of his deals really, really well.
Scoop.it!
Conflict is a necessary part of a functioning team. But it doesn't need to be mean.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
'Conflict resolution' is a very searched for term in Google.
Makes sense, because for most, one of the most stressfull workplace experiences is conflict.
And yet, project management, change management, ensuring stakeholder engagegment generally, typically fails on perceptions of difference between the parties - and the conflicts this generates.
What Liane Davey has done nicely here is identifiy how to play nicely with people when we feel what they are talking about or proposing is at odds with our understanding or beliefs.
How to revisit a topic to bring the parties together, and not have the process of engagement drive people further apart.
Scoop.it!
There are many who lament the poor state of affairs of science communication in Australia.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Can we always expect stakeholders to hear messages ?
Even when the nessage is 'true'? Of course not.
Science SEEMS to struggle - the 'truth' often seems to lose out to 'beliefs' - a study last week highlighted the terrifying news that a majority of US Republican party members now no longer believe in the scientific evidence around evolution.
And, as this great article from Merlin Crossley in The Conversation highlights, belief based denial is always a barrier to new ideas.
He also points out the challenges new science, new ideas, new proofs have always faced from vested interests - the ironically named Murdoch 'News Limited" springs to mind - where the science might be understood, and believed, but does not suit some people. Even the scientific community can have it's own resistance to new ideas.
What I loved about this article is the 'good news' reframing of the situation that science is heard, sought out, and most importantly, trusted! More please!
(Full disclosure - I'm a member of the Australian Sceptics )
The big question for me is, to what extent do scientists, and the scientific community, actually embrace the science of influence and persuasion in getting the wide range of complex messages across to the public, the politicians, and business interests?
So, just how good is 'science' at using science for stakeholder engagement?
Scoop.it!
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Without knowing the actual reasons behind Obama's negotiation strategy, it's hard to understnad some of the tactics on display. For example "When he didn’t feel like negotiations were going his way, he traveled the country belittling the other party in campaign-style speeches" is an interesting choice. Maybe attampting to leverage unfavourable public opinion could work, but might be best by listening to the public and actually quoting the feelings of others not just your own labelling. BTW, this goes for both sides of politics. And certainly using the needs and will of the people to build common ground with the other party has alaways been more inclusive and productive. BTW, not common behaviour from the other party lately either. But two wrongs don't make a right, expecially in high stakes deals or negotiations. What happened to MEMO? (Meet Early Meet Often - in the ENS world)
Scoop.it!
Trying to sway others to make a difference or a change? Expand your influence in any area with these tips that will also help you become more relatable!
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
This will be one of my last Scoops for the year - so I thought I'd start winding up on a lighter note. Fresh from lifehack.org - some pleasant reminders and great tips when working with new or younger negotiators on the broadest aspect of the discipline - influence.
That said, these are all easy to fall out of practice with, even as experienced hands.
Quick test - where would you rate yourself on these over the last 30 days?
Scoop.it!
APMP Announces Procurement Improvement Initiative - Association of Proposal Management Professionals
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
The best outcome in negotiations always result when you remember MEMO. Meet Early Meet Often. This APMP initiative is a smart, solid example of the potential for discovery and collaboration.
Scoop.it!
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Selfishness. The lack of concern for others - In Shipley 'Winning Work' programs with executives and their teams this requires exercises on Customer Focus. (vs seller focussed deals & proposals)
In stakeholder management or supplier negotiations it requires what the ENS framework reminds us, is the requirement to NOT be selfish, and to understand the needs of the other party.
What Daniel Lock highlights is "what the leaders cares about... does not tap into roughly 80% of the workforces primary motivators for putting extra energy into the change program" In other words most 'leaders' put forward their own agenda without any idea of the WIIFM (Whats In It For Me) of anyone else.
I'm helping a client at the moment where this failure to understand both the needs of the other parties, but also the needs of their own team, are blocking anything but stubborness and intransigence so far.
Getting your own team lined up behind an idea is not just good manners, it is commercially the only proven, effective strategy.
Scoop.it!
Learn how this model can help you to influence others, even if you don't have authority over them.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
I like most of the Mind Tools materials - well researched and re-told with simplicity & clarity - and this one, based upon the book "Influence Without Authority" (Cohen & Bradford 1991) is great for personal use, or for colleagues new to Negotiation & Influence as a practice & discipline.
While full of links, most are initially helpful expositions on topics - although of course all end in an invitation to subscribe.
If you do buy the source book, also look at "Influencing Up" by the same authors. Published in 2012 it applies their principles to the all too common scenario of influencing upwards - managers, beaureaucrats - where there is an actual or perceived access or status 'gap' which makes influence seem unlikely or difficult.
I would actually recomned this for community or business leaders to help them understand the things they could do to improve accessibility to themselves (assuming some degree of this is part of their charter)
|
Scoop.it!
