Jeffrey Cufaude, Idea Architects

Hi. I'm Jeffrey Cufaude.

2030-04-20T09:56:00.000-04:00

I believe deeply that the communities of which we are part are resource-full, but we must be more resourceful in how we invite and engage individuals to be caring contributors and learners. My past experience as executive director of two national associations and as a student affairs staff member at two large public universities has informed much of my subsequent 20+ years as a facilitator, strategist, leadership conference designer, consultant, and speaker.

Meaning & Means: Three Questions for a More Sustainable You

2020-07-21T01:24:00.003-04:00

The pandemic has allowed many people time to take stock of their professional and personal situations: Are they living in the right place? Are they working in the right profession? Are they spending their years in the most rewarding manner? And many more.

You could amass quite the collection of books on finding purpose in your life, career planning, and the like. I've read many of them, and many are quite good.

Rather than a book, I offer these three fundamental questions for to help clarify intentions and aspirations:

How do you define a meaningful life?
What resources does this definition require?
How can you attain and sustain those resources?

While what do you want to be when you grow up? is the more common question, it is incomplete, focusing only on the work aspect of our overall life. Essentially we need to start broader and then slowly narrow.

Recalibrating the meaning we seek and the means it requires will no doubt occur many times over our lives.

We don't want to live beneath our possible meaning, nor do we want to live beyond our means. Neither are sustainable.

The opportunity for each of us is to craft a life filled with meaning that requires means that we can sustain.

Exploring the creative tension between means and meaning is one aspect of my signature program, Say Yes Less: Why It Matters and How to Do It.

After completing a free registration, you can watch an archived webinar on this topic.

If you'd like me to share this content at an upcoming gathering, you can contact me here.

The Clock Doesn't Tell the Whole Story

2020-07-08T03:16:00.000-04:00

“Everyone is given the same 24 hours in a day.”

Well, of course, right? How can you argue with such a simple “truth”?

You can’t at face value, but the meaning behind the statement merits further examination.

Think about how this statement is most commonly used. I most frequently hear it when people try to prod others into being more productive with their day.

It’s often paired with the example of how some uber-entrepreneur invents some world-changing smartphone app before most of us finish our morning coffee.

“Look at Erin. She gets more done in a few hours than most of us accomplish in a full day.”

Be. Like. Erin.

The underlying message is we’re not worthy because we don’t make as much of a difference with our 24 hours as others do with theirs … and remember, we all have the same 24 hours in a day.

Except that we don’t. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

I am self-employed. I am single. I don’t have kids. I don’t have pets.

These four facts are the basis of a 24-hour day that undoubtedly is very, very different than others. For the most part, I have almost complete control over my day unless I am speaking or facilitating for an organization or participating in the occasional conference call to plan upcoming client work. In general …

I get up when I want.

I work when I want.

I don’t have to attend many meetings.

No one checks when I punch in or out.

This is the epitome of privilege. This is what genuine freedom of choice looks like, and it is a freedom that people possess in widely varying degrees.

We may each start with the same 24 hours in a day, but what is important to acknowledge, understand, and appreciate is how many of those hours are genuinely available for our discretionary use. And that’s where the clock starts to tell time differently.

When I was an association executive I found it very helpful to ask my board chair to tell me about his/her typical day. You can learn a lot about others by getting a sense of how their 24 hours often unfolds and what choices are available to them about how they spend their time. I’ve since turned that simple conversation into the exercise “A Day in My Life” that I often use as a part of leadership conferences or organizational retreats that I facilitate.

The bottom line is this: we don’t all have 24 hours a day available to us for our use. In fact many people have very few discretionary hours at their disposal in any given day. This needs to be acknowledged and addressed both at the personal level and the policy level.

If we want to build more effective teams, if we want to strengthen interpersonal relationships, understanding a day in the life of others is a very good place to begin. Effective leadership can then enact policies to reduce some of the systemic inequities of the clock that inhibit people from making their strongest contributions in the workplace.

Every Day is Interdependence Day

2020-06-29T14:57:00.001-04:00

Like many Americans you probably are excited for the upcoming Independence Day, more commonly referred to as July 4. While the independence associated with this holiday certainly merits celebrating, I’m not sure independence in and of itself is an entirely desirable goal today.

Too often we fail to acknowledge the impact our choices have on others' well-being. The debate over wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic is perhaps the most obvious and current example. Our health and safety is somewhat dependent on choices that others' make. I wear a mask to protect you and hope that you wear a mask to protect me.

Homeowners are very interdependent. If your immediate neighbors don't maintain reasonable care of their properties, it most definitely affects the price your home can attract when you next put it on the market. I don't have kids, but I need to be concerned about the quality of our inner-city schools or else I will live in a community that parents with school-age children find undesirable.

In our organizations, individuals and departments try to reduce what they perceive as “dependence” on others in order to get their work done. While independent mindsets can lead to greater initiative and speed-to-market, we might be better served in organizations if we acknowledged and embraced our interdependence.

Imagine right now if a portion of your salary was dependent on how well you contributed to the ability of your colleagues to complete their work successfully. Actually, it's not necessary to imagine that's the case because it actually is.

But most of us have not really been schooled in what it means to be a true team player, to operate interdependently, or fully considered what it might mean for our individual choices.

Interdependence also seems to go against the grain of the rugged individualism that many associate with America and that they will celebrate on July 4. If my success is somewhat dependent on what you do, what if you don’t come through?

What indeed? That’s the beauty (or agony depending on your perspective) of interdependence: it asks us to be as concerned with the efforts of others as we are with our own. It asks us to own the whole, not just our individual piece of the puzzle.

It asks us to readjust our priorities for any given day at work in order to support colleagues who may need our time and attention in order to complete their necessary assignments.

It prompts us to be concerned with the welfare of those with whom we work and live.

It requires us to acknowledge that some things do exist that we simply cannot do independently.

It asks us to understand our self-interest is inexplicably tied to some community interests.

So by all means let's celebrate independence on July 4, but let's also acknowledge and celebrate the freedom we possess to intentionally act in and embrace more interdependent ways.

What does acting more interdependently look like in action to you?

Help Your Speakers Embrace Diversity and Inclusion

2020-06-06T05:39:00.003-04:00

Note: I wrote the following article for ASAE-The Center for Association Leadership, and it was originally published in their Associations Now Plus members-only resource. It is used here with permission and ASAE retains the copyright.

A full commitment to diversity and inclusion means that an association’s educational programming—and the speakers providing it—reflect the learning community. Here are some practical steps associations can take to help presenters prepare sessions that reject assumptions about the audience and meet diverse attendee needs.

Association resource materials for speakers traditionally include key dates and deadlines, room and AV logistics, and suggestions for slide and handout presentation. Some also include basic tips on adult learning and how to create more engaging and interactive sessions.

Yet additional guidance in a critical area too often is missing: designing for the composition and culture of your learning community. Although this may be particularly valuable to presenters from outside your organization, even internal subject-matter experts can benefit from more specific instruction on how to design and deliver a session that not only is inclusive of the diverse participants they will address, but also reflects a genuine commitment to diversity and inclusiveness as core values. Learners want to both see themselves and hear themselves reflected in session content and delivery.

Here are a few examples of what associations are doing to help presenters prepare.

Guidance and Orientation

LeadingAge Illinois, like some associations, includes a brief statement in their speaker guidelines “to sensitize speakers to the potential diversity in the audience.” It urges speakers to review their course content and style for inclusive language, professional content versus personal beliefs, and potential sexist, discriminatory, or similarly insensitive language.

Presenter standards from the Promotional Products Association International also include advice on introducing panelists in a non-sexist manner and avoiding visual aids that show people in stereotypical roles. The latter echoes encouragement from the LeadingAge Illinois statement to “make no assumptions about those in the group other than a common interest in the content area delineated in the printed meeting materials.”

One way to prevent speakers from making assumptions about attendees is to provide them an accurate profile of their audience. No doubt you orient new employees to key elements of your profession or industry, demographic data about your membership, and some of the cultural norms that may be unique to your organization. Speakers would benefit from the same insights.

As a presenter, I find it useful to also receive detailed event or conference profiles that provide similar information for the specific conference community. Several years ago, I benefited from conversations with staff at the Foundation to Prevent Blindness about what types of visuals I could use effectively given the range of sightedness in the audience. Based on their guidance, I included more and differently designed visuals than I would otherwise have used.

