If You Want People to Actually Read What You Write

Ever get looped into an e-mail thread on the fifth round and tried to figure out which part you're supposed to read? All you see is a tangle of text chunks indented with strange characters and punctuated with outdated header information and worthless "Thanks!" replies.

Whether you know it or not, when you compose an e-mail, you're designing. When you reply to an e-mail, you're designing. When you assemble a grant proposal, a business plan, an executive summary, you're designing.

And good design gives you an edge. How big an edge? It's the difference between getting read or getting ignored. You don't have to understand Photoshop or other design programs to be able to create clean business communications. You just have to develop an eye for the difference between visual order and visual noise.

Everyone could benefit from taking an introductory design course at a local college or reading a great design book, like Design Basics by David A. Lauer and Stephen Pentak. But if you don't have time for that, here are some basic rules:

Blur your eyes and ask yourself, Does this communication have a sense of order, or does looking at it give me a headache?

Have the decency to shorten your communication. Follow the wise insight attributed equally to Twain, Churchill, Pascal, and Lincoln ("If I had more time I'd have written a shorter letter") or Richard Bach's maxim ("Good writing is all about the power of the deleted word") and remember that length is design, too.

Clean up messes. If you're sending someone a conversation thread but only one sentence of it is important, delete the extraneous 42,000 words. Delete automatically generated dotted lines, indentations, and fonts in multiple colors.

Reduce the number of hard returns, especially in e-mails. They create visual noise.

Avoid huge monolithic blocks of text. No one will read them.

Don't get fancy. If you haven't taken a design course, stick with a classic font. Don't use more than three font variations on a page. That means changing typeface, size, or style (italics or bold). Don't underline.

For e-mails, pick a font that's web friendly. (Arial, Helvetica, Lucida Sans, Palatino, Verdana.) That way, you'll be sure that the way your message looks to you is the way it will appear to the reader.

Break some rules. Where tradition might tell you to fill every page of your business plan with text, identify the single most important sentence on a page, blow it up to 36-point type, and give it the entire page to

If you don't know what the rules are, be careful about breaking them. The point is not to be, or look, rebellious. It's to be effective.

Learn to use pull-quotes. If you have a lengthy block of text, pull out the most important sentence and create an easy point of entry for the reader, the way a magazine would.

Learn to love white space. Don't fill the page edge to edge with content. Leave room for things to breathe.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Break up a business plan or a memo with a professional image. Stock photography or illustration houses like istock are your friend.

Don't use tacky images. If you're generally tacky, I can't help you with that. Just try not to be. Think a nice black Armani suit or cocktail dress versus, I don't know, a Worldwide Wrestling Federation t-shirt.

Don't give people whiplash. Don't center one thing, left justify another, right justify another, center a fourth, and so on. It makes things look like an obstacle course. Pick one justification and stick with it.

Be careful with color if you don't know what you're doing. You could hurt someone. Stick to one color to be safe — black — and use shades of gray to add sophistication.

If you forget all this, just think simplicity. Less is more. Good design doesn't add stuff. It takes stuff away. Don't get fancy, don't overdo anything, don't use gimmicks. Simplicity and power are not mutually exclusive. They are often one and the same.


Tomado de HBR el 13 de abril de 2011
-- Desde Mi iPad

Las decisiones se toman mejor en grupo

Dos cabezas piensan mejor que una. Y ocho mejor que dos. Es lo que se deduce de un estudio realizado por Ashley Ward y sus colegas de la Universidad de Sidney (Australia) con peces mosquito (Gambusia affinis) y que ha sido publicado en el último número de la revista PNAS. Para llegar a esta conclusión, los investigadores colocaron a los animales solos, en pareja y en grupos de 4, 8 y hasta 16 individuos dentro de una serie de laberintos con forma de Y. En uno de los brazos de cada laberinto situaron una réplica de un depredador típico de esta especie.


Siguiendo los movimientos de los peces observaron que, mientras los que estaban aislados elegían el camino que los alejaba del depredador tan sólo en la mitad de los casos, los peces en grupo escogían con más frecuencia el camino correcto, alcanzando hasta un 90% de acierto cuando el grupo estaba formado por 16 miembros. En otras palabras, cuanto más grande era el grupo, mejor era la toma de decisiones.

