Executive Voice: the power of podcasts

I read an interesting article on the BBC website about podcasts:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/9545533.stm

With social media being the buzz word du jour, it appears that podcasts are no longer in vogue. It appears that everyone is tweeting; on facebook, or for work on Linkedin. However, the BBC has discovered that podcasts are being downloaded and listened to more.

As a communication tool, podcasts are very useful in that they have a human contact element to them. We engaged with the human voice in a way that Twitter -which of course has it's own uses, does not. Listening to tips on setting up a business; training for the marathon or even deciding what to cook for supper tonight engage many people that prefer audio communication to the written word. Using podcasts transmits information to more people than written word only.

I currently use audioboo for my podcasts (although I am just about to change). My channel is www.audioboo.fm/executivevoice

Tweeting is only one way of engaging clients

I have a number of acquaintances I have met through business, who rave about Twitter. They have had seriously good results from Twitter: linking up with a number of people; getting business this way; having thousands of followers to their tweets. This is brilliant and I am really pleased for them. In this world, success stories are uplifting!

However, I have also met people, that I have engaged with; subsequently worked with, and who now appear to have moved onto the next 100 people to engage with and be followed by. These particular people rave about Social Media as if it is the ONLY business tool to use, yet they've unfortunately disengaged me! Emma Freud mentioned that at a party, her sister ignored her because she wanted to speak to her new 'Twitter' friends that were there. 

And last week I was at a select business meeting where I started a conversation with another business owner. On trying to find out more about her business she said 'Do you go on Twitter; if you follow me, then you'll know what I'm doing!" Yet I was in the room with her; face to face engagement is invaluable for starting a business relationship!

There is no doubt that Twitter and other Social Media packages are an invaluable business tool for engaging with other businesses and to establish a rapport. From tweeting I have gone on to arrange face to face meetings and to develop the business relationship further, and postings are a great way to keep people up to date with what you are doing.

But relationships are more than collecting as many followers as possible; and there is a process from initially connecting with a person via Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook etc, to picking up a phone and interacting as human beings - rather than via a computer. Once the human interaction takes place, the business relationship moves forward far faster. Face to face meetings also play a major impact in this; the number of times I have gone out of my way to pop into a new contact - which has led to business is significant, yet I'd been emailing for some time before that!

However, even after telephone or face to face meetings, you STILL need to maintain the relationship, and tweeting alone isn't enough. You almost need to be more personal; more hard working with these relationships once you've reached this level.

The social media expert Eileen Brown, says that you need to monitor how long you spend each week on Social Media; measure the results and effectiveness of your activities and don't spend more than 5 hours a week. She is an expert and I believe her advice is valid: it is easy to get sucked into building up a large following which takes up time, and does not lead to significant business or to developing long term business relationships.

In the end it is about balance, and the realisation that people buy from people. Let's not forget the power of ourselves - our physical presence and voices, in selling our services.

The Apprentice: All talk and no action

There is no doubt that Melody has an impressive CV: being tutored by world leaders including the Dalai Lama and Al Gore. Winning a number of awards and running a Global Industry. Then why don't I take her seriously and respect her?

Really it is the outlandish self promotion; the talking; the inability to answer the question 'What do you do?'; the arrogance. In our youth, we all over emphasise our achievements, but we learn when to stop and when not to over exaggerate. Yet Melody's exaggeration appears to be a business version of those X Factor candidates, that despite being tone deaf, really believe they are star singers.

Of course, for the BBC, Melody was gold dust; she provided excellent TV with her memorable claims and quotes, and her obvious business flaws. It was hilarious that she was unable to explain the nature of her business: something that anyone would ask - and demand a simple explanation.

However, my concern is that she is obviously a role model for young people; she coaches in communication skills, yet she had a style that invited ridicule and disbelief. Is exaggerating experience really going to win a young person a job, or investment in new business? Is this communication style going to win a young person respect in an adult world?

Recently I was an invited guest at a conference. One of the speakers was a beautiful young woman, who specialised in 'communications'. She spent her 30 minute speech, talking herself up, and outrageously name dropping. Her feedback marks were very low, with some devastating comments. At no time did she engage her audience; she never indicated how she might help of assist any of the businesses represented at the conference, and as a result, didn't create any possibility of trust or of any future rapport. It was a puffed up presentation by someone that gave little indication that she could cope with anything more demanding that the primary school tuck shop, with adult help. I have no idea how good this woman was at her job, but her communication and presentation style was flawed.