Other orientation materials could include

a glossary of key terms and acronyms to use (as well as ones to avoid) and other tips on appropriate language.
insights about learner preferences that you have gleaned from previous evaluations.
a brief overview of the current environment for your profession or industry (trends, challenges, opportunities) to help presenters customize content with the most relevant examples for your current context.

Speakers can be more inclusive of diverse attendee needs and interests when you provide specific information to help shape what to include and what to exclude in their content and delivery.

Broadening Participant Perspectives

To help its subject-matter experts and other presenters infuse equity and inclusion into their conference presentations, ACPA-College Student Educators International offers comprehensive guidance for speakers in a micro-site. Dr. Kathy Obear, a diversity educator and organizational development consultant who led the development team for the guidelines, describes them as a “proactive step to help presenters develop formats, curriculum, and facilitator techniques to better meet the needs of an increasingly diverse membership.”

While the ACPA guidelines help prepare speakers to design more inclusive sessions, Obear says they also are intended to “help facilitators infuse issues and images in presentations that help participants deepen their multicultural competencies and challenge implicit, unconscious bias.” In other words, presenter preparation should include planning how to help learners broaden, deepen, and be more inclusive of the perspectives that they themselves consider.

Doing so is both art and science. Associations should engage speakers in sharing advice with each other about strategies they use to challenge the potentially limiting perspectives of participants on ways that facilitate growth and learning.

A Self-awareness Checklist

In my undergraduate coursework as an English major, one of my instructors taught my class to proof our work seven times, each time focusing on a specific variable: tone; spelling, grammar, and punctuation; cohesiveness of argument; and so on. Associations looking to help busy presenters design and deliver more inclusive presentations may be wise to create a similar checklist, one that includes such proofing criteria as inflammatory or unhelpful language, diversity of content sources referenced and examples offered, visual portrayal of people and groups in materials, and presenter confirmation bias. Until diversity in presentation design and delivery is your default, a checklist is a helpful tool to make sure you aren’t missing a critical program enhancement.

Other presenter support—such as webinars, online resource centers, and speaker coaching—can address these same opportunities but in more specific ways. To make tangible improvements in their programs, analytical and more detailed-oriented presenters will appreciate having “before and after” examples of infusing inclusion into a session design, a particular teaching technique, or even a slide.

Finally, associations should consider including a speaker-prep workshop at their conferences to continually build the capabilities and confidence of their members to be better presenters and learning facilitators.

The Person Behind the Presenter

Statements, tips, and checklists can definitely enhance a speaker’s presentation mechanics so that sessions better exemplify an inclusive design. But every presenter is also a person, and for these mechanics to have authentic meaning presenters may need to do their own inner work related to diversity and inclusion.

That work has value beyond the conference itself. As Obear aptly notes, “Most organizations are preparing members to serve increasingly diverse populations locally, nationally, and globally, so their members may want more knowledge and skills for better serving others across all group identities.” Evidence that an association is truly committed to equity and inclusion should include support and learning opportunities for the person, the professional, and the presenter.

Be Careful With Your Changing of the Guard

2020-05-26T18:11:00.001-04:00

I facilitated a session a few weeks ago where some participants talked about the need to replace the "old guard" with some new faces and fresh thinking.

It's a common concern and a common expression. No doubt for even the most dedicated of lifelong learners there is an expiration date on the value of their tenure in a particular role.

But remember, just because you're changing the guard doesn't mean you necessarily want to change what they were guarding.

People and programs will come and go.
Purpose and principles should be more permanent.

When recruiting and orienting new leadership be sure to explore their commitment to the purpose and principles you want to preserve, as well as their ideas for new ways to amplify them in the programs and practices they want to pursue.

Challenging Assumptions About Growth

2020-05-23T02:53:00.001-04:00

Double our membership.

Increase conference attendance by 50%.

Triple non-dues revenue in five years.

These are a few of the growth goals I have heard tossed about in strategy conversations over the years. If there is one common interest or goal of organizations it is getting more people or more money.

But to what end? And at what potential cost? Amazingly, organizations often fail to explore the short- and long-term consequences (positive and negative) of having more. Too many groups put growth goals ahead of any real strategy, a shortcoming explored in this excellent strategy + business article.

People often have strong mental models about growth. Mine is simple: growth should enable accelerated progress on an organization’s mission and vision. Simply getting bigger to be bigger is not strategic enough in my eyes.

When facilitating conversations about growth, the two initial questions I usually pose are: (1) What mission-related results will more _____ (members, volunteers, conference attendees, monies, etc.) help make possible? (2) What are the possible trade-offs involved if this growth is pursued and/or realized?

In terms of negative consequences, organizations that pursue explosive growth sometimes fall prey to the following:

Inadequate competence or capacity to scale their efforts.
Incomplete criteria and/or processes for evaluating potential growth opportunities, be they partnerships or new programs.
Insufficient shared clarity around what truly constitutes the organization’s core and its historic success, brand value, and market position and differentiators.

The issues raised in the three points above sometimes cause an organization to pursue opportunities that promise significant enhanced revenue streams, but are not fully aligned with its core values, market position, or competencies.

The potential negative consequences of this are several, including:

Diminished quality control on their existing successes which in turn can reduce market interest/demand for these programs or services, creating new financial pressures for growth.
Fragmenting their identity in the marketplace as prospects and/or long-term partners wonder “why are they doing that?”
Pursuing new opportunities because ofconvenience, timing, or personalities of those advocating for an idea versus thoughtful and consistent application of evaluation criteria.

Decision-making conversations shift from what the organization should do based on core values and strategy to what the organization could do based on available opportunities and the ease of implementing them.

None of this happens overnight; none of it is usually irreversible.

All of it likely can be avoided by proactively addressing the three points previously outlined before launching major growth initiatives and/or new programs.

To do so, I find it effective to have staff, board members, and other volunteers discuss and apply the following observations and frameworks for organizational strategy. Notice how they differ somewhat in content and tone from traditional (and too often predictable) goal-setting.

I invite you to try them on for size in your own discussions about strategic direction and growth.

Wayfinding for Groups: Seven Questions to Accelerate Progress

2020-05-15T07:09:00.002-04:00

Wayfinding.

It is the term used to describe the various ways that cities, buildings, parks, transit systems, and more help people find their way and avoid getting lost.

I find that more successful organizations pay great attention to wayfinding. Doing so usually accelerates group progress and often increases the satisfaction of group members.

During the early stages of every new group—a committee, a staff project team, a board, et al—a handful of basic wayfinding questions need to be answered.

They are not particularly sexy.
They are not particularly challenging.
They are not difficult to answer.

Yet they often go unasked and unanswered, essentially leaving those convened to accomplish something to feel rather lost in how to do so.

That's a huge missed opportunity.

When you next convene a group of people address the following, at minimum:

What are we here to do and how does it relate to other efforts? Clarify purpose and overall strategy.
How will we know we are successful? Explore desired results, key metrics for progress, and feedback opportunities.
Who’s here to do it (background info), what can they contribute, what are their interests, how to they engage? We don't trust people we don't know. Help us get to know each other.
How does work usually get done? Review structure, legal obligations, processes, systems, and the range of permissions for people to exercise initiative.
What agreements do we need to make with each other? Calibrate individual preferences with group and organizational needs.
What relevant “insider” info will help me contribute more effectively? Help orient me to the existing culture, relevant historical data/efforts related to our current charge, and available resources we can access.
What should I do between meetings? I'm here to work. What should I do besides showing up for meetings?

Want to go to the head of the class? Share all of this info prior to the first meeting being convened. Or better yet … as a part of the recruitment process to make sure you are attracting the right candidates.

This orientation shouldn't be tedious and complex, but it should be done. Consistently.

What other core questions would you add to this list?

Privilege Active Learning: In-Person and Online

2020-05-11T06:37:00.001-04:00

Here's a very simple principle anyone who designs and/or facilitates meetings or workshops should commit to memory: for every content segment, a more engaging format likely exists. In the recent rush to move workshops and conferences online, engaging participants in the process of learning does not seem to be a priority.

How should this reality inform our workshop or meeting design? In The Chronicle Higher of Education's Teaching newsletter, a Grand Valley State University professor suggests we should privilege active learning.

I agree wholeheartedly with one minor caveat: we must remember that engagement, participation, and active learning mean different things to introverted and extroverted learners.

