Authentic Conversations
Nancy Dixon | Business Frameworks Can’t Replace Thinking | What, So What, Now What | Factoids | Elsewhere, Elsewhen
The greatest knowledge deficit in organisations is not the lack of sharing nor poorly designed repositories. Rather, it is the inability to hold authentic conversations.
| Nancy Dixon, The Hidden Knowledge Problem in Organizations
…
Paradoxically, I hold that using highly structured communication to make it easier for people to communicate more clearly and therefore connect better with others.
For example, I have promoted the use of ‘even over’ statements to clarify what companies stand for, and to guide people’s decisions, as I wrote about in Business Frameworks Can’t Replace Thinking:
In my experience, the shiny appeal of abstract models lies in making decisions through deduction. But deduction relies on starting with facts we know to be true, and in complex systems like businesses, we must work with incomplete information of unknown accuracy and reliability. If the inputs to our models aren’t very good, we must instead rely on something else. I believe we should rely deeply internalized principles to guide us.
One approach to using internalized principles I’ve found helpful is making decisions based on explicit relative values. The approach uses “even over” statements to guide our decision making, like these:
Employees' wellbeing even over customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction even over profits
With these principles in place, a customer support rep can make the decision to give a customer who has an emergency temporary free access to a paid tier of the product knowing customer satisfaction is more important than the profits from a single transaction.
A company, team, or individual can draw upon internalized principles like these when deciding a course of action that will take them from an Objective to Key Results, without resorting to some Harvard Business Review article on strategy.
And this, from an HBR Business Review article on tactics.
In A Simple Hack to Help You Communicate More Effectively, Matt Abrahams shares the ‘What, So What, Now What’ communication schema:
The “What, So What, Now What” Framework
Much like the Swiss Army Knife, known for its versatility and reliability, this structure is flexible and can be used in many different communication situations. The structure is comprised of three simple questions:
What: Describe and define the facts, situation, product, position, etc.
So What: Discuss the implications or importance for the audience. In other words, the relevance to them.
Now What: Outline the call-to-action or next steps, such as taking questions or setting up a next meeting.
This structure not only helps in organizing your thoughts but also serves as a guidepost for your audience, making the information easier to follow and act upon.
The Framework in Action
What does this structure look like in practice? Here are three examples:
1. Introductions
Introductions can often ramble and confuse. Using this structure can help you be clear and set expectations for what is to come.
When you’re introducing someone:
What: I am honored to introduce Dr. Clark, who is here to discuss her insights into attachment theory.
So What: Her work has changed the way many people go about making daily decisions. I am certain you will think differently when you leave here tonight.
Now What: Without further ado, join me in welcoming Dr. Clark.
2. Answering a question
Questions are a great opportunity to use this structure. For example, imagine a job interview where you are asked: “Why are you qualified for this job?”
What: I have over 12 years of experience in customer-facing work, addressing challenges such as migrating to new systems and implementing new processes.
So What: These previous experiences will help me provide your customers with high-quality results, while also assisting you to streamline your deployment process.
Now What: I’m happy to have you discuss my qualifications with some of my former clients.
My personal use has been close to home: pitching a story to an editor.
What: Workplace transparency sounds like a net positive, but there is a great deal of evidence to suggest there may be a dark side: not just the psychological impacts of surveillance, but the impact transparency can have on innovation and performance.
So What: If companies move forward with a simplistic concept of workplace transparency they could disrupt activities that are beneficial for workers and companies. I plans to present concrete examples from contemporary research that could help with that. I can share some of that research with you.
Now What: I propose to draft a longer abstract following your go-ahead, with a first complete draft early in November.
One concern: Abrahams ‘structured communication’ is a schema for what one plans to share with others, but it lacks consideration of ‘structured listening’. For example, in the ‘answering a question’ section above, each of the What, So What, and Now What steps could include give and take between the speaker and the listener, and definitely at the end. Abrahams doesn’t treat that at all, but in practice, we all have to face that. Still, the central idea of ‘What, So What, and Now What’ is helpful, especially for planning how to structure a discussion.
Give it a try.
Factoids
Insurance costs climbing because of climate change.
Overall, the average home insurance premium in the United States climbed by 33 percent from 2020 to 2023, far exceeding inflation.
| Benjamin J. Keys, Philip Mulder via David W. Chen
North Carolina is looking at a proposed 42% home insurance rate hike.
…
Apparel resale growing fast.
In 2023, apparel resale in the United States grew seven times the rate of the broader retail industry, and the used clothing market reached $43 billion, up from about $23 billion in 2018.
| ThredUp reported by Linda Baker.
Resale creates a reason to visit brick-and-mortar shops. And major brands are getting on board, in many case creating stores and online sites to resell their vintage goods:
The little Hudson Valley of Beacon has at least five vintage shops along 1.5 miles of Main Street, with only one grocery store, and no brand clothing stores along the way.