Youthful optimism and lack of fear is such a powerful tool, and one that we all want to encourage within young people. However, this style of communication, and mind set is doing no favours to our young people. There are plenty of fabulous young people, however, the promotion of this style of b***shitting, as being in any way acceptable, is risible - and won't lead to any more people being able to win investment for their businesses or job offers.

The crazy thing was that for a moment, we saw a less arrogant Melody in 'Your Fired'. She suddenly became the 26 year old that she is: passionate, wanting to learn and humble. It was only for a brief second, but it left me sad that she wasn't able to be herself - rather she'd decided to portray herself as a Global Leader.

Do you have to be well mannered to get on in business?

Well, it was another interesting Apprentice programme last night wasn't it? There was some jaw dropping behaviour both inside and outside the boardroom. I will discuss this later. What I have also found interesting is a column by Allison Pearson, who compared our Melody to Margaret Thatcher and other high achieving women leaders. Now I personally cannot see any similarity between the two women, other than having a forceful, focused 'verbal' handbag technique. Allison Pearson also argued that people didn't like Melody because she was a b*tch and that these qualities are admired in men but not women.

As edited by the programme - and of course, we can't be totally sure the editing has been completely balanced, Melody is very good at persuading/bulldozing others into agreeing with her. She doesn't listen to other people's advice or views, and even disregarded the chosen panel of tasters, who 'didn't agree' with her ideas. She just latches onto an idea and goes for it. I admire anyone that has the focus and strength of character to fight for what she wants, but surely it is a fatal flaw to disregard other people's opinion, observations and even panel research. I just can't wait to see this woman in the interview stage...

The other person I wish to discuss this week is Zoe, who was just ghastly, to Melody. She's been ghastly to Susan and Natalie in the past. Of course, the venom directed at Melody isn't totally unjustified;  but the personal attacks 'below the belt' to Melody just before an important presentation (were the buyers from Asda able to hear the performance?) was so unprofessional. Talk about shattering the confidence of your team just before an important presentation. Zoe has the ability to fight dirty: real 'girl fight stuff'. One imagines she would have scratched and pulled hair in fights with any girl she disliked at school. I don't know if she resorts to personal attacks when she feels under pressure; she was much better when she wasn't a team leader - but of course this could have been the editing. It was as though she wasn't capable of making a decision, but would lash out at team members rather than take responsibility. You could see her digging a hole as she attacked Melody and then Tom in the board room, and interestingly enough, the person who was the recipient of previous attacks, Susan, wasn't called back into the board room.

I am going to sound like Karren Brady, who hates women behaving in this way, particularly in the board room. Unfortunately, there is a particular type of male (and Daily Mail readers) who consider that all business women are second rate and behave in the way Zoe does. They don't, believe me! However, her behaviour ticks every stereotype of women as leaders, and unfortunately does no women any favours.

I will therefore go to an article I read where ex-Tesco CEO, Terry Leahy recommended that good manners in business was the key to success. Both Melody and Zoe, and also Jim, do not appear to have this characteristic; one because she plays dirty and makes personal attacks, the other two because they are so focused, they will do anything to get where they want, which will include shouting down others; manipulating and not listening. On the other hand Jim was heard saying that Helen was quiet and gentle and he liked her because he coujld get his way. However, one wonders whether he has underestimated her ability to manipulate him!

I am wondering whether people feel that they have to be the loudest; the most aggressive; the most devious in order to be successful in business. I believe you need a focus, determination, energy and charisma. But loud? Your marketing can be loud, but you could be the quietest person but full of energy and charisma!

It's all in the market research

Now I have some inside information on Market Research; I worked in the industry for nearly two years, and learnt two very important things: you can lead the respondent to answer in a particular way and you need more than 4 respondents. I even knew that from an O Level research exercise. But then again, I don't run a global industry. And I don't have a wealth of awards - although I'm up for the viola player of the year award in our household, which is a given, since I'm the ONLY viola player in the household.

It is also not de rigeur to interpret 'very good' and 'excellent' for, 'not really' and 'okay': unless your French isn't quite as good as you've talked yourself up to be. Or perhaps you just didn't like the product and wanted to ensure it wasn't selected. Or maybe you don't have a good grasp of what consumer's might buy, which is a surprise since you run a global organisation and have been mentored by an impressive list of world class thinkers and Nobel Prize Winners.