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Some bloggers should not blog! And some, like this, are gold every time.
Good science does not extrapolate incorrectly, or unnecessarily - and good science should never be used to justify wasting money on unproven outcomes.
Dodgy 'persuasion' ideas being sold to big companies gives fact based, ethical persuasion a bad name.
Scoop.it!
I emailed my 22 year old cousin Eric, who’s graduating Summa in Economics from Harvard, to see if he needed any help getting interviews...
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
A wonderful funny, sharp piece on the strongest power in the world (the flip side of fear)
Read it, and reflect on the extent to which your last - or any stakeholder engagement, or influence - was as slick as this.
Genius
Scoop.it!
What puts the nation’s second largest retailer over the top in the competition for the “Happiest Company in the World?” According to the recent cover story in Bloomberg BusinessWeek, Costco clinched t
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Classic Negotiation & Influence smarts going on here...
A limitid, narrow view of the company employee stakeholder relationship - as practised at WalMart says ' employees are just a cost, pay them as little as we can get away with - so someone 'wins' for having kept staff costs down.
What happens with more broad stakeholder understanding, including the stakeholders that actually make the most difference to company success, the customers?
Triangulating the intersecting and overlapping interests from the elevation of a 'process helicopter' enables the insight that 'people are not economic machines' - to guide the realisation that happier staff are what create happier customers, not JUST low prices. In fact, in many studies the services received is usually ahead of the raw sales price as a driver of customer satisfaction.
So the Costco (and South West Airlines) approach to stakeholder enagement results in a different negotiation mindset, trade-offs, Return On Assets, and share price.
Great negotiations & influence start early, with deep understanding of all stakeholder needs, not just the accounting department.
Scoop.it!
He was massive. He was feared. His name was Bodacious. And there were just a handful of cowboys in the country whose attitude he couldn’t change…in less
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Just 4 x steps, and less than 60 seconds. Instant, positive influence on your most critical stakeholders, your employees.
Scoop.it!
To ensure that corporate culture supports—not hinders—the ability of women to reach top management, companies must address mind-sets and develop a more inclusive, holistic diversity agenda. A McKinsey & Company article.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
A 3,000 year negotiation! - some recent insights from McKinsey for better influence & engagement.
I've fathered and I co-parent 3 x children who are subjected to daily discrimination. Not that this is new, by some accounts it has been happening for millenia.
Ironically, the greatest drivers for change might come from all of the parties involved realising it's commercially pragmatic to move now.
Much of the change already - and we are talking gender based discrimination here - the version impacting females - has come about where women have, mainly through education, achieved greater insight & financial independance. Some change has also come from shifts in the values & beliefs of some males in positions of authority & influence.
But much is still to be done - this research summary suggests some ideas.
Scoop.it!
We like to think that we reach conclusions by reviewing facts, weighing evidence and analysing arguments.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Is belief reality? What happens when beliefs clash? How could rationalising be less 'accurate' or 'true' than inference?
Great provocations by Lecturer in Crtical Thinking at Uni of Qld, Peter Ellerton - with the links also a great read
Crucial to understand why persuasion & influence can be so conuter-intuitive
Scoop.it!
Focus on what you have to gain rather than what you have to lose.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
One day I'll read an article, or blog on influence and negotiation, and discover something really, really new.
Until that day, Heidi Halvorsen has highlighted here useful evidence of how a fundamental principle of the negotiation & influence framewrok developed by Michael Hudson and his business partner over 30 years ago.
In this article, (spoiler alert) one simple pre-work step made a huge difference to negotiation outcomes.
The psychology of a 'promotion focus Vs prevention focus' is essentially the difference a 'glass half full Vs glass half empty' mindset has on negotiation outcomes.
In the research cited, Columbia's Galinsky simply asked study participants the following : "Please take a couple of minutes to think about the aspirations you have in a negotiation. What are the negotiation behaviors and outcomes you hope to achieve during a negotiation? How you could promote these behaviors and outcomes?" Experienced negotiators know that early, rigorous and effective planning makes a significant difference to successful negotiation outcomes - often more than tactics on the day. This terrific example highlights just how straight forward that pre work can be for the less expereinced memebers of your teams.
Scoop.it!
No need to worry about reading-up on the 61 pages of Emission Reduction Fund Green Paper. Page 4 reveals that the scheme will be laughed-out the door of any serious bank in the country.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Sometimes when we look at the actions of a party that look to be influencing others - in this example the Australian Government influencing polluters to create less pollution - it is bewildering to see poor, ineffective policy highly unlikely to influence anyone.
And 'direct action' is a classic example of policy that is just not going to achieve the 'stated' objectives.
So why does this sort of thing happen? Think 'Yes Minister' - the brilliant UK TV series - where what is said is not what is meant, and vice versa.