Los autores sostienen que los resultados podrían aplicarse a la toma de decisiones colectiva en humanos, que gobierna el comportamiento de Internet, de los mercados financieros o de los miembros de un jurado.

http://www.muyinteresante.es/las-decisiones-se-toman-mejor-en-grupo

Be the boss, not a friend

Why is it that so many managers fail to live up to their full potential? After making it to management, many end up losing steam along the way, drowning in endless meetings and emails while trying to manage up, down and influence their peers. Feeling discouraged, most grow complacent. The following excerpt from Being the Boss: The 3 Imperatives for Becoming a Great Leader by Linda A. Hill and Kent Lineback addresses the all too common problem when managers become friends with their direct reports.


Do you consider your direct reports your friends? Perhaps you're driven by a deep need to be liked. Your first instinct in any interaction is to build close, personal relationships, and you will do almost anything to protect them. One new manager said he had to "fight the burning desire to be accommodating . . . so that [my people] would like me." To confuse being liked with being trusted or respected is a classic trap for all managers.

Perhaps you hate conflict. You avoid doing or saying anything that might cause tension or upset others. When strife of any kind arises, you leap to remove it or tamp it down. As another manager discovered about himself: "I don't react well in conflict situations. I back off. It really hurts me to have people get mad at me." Perhaps you're simply uncomfortable with the idea of disrupting others' lives. This aspect of being a boss unsettles many managers.

As one explained, "What really makes it tough is that you get to know the person fairly well and you know he has a wife and two children and owns a home and has debt like the rest of us. You're saying, 'Look, you aren't cutting it.' And you're assaulting their self-image and threatening their whole lifestyle."

Perhaps you've made a rational choice: you think close personal relationships are the best way to influence people. When you ask people to do something, you're saying, in effect, "Do it for me because we're friends." What could be more compelling?

If you create or allow close personal ties with your subordinates for any of these reasons, you will struggle as a manager. You won't be able to make tough but necessary people decisions or evaluate people accurately and give critical but helpful feedback. If you try to stay on good terms with everyone, you'll make exceptions for individuals that others consider undeserved or unfair. Relationships that are primarily personal can only produce disappointment for your people in the long run and make you much less effective.

Do you tend to create such relationships? Think of your people one by one and ask, "If his performance slipped and didn't improve, would I be able to terminate him? If she made repeated serious mistakes in spite of careful coaching, could I cut back her responsibilities or tell her she won't get a raise?"

If you're reluctant to discipline or terminate someone because of the harm it might do to your relationship, then your ties to that person will prevent you from doing your job as the boss.

Consider the differences between being a boss and being a friend.

Friendship exists for itself

Friendship is not a means to some other end. As social beings, we need close, supportive connections with others. That's not, however, what drives the boss–subordinate relationship. That tie exists to accomplish work. If something prevents a direct report from doing his or her job, then the relationship must end.

Friends are equals

Bosses and direct reports are not equals inside the organization. Even if the boss keeps her stick of authority hidden most of the time, she will still need to use it on occasion in ways that may not please her subordinates. Not many friendships can survive such status inequality when that happens.

Friends accept each other as they are

Friends don't actively evaluate and try to change each other. They certainly don't make their friendship contingent on such change. Yet an effective manager must constantly assess his people's performance and abilities and press them to develop and change. Such benevolent but real pressure is an important, unavoidable part of managing.

Friends don't check up on each other all the time

Managers continually press their people to report on progress, evaluate themselves, and commit to future results. Friends do have expectations of each other, but they're mutual, not one sided, and less demanding.

As a practical matter, you cannot be friends with all your people equally

If you choose to make friends of your people, human chemistry will come into play, and you'll develop closer ties with some than others. You can imagine the havoc that will wreak with your efforts to manage a smooth-working team, especially a virtual team with far-flung members.