Our design choices must intentionally honor and leverage those differences for a stronger experience for all participants in a workshop, meeting, or conference. It is too easy for presenters or facilitators to instead unintentionally privilege those learning formats and teaching techniques with which they are most comfortable, regardless of their potential appropriateness for participants.

For me, this intentional design involves a simple process for each content segment of a program:

brainstorm possible ways to teach it (workshops) or explore it (meetings), ones that move participants from passive to active whenever possible;
select one of those options as an initial planned format/teaching technique;
order the content in an appropriate flow, both in terms of content and learning format
examine the flow of the draft teaching techniques and formats and how different learners are engaged through the session, revising as desirable; and
identify backup formats for each individual segment and an alternative revised flow so you can make adjustments in real-time while preserving the desired engagement from/for all learners.

What often happens, however, is a presenter or facilitator focuses almost exclusively on content or format. Design becomes an either/or activity for them instead of one involving the AND.

Great content, poorly presented, sucks the life out of participants. This is the shortcoming of many subject matter experts presenting at association conferences. They know their stuff, but don't really know how to engage others in learning about it any way other than talking at them. I previously wrote about this challenge and offered some practical tips in this piece for the ASAE Professional Development newsletter.

Or a presenter gets so excited about using a teaching technique (case study, audience voting, role play) that they lose the necessary connection between content and learning format. Interesting and varied teaching techniques can initially mask weak content selections, but ultimately are like cotton candy: the good feeling dissolves and leaving nothing behind.

Calibrating the selection of appropriate content and learning formats is as much art as science, but doing so is a commitment each of us needs to make to honor the interest and attention of participants and the process of learning. I like how Jeff Cobb defines learning on his Mission to Learn site: "Learning is the lifelong process of transforming information and experience into knowledge, skills, behaviors, and attitudes."

For virtual programs, this tranformation process will require intentionally calibrating the mix of synchronous conversations and interactions online in a learning community and asynchronous interactions done offline. I find it easiest to determine those critical moments and formats for synchronous online interaction and to then build the asynchronous elements around them.

Bottom line?

Robust content presented in ways that engage participants in active learning should be a minimum standard for success, not an aspiration only few strive to achieve. Too many speakers and program designs (online and in-person) still focus on presenting information instead of facilitating learning. Let's change that.

Two Questions to Make Yourself a More Valuable Contributor

2020-05-04T08:14:00.000-04:00

Master keys unlock every door.
They are incredibly powerful.

When thinking about how to unlock the potential that rests within a group of people coming together to collaborate, I suggest two questions you can ask yourself, ones that function as personal master keys:

What contribution can I make in this conversation to advance our collective work?
What factors do I need to consider to successfully make that contribution?

In my experience, individuals who thoughtfully consider these questions and then act on their answers are more vital contributors to group work regardless of the group composition, its purpose, or the individual's prescribed role in it. Like a Master Key, the questions are universal in value. Let's dig a bit deeper into each one.

What contribution can I make in this conversation to advance our collective work?

Answering this question requires mentally stepping outside the group and assessing its current reality without judgment, much as a facilitator might:

What is happening?
What is being said?
How are people interacting?
What is the mix of participation (both extroverted and introverted)?
Whose voices are not being heard?
What perspectives are not present among the actual participants?
Where does agreement or disagreement exist?
Where is there understanding and where might confusion exist?
What's absent from the discussions?

Answers to these questions (and others you might generate) will help you identify what the group may need to make progress. You can then consider what contribution you might make to what you've identified as being needed. This transitions you to the second Master Key question.

What factors should I consider to successfully make my identified contribution?

Your contribution will occur within a context and culture. Think about the action you've identified in relation to the following question in order the shape the manner in which you might the contribute:

What is the culture in which this group operates, as well as the culture of the group itself?
What trust and social capital have you built with groups members and which ones?
How alike or different is the contribution you want to make from how you normally act in this group? How might this affect how it will be perceived or received?
How might your default style help or inhibit you successfully making the contribution you've identified?
How might you modify your tone, expression, language, et al in order to have people hear the value you are trying to contribute?
What observable behavior and understood data can you link your contribution to and how might you build on what others have shared?

At first, working with these two Master Key questions may require great focus, perhaps even jotting down your thoughts. But as you consistently do so with both intention and attention, the less perspiration they will require over time.

Postscript

When all else fails, consider consulting a "locksmith", someone whose personal qualities and/or experience with the group might help with a stubborn lock.

Five Principles for Better Webinars

2020-04-22T10:43:00.000-04:00

It’s a Webinar World. We just live in it.

It sure feels that way, right?

Current conditions have led organizations to exponentially increase the volume of webinars they present to members and customers. As you might expect, the value provided varies widely.

As someone who presents (and participates in) a lot of webinars, I have some simple tips that might help make yours better. My advice is not comprehensive; rather it reflects a few key principles I find helpful as a Webinar Warrior (that’s a thing, right?).

1. Don’t make presenters multi-task.

When attention is divided; value is diluted. Few presenters can simultaneously deliver quality content, attend to informal messages from the webinar host, and engage with the participant chat. No one should have to do so.

Solution: Prerecord the presentation segment(s) of the webinar. This has several advantages:

Speaker(s) focused only on presenting great content.
You can re-record a segment if something isn’t right.
Graphics and other enhancements can be added in post-production, if desired.
It reduces challenge of speaker tech problems when presenting live.

2. Create greater content clarity.

Do freely brainstorm all of what you COULDpresent, but then edit ruthlessly to distill the specifics into a handful (4-6) overarching themes or branches upon which you’ll hang the rest of your content.

A simple structure—exploring a limited number of key points—helps participants follow along and reinforces what you most want participants to remember.

Like the old five-paragraph essay, having your webinar preview the content, deliver the content, and review the content can increase the value it delivers.

Finally, federal law does not mandate webinars must be 60 minutes in length. Shorter webinars (30-45 minutes) with concentrated content also work well. And for a one-hour webinar, I always start at five minutes after the hour to allow people coming from commitments ending on the hour to arrive.

3. Involve more people in the webinar management.

Whether or not your prerecord content segments, you should involve more people in webinar management. Instead of one or two webinar generalists, consider a team of webinar specialists, each having one specific function:

Marcus: Moderator
Marcus is the primary liaison to the presenter(s) and helps open and close the session.

Terry: Tech Support
Terry’s sole job is to answer participants; tech-related questions. This should be done via participant messages to Terry, not in the main chat window. That window is reserved for content-related chat.

Wendy and Wesley: Welcome Wagon
This duo is the engine for warmth and community, greeting people by name when they arrive for the webinar and inviting them to get ready to learn.

Carmine, Chris, and Coby: Conversation Catalysts
Conversation Catalysts ensure your webinar has no dead air. They are on alert to pose questions if none are asked, engage early in the chat in response to presenter questions posed, and build on other participants’ chat contributions to extend the conversation.

Rob, Rhianna, and Rhen: Reactors
Reactors are "insiders" from your profession, industry, or community who you have invited to share 2-3 minute reactions to, and applications of, the content from your main presenter(s). Draw on individuals who reflect the diversity of those you want to reach.

Each of these roles is a great micro-volunteering opportunity for members of your organization.

4. Make it easier for participants to engage.

Webinar design must effectively facilitate understanding, learning, and application.

At its root, facilitation means one simple thing: actions that make it easier. Effective webinars intentionally design a learning experience that makes it easier for participants to get what they need and put it to use. Consider doing the following:

Draw on diverse voices and perspectives in the sources drawn from, the examples shared, and the voices amplified. I like to include short video segments featuring individuals with different backgrounds or perspectives sharing a quick case study or featuring a brief Q&A.
Toggle content between theory-practice, ideas-action, strategy-tactics, and general-specific. You’ll likely have participants with varied learning preferences and needs. Ensure your content and presentation covers the spectrum.
Use the poll function to assess learning. Polls can be used effectively in several places: at the start as a “pre-test,” throughout the webinar to assess needs or facilitate content application, and/or at the end as a review. Announce a response rate goal to prod recalcitrant folks to engage.
If your platform allows, use breakout rooms to let participants go deeper. Use breakouts to allow all participants to explore the same question in smaller groups, different groups/rooms explore different questions, or for "like-minded" participants (organization type, role or responsibility, et al) to freely discuss with each other.

5. Use information wayfinding in your design.

Web sites create clear content architecture that makes it easier for site visitors to find what they seek and know where they are. Your webinar design should do the same.

