nic-oliver.com

What’s stopping you from achieving personal growth? Michael Jordan recently said that the only thing that held him back was himself and there’s a lot of truth in his statement. So let’s have a look at the ten most common reasons for our not achieving what we want to. Read more…

I want to thank Thomas Power for nagging me on several occasions to do something with the Connect, Engage, Share(CES) model. I was, and still am, very wary of just adding more noise into the Social Media (SM) world but he convinced me that the model has something useful to contribute. This article is about the spirit of CES and is made up of a number of things I’ve discovered the hard way.

It’s the People! SM is not about the technology, whether that be hardware or software. It’s about people. This may appear to be self-evident but there is a lot of bandwidth wasted on discussions about the newest tweak to this or that. SM is a set of tools that allow you to communicate, to connect, engage and share and thus to build relationships.

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. I’ve lost count of the number of different Social Media Sites out there but I recently came across software offering to connect you automatically to the top 250 Social Media sites. You provide a profile and a CSV file of members from an existing network and it does the rest. But then what? The software makes the initial connections but how do you engage and share across all of those sites? Most of us have to work for a living away from SM. If you spread yourself that thinly, where will you find the time to connect, engage and share in a meaningful way? And how does it look if your profile on a site reveals your background, some contacts and perhaps one or two posts, the last of which was written 3 months ago?

Connect, engage and share with “real” people. It’s easy for many of us to spend much of our time communicating geek to geek and forgetting “real” people. It doesn’t matter whether you are one of the well-informed minority or the “What’s this all about” majority. We all know how to communicate – SM merely provides a different set of tools. Connecting with people, engaging them in conversation in a natural way and sharing knowledge will allow you to build a deeper connection, engage on a deeper level, share more information and so on, round and round, building what Thomas Power calls “Connectedness”.

Only automate when necessary. Whilst technology helps us to be more efficient, it should never replace human interaction.  It’s a fine line – auto-responders to advise someone who has emailed you that you are out of the office makes sense. But remember, even Gary Vaynerchuk commits himself to answering every e-mail he receives! There are people in leadership positions in the SM world who never reply to e-mails or personal messages. There’s a real risk of them appearing to be incongruent.

Similarly, I’m amazed at the number of people who post articles on their own blogs and on sites like ecademy and never reply to comments. To me, this has nothing to do with social media or networking: it’s plain, old-fashioned courtesy!

Never Mind the Width, Where’s the Depth? I often ask myself whether, with the benefit of hindsight, I’d have joined the auto-connect experiment on ecademy. I would, but only because I believe that soon, we will be given the tools to enable us to create clusters of members within our networks around keyword searches.

Let’s say I want to engage with people in my network who, for example, live in the South West, are healers with an interest in Chinese Medicine and in using modern technology to enhance healing. I should be able to enter those keywords within my network, identify those who fit the description and then send them a message. At the moment, this is not possible on any site of which I’m aware.

Real Time Relationships are Still The Most Important Ones. How many of us have heard comments from loved ones like “Are you on Facebook/ecademy/LinkedIn/that blog again?” or “You spend more time with your on-line networks than you do with me!” Unless you are very disciplined, it’s easy to drift into this habit. I wonder how long it will be before “Too much time on-line” will be seen as a justified reason for a partner’s filing for divorce?

Be Yourself. Have you noticed how many cloned sites there are out there? Sing your song, with your voice and don’t be afraid to be different! People will connect and engage with others with whom they feel comfortable. Fakes are spotted sooner or later and it’s difficult to feel comfortable with someone who’s a fake.

Communicate Rather than Broadcast. This takes me full circle. Membership of too many sites leads to a situation  in which it’s impossible to engage in meaningful 2 way communication with people. You end up either “broadcasting” rather than “communicating” or neglecting people, which is a surefire way to kill relationships.

Nick Tadd made an enigmatic comment on Tuesday suggesting he had learned much about this on  his recent trip to the USA and I hope he jumps in here. Whether he does or not, have I missed anything out? What are the lessons you have learned about Connecting, Engaging and Sharing?

In pubs, clubs, restaurants, business meetings, blogs, chats, I hear the same question being asked – When will this economic crisis end?

If the end means returning to things as they were, I believe that this is the wrong question to be asking! Put it this way – if you were with someone who you thought of as a friend and they started beating you up, when trying to defend yourself and come out of the encounter in good shape, would you be asking yourself when the attack would end so that you could resume your friendship?