If you create friendships with your people, if you try to motivate them through the personal ties you've created or allowed, you're likely to find yourself having to choose between maintaining the ties or obtaining the best results possible. If you maintain the ties, you will compromise results or make unethical choices that harm others not for a greater good but for the good of a friend. If you choose work and the work group over the wishes of a friend, as eventually and inevitably you must, the friend will feel betrayed.

Sooner or later you must decide against, disappoint, criticize, discipline, demote, or even fire someone who works for you. To someone who thought you were friends, those actions will feel like a personal betrayal and will damage or destroy that person's commitment to the work.

Another paradox: Caring, even close, but focused on the work

Your relationship with your people should be driven by neither control nor friendship, defined by neither affection nor authority, though affection and authority should certainly be pieces of the puzzle.

In a word, the boss–subordinate relationship is another paradox, one of the most profound you will encounter as a boss. It's a paradox because it must be genuinely human and caring—even close, since you and your people strive toward a common, worthwhile purpose. But it must remain a relationship that never loses sight of one fact: it exists to accomplish work. It is a means to an end. You and your people need to connect as humans but always, in the end, to focus on the work. You and they need to be friendly— no one will work hard for a cold, distant, uncaring jerk—but ultimately not friends in the true sense of the word.

We've heard some say, "Then it's just manipulative. You only care in order to get work from people. You use them. You don't truly, genuinely care about them." We understand how someone might reach that conclusion. We're sure many managers feign concern only to get what they want.

Still, we maintain, it is possible to care deeply while focusing on the work. Consider other relationships. Do you expect or want your lawyer, doctor, accountant, or therapist to be your close friend? You want them to care deeply and genuinely for you. But you want their insights and expertise, and you don't want those clouded by affection for you. Think of a great teacher you had. You wanted her on your side, caring for you, but you understood that if you didn't know the exam answers, she would grade you accordingly. Think of a coach. Again, you wanted him to care for you and help you develop, but you both accepted that his ultimate goal was to field the best team. Whether you made the team, whether you played or sat on the bench, depended not on his feelings for you but on your performance.

Management is no different. It works best as a cordial, genuinely caring relationship, but it's not about the relationship. It should be an open, positive relationship, but one in which there is ultimately some distance, a line never crossed. If you create relationships in which the primary goal is to sustain the relationship rather than do work, you will be creating a trap that sooner or later will snare you.

Why it's hard to get the relationship right and keep it right

Given its paradoxical nature, the boss–subordinate relationship is easy to get wrong. Instinct, gut feel, and natural chemistry are poor guides. They'll push you away from people you instinctively don't like and pull you toward those to whom you feel naturally attracted.

Yet, it falls on you, as a boss, to work with and create the right relationships with both. All your relationships should be bounded and defined. They're not about liking, chemistry, or personality. While those factors don't disappear, and you will have to deal with them, they do not and should not define your fundamental relationship with your people

Linda A. Hill is a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. Kent Lineback spent many years as a manager and an executive in business and government. Reprinted by permission of Harvard Business Review Press.

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/18/be-the-boss-not-a-friend/

Liderazgo y estrategia: lo que buscan las empresas en las escuelas de negocios

A la hora de elegir programas de educación ejecutiva, la estrategia y el liderazgo son los preferidos por las empresas latinoamericanas. De las escuelas que entregaron datos para este especial (y considerando todos los tipos de programas), los cursos de estrategia suman 1.094 y 997 los de liderazgo.


“El mayor predictor de éxito de un gerente es su capacidad de liderazgo”, dice Carlos García, director de desarrollo gerencial de la escuela venezolana IESA.

Según Gracia Serrano, directora de la española ESIC, “antes las empresas solicitaban cursos en el ámbito más aplicado como finanzas y marketing, pero ahora las peticiones se están volcando a aquellas competencias que permitan tener una mayor visión de negocios, especialmente con la irrupción de China y Brasil en el concierto económico mundial”.

En esto coincide Jaume Hugas, executive director de la española ESADE, quien explica que los programas más solicitados “son aquellos vinculados a diseñar y ejecutar estrategias, sea por la vía de la planificación”, o bien, a través de mecanismos auxiliares, “como la armonización de la cultura corporativa o el desarrollo de las capacidades directivas”, dice.