…
The impact of Trump’s deportation plan.
A mass deportation plan designed to expel 13.3 million undocumented immigrants over about 10 years would crash the economy, immiserate millions of Americans and siphon nearly $1 trillion from the federal government. To deport one million immigrants per year would incur an annual cost of $88 billion, with the majority of that cost going toward building detention camps. [Including salaries for additional government workers and related cost, like travel] would cost at least $967.9 billion over 10 years.
| American Immigration Council via Jamelle Bouie
It’s an insane idea. Note that ~30% of construction workers are undocumented immigrants, and we are in a housing crisis.
…
Read more!
Americans who read at least one book a year—just over half of adults—complete 11 a year on average.
| The Economist, How long would it take to read the greatest books of all time?
It staggers me that just over half of Americans read at least one book a year.
Elsewhere
I read Volkswagen’s Woes Reflect a Stagnant German Economy by Melissa Eddy. Her lede is 'No industry is more important to the German economy than automobiles. And no carmaker is more important than Volkswagen.'
As goes VW, so goes Germany… it seems. VW is facing headwinds, as a consequence of anti-EV policies that have now left the company confronted with falling sales, especially in China. A combination of factors -- lack of investment in EV tech, high costs for labor in Germany, and the German government's unwillingness to run a larger deficit -- leaves the company with few levers, and so it is planning to pull the layoffs lever.
One insight of general value: In times of great change, your greatest strength can become your greatest weakness, and the greatest champion may, therefore, be the first to fall.
German labor believes that the company has failed to address 'bureaucracy and complexity' -- which I interpret to mean too much management, but Eddy never details what ‘b & c’ means, really.
Erecting tariffs against Chinese cars -- which VW opposes -- might shield the industry, but it would raise the cost of the cheapest EV cars, harming European consumers, and thereby slowing the green transition that Europe is theoretically committed to.
Likewise, calls from economists and managers for the company saying VW and others need to become 'fast and flexible' I interpret to mean that massive layoffs are necessary, and perhaps even desirable: would they welcome weakening unions? But are they going to push the country into a recession? That question is never raised.
Unexamined: How exactly is regulation blocking 'nimbleness'? Are ordoliberal policies -- market regulation that led Germany to the peak of international prosperity -- no longer good policy now that Germany is confronted by a managed economy like China's?
And of course, the US economy has bounced back from the pandemic downturn much better than Germany (and the rest of Europe), too, at least partially because the US invested heavily (incurring massive debt) to turn the economy around. Also, the US under Biden has adopted industrial policy via the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Germany hasn't. Are economists specifically talking about the German regulation that stops the country from going in the hole to grease the economy? Or are they hinting at breaking the compact between corporations and German labor?
A lot of questions unasked and unanswered.
…
Elsewhen
Workplace transparency needs privacy.
In The Key to Effective Workplace Transparency? Privacy (2023), I explore the balancing act between workplace transparency and privacy:
Engagement at work is the center of the relationship between a company and employee and is reflected in employee retention, motivation and positive business culture. In this article, we will explore the balancing act between open communication — the information shared publicly between employers and their employees — and what might be better kept outside the glaring floodlights of total transparency.
I draw attention to the inherent surveillance built into transparency:
Almost every communication tool has two sides. First, the primary function — such as Salesforce being used for the selling process — but also a secondary capability: keeping track of what people do at any time of the workday. In the name of “productivity,” companies have set up surveillance systems:
I would like to erase the word ‘productivity’ from our discussions. Oftentimes when we’re talking about productivity, it’s coming down to monitoring… we’re tracking how many times have you logged in, how many emails you’ve sent, are you green on Slack? That idea is rooted in the industrial revolution; it’s not modernized to represent actual business results or employee output. Do I believe that employees should be measured on results? Absolutely. Do I think productivity is the best way to think about it? No. To me, ‘aligned,’ ‘motivated,’ and ‘clear on results and impact’ are far more important than ‘productive.’
In particular, I drew on research from Ethan Bernstein:
In 2014, organizational psychologist Ethan Bernstein published breakthrough research on the need to create 'zones of privacy' within open environments after determining that fully transparent organizations leave employees feeling vulnerable and exposed. As he characterized his findings,
Here’s the paradox: For all that transparency does to drive out wasteful practices and promote collaboration and shared learning, too much of it can trigger distortions of fact and counterproductive inhibitions. Unrehearsed, experimental behaviors sometimes cease altogether. Wide-open workspaces and copious real-time data on how individuals spend their time can leave employees feeling exposed and vulnerable. Being observed changes their conduct. They start going to great lengths to keep what they’re doing under wraps, even if they have nothing bad to hide. If executives pick up on signs of covert activity, they instinctively start to monitor employee behavior even more intensely. And that just aggravates the problem.
I think it's a good piece.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Work Futures to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.