Robert Harris delivers the keynote address to the 2011 American Dietetic Association…Robert has been invited back to address over 200 ADA professionals in Scottsdale Arizona.   Robert was a top rated presenter at the ADA annual leadership event which lead to Robert’s being invited back for a return engagement in 2011.   Robert will be speaking on “Strategic Influencing – How to Get Commitment to Critical Business Goals” and also “Leveraging Your Leadership Strengths”.   For the leadership presentation, attendees will be completing the Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI) in advance of the session which will allow Robert to explain their core “motivational values”, how they can be most rewarded, and what would demotivate or cause them conflict.    Last year’s session was extremely well received.

On April 5, 2011, Robert Harris presents at an Ontario Wellness Conference sponsored by the Region of Peel Public Health.   Robert will demonstrate his innovate 4 step communications process for “Getting Buy-in when Your Goals Aren’t Their Goals”… Robert will be teaming up with Allan Smofsky, an Independent workplace health strategist.   Allan is a 2008 winner of the Rogers Media Working Well Who’s Who in Workplace Health award, and is a frequently invited speaker and writer on workplace health & well-being issues. 

On May 3, 2011, Robert Harris Resources has been invited to present at the 2011 Credit Union Central’s annual conference.   Robert and his colleague Francoise Morissette will be co-presenting.  Francoise will also be highlighting her best selling book entitled “Made in Canada Leadership”, published by Wiley.  

Sincerely,

ROBERT HARRIS RESOURCES INC.

I believe a different, almost counter-intuitive, approach is needed.   

Instead of advocating for the validity of your perspective, you first need to acknowledge the validity of theirs.   A good example is anything requiring organizational change.   Whenever an individual, team, department or entire organization is asked to embrace a change, there are invariably two “camps” that quickly form – those who support the change (advocators) and everyone else (resisters).    Change frequently fails because these two factions simply refuse to accept the viewpoints of the other.    From my perspective, there is often validity in both viewpoints that must be worked with.

I teach a 4-step communications process that integrates differences and builds shared commitment to organizational change.   The keys to this model include:

• You must present a “burning platform” as to why this change is necessary, not only to others but to the person you are trying to engage
• You must demonstrate that you not only understand the other party’s “resistant” points (concerns and needs), but that you are willing to work with them to minimize or lessen these issues
• You must avoid over-selling your perspective as this comes across as “cheerleading” and causes the other person to quickly dismiss you or your purpose.
• You must explain what is not impacted by your proposal; that is, those things the other party values that are going to remain intact.   
• You must invite their input so that solutions become “our” solutions, not just yours.

All too often, the person trying to get agreement from key decision makers is passionate but unsure of how to get commitment to their purpose.   When resistance is encountered, the proposer loses confidence which makes the next client meeting even more difficult.  

Getting commitment is a process and very few decision makers are going to commit on first encounter.  Changing our own mindset about what should be the goal for a client meeting is crucial.  Rather than expecting immediate endorsement, instead we should seek to effect an attitude shift that moves the client, over time, from disinterest to interest, to understanding, and finally to shared commitment to move forward collaboratively.

Robert Harris is a president of Robert Harris Resources Inc., an organization which trains employees at all levels on interpersonal effectiveness.   You can visit our website at www.rhresources.com

For more information, please contact Robert Harris at rhr@idirect.com or the University of Toronto, School of Continuing Studies.  These programs will also be offered in the fall of 2009 in the evenings.

This past week (February, 2009), I had the pleasure of delivering a seminar for a national sales conference in conjunction with my close working colleague, Bill Smalley.   Bill is an expert on sales and marketing and speaks on these topics globally.

Bill and I were co-presenting to an organization that was requiring its sales force to take a new approach to its selling efforts.   Today’s economic climate has presented this organization with some tough business challenges that require its sales representatives to think and act differently.

I specialize in change leadership and how to influence others; Bill specializes in professional sales skills, so we titled our presentation: “How to Overcome Resistance and Move into a Collaborative Selling Mode.”   Our presentation was very well received.   Here is a synopsis of some the content.