En el caso del Grupo Bimbo de México, sus directivos decidieron contratar a ITAM para que ejecutivos de rango medio y alto recibieran capacitación dos veces al año.

“La idea fue que la gente de ventas pudiera interactuar con los de finanzas o marketing de una manera más técnica y documentada, de modo que exista un diálogo estratégico que ayude a la confianza, mejore la toma de decisiones, así como se den nuevas facilidades para conseguir, procesar e interpretar la información”, dice José Alfredo García, gerente corporativo de ventas de Bimbo.

http://mba.americaeconomia.com/articulos/reportajes/liderazgo-y-estrategia-lo-que-buscan-las-empresas-en-las-escuelas-de-negocios

10 juegos que no son juego

En 1807, los hermanos Jakob y Wilhelm Grimm se embarcaron en el ambicioso proyecto de recolectar los mejores cuentos de la época. En su primera edición del libro clásico Cuentos para la infancia y el hogar, los hermanos Grimm recogieron 86 de estos. Unos años más tarde serían más de 211 y sin su aporte hoy no conoceríamos La Cenicienta, El príncipe encantado o Hansel y Gretel. Recientemente, los consultores en creatividad, Dave Gray, Sunni Brown y James Macanufo, emprendieron una tarea similar. Su argumento es sencillo pero poderoso: en la era industrial la mayoría de trabajos llevan una secuencia lineal. La mayoría de preguntas tiene una respuesta concreta. "Pero, hoy en día, en la inmensa mayoría de trabajos las respuestas se hacen impredecibles en el camino", sostienen los autores. Se requieren entonces nuevas técnicas para captar ideas.

Es por esto que decidieron recolectar cerca de 100 juegos destacados en el mundo corporativo. El resultado es la colección de juegos que contiene su reciente libro Gamestorming: A Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers, and Changemakers. En la misma forma como el concepto de lluvia de ideas se apoderó del lenguaje de los negocios; Gray, Brown y Macanufo esperan que la gente entienda que es posible extraer y recolectar las mejores ideas de la mejor forma posible: jugando. Estos autores son expertos en proponer juegos para motivar, extraer y concluir ideas. Dinero hizo una selección de algunos de los más interesantes para compartirlos con sus lectores.

1 - Bodystorming

Este juego se asemeja a la conocida técnica de la lluvia de ideas (brainstorming) pero utilizando el cuerpo. Tiempo de juego: entre una y dos horas. Número de jugadores: entre 5 y 15. El objetivo del juego es divertirse imaginando e interpretado una idea o un proyecto. Ya sea actuando la prestación de un servicio, el uso de un producto nuevo o soñar cómo sería el futuro de la compañía, los jugadores aportan su creatividad con pequeñas obras de teatro. Autor: Colin Burns.

2 - El regalo

A veces las compañías olvidan la importancia de conocer bien a sus clientes. Tiempo de juego: media hora. Número de jugadores: entre 5 y 15. Quien dirige el juego pide a los asistentes formar una pareja con quien considere la persona más allegada del grupo. A cada uno le entrega una hoja en blanco con la instrucción de dibujar un regalo que compraría una tarde con $300.000 para su compañero. Al final este lo califica. El mensaje es que toda empresa es como un buen regalo, sabemos qué dar cuando realmente conocemos a la gente.

3 - El mapa histórico

Las compañías siempre tratan de anticipar el futuro, pero para esto deben revisar el pasado. Tiempo de juego: entre media y dos horas. Número de jugadores: máximo 50. En un tablero se establece una línea de tiempo desde el inicio de la compañía al presente. Cada jugador cuenta con varias notas adhesivas (Post-its). El juego consiste en ir colocando en cada año eventos y circunstancias importantes. Las personas escriben cuándo ingresaron a la empresa, mencionan cambios de política, tiempos de auge o crisis.