Use the same font, colors, and/or images or graphic icons to distinguish different content segments.
Consider adding musical alerts or transitions to introduce chat, polling, or other participant engagement opportunities. Very inexpensive sound files ($5-$25) can be purchased from sites like 123rf.
Provide in advance a learning/notetaking worksheet to facilitate engagement. It could be a text outline, a mindmap, or a visual facilitation summary. If possible, use your color and image wayfinding choices here as well.
Provide time/topic bookmarks for your archived webinars.

Need help designing or presenting webinars or face-to-face learning experiences?

You can contact me here.

You might also like:
Behind the Scenes: Designing and Presenting a 55-minute webinar

Six Principles for Harnessing Volunteers' Talents

2020-04-21T11:15:00.000-04:00

Author Bruce Tulgan (Winning the Talent Wars) asserts, “In the new economy, the best people are the most likely to leave. Why? Because they can.” Perhaps this is why management guru Tom Peters says we must be obsessive about P.O.T., the Pursuit of Talent. While Tulgan and Peters are both talking about paid staff in the new economy, associations and other organizations would be wise to note the relevance of their thinking for recruiting, developing, and rewarding volunteers. When competing for volunteer time and talent, organizations need to have compelling value propositions to offer.

We are told this is the era of Me Inc., the Brand You, the Free Agent Nation, a time when everyone is taking his/her personal portfolio of talent and auctioning it to the highest bidder. Volunteers, however, have always been free agents. Organizations have never been able to hold volunteers hostage as corporations hold employees with their stock options, vested pensions, and so forth.

Sure some volunteers in the past “toughed it out” in unfulfilling positions, because they were the generally accepted stepping-stones to more significant leadership roles. But volunteers have always been free to walk. The difference now is more and more of them may be doing just that, taking their talent portfolio to volunteer opportunities (and organizations) they find meaningful, challenging, and rewarding.

So how do organizations attract and reward talent-rich volunteers in this age of Me, Inc.? Tulgan offers "a new set of organizing principles for employing people in the new economy." These principles appear below along with my commentary on their relevance to volunteers as opposed to employees.

Talent is the show.
Talent is the show when it comes to volunteers. Organizations need their talent, and volunteers are looking to further develop and/or share theirs. You would be well served to revise your recruitment brochures and methods to focus on recruiting talent regardless of an individual's age, tenure, and so forth. Learn what talents people can share and what talents they can teach others. Then match them with the work to be done.

Staff the work, not the jobs.
Spend less time monkeying with the organizational chart. Identify the work you hope to have volunteers do, find individuals whose talents match the work, and then create the structure to get the work done. A few talent-rich people with lots of time could fill what you might now list as multiple leadership positions. The work matters, not the positions. Structure should never be an end in and of itself. It exists only to facilitate the work being done and should be changed freely as needed.

Pay for performance and nothing else.
We need to break the practice of rewarding volunteers just for showing up. If volunteers do not see serving the organization and its mission as a privilege instead of a right, you need to help reframe their thinking. Volunteers who do nothing more than take up space should be cordially invited to the door. Organizations need clear performance standards for volunteers, and these should be articulated as people join your team. Reward results and performance … nothing else! Make results the criteria for more prestigious positions in your organization, not simply lengthy do-nothing tenure.

Turn managers into coaches.
If you have recruited for talent and provided an appropriate overview and training, your volunteers now need coaching. Being micro-managed is one of the many pet peeves of volunteers (ironic that this is a frustration shared by staff). If I am smart and talented, I need to know the rules of the road, the desired end results, and the deadlines to be met. Then I need you to get out of my way and let me show what I can do. Think athletics: when you deal with superstars, you coach more than manage. And if you are not recruiting superstars for your volunteer opportunities, you should be developing those volunteers you are recruiting into superstars.

Train for the mission, not the long haul.
Don’t assume your most talented volunteers have any intention of being around for the long haul. Focus on connecting their talents and interests to the organization's current mission and vision. If they stick around for more involvement beyond their initial contribution, great. Just don’t organize all your recruitment and training efforts to create volunteer "lifers" for your organization; it probably won't happen as much as you might hope.

Create as many career paths as you have people.
To be attractive to potential volunteers, we need to have flexible and fluid opportunities to leverage their time, interests, and talents for the good of the organization. How ridiculous is it that many organizations still turn away willing and capable volunteers because “no positions are available at this time.” Projects and positions should always be available if the right candidates/talents present themselves. After all, the work is never done. Try thinking of what your organization would look like if every individual sought a meaningful volunteer opportunity. Then organize yourself to let that become a reality. With any amount of luck, it just might.

This is an uupdate of an earlier post.

Leaders Who Belittle

2020-04-14T04:01:00.000-04:00

Image Credit: Leonard John Matthews. Creative Commons License

Stop yelling at us.

We hear you just fine.

Stop talking to us as if you’re all knowing.

We know things, too.

Stop bombarding us with more of the same.

We see the points you’re making.

It’s always dangerous when people trying to lead others unknowingly treat them as if they are uninformed or ignorant. Dismissing others’ perspectives because you believe yours is better is rarely the way to win converts to your position, yet that’s exactly what some leaders do.

When encountering resistance, they dig in. They talk louder. They talk more. But they talk at us, not with us.

They engage in a monologue about their truth instead of a dialogue in which all participants share their truths. They advocate the merits of their position instead of inquiring about our thinking.

Instead of saying "Tell me a little bit more about where you're coming from" we get "Let me tell you a lot more about where I am coming from and where you need to go."

Passionately professing our deepest held convictions is one thing. Convicting those who might not embrace our prophesy is quite another.

If we can’t respect that others might have an opinion or perspective that they believe is as valid as ours, we shouldn't expect them to respect our position or to try it on for size.

When we belittle others, we end up being little … little in stature, little in influence, and little in results.

We can't hope to influence others if we are not open to influence ourselves.

Powerful Partnerships: Looking for Opportunities to Serve

2020-04-06T06:30:00.000-04:00

Partners search for opportunities to support, contribute, and be of service.

That's the core message of the keynotes I deliver on Powerful Partnerships. It reminds me of my days in high school when I was a restaurant server.

Our restaurant was divided into sections of 6-8 tables, each assigned to an individual server. My first few days I spent a lot of time watching other servers to see what I could learn. Here are two lessons I picked up that I think reflect critical components of powerful partnerships.

Look for opportunities to serve.

Some of my server colleagues engaged in what I call "one at a time" service. They saw a table in their section needed something, went to that table, did what needed to be done, and then returned to the server work area by the kitchen. This process occurred repeatedly each time they noted a table in need … back and forth, back and forth.

Other servers regularly walked through their section, scanning all their tables to see where they could be of service. Or if they made a trip to serve a specific table, they always looked around to see if they take care of any other tables at the same time. While this seems like the obviously better approach, you'd be surprised how many servers simply react to a customer need instead of proactively look for opportunities to serve.

Own the whole.

Despite the fact that we didn't pool and divide tips (you only kept the tips from your tables), a few servers regularly went "out of their way" to help take care of customers in other sections … offering coffee refills, clearing dishes, responding to requests.

Since sections were adjacent to each other, it hardly made sense to ignore a request for coffee from a table not in your section, if you're going to walk right by them with a pot to offer refills to a table in your own. As you might guess though, that's exactly what some servers would do, seeing their job as serving only their section as opposed to helping provide customer service to anyone in the restaurant while primarily focusing on their own tables.

In my ideal partnerships, each of us owns the whole, looking for opportunities to contribute to the success of the overall effort, not just fulfill our specific responsibility. We don't see doing so as going out of our way, but as the only way to go.

What's been your experience with what helps make powerful partnerships?

Effective Facilitation: Clarify Your Values

2020-02-21T09:17:00.004-05:00

Who are you?

This is another critical question to answer for one simple reason. People are more likely to trust you when they have a sense of your character … your beliefs and values.

After defining your work (your WHY), it is important to clarify the values (your HOW) that will guide your efforts. These are the ones you want others to associate with you and your work.

Your values are evident in how you “show up” with others. In marketing terms, your values help define your brand. They distinguish you from others who might do similar work.

You can think of values like an anchor that holds you in place when turbulent conditions might tempt you to make undesirable choices.

You can think of values like a compass that can provide direction when you feel a bit lost or uncertain about which way to go.

In practice, values likely are a bit of both. As the Josephson Institute of Ethics says, "Values are core beliefs or desires which guide or motivate attitudes and actions."