Read more…

When I think back on life, I realise that the times when I’ve really thrived, when life was exciting, was when I decided to march to the rhythm of my own drum.  The times I’ve felt stifled, on the other hand, were when I conformed to everyone else’s view of the norm.

This has taught me that whether they think they can, or think they can’t, everyone has the ability to be innovative. It just takes time, practice and daring. The box of crayons in kindergarten were not limited to those who possessed potential; because the truth is, everybody has potential for personal development. You are not stuck with who you are now, unless you choose to be. Read more…

All too often, when coaching clients or just generally chatting with people about their personal growth and development, they tell me that they’re unhappy with certain aspects of their personality. When I ask them what’s stopping them from changing, they say things like “I was born this way”, “It’s just who I am”, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks”, “I’m too old to change” etc..

The good news for anyone wanting to change is that all of these excuses are just, well, excuses! Neural plasticity means that our brains are able to create new neural pathways no matter what our age! Which means that you can change any aspect of your personality that you don’t like. And it means that age is no barrier to personal growth.

Read more…

Many people are motivated by having something to work towards; for them, having a clear vision is useful for their personal development and journey in life.

Endless Possibilities

If you are someone that needs to find a vision for yourself you will want to make sure that you are following through with what life has in store for you. You also need to make sure that you don’t get locked into one set way of achieving that vision. There are endless possibilities for everyone.  If you are looking to make something great of yourself then you will need to set some priorities and goals to set you on your way to a better and bigger future. Read more…

I’m over  50 years old, and whilst I’m not a great believer in regrets, I’ve made more than a few mistakes along the way. Many people at this point would write something like “and I’ve learned from every mistake!” Unfortunately, being stubborn, that has not always been the case and I’ve repeated some mistakes several times before I got the message –  and some I’m still learning!

However, there are a few things I wish I had discovered, learned or been told earlier in life that would have made things a whole lot easier. Or maybe I just wasn’t ready to hear those messages back then – these things have a habit of happening when they should! Read more…

One of the facts that gets quoted every now and then by people advising bloggers on how to write articles is that the top bloggers use the word “you” more often than “me” or “We/Our”. So I thought I’d take a look and see if this is true, or another Social Media Urban Myth.

As a starting point, I took the blogs of 8 of the top Social Media Bloggers and looked at their percentage use of “I”, “We”, “You” and “They”. In each case, I collected at least 5,000 words, which for most equates to between 6 and 8 articles.I know it’s not a very large sample of writers or words, but I wanted to see if any patterns emerged. And they did!

Louis Gray blogs more about developments in SM and emerging technologies, so I had thought that perhaps he would have used “me” more often, as he is often giving his opinion. But he still managed to use “you” more often than “I” and “We” combined

Chris Brogan uses the first person singular a lot in the sample tested but there’s a good reason for it – among the posts that I sampled were several explaining how he uses mind mapping, how he doesn’t use LinkedIn as he feels he should etc.. I’m going to go back and examine his more general articles to see the pattern there.

As can be seen from the table, all of the others use “you” almost twice as often as they use “I”, the exceptions being Seth Godin who uses “you” 3.5 times as often as he uses the word “I” and Karen Skidmore who uses it a whopping 8 times as much!. This is entirely consistent with SM articles being about engaging with other people and drawing them in. With the exception of self -disclosure articles of the type Chris Brogan has been writing recently, most of us would soon get bored with, and probably stop reading, writers who used “I” twice as much as they use “you”.

There’s a lot more I’m going to be analyzing, such as percentage of past, present and future orientated words, the percentage of nouns vs verbs etc

The conclusion? These people are some of the top in their field – anyone wanting to be up there with them needs to be looking at their writing style. The small words matter. You will find another article here that examines the subject in more detail, and announces a new service for writers.

Do you ever worry about the lack of real leaders around the world? From a British perspective, do you feel a bit glum when you think about the General Election in  May 2010 and try to identify the genuine leaders amongst the front benches of the major parties?

A lot of people confuse leadership with management, thinking that the two are synonymous. Nothing could be further from the truth and in this article we are going to draw clear distinctions between the two before looking at the specifics of servant leadership.

Putting it simply, leadership is about deciding the right things to do whilst management is about doing things in the right way. Management is particularly concerned with the efficient use of resources. Peter Drucker once wrote that most organisations are over-managed and under-led and this can be seen when examining bankruptcies. The courts are full of companies that were highly efficient at doing the wrong things!