4 - El producto pinocho

¿Qué pasaría si uno de sus productos cobrara vida? Tiempo de juego: una hora. Número de jugadores: entre 5 y 20. En las empresas existen muchos beneficios al pensar en los productos como si fueran amigos con vida propia. En una cartelera se dibuja el producto a estudiar y se le inventa un nombre. Allí, con la ayuda de todos, se contestan preguntas claves ¿Cómo soy? ¿Cuáles son mis valores? ¿Qué me hace distinto? ¿Cuál es mi propósito? o ¿Cuál es mi comunidad?

5 - ¡Muéstrame tus valores!

La otra cara de cómo los colaboradores sienten los valores en su empresa. Tiempo de juego: entre 30 y 45 minutos. Número de jugadores: menos de 15. Con antelación al juego es prudente definir los valores a tratar. Con abundante material de revistas los participantes se reunen alrededor de una mesa. El objetivo es que por cada valor identifiquen imágenes que los puedan ilustrar mientras se van contando anécdotas que los identifiquen. El resultado debe ser una especie de collage para compartir con el resto de compañeros.

6 - Inversionistas y emprendedores:

El lugar donde los proyectos más prometedores toman vuelo. Tiempo de juego: entre media y dos horas. Número de jugadores: entre 4 y 12. Siempre en las empresas hay proyectos en cola a los que les falta apoyo. La idea es hacer pequeños grupos y separar la gente entre inversionistas y emprendedores. Los emprendedores tienen 15 minutos para preparar la presentación de su proyecto a los inversionistas. Estos, al final, votan por el más promisorio.

7 - Guerra de debates

Es aquí donde los mejores argumentos triunfan. Tiempo de juego: de una a dos horas. Número de jugadores: de 10 a 30. Con antelación, el líder del juego prepara una serie de preguntas clave para la compañía. Por ejemplo, ¿cómo mejorar el servicio? ¿Cómo deberían ser las nuevas contrataciones? etc. Se forman pequeños grupos para competir en rondas de debates de diez minutos en los que defienden una posición. Al final, el resto de la gente vota por el ganador, que pasa a una siguiente ronda hasta que se identifica al mejor.

8 - Mostrar y contar

Buenas ideas a partir de objetos valiosos. Tiempo de juego: entre una y dos horas. Número de jugadores: entre 5 a 20. En los colegios de Estados Unidos es tradicional el juego en que los niños llevan a clase un objeto para compartir con el curso. Según los autores, esta práctica también es de gran utilidad en las empresas. Los colaboradores deben pensar un objeto para presentar que tenga un valor particular y su rol dentro de la organización. Cada persona tiene cerca de cinco minutos para este ejercicio.

9 - El muro de la memoria

Siempre es importante asignar un tiempo para agradecer. Tiempo de juego: entre 45 minutos y dos horas. Número de jugadores: 10 a 50. Estando todos reunidos, el líder del juego le pide a la gente levantarse y dar vueltas por el salón. De repente, tienen que formar parejas, las cuales deben identificar algo que tengan por agradecer el uno al otro, como el apoyo en un proyecto, una oportunidad o el buen trato. Cada cual debe dibujar esa idea en una hoja en blanco para luego pegarlas todos en la pared.

10 - El artículo de revista

Las ventajas de visionar un futuro prometedor con imágenes. Tiempo de juego: entre una y dos horas. Número de jugadores: entre 5 y 20. En este ejercicio, la empresa imagina que ha logrado la más ambiciosa de sus metas y una revista prestigiosa quiere escribir sobre el tema. El grupo tiene el objetivo de pensar cómo sería este artículo. Por grupos, algunos definen las imágenes, otros las entrevistas, el cuerpo del texto y las citas para completar el artículo gráficamente en un tablero.
http://www.dinero.com/edicion-impresa/management/10-juegos-no-juego_77688.aspx

Don´t Get Defensive, Ask Questions

When you are criticized or told "no," your instinct may be to immediately fight back and defend your position or project. Next time you face resistance, instead of articulating all the reasons why you are right or why your project should be funded, ask a few simple questions. Questions like, "Why did you say that?" or "What led you to that conclusion?" can help the other person rethink his assumptions and help you understand more about where he is coming from. Asking questions allows you to get beyond the immediate disagreement and deeper into what is driving each side.
http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=2630581483764018750