Some people draw on institutional or company core values when selecting their own. They can be a great starting place. I generally choose no more than a half-dozen values to guide me in my work.

Because the value itself is just a single word imbued with a great deal of meaning, I usually take an additional step: for each value, I generate a few alignment principles. This helps ensure my values really do motivate my attitudes and actions.

Evaluations can gather others’ feedback on how they assess my values alignment. To do so, I often ask a simple question: what are a few adjectives, qualities, or values you associate with me work? If the feedback does include language reflective of my values and principles, I know I have work to do.

Ultimately, people form impressions not based on the values you espouse, but by the way you act. Aligning your actions with your values must be an ongoing effort. Achieving integrity requires regular reflection, assessment, and adjustment.

Remember, the way we do our work “models the way” for others as they infer lessons from it. Everything you say and do tells a story about what you believe and value. What story does your example tell?

Next in this series: digging into the WHAT, the work of effective program design and facilitation

Effective Facilitation: Define Your Work

2020-02-13T21:27:00.000-05:00

What do you do?

It’s an oft-posed simple question. Responses frequently default to job titles or a bullet list of responsibilities.

Such surface level answers mask the deeper purpose or meaning at the heart of our work. Simon Sinek addresses this with his simple Golden Circle framework discussed in his book Start With Why and his popular TEDx talk on the topic:

“When most organizations or people think, act or communicate they do so from the outside in, from WHAT to WHY. And for good reason — they go from clearest thing to the fuzziest thing. We say WHAT we do, we sometimes say HOW we do it, but we rarely say WHY we do WHAT we do.”

Sinek’s book and talk focus primarily on organizations and helping them discover why they exist: what is their purpose, cause, or belief? But this line of questioning is equally important to individuals and our work: what is our WHY? What is the purpose, cause, or core belief of/for your work/role?

Used appropriately, our WHY becomes a prism through which we view all our efforts. Consistently applying it is critical, and it should inform at minimum:

the metrics you use to evaluate your success;
the data that informs your efforts;
what details most command your attention;
the professional knowledge you seek to master; and
the criteria you use to make decisions.

So how do we discover this important insight?I find the Five Why Method (also known as Root Cause Analysis) useful in getting to the WHY of my work. This journey is like seeking the center of Russian nesting dolls or peeling back the layers of the onion. You keep digging until you find the compelling (and likely succinct) WHY for all the WHATs of your work.

We begin with our initial surface responses, but then examine them and go deeper, answering: why does that work matter? why is it important? what value does it help create?

We now look at this second set of responses and again dig deeper and answer: why does that work matter? why is important? what value does it help create?

We repeat this process until we arrive at a succinct phrase or statement that represents our WHY, the essence of our work. I do this process annually to rethink and refresh my why. Currently the WHY driving all of my program design and facilitation is this: help accelerate learning, community, and sustainable progress.

I've created a downloadable PDF worksheet to guide you through this process for your efforts in the design and facilitation of meetings, workshops, or conferences. See what deeper purpose you unearth. Find the WHY that can provide greater meaning to the methods you use in your work and the tasks associated with it.

Preparing for Precipitating Events

2019-03-21T13:47:00.000-04:00

Home Depot. USPS. U-Haul. Lowes. AT&T.

When infrequent exchanges with these companies become almost daily interactions it can only mean one thing: you're moving and are involved in a home renovation.

It’s amazing how one decision leads to a cascade of consequences and perhaps more importantly to a dramatic change in your routine. When that first domino falls …

From the day you put your house on the market, a constant stream of promotional offers from moving companies and other related entities will arrive. These companies discover you as a new prospect and respond accordingly.

Surprisingly though during my last home renovation, when my Home Depot and Lowes trips moved from every few months to every few days, neither of those companies changed how they engaged with me.

Behold: the power of the precipitating event. How do you or your organization respond to them when they occur in your members’ or customers’ lives? With a designed intervention and offer or benign indifference?

Pattern recognition is a key element of systems thinking, but too many organizations don't put systems in place to recognize them or spot changes in them and then respond accordingly.

When I listen to association staff members talk about member data, they tend to slice and dice us by typical demographic demarcations: age, career stage, gender, etc. That’s fine and sometimes useful, but it neglects the other opportunities that precipitating events offer to be of value.

Move into a middle management position and you immediately need an entire new suite of professional development offerings.
Move to a new city and you would immediately value getting connected to your new community of colleagues.
Switch professions and you’re likely to need a fast foundation in the new landscape in which you’ll be working.
Decide you want to sell your business and/or retire and you’ll want to hear from others who have already done the same thing.
When a major crisis occurs you want to implement a tried and true response plan.
Get laid off and you will want to leverage a variety of career-related resources.

The irony (to me at least) is that we know these events are going to occur in the lives of our customers and members, so we can easily bundle what they might value when they happen.

What we don’t know is when they are going to occur. As a result, we must have these offerings always visible (I’ve rarely seen web links related to the events I described above), as well as develop better signaling mechanisms to alert us of the changes and the opportunity to be of service.

Precipitating events change patterns of behavior.

Smart companies and associations will appropriately attempt to convert this temporary change into a more long-term and sustainable connection. Yet far too few are ready to act when the first domino falls. Are you?

What are other precipitating events when associations
would definitely be of increased value to their members?

Tips for Facilitating Conversation About Big Ideas and Innovations

2019-02-26T10:51:00.000-05:00

I love to facilitate conversations and sessions that explore big ideas and possible innovations. Reflecting on previous efforts I designed and led reminded me of some common sense tips about what they require. The list below is not all-inclusive, but highlights some of the core considerations.

Image source unknown.

1. Determine the right time and environment. Participants need the right mental and physical space to think differently and more expansively. Block sufficient time and create an environment conducive to sharing ideas, sketching possibilities, and that honors both introverted and extroverted processes and contributions: Intimate and flexible space; flipcharts, whiteboards, or walls covered with IdeaPaint; food, music, and props to sustain the energy; modeling clay and other prototyping supplies.

2. Articulate the purpose and define success. Skeptics and fans alike need to understand just what the conversation is intended to produce in order to contribute appropriately. It's hard to do the what if you don't understand the why. Clarify the problem to be solved and/or the opportunity to be leveraged.

3. Put the conversation in context. Don't make innovation something that occurs outside of your organization's regular efforts. Connect conversations about ideas and innovations to your ongoing development of programs and services and incorporate these discussions into your regular planning routines.

4. Leverage pre-work. To stimulate everyone's best thinking, provide core background information and a few compelling questions in advance that session participants can mull over. While some people think fast in the moment, others contribute best when they have had time on their own to reflect. Design for both as best as you can both before and during the actual session.

5. Clarify the terms and process to be used. People need to understand the rules of

engagement, whatever they are determined to be, as well as terms likely to be thrown about including creativity, innovation, value, et al.

6. Create, critique, construct. Remember these three types of thinking (usually attributed to Edward deBono) and make sure your process addresses them in this order:

Expansive, divergent thinking exploring what's desirable and/or possible;
Convergent, narrowing thinking selecting which ideas to advance using shared criteria for evaluation all the possibilities; and
Getting in action and determining and constructing rapid prototypes to test the chosen ideas with actual users.

7. Facilitate assertively when needed. What I routinely witness when facilitating ideation and innovation conversations is that participants too quickly abandon the stated process and move straight to problem-solving and implementation. Don't let that happen. Ensure people dwell longer in possibilities and more expansive thinking. Clarify upfront with participants that you will be assertive in not letting them step too quickly into critical thinking.

8. Let user behavior be a catalyst. Thomas Stat, formerly with IDEO's Chicago office,

reminds us that innovation often begins with behavior, not pre-determined ideas. If you carefully observe member or customer behavior without judgment and with deep empathy (try this IDEO exercise on Creating Empathy Maps), the rich story their actions tell will instruct you on where innovation may be needed.

9. Use disruptive premises to evoke creative possibilities. Once you've identified the opportunity areas to pursue, use disruptive hypotheses or unreasonable provocations as suggested by Luke Williams in his book Disrupt. Ensure the questions posed for exploration are "beautiful" as Warren Berger defines in his book A More Beautiful Question. Doing so will help shift the subsequent creative thinking away from the traditional solutions and into potentially more inventive and interesting areas.