5 Generations of Selling

The reality is…sales has come a long way.   If you look at the selling process over the past 60 years, it has really evolved through 5 generations.   We call these the “5 C’s”.

1.  Cronyism. The first era of selling, prevalent in the industrial boom following world war two, was what we call, “cronyism”.    In this approach, the sales person was essentially your buddy; that is, someone whom you got to know well and liked.    The sales person would drop by every so often and take your order.   Times were good and there was very little differentiation of product or focus on deeper buyer needs.

2.  Commodity Selling. The second era took hold from the 1950’s until mid 1960’s where sales people basically sold on price.  Again, there was little product differentiation, which resulted in discounting and price wars.    Sales people typically dislike this approach as there is always pressure to cut the margins.

3.  Content Selling. This era of selling was the first to involve a strategic differentiation of one product from another.   Starting in the 1960’s through to the 1980’s, professional marketers, with the help of advertising agencies, were now able to create brand awareness and customer knowledge as to why one product was superior to another.  The goal was to educate buyers on the “features and benefits” of a specific product, and thereby generate excitement in purchasing these features and benefits.

Content selling enabled sales people to move away from a commodity approach based on lowest price to being able to charge a higher price (with greater margins) due to brand awareness and buyer sophistication.

Although this era marks the start of “professional selling”, the flaw with a features and benefits approach is that it did not take into account the unique and differing needs of customers.  In effect, this approach was product-centric versus customer-centric.  Although “content selling” raised the likelihood of increased sales with some customers, it did not maximize success with all customers.    Hence the evolution to the 4th era of selling…

4.  Consultative Selling. Over the past 20 years, consultative selling has been very much in vogue.   By the 1980’s, organizations realized the problem with content selling (“features and benefits”) was that you may be providing a benefit that the customer doesn’t value, and missing a benefit that the customer does want.

In consultative selling, the initial focus is on first understanding the deeper needs and buying motives of the customer and then ensuring your product fits with these needs and motives.   Given that customers value different things, this approach requires some product diversity but also presents greater upside on the sales front.

However, even consultative selling has a drawback, which is particularly apparent in these tough economic times.   That is, when the entire focus is on meeting the needs of the customer, that negates the very real needs of the supplying organization, especially when the business climate is hurting.     In other words, notwithstanding the critical importance of the customer, if those needs are the only ones that matter, then some excellent selling organizations may be pushed out of business – and that indirectly hurts the customer that has benefited from this solid customer-supplier relationship.

This brings us to what we see as the dawn of a 5th era in selling – Collaborative Selling.

5.  Collaborative Selling. In a collaborative selling approach, there is a partnering mentality between customer and supplier.   Both organizations realize that their longer term success is predicated on both of them staying in business – and this means that supplier needs matter too.

We are currently in a well document economic climate of restraint and cutbacks.  Sales volumes are down in almost all industries.  This means that many suppliers will find their revenues decreased and be required to make some tough business decisions to survive.

This is where the buying organization’s role takes precedent.  The buyer may be able to partner on matters that would typically be the sole responsibility of the seller.    We are not suggesting that the buyer take a reduction in quality or service; that wouldn’t make sense.  But there may be some opportunities where the buyer can be flexible in order to help the seller survive.   This could include some flexibility on payment terms, inventory levels, and other items that help the overall bottom line of the seller, without significantly impacting the business of the buyer.

In effect, in collaborative selling, both buyer and seller become customers to each other.   This approach has three (3) primary goals for both organizations:  (i) minimize short-term risk (ii) maximize long term gain and (iii) create value by partnering with each other.  Creating value is recognizing the natural synergies that already exist and jointly seeking new ways to be innovative and proactive in adding to each partner’s business success.

How and When to Move into Collaborative Selling Mode

We realize that not all customers want to be partners.   In fact, for many customers, the current focus on consultative selling (with a focus solely on their needs) works just fine.  For these customers, the sales person should continue to do what’s been working well – no need to change a winning game!

There are in fact 3 ingredients that cause both buyer and seller to want to move from a consultative to a collaborative mode, including:

1. The two organizations (buyer, seller) already have a successful and trusting business relationship.
2. Each organization needs the other organization to succeed in order for it to succeed.
3. There is some element of risk threatening the welfare of one organization that potentially could cause harm to both.