Please don't think I'm just getting at Melody. She is a tigress and as Lord S said, she will fight for her place in the Apprentice. She also worked incredibly hard getting appointments, and had a stab at speaking French. However, it was all for her own gain; she isn't a team player and had an inability to hear requests for anything that wouldn't further her own position within the process. She based her decisions on 'gut instinct' without considering any evidence and also conveniently 'forgot' to do some tasks that the team leader asked her to - research on La Redoute for example.

Personally I have a problem with individuals that constantly blow their own trumpet: the 'All talk and no action' brigade. They expect everyone to shine their lights on them; illuminating their talent at the expense of everyone else's. My friend Samantha told me that when she met Rupert Murdoch, he had a charisma and he listened to what everyone said. He really paid attention and made you feel that your opinion was valid. He then went away and considered the evidence (statistical and opinion) before making a decision. He runs a successful global business. That is the skill base you need to be successful Melody. I can't wait to see her in the interviews!

“I can take their hearts, I can take their minds,” The Apprentice

“I can take their hearts, I can take their minds,” he dreamed. Now I apologise for blogging late on this particular episode of The Apprentice, but I had been so mesmerised by Jim's mellifluous tones that I was charmed into thinking he liked me; not that he wanted me to do his thing.

Ah! Of course we know that he told the TV viewers that he had a game plan for manipulating his team into being submissive and if the going got tough, then he'd stick the boot in. As he showed in the board room. As Karren kindly summarised "You have a passive aggressive personality". Anyone that has had a boss like this - or a friend for that matter, knows the outcome is heartbreaking. I am sure Jim's team will also be more wary of his games now.

Yes: this bloke does get everyone to work together, and he makes everyone feel valued. He does the eye contact; open body language - even mimicking body language to develop rapport very, very well. Even the frosty Zoe fell for Jim's charms and was dancing to his tune. 

Yet when the evaluation of the task, in the boardroom, took place, he was first to devalue other's contribution, lying and scraping to save his place. We have all worked with or for people that behave like this. How do they gain promotion? How are they so effective? Perhaps they don't make the progress they like; perhaps the reality is that they aren't telling the truth with future plans and opportunities. I worked with a tenor who was exactly this; terribly destructive to colleagues when the going got tough. Slowly we all unravelled the considerable web of deceit, which took a while to recover from.

If you are in work, it is good to have a mentor or someone that you can trust who might not be in your department. Someone that has one step away from the action but might know the characters. A mentor is invaluable for noticing games and situations that are occurring to warn you, and also to provide advice if the going gets tough.

Jim is, of course TV gold and we are waiting for a withering look from Margaret in the interview session!

Glaswegian accents affect success of winning jobs

 I read the following press release yesterday: this was describing the results of a survey on accents and employability.
http://www.responsesource.com/releases/rel_display.php?relid=6525

As we all know, discussing accents is an emotive subject for many people. An accent does identify where the speaker is from and class - which for many British people is key. But certain accents provoke prejudice, which I believe could be the cause of the results. My views on accents and where I rank them are different to these results, as I am sure readers would also agree. If I'm analysing the results, I might suggest that there was regional (southern) bias in the research: I doubt if anyone from the north would consider an Essex accent the most preferable accent to have.

 However, the whole issue of accents is interesting when considering 'employability'. In fact a number of well known presenters have said that their middle class accents was a disadvantage when working at the BBC where regional accents are now favoured. To a certain extent, it is 'horses for courses'; a Public School accent for a business with many people of that background would be an advantage, but wouldn't work so well, if they were targeting Liverpool clients. Yet the lovely Ashley in Michel Roux's "Service" demonstrated that he didn't need to speak RP to engage some very posh guests at a country hotel: his warm, endearing personality was a winning formula.

When I first taught in London, the headmistress of the prep school I was working at was incredibly posh. However, upon meeting her family, it transpired that they didn't present themselves in that way, and she had consciously 'lost' her scouse accent between Liverpool and Euston station, to advance her career. Another headmistress I have met: a dynamic, successful primary head, was told to 'get rid of her brummie accent if she wanted to get on' - and this was in Essex.

In the end, it is about being understood; speaking clearly, effectively and appropriately. A thick accent whether it be Public School posh; Glaswegian or Scouse is more difficult to understand than a voice with 'a little' accent, which still provides interest and individuality. However, poor grammar - of the Louise Rednapp/Alesha Dixon "You was great" variety, does not give a good impression; rather it shows the person is lazy and poorly educated. Would I employ them - or even buy from them: no. Would I employ or buy from someone who has a Glaswegian accent - yes, if they spoke clearly, with good grammar!