10. Introduce cross-disciplinary ideas and thinking. Chances are others may already have generated ideas or solutions that you could adopt in principle and/or adapt in practice. Solicit insights and resources (and challenge participants to do the same) drawn from outside the organization, profession, or industry.

11. Listen for concepts behind ideas. No matter how assertively you facilitate the process, our inner critics emerge too quickly in the discussions. When you hear people reacting negatively about a specific idea (example: there should be set office hours), identify its underlying concept (example: flexible work schedules) and ask what other ideas people might that relate to it. This keeps the creative energy moving forward and is a technique called Concept Fan by Edward DeBono. Watch a short Prezi on the concept fan process.

12. Identify opportunities to experiment. Seeking small wins (James Kouzes and Barry Posner). Try stuff to learn what works (Jim Collins). Making little bets (Peter Sims). Normal innovations, not just blockbusters (Rosabeth Moss Kanter). Name your innovation guru and each has his or her own way of trying to quickly get us in action and in the process of discovery. Instead of trying to 100% plan our way to success, we need to move quickly from planning to playing with some of the possibilities we have identified.

13. Your choice. What is a relevant principle or practice your experience suggests should be added to this list?

__________________________

Looking for sample outlines and activities to facilitating big conversations about ideas and innovations? This PDF contains dozens that I created for ASAE's InnovationTalks.

Contact me here if I can design and facilitate an ideation/innovation session for your org (or help you design and prepare to facilitate one yourself).

This is an update of an earlier post.

Toward Less Painful Panels

2019-02-02T19:53:00.001-05:00

I attended a panel discussion recently that could have been a much more powerful learning experience. An inadequate session design and a limiting room set shackled the interesting panelists. Panels are always tricky, but they are a staple of industry conferences, so it is high time we made them more compelling.

How Panels Commonly Unfold

Marketing for most panel discussions highlights the topic, maybe the questions that will be explored, and the panelists who will speak. The actual programs usually begin with logistics announcements, promotional info, and introductions of each panelist. At the program I recently attended this ate up 20% of the session time block: unacceptable.

A moderator then poses a question and often each panelist responds. Better moderators help connect individual responses and/or offer some thoughtful follow-up questions or comments. This is repeated numerous times for the bulk of the program and then the floor is opened for Q&A. Generally only a handful of people in the room get to pose a question.

In this framework, I feel lucky as a participant if I get 2-3 insights to take away when much more is possible in a 90-minute session. Plus the format is repetitive and flat, leaving audience members sitting passively for far too long and then only giving a few individuals a chance to pose questions.

What Panels Could (Should) Be

As a learner I want to hear the equivalent of content concentrate not diluted generalities ... insightful and provocative comments from a diverse (that's a key word) mix of panelist perspectives and experience a lively conversation among audience members and the panelists. Ideally it feels free-flowing instead of the slow staccato rhythm many panels engender.

Much can be improved in moderator and panelists prep. While Guy Kawasaki and others have offered great tips on being a better panelist, we really need to rethink the conditions in which panelists and audience members are placed. Otherwise we are just making the best of a less than ideal situation.

We must better equip the audience to engage and interact.

Get likely attendees in the conversation sooner by having panelists share some of their ideas/content (1) in the marketing materials, and (2) in a panel preview. By including a key insight or assertion from each panelist in the marketing material, you can arouse more interest (and probably attendance) than just the usual listing of names and titles. It promotes a flavor of the conversation that might unfold instead of just the credentials of those conversing.

A panel preview should then be shared fairly close to the panel date, offering each panelist an expanded—though still concise—platform to share more views. The preview could be a short YouTube video, a few slides with synched audio, a couple of social share, or a PDF file with brief written commentary. The goal is to seed the conversation in advance so that it can begin immediately when the program starts.

Participants should Tweet or submit questions and reactions based on this advance sharing of content. The panel I attended said no one did so for their discussion, but I cannot find anywhere that we were invited to contribute ... not in the marketing and not in my confirmation, two places where that invitation should be prominently displayed.

Questions and comments could again be collected on-site using social media or being written on index cards. Heck, let's have people write them on sheets of paper, crumple them up, and then throw them at panelists to get the energy level higher in the room. Whatever it takes. Let's get as many voices into the conversation even if they are "voiced" by the moderator on behalf of the participants.

We have to design the format and the room for conversation not exposition.

Panel room sets are as predictable and outdated as wood paneling in your basement. Both need to be replaced and refreshed. Straight-line seating on risers immediately leads to personal pontification delivered from one to the masses. And when you are a panelist on a stage, it's difficult to connect with people seated parallel to you, individuals you can't even look at directly.

Let's try setting a room fishbowl with the panelists in a center circle, facing each other in a conversational boxing ring. Include extra chairs among the panelists that audience members can claim to briefly join the conversation.
How about a fashion show set with panelists roaming the runway sharing their viewpoints with each other and the participants?
Maybe mimic the House of Commons environment and have panelists take center stage on all four sides, facing each other and surrounded by audience members.
Or let them really get on their soapbox and stand on soapboxes stationed among the audience members and recalling the town criers of yore.
If you must use a traditional room set, at least launch the program with each panelist using Pecha Kucha or an Ignite format to introduce all of their thinking ideas in 6 minutes or less and then open the floor for facilitated conversation.

When I attend a panel, I come to learn from the experts, not just listen to them. It's time we design for an engaging conversation, one that our current mindset and room set rarely allow.

P.S. About panelist intros. I don't want to listen to them voice basic biographical info that I could be given in writing or that could be displayed on the screen. Let them share something personal, something that allows us to connect to them as people instead of their resumes.

Thinking Differently About Volunteering

2019-01-23T08:50:00.000-05:00

I think we need to reframe the way many organizations currently view volunteers. They see it as something that only “some people” may do. But as The Decision to Volunteer noted, many members say they are volunteering in ways beyond how the board often defines volunteer involvement (positions, formal service, etc.).

What if we think of volunteering as something everyone should do because it is one of the most significant ways to build a strong professional network, to connect more to the professional community in general, and to receive more value from being a member?

That’s how most highly engaged volunteers would describe their experience: you get more when you give more.

If we start with this premise: everyone will want to (or should want to) volunteer, we would enact a very different method of invitation and engagement:

The membership application would solicit your volunteer interests and the talents and time you have available to contribute.
You’d be contacted personally within a set time (say 5 business days) to extend an invitation to contribute.
We’d look for more real-time micro-volunteering opportunities during major events like annual meetings.

In short, we would organize the enterprise for 100% volunteering.

Would we achieve it? Probably not. But in creating the system to enable and support it, we would most likely diversify the number and perspectives of people volunteering and the ways in which they contribute.

And we could also more intentionally engage non-members in connecting with and contributing to the community in limited, ad hoc, volunteer responsibilities as a means of diversifying our membership recruitment efforts and results. “Come initially to contribute on an issue you care about. Then join and stay for the community and content."

If we want to achieve radically different results, then we need to start with radically different premises and assumptions.

Seven Questions to Move Things Forward

2019-01-08T14:25:00.001-05:00

If a picture is worth a thousand words, some words combine to create very valuable picture in the form of questions, ones that consistently help a group get unstuck and make decisions leading to better results.

While the seven I offer below from my facilitation experience may not have the sheen of Peter Drucker's The Five Most Important Questions You Will Ever Ask About Your Organization , each one has proven invaluable time and time again in helping people accomplish more.

What is it that we believe we are here to do today?
What holds us back from what we know needs to be done, and how can we eliminate or minimize how it constrains us?
What are the most important results we need to achieve (for this effort)?
What other perspectives or opinions might enhance our discussions and/or with whom do we need to share what we talked about today?
What is most important for us to discuss, but people might be unwilling or unlikely to bring up?
Where do we have agreement about what needs to be done, and how can we build on that to get in action and move forward?
What is the most significant commitment to act that we can all make with conviction right now?

I generally try to surface participants' responses in a transparent way with each individual sharing his/her own perspective. In some limited cases though, the only way the answers can comfortably be shared is if the process is anonymous. In those instances, I distribute index cards and have participants write their responses. I then verbalize each one to the group. Some of the questions certainly could be surveyed anonymously in advance.

While anonymous input surfaces the content for further conversation (a critical short-term win), the fact remains that people didn't feel comfortable sharing their opinions outright (a critical long-term need). To address this I almost always engage the group in a discussion of that reality by posing an additional question when the timing seems right: What would need to change in order for everyone to feel comfortable owning and freely sharing their opinions instead of having to contribute them without attribution?