This can also be seen in the uptake, or lack of uptake, of Social Media in organisations. Many managers prefer to optimise current work practices rather than embrace change. If those same organisations lack leadership with the vision to see that the game is changing, then they are unlikely to successfully integrate Social Media into their culture. They will be highly efficient players in a game that no longer exists – they may dislike change, but eventually they will come to realise that they will like being increasingly irrelevant even less!

Leadership is about doing the right things and this has two dimensions to it. Choosing the right activities to be involved in and also ‘doing the right thing’, in other words, choosing the morally right thing to do. And this is where servant leadership comes in. The title of ‘Leader’ is not something that someone awards to themselves. It is something that is recognised in the individual by other people. In the increasingly transparent world that is a result of Web 2.0 and 3.0, self-proclaimed leaders without the track record to back it up will have a very short shelf-life.

And other than with senior appointments in organisations (and even then I’d argue that most are managers rather than leaders), leadership will be something one does with people, not to them. In fact I’d go a stage further and suggest that Servant Leadership will often be characterised by what the Leader can do for her/his people. The very name suggests that servant leadership is concerned with issues such as “How can I Serve my Team?”

What are the qualities, skills and behaviours of Servant Leaders? To adapt one of my favourite pieces of writing, I suggest that in practical terms, Servant Leaders:

Are patient
Are kind.
Do not envy,
Do not boast,
Are not proud.
Are not rude,
Are not self-seeking,
Are not easily angered,
Do not keep no of wrongs.
Do not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
Will do the morally right thing rather than hide behind what is legal or expedient
Always protect, always trust, always hope, always persevere.

During the last month I’ve read several books on Social Media, which inevitably discuss communication issues. At least 2 of them refer to the following statistics about communication. They say that:

• 7% of meaning is in the words that are spoken.
• 38% of meaning is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said).
• 55% of meaning is in the body language.

If the author knows the origin of these figures, they will attribute them to Albert Mehrabian. However, even a brief search via Google will quickly reveal that whilst this information is widespread, it is in fact a myth.

All Mehrabian’s research showed was that in situations where there is an incongruence between words and expression, and where the message has an emotional content and context, then in his study, people tended to believe the expression they saw, not the words spoken.

Their interpretation was as follows:
• 7% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes was in the words that are spoken.
• 38% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes was paralinguistic (the way that the words are said).
• 55% of message pertaining to feelings and attitudes was in facial expression.

Interestingly, with regards to the 55% of the message, it was not even whole body language. The research subjects were shown a head shot photo of the speaker.

What is more, as Mehrabian points out when reviewing the study in his book (1), there are other more significant factors, such as the relationship between the communicator and the receiver that will affect how meaning is deduced, and that these factors can easily override the 7/38/55 split.

There are also problems with the study itself; it is based on the response of only 37 female, University of California, psychology undergraduates, hardly a representative sample in either number or background! And the 7/38/55 formula that people quote is not even derived from a single uniform study looking at the three types of responses; rather it is derived from combining the results of two studies – one that compared single words to vocal tone, the other that compared facial cues to vocal tone. No study was carried out to complete the triangle, comparing single words with facial expressions.

What I find surprising is that many writers (eg http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-1332.html, and http://resourcemagazine.co.uk/acatalog/lapakko.pdf) have tried to debunk this myth with little success – why is it so persistent? Much of our communication does not include emotion and, in an internet context, is not between people who are sitting face to face!

So the important issue, particularly for Social Media, is that the words do matter and deliver far more than 7% of the meaning.

Leaving the final word with Mehrabian himself: “My findings are often misquoted. Please remember that all my findings on inconsistent or redundant communication deal with communications of feelings and attitudes. This is the realm within which they are applicable. Clearly it is absurd to imply or suggest that the verbal portion of all communication constitutes only 7% of the message. Suppose I wanted to tell you that the eraser you are looking for is in the second right-hand drawer of the desk in my third floor office. How could anyone contend that the verbal part of this message is only 7% of the message? Instead and more accurately, the verbal part is nearly 100% of the message. Again, anytime we communicate abstract relationships, clearly 100% of the entire communication is verbal.”

(1) Mehrabian A, “Silent Messages” — A Primer of Nonverbal Communication (Body Language) for the General Audience, 1981, Wadsworth Publishing Co