The Liberal party agenda or objective was to look like having an inexepensive policy, to win the election.
Their intention is not to influence polluting industries or companies - because they do not believe in the science of climate change, nor Australia needing to play a part in doing anything about it - at least if it means any sacrifice by their mates at the big end of town.
So it is not a actual government policy, it was, and is, an election tactic.
So in that context, it was perfect - well nuanced, inexpensive, persuasive, and incredibly effective.
Great negotiation. (Poor science, morally weak & comercially shortsighted, but great stakeholder management)
Scoop.it!
Propaganda: Power and Persuasion at the British Library is an exhibition that is full of intrigue, thought provoking content and brilliant artefacts that puts you in the middle of a power struggle ...
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
No that you need another reason to visit London - but, just in case, drop in and check out this great sounding exhibition.
We when say 'negotiation' is all around us, it really is, from the Government down...
Scoop.it!
Never underestimate the value of a great receiver.
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Listen !
I mean REALLY listen...
Peter Bergman's reflections in this blog remind of this quote by Jiddu Krishnamurti " The ability to listen without evaluating is the highest form of intelligence"
Wait - listen without evaluating? Yes. To realy take on board what someone else is really saying, you have to shut-down, abandon and let go of the need to continuosly evaluate or judge everything they say. And actually hear them.
This is timely for two reasons.
Firstly, the ENS international framework for Negotiation & Influence is based upon this simple, powerful quality of listenting. Both to the 'other party' - but also, listening to yourself.
To be courageous, to not judge or evaluate, and to stay open - these are indeed powerful and overlooked leadership qualities.
Secondly, as we go into the changeover of a new year, to be courageous, to not judge or evaluate, and to stay open - these are indeed powerful and overlooked personal qualities as we find ourselves with family and friends - and re-imagine ourselves for 2014.
Scoop.it!
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Succesful Negotiation & Influence outcomes start with your own beliefs about the outcome. Learned optimism is a key Negotiation & Influence 'skill' or belief system.
One of my ENS colleagues make a great point about the first step in most negotiations being "the negotiation with yourself about the likely outcome, even before you talk to the other party."
In other words, people have a more negative view than is reality when asking a favour, or concession. According to Daniel Newark "our research indicates that they fear rejection more than they should. Most people, even those who have turned you down before, are more willing to lend a hand than you’d think." This was also a parallel premise in Martin Seligman's book "Learned Optimism' (1990). This was based upon a study done by Wharton's Peter Schulman, published in the Journal of Selling and Sales Management. After measuring the optimism levels of a large insurance sales force, they discovered the optimistic sales people sold 35 percent more, and that pessimists were two times more likely to leve the company in the first year than the optimists. To what extent do you, or your team set yourselves up to win, or lose, based on your own initial, perhaps unfounded beliefs about the outcome?
Scoop.it!
Humility may be a virtue, but it’s also a competitive advantage. According to research from the University of Washington Foster School of Business, humble
Jeremy Pollard's insight:
Why an article about leadership In a post about Negotiation, Influence & Engagement? Because I believe leadership is about drawing people to a position, not ordering them to do what you want.
Unless you are in the military, the rest of us have to influence without authority. Even in a organIsation with a supposed hierarchy , most people come to work but not to be ordered, they come to be lead..
Only ly slightly off topic, I'd also recommend these principles for parenting!
Great article at many levels
|
So, Larry Ellison has personally approved Oracle's new immersive, 10 week Sales Academy for graduate hires.
Two observations for me...
1. It's about time the most senior executives in big companies took a direct, personal interest in sales as an end-to-end process that desperately needs senior management understanding, insight and focus.
Some industries learned a long time ago - like insurance in the 1960s, Xerox in the 1980s -that you have to invest directly in your sales force.
Hoping to save money by hiring good reps off your competition looks great to your CFO but is ultimately a zero sum game.
Even IBM is still smarting from abandoning their decades long Sales School, which produced some of the best IT reps the world has ever seen. Maybe they'll follow Oracles lead?
2. It's also great to see formal recognition of and support for the new reality that Jill Rowley has made work for her, that 'fishing where the fish are' today is online, and in and around social media.
So many companies are still letting their sales teams stumble through with trial & error, or demanding illogical 'proof' before investing in social skills, training and centralised tools.
Think about it - who seriously challenged golf club fees for senior account executives to socialise with senior decision makers?
Low self-awareness by senior management does not mean social doesn't work for sales - but being clear about the buyers journey, and the appropriate roles and responsibilities of your marketing and sales teams will become more, not less vital to get right in a social selling world.
Marketing already do too little to support sales - if sales have to run their own Social Media networks and systems there is a chance they will become unnecessarily distracted by this, and marketing will feel even more off the hook to deliver value.
Jill's experiences may not translate into universal processes and tools for the many. It will be good to watch what happens.