What other questions have you found really help a group with its work?

Note

Looking to enhance your facilitation skills (or know someone who is)?
Let me help.

Overcoming Resistance

2018-12-27T15:38:00.000-05:00

How do you overcome resistance to change?

No matter the audience, profession, or industry this has been one of the most common questions I've encountered this year.

Resources that offer insight are abundant. My sampling of them finds that they tend to focus on how to overcome objections or conquer the resistance. Anecdotally most, but not all, seem to frame the issue as a win-lose proposition and offer counsel on how to ensure your proposed changes win against those who oppose them.

I once drew heavily on these resources when responding to this frequent query, but lately I've found the framing less helpful and its possible answers too limiting. A recent home renovation has helped reshape my thinking. Bear with me while I explain.

I live in a late 1890s home in Chatham Arch (come visit!), a historic district in downtown Indianapolis. A variety of municipal codes and historic covenants determine the appropriateness of both new construction and changes to the exteriors and ground of existing properties.

Historic district guidelines aren't intended to stop change from happening. They are meant to ensure that any changes implemented preserve what is considered to be essential or appropriate character of the neighborhood and its individual properties. While many options are available for most changes, I don't have carte blanche to just do anything to the exterior of my home as it stands in relationship with the rest of the neighborhood. What I do has an effect on my neighbors, as well as the overall character and appearance of our neighborhood, something which affords us a premium on our property values.

That's why my house seemingly has more than one front door. The "front door" closest to the street is the original door, one that now opens into my master bedroom instead of the original living room. That door can never be removed because it preserves the clear sense from the street of my home's history. Subsequent entrance doors and the porch come from a 1950s addition. Would I like to replace the old unused front door with a wall or window? You bet. But I live with it as it is because I respect what the guidelines intend to preserve.

How might your conversations change with those individuals you identify as change resistors if you instead thought of them as conservationists or preservationists, individuals with a commitment to preserving something they believe matters a great deal?

What might you learn if you inquired about the meaning they associate with whatever they don't want changed? What are they concerned might be lost if the proposed changes are implemented?

When I have adopted this mindset in my conversations with "resistors," I've found the discussion feels more welcomed and far less adversarial. I have heard stories about what people care about and what they don't want to see lost. And in many cases, I've been able to separate the meaning of what they want to preserve from the form with which they associate it … offering alternatives to how we might incorporate their insights and improve on a proposed change.

Progress and preservation can be complementary if only we take the time to consider both perspectives. Changing minds sometimes requires honoring hearts.

Additional resource
The language we use and the frames we adopt dramatically influence the choices we make. I have found How the Way We Talk Can Change the Way We Work by Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey useful in helping me think about alternative language and frames. PDF summary here.

The More Appealing Appeal

2018-12-14T13:51:00.000-05:00

I am always thankful to get past December 31 of any year. It's not because I hate New Year's celebrations or all the talk about a clean slate, making resolutions, or starting a diet.

January 1 means we have 360 days or so until charities and other nonprofits send out their well-intentioned, but often underwhelming last minute year-end solicitations.

If you want to make a new year's resolution that may help with your friend-raising or fundraising, let me suggest a simple one: stop using mass messaging that treats all recipients the same.

Say what?

In a four-hour span one day I received emails from four organizations I support asking me to make a donation before year's end. Earlier in the year, I had already made contributions ranging from $100-$250 and I have given annually to three of the groups for multiple years.

Two emails were completely generic in their pitch, saying little except please make a gift and stressing the year-end deadline for tax-deductible contributions.
One was tailored to the organization's announcement of just receiving a major grant. Always a good strategy to link a solicitation to noteworthy and very timely news.
One was deeply heartfelt in reflecting on all the good that the organization had accomplished and what more might be possible in the year ahead.

So of these four, two were what I call fundraising spam: generic, impersonal, reflecting little thought. I dismissed them outright. Two were strong examples of fundraising storytelling. But those two excellent examples were undermined a bit by a simple mistake they shared with the two weak appeals. And it is a mistake that occurs all too regularly throughout the year, not just at crunch time.

What was it? They failed to treat current year existing donors with any more personalization or attention than everyone else on the distribution list. While not a fundraising felony, it certainly falls into the category of an avoidable error.

Here's what I'm talking about: in three of the four emails after the ask was actually made, a comment along the lines of "thanks to those of you who have already made a gift" was then noted. The fourth email didn't even bother to do that.

At its most basic, when we do this we treat current supporters and their contributions as an afterthought: Oh yeah, thanks for that gift earlier in the year. Don't ever make donors an afterthought if you want them to keep thinking about you.

So here's the oh-so simple way to avoid doing this again next year. It's Fundraising 101 that often doesn't occur because of lack of staff time, training, or advance planning of donor communications.

Segment major solicitations and communications into two categories at minimum: (1) current year contributors and (2) current year non-contributors. If you don't know how to do this with whatever list management program you use, stop reading immediately and go learn that first. It is the foundation upon which everything else is built.
At minimum craft separate communications for those two lists. Start your pitch to current year supporters with a re-acknowledgement of that contribution and what it has enabled the organization to do. Then launch into telling the story of your future plans and what an additional gift might make possible. In short: thanks again for the past gift, here's what it has helped us do in the present, and listen to our plans for the future. We'd love for you to be an even greater part of what we have planned.

That's it. That simple shift requires about 30 minutes to make, a minor investment in your major goal of increasing the support of existing contributors. You don't want to treat all recipients of your message the same if their current level of interest and support is different ... differentiate your message to make them more meaningful.

Once this is mastered (or perhaps at the same time) do additional segmentation of current contributors based on level of support and engagement and create additional messaging and communications (both in content and form) that match appropriately.

And don't just make this a staff responsibility. While we often draw board members into making the ask, we less frequently involve them in "making the thanks." One of the most fulfilling 15 minutes I've had as a nonprofit board member was when we took time at a board meeting to each do a handwritten thank you note to a donor who had been especially supportive of our current efforts.

So the strategic question if you want next year to be one of greater friend-raising and fundraising is this: how might we make our appeals more appealing and what systems and processes must we create to do so with a consistent level of quality and timeliness?

Now go get to work. Those 360 days will go by quickly.

P.S. Some of you might be asking yourself if this is really such a big deal: don't donors support the cause/organization and not their communication practices? Absolutely, and if you weren't competing for time, interest, attention, and money any list management or communication issues might be more easily overlooked. But you're not. You're one of many. And more importantly, segmenting lists and messages suggests a level of operational intention and attention that may inspire donor confidence.

What do you think?

2018-11-27T05:08:00.000-05:00

Four seemingly innocent words that so often unleash such mayhem when expressed: what do you think?

I witnessed this phenomenon in a retreat I recently facilitated. A staff member, eager to get feedback from board members, posed that simple question: "What do you think?"

We've probably all learned the shortcomings of close-ended questions, but I'm not sure as much attention is paid to the possible pitfalls of open-ended questions.

Asking, "what did you think?" is an invitation for completely unfiltered, unstructured, and unfocused input or feedback. Anything goes ... and just about anything is what you'll get.

If that's what you seek, more power to you. But if you have a decision to make, you probably need more specific reactions, ones this open-ended invite may not elicit.

In my retreat example, responses ranged from tactical criticism to strategic input, from commenting on one specific element of the proposal to questioning the project's overall intent.

After letting participants offer their wide-ranging thoughts for a few minutes, I gently asked the staff member posing the question: what direction do you need from the board in order to make a decision?

Some basic criteria were put forth, and board members tailored their subsequent input accordingly. In a relatively short time the staff member had what she needed and we moved on to the next agenda item.

As human beings, we aren't always helpful with a carte blanche invitation to share our thoughts. Fortunately, some simple adjustments in the way we have discussions can more quickly gather the input we need and make the decisions more effectively.