When these three conditions are present, it is in the best interests of both organizations to partner with each other.    Given their already trusting relationship, it should be relatively easy for the sales person to articulate the needs for flexibility and joint problem solving on matters that were traditionally the sole concern of one organization, but not both.

It is also worth pointing out that the “tables can turn”, so partnering can have reciprocal benefits to both organizations.  That is, whereas one organization may be struggling today; the other may be struggling tomorrow.  Working in a collaborative way builds a spirit of reciprocity that can help both partners as business cycles ebb and flow.

Ramifications to Your Sales Success.

Our hope is this article presents the differing approaches to selling and gives you insights as to ways you can increase your sales success.

Start with self awareness – what type of sales person are you?   Are you still sticking to the old ways of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” (cronyism)?   Are you engaging in price cutting to secure business but significantly hurting your livelihood in the process?  Are you still pushing the features and benefits of your products even though these are not compatible with the deeper buying motives of your customers and prospects?

Hopefully, you are mostly engaged at a higher level of professional selling in being consultative with your clients.  But don’t stop there.  This article gives you suggestions on how to further raise the bar with some key clients and thereby significantly reduce the business risk inherent in today’s precarious economic climate.

Collaborative selling makes sense, especially when conveyed in a manner that helps both parties over the longer term.   By partnering with the seller, the buyer receives greater benefits since the business relationship is maintained and the opportunity to create value now exists.   This will add to the bottom line of both organizations.    Find ways to make the business case for your customers to partner with you, and then move into the new era of selling – that is, be collaborative.

I wish you the very best in your selling efforts.  If you have selling or consulting needs, you can contact Robert Harris at rhr@idirect.com or visit our website at www.rhresources.com.

This article was authored by Robert Harris, B.Comm, MBA, CHRP who is President of Robert Harris Resources Inc. and author of the new book, Change Leadership: Inform, Involve, Ignite!

Middle managers are front line supervisors and managers who are not empowered to make the strategic business decisions and, instead, report to more senior managers who do run the business.  This group is crucial in terms of ensuring organizational efficiency, and often has a wealth of important historical expertise and knowledge since they move around less than the executives above them.

Unfortunately this group is in peril as we experience these tough recessionary times.    Imagine having the stressors and expectations on you that accompany today’s business climate without having much control to influence outcomes.

Furthermore, middle managers must not only try to perform in difficult circumstances, since everyone’s viability comes under scrutiny in tough times, they must also meet the needs of two very disparate groups – those who report to them (their staff) and those to whom they report (their bosses).

When I was a youngster, we used to play a baseball related game called “monkey in the middle”.    Two players would toss the ball back and forth between the bases while a third player was “hung out” in the middle and needed to safely get back to a base.  It wasn’t easy, took lots of patience and perseverance, and more often that not, resulted in the hung out person being tagged “out”.   In some ways, that is how I envision the plight of the middle manager during these tough times.  They are feeling less empowered than ever, while somehow trying to get control of a ball that seems out of their grasp.

There have always been challenges for front line supervisors and middle level managers, especially when it came to implementing change decreed from above.  However, the pressures today from both above and below are extreme.

Subordinates are likely feeling very insecure.   On January 26, 2009, over 70, 000 job cuts were announced in the United States in one day along. This has a ripple effect on the fragile psychological state of many employees who are already anxious about their security.  And of course they will be looking to their managers for reassurance and direction as these types of insecurities and ambiguities increase.

Senior management is also challenged to find new ways to navigate through choppy waters.    This will certainly translate into additional pressures being put on middle managers to find savings and generally, do more with less.

So what is needed?

I believe the answer lies in the concerted efforts of 3 key organizational levels to ensure that middle managers are able to cope and thrive.

Helping middle managers from below – How staff can help…

Interestingly, staff who report to middle managers may, temporarily, be feeling more resilient than their bosses.   Even though their energy may be waning, the very fact that they have less on their plate may give them the psychological energy to play a supportive role to their managers.  This won’t be true for all staff of course, but certainly some staff will be feeling more energized and capable than those to whom they report.  I liken this to a form of “role reversal”.