Many organizations find Edward deBono's Six Thinking hats to be a useful and easy-to-implement framework to help a group focus their deliberations on a specific idea or question and get maximum input in minimum time. This is called thinking in parallel. Some do a compressed version of deBono's six-stage process that is called PMI, exploring Plus Points, Minus Points, and Interesting Points for the item under consideration.
Determining decision-making rules or criteria in advance of recurring types of decisions provides continuity in process and can help minimize potential political or personality battles that might erupt around one specific decision and its potential consequences. An example would be a board or management team that determine specific thresholds or results that automatically move an idea into a pilot stage or cause an existing program to be evaluated for whether or not it should continue. Decision-making can be enhanced by simple if-then statements or by established criteria which all participants use to rank or evaluate options
When asking for ideas or input, frame your question more narrowly to help respondents focus their responses to what you need. Doing so means you first have to ask yourself: what feedback or input would I find most helpful? Once you have clarity you can invite others to share accordingly. Edgar Schein's book, Helping, is a wonderful resource for this area.
Narrowing the input sought is a common approach innovators use, as constraints are known to help inspire fresh thinking and new solutions. Rather than opening up a general call for ideas, they invite ideas that meet a limited number of specific criteria already identified as critical to the innovation envisioned.
You can also use a limited number of criteria as a constraint to help quickly reduce the number of ideas or options that are then discussed in greater detail. Think of a hiring process in which only candidates who have a college degree and a minimum of three year's relevant experience move on to the next round of review.
Create evaluating forms for workshops or programs that gather the input you need to inform the subsequent decisions you will make. Evaluation forms often are too generic because the future use of the feedback they solicit has not been fully considered.
Distinguish between making an adequate decision versus an optimal decision. Sometimes the
input we need is to determine if something is "good enough" to be shared or released, but all of the deliberation is about making the product perfect … even though that is not the goal.
Finally, don't forget to be inclusive in how you invite the input you seek. Asking for verbal feedback on-demand biases extroverted feedback and may minimize the amount of ideas you gather from more introverted individuals. Giving time to consider the question and allowing people to share input in written form as well as verbal are simple adjustments you can make to honor their participation.

Asking for feedback or input is desirable. Tailor your request to elicit the most thoughtful contributions.

So, what do you think?

Behind the Scenes: Designing and Presenting a 55-minute Webinar

2018-11-18T18:27:00.003-05:00

Recently I presented a 55-minute webinar on the topic Say Yes Less: Why it Matters and How To Do It. To help others who plan similar online learning experiences, this post goes behind the scenes of the design process. I highlight decisions made, the reasoning for them, and lessons learned.

Determining the content

Having done keynotes and workshops on this topic in recent years, as well as some extensive (as of yet unpublished) writing, I had ample content from which to select. I spent about three hours reviewing it to produce an initial draft of about 50 possible content points and quotes, initially organizing them into five color-coded sections.

A solid first pass, the five categories soon felt somewhat limiting. To free myself of my initial categorizations, I created a text-only slide for each point or quote. This fresh look at the content helped me spot a few gaps, and I did additional research and reading to gather more insights. With these additions, the slide deck swelled to about 90 slides.

Total prep time at this point was approximately five hours.

Reviewing other webinars

I reviewed six archived webinars, three that colleagues recommended and three previously presented by LeaderShape, my webinar's host. While watching, I noted the timing for a few key elements: (1) welcome, logistics information, and presenter introductions, (2) when the presenter started sharing substantive content, and (3) every interaction opportunity (chat, polling, Q&A, et al).

I discovered that on average, each webinar spent 6-8 minutes initially on logistics and introductions. This may partially have been a strategic buffer for people arriving after the official start time. Overall interaction generally was less than I would have anticipated with Q&A or chat often saved until the end of the webinar. These chronological assessments greatly informed the design choices I subsequently made.

Six hours of webinar viewing brought my total prep time to 11 hours.

Getting out of the blocks faster

One overarching goal for my design was to accelerate participant engagement and the presentation of substantive content. With LeaderShape’s blessing, we moved the start time to five after the hour in order to allow people to arrive on time from meetings just ending on the hour.

Given that most webinars seem to start on the hour, I assumed some would show up then. For their viewing, I created a five-minute slide show that rotated logistics information, chat questions the session would pose, and content-rich quotes. The quotes were pulled out of my draft content slide deck and also were provided in a downloadable handout. This “arrival” deck ran in silence until the final 45 seconds when an upbeat music element was introduced to get people’s attention that we were about to begin.

In collaboration with my LeaderShape host, we dramatically reduced the amount of time spent on logistics, as well as my intro. To support her verbal explanations, I created a slide illustrating the various webinar functions participants could use. My complete bio was available as a handout from the start of the webinar, and the host kept her intro of me very brief while we displayed a single slide highlighting my entire job/career history.

LeaderShape’s previous webinars also included 2-3 minutes of organizational promotion on the front end. To support my desire for a faster immersion into the content, we relocated this to about 20 minutes into the session and designed it as a commercial break. A 90-second promo video coupled with the LeaderShape host offering a bit of commentary for three promotional slides I created made this a nice change of pace.

Creating the arrival show and the additional visuals required two hours of work, increasing total prep time to 13 hours.

Designing the main content flow and visuals

From my draft content slides, I identified about a dozen to offer a quick overview of my key points. To accelerate participants engaging with the content and each other, I interspersed three purposeful but brief polls and one chat question. I wanted to quickly model a more active learning experience.

The draft slide deck now contained about 80 slides, far more than what I might use in a face-to-face presentation of the same length, but appropriate for the more frequent visual shifts a webinar can use to reengage participants’ attention. I organized the slides into several different combinations before deciding on three sections after my opening: rethinking your beliefs, refreshing your behaviors, and how to say no. Several hours were then spent ordering the slides and honing text and images to only the essential and compelling. During this process, I eliminated a few duplicative content points and combined a few slides for more powerful messaging.

Finally, I identified logical polling and chat question opportunities in each segment and built them into my slide deck and the webinar platform’s polling function. I used a uniform color, iconography, and layout for the polling and chat question slides throughout my deck to distinguish them from the other content.

I invested three hours on this final slide design, bringing total prep time to 16 hours.

Two offline content rehearsals on my own and two online tech rehearsals consumed three hours total, and the three experiments below involved two additional hours of work. Final total prep time? 21 hours.

Three other design decisions

1. Eliminating polling dead air

I find dead air during polling (or the presenter narration of responses coming in) to be lacking. My solution was to first introduce the polling question and options on a slide and let people quickly scan their choices. I then opened up the actual polling function for them to cast their votes while simultaneously playing a 20-second lively music clip in the background.

I purchased these royalty-free clips from 123RF, a stock image and audio website, for about $50 total, including the music used in the arrival slide show. They required a bit of conversion to work on the Big Marker webinar platform. I do not know if it felt better for participants, but I liked it.

2. Soliciting participant input

Ideally, the registration process allows for asking participants to share questions about the webinar topic or what they hope to learn. Big Marker did not, so the registration confirmation included a link to a separate two-question online survey. To entice contributions, we informed participants that upon completing the survey they would receive a link to a Dropbox folder with a few resource articles I had selected. Only 10% of the registrants responded, but their contributions helped shape the webinar content.

Increasing evaluation response rate

Low evaluation completion for webinars is common, and this was true for LeaderShape’s past efforts. To try and increase the response rate I: made an evaluation plea in the arrival slide show displayed prior to our beginning, offered a verbal plea at the end of my presentation, and added the incentive of entry into a leadership book drawing for every evaluation completed. Happily, we improved the response rate to slightly more than 50%!

Key lessons learned

Participant evaluations were strong on the metric that matters most to me: how much value they received from my webinar compared to others they have attended. I had planned for an even more powerful learning experience, but ran into a few hiccups.

Despite no problems during two tech rehearsals, my microphone and webcam failed to connect with the webinar platform on the presentation day. This led to last-minute conversations with the tech folks, resulting in me using a telephone audio connection for speaking. Live time on camera was not possible. Sigh.

Some additional minor tech issues caused a slightly later start than planned. Losing these minutes on the front end coupled with the initial chat conversations running longer than I had planned meant I was pressed a bit for time. This forced me to eliminate the final two chats, something that lessened both participant engagement and the overall impact a bit.

I also failed to allow time for the host's wrap-up. Duh me. As a result we ran over our ending time, something I hate doing. I still am upset that I did not build that content segment into my flow and timing.

Bottom line?

This effort felt like two steps forward, one step back. While the overall experience seemed to deliver strong value and some of the new ideas worked fairly well, I know I could have avoided some miscues and plan to do so in the next webinar I present.

____________________________________

I hope you found this behind the scenes tour to be informative. I welcome your questions in the comments and will definitely respond to them.

A recording of the webinar can be found here. I believe you will need to provide a name and email simply for tracking views of the recording.

If you would like me to present Say Yes Less: Whit It Matters and How To Do It in keynote, workshop, or webinar format, please complete this brief inquiry.