So, what can staff do?

(i) This may be a good time to “step up to the plate” and ask the manager what needs doing and how they can help.   The benefit to staff is the opportunity to grow and develop on assignments and tasks they might normally not be considered for. This provides both new skill development and important visibility.   Furthermore, the staff member’s attitude and willingness will likely be appreciated and well received by the manager who is struggling to cope.

(ii) Staff may also notice a downturn in the behaviours of their managers.  Whereas the manager may have previously provided a reasonable balance of task (directing) and relationship (supporting) behaviours, now the heavy focus will likely be on task.   This can lead to morale issues if staff don’t recognize the situation for what it is – that is, the manager is under increased pressure to get things done and may overlook the niceties of the past.  Staff need not interpret this as negative or intentional on the part of the manager.

(iii) Staff may even be able to help normalize things for the manager by acknowledging the challenges everyone is facing.   Nothing is more challenging that feeling isolated at the very time when you need some help.   Staff may be able to share their awareness of the collective challenge and this will help re-energize the manager.

Helping middle managers from above – How senior management can help…

Senior management needs the support and trust of their middle managers, now more than ever.  If things are going to get done, new changes implemented, all while trying to

ensure that the most capable people don’t leave the organization, then executives need to connect with middle managers.   The middle rung is literally the “glue that holds everything together”.

So, what’s needed from above?

(i) Executives have to make more calculated decisions on what’s a priority and what’s not.   Notwithstanding the importance of change, it is also important to foster some sense of stability – especially in these times.   Middle managers need to clearly understand why certain decisions and actions are being undertaken, and also feel confident that less important actions are (at least) temporarily shelved.   It really boils down to looking at what is important and urgent, not just what is urgent.

(ii) Senior managers also need to give some slack to middle managers who might not be feeling at the top of their game.    Knowing that executives “have your back” will lessen the stress on middle managers and cause them to be more open to change.

(iii)  Communication, typically poorly done, needs to be significantly ramped up!   Executives must seek the input of middle managers on matters pertaining to them and, wherever possible, act on that input.    Senior management can also provide feedback on business matters that perhaps don’t normally get relayed downward.  This will also send a positive message to middle managers who typically feel out of the loop.

(iv)  Finally, during precarious times, senior management can articulate “guiding principles” on how decisions and actions will be taken.  This will have a calming effect on many middle managers.   These could include: (a) people will always hear about things impacting them first and not through a peripheral 3rd party; (b) information that is believed accurate will be shared sooner than later and (c) timelines will be provided when information that is currently unavailable will become available.   In effect, senior management is modeling a values-driven approach to operating.

Most importantly – how middle managers can help themselves…

There are things middle managers can do that will help with their “psychological” state, which in turn will help with their physical capacity.

(i)  My first recommendation is that middle managers get clear as to their “circle of influence” and focus their attention on this area.   All too often when under stress, people tend to obsess about things outside their control which takes their focus and energy away from things within their influence.  Getting very clear on what can be controlled or influenced allows middle managers be a more useful coach to their staff who will be looking for feedback and clarity.

(ii) Middle managers need not be an “island unto themselves”.   Instead of masking their concerns or worse, putting on overly positive airs, middle managers should be honest with others about the realities and implications of the situation.  Their staff will respect this type of candour and, being honest, doesn’t mean having to preach doom and gloom.  In fact, when managers combine honesty with our recommendation above about focusing on their circle of influence, they will actually be able to help themselves and others take meaningful actions.

(iii)  Finally, middle managers need to be honest and upfront with more senior management.   Key to “influencing up” is the ability to present a balanced picture which realistically presents both the benefits and the risks of different actions.    Middle managers need to push back as the need arises but in a professional way that clearly shows how the risks outweigh the benefits of what is being proposed from above.   The more that middle managers can move into a partnering role with their bosses, the easier it will be on both levels of management to succeed during tough times.

In one of my recent articles, I discussed a 4 part strategic influencing tool that allows middle managers both to promote change and push back on upper management when change is ill-advised.

I sincerely hope this article provides both an awareness of the critical importance of helping middle managers succeed as well as some concrete ideas on how all organizational levels can help.

Authored by Robert Harris, B.Comm, MBA, CHRP who is President of Robert Harris Resources Inc. (www.rhresources.com) and author of the new book, Change Leadership: Inform, Involve, Ignite.

I believe there are a number of leadership insights that, if emulated, can help everyday organizational leaders achieve the results they seek.  These lessons include:

Never get “hooked” or “take the bait” when others attack or try to make it personal. Both in the primaries (especially in debates with his counterparts), and then in his head-to-head interactions with John McCain, Obama was attacked on a number of fronts.   His adversaries tried to portray him as “un-American”, risky, inexperienced, lacking substance, and elitist.   Obama never got overly defensive.  Instead, he acknowledged that he has made mistakes and is human like the rest of us.  He also acknowledged that others have the right to their viewpoints and he was consistently respectful of diverse perspectives.   He demonstrated a higher quality of emotional intelligence than we have been used to from our politicians.   On the contrary, as surveys started showing the Republicans were trailing in the polls, John McCain and his Vice President nominee, Sarah Palin, were throwing everything but the kitchen sink at Obama.  They started shifting their tactics which reflected the old mantra that “the end justified the means”.   If anything, these tactics caused their status in the polls to fall even further.

Mobilize others and recognize their efforts. Virtually all strategists have complimented Obama on his ability to mobilize and meaningfully engage a massive army of supporters and volunteers.   His ability to stimulate a grass roots organization fully committed to his cause resulted in the largest fund-raising ever seen.  Obama was able to cut across gender, race, and economic backgrounds to completely energize those who believed in his mission.   Established heavy-weights like Hillary Clinton and McCain were steamrolled by a      grass-roots movement they could not come close to matching.  Obama was available and accessible to his supporters.  He participated weekly in extensive conference calls whereby thousands were able to communicate in person with him.   He invited as many people as he could to meet him and others on his team.  He portrayed an aura of appreciation and collaboration versus the “hero” mentality of someone who was going to ride in on his stallion and personally save the nation.

Hone in on values that people can relate to. Obama’s slogan was “Change We Can Believe In”.     I really liked this message because, from all my work, I know that people’s biggest challenge with change is their sense of distrust about the motives and capabilities of those driving change.  Obama’s message resonated so well with people who were looking for their leaders to be honest and trustworthy.     Obama pointed out what mistakes had been made in the past and the fact that real change will never happen if Washington continues to operate in its “same old / same old” way.    Obama talked about getting rid of the elitist “old boys” network and lobbyist agenda that was not meeting the needs of the larger majority.    He was able to use statistics and facts that clearly supported his case for the need for real change.   And throughout the entire campaign, he never deviated from his message of “Real Change that We Can Believe In”.   His supplemental slogan of “Yes We Can” truly inspired the everyday citizen who for so long felt just the opposite.   In reality, he so captured the minds and hearts of the general public, that it was going to be hard for experienced candidates like Hillary Clinton and John McCain to defeat him.

In the end, Obama’s victory was a victory for the everyday person and nothing is more powerful than that.  Of course, now Obama must deliver but it is clear from how he conducted his campaign, that he truly understands the components of effective Leadership.

The CEO was to launch the event and speak for the first hour.  Then, following a coffee break, I was to speak on Change Leadership.   What happened next was both predictable and, unfortunately, highly ineffective.

As the CEO reached the podium, a huge banner unfolded with the message: Vision 2009.    The CEO then explained that the organization was transforming from what he called a “transactional based business” to one much more focused on adding value to the customer.

He enthusiastically talked about the importance of “seizing this window of opportunity”, “raising the bar” and “moving into the 21st century” in terms of how the company did business.   He noted that employees would need to shed the old ways and, instead, assume new roles and competencies to align the company for future success.

After about 30 minutes, the CEO paused and asked, “Any questions..?”    An awkward silence engulfed the room as people looked away nervously.    At that point, the CEO turned to me and whispered, “That’s great – they must have got it!”, and off he went back to head office.

As we broke for coffee, the hallways were instantly abuzz with questions and chatter about what people had just heard.

This brief scenario illustrates a major problem in getting buy-in to change; that is, the real conversation must happen in the room, not outside in the hallways, washrooms, or parking lots.

So, why the silence?   Let me explain. First of all, the CEO was totally fixated on the benefits of the restructuring – for people to suggest otherwise would be risky and likely a career limiting move.   Secondly, by the time the CEO announced the changes, these changes were portrayed as a “done deal”.  In the minds of the audience, there would be little benefit in engaging in a dialogue since there was no opportunity to influence the outcome.

Unfortunately, that CEO was on what I call the “slippery slope” to change failure.   You may find it surprising (perhaps not!) that over 2/3 of all changes fail to achieve the objectives and goals established at the outset of the change.   Furthermore, of all the factors contributing to change success or failure, communications is invariably cited as the number one predictor of whether or not change works.

I spend much of my business practice guiding organizations and leaders through change.  What is critical is how the change starts because, as the saying goes, “you never get a second chance to make a first impression”.   What is said or done at the beginning has a huge bearing on how the change will progress.

There are five (5) keys to effective change communications:

1. It must be understandable and reflect the reality of people being asked to change;
2. It must be balanced in reflecting both the upsides and downsides of change;
3. It must be credible and transparent such that people trust both the message and the messenger;
4. It must reflect both the logical and emotional elements that people are struggling with during change;
5. It must cause others to act – in other words, it must engage the audience and cause others to want to participate in the change.

Let me offer a much better way to communicate change that can significantly raise the odds of change success.  I refer to this process the 4-Box Strategic Influencing Model.

This tool is extremely useful for first planning the change, and then launching the change in a way that is balanced, credible, engaging, and ultimately leads to shared commitment to needed outcomes.

Here’s how the 4-box model works:

Step One: The communicator must first explain the reasons for the change.   It is virtually impossible for people to accept change if they don’t understand the rationale driving that change.   All too often, employees lack commitment because they simply don’t understand the logic.    Communicators must use facts and language that is grounded in reality.   Stakeholders being asked to change must feel this rationale represents their reality and is not simply perceived as “corporate-speak”.

Step Two: The communicator then needs to address the benefits of the change but in a way that resonates with those being asked to change.   Furthermore, when extolling the virtues of change, the communicator must initially keep this brief – otherwise, it comes across as hype or what I liken to “cheerleading”.     Later on, once a two way discussion ensues, there will be ample to time to elaborate on the benefits of the change but, initially, keep it brief.

Step Three: At this point, it is critical to talk about what the audience would see as the downsides to the change, as well as talk about how the organization and its leaders will
lessen these issues and concerns.   That does not mean that the organization can “fix” everything; it can’t.  But what is important is the acknowledging of these issues and a demonstration of genuine intent to help with these issues.

Equally important at step three, the communicator needs to invite stakeholders to work with the organization to find solutions to the challenges presented by the change.  Step three is critical in fostering a climate of trust and “safety”, especially if there is a power differential between the communicator and the audience.  In effect, by acknowledging and legitimizing the downsides to change, the message comes across as balanced and credible.   This is critical if people are going to trust the message and the messenger.

Step Four: Finally, the communicator must specify those things people value that won’t be impacted by the change.  Put simply, communicators must talk not only about what is changing, but also about what is staying the same.     This has a calming effect on those who are convinced that “everything is changing” and reassures people that this change will be reasoned and balanced, not just “change for change’s sake”.

I have used this 4-box model with numerous client organizations both for large scale change and smaller changes as well, with excellent results.   By following this process, you will notice new attitudes and needed behaviours from people being asked to change.  Instead of generating apathy or cynicism, the 4-box model leads to understanding and ultimately commitment to very important organizational goals.

Please feel free to contact us at rhr@idirect.com or phone me at (905) 827-5493 and I will be happy to elaborate on what is described in this article.   You can also reach us through our website at www.rhresources.com.

Robert Harris Resources Inc. offers training, speaking and consulting services in the areas of change management, communications, conflict resolution, negotiating and influencing skills, internal consulting, career planning, enhancing individual and team effectiveness.

Finally, let me wish you success on your change initiatives.