Posts Tagged ‘perception’

Can we observe an attitude?

February 15th, 2010

What happens when you provide someone with feedback?  Do they welcome your comments?  Does it depend on who it is you are providing the feedback to?  What exactly do you feedback to them…their behaviour?  their actions? their attitude?

Many would agree that a person’s attitude has a real and measurable impact on behaviour.  Many managers think that it is the employee’s poor attitude that causes them to produce poor quality work or a good attitude makes a person a better worker.

How would you feel if I told you that it is impossible to observe attitude?

To demonstrate what I mean, lets start with the dictionary definition of  ‘observe’.

Ob-serve

  1. to see, watch, perceive, or notice.  “He observed the passerby in the street.”
  2. to regard with attention, esp. so as to see or learn something.  “I want to observe her reaction to the judge’s question.”
  3. to watch, view, or note for a scientific. official, or other special purpose.  ” To observe an eclipse.”

So how do we observe an attitude?  For example, someone enters a room in a raging temper, obviously incredibly upset and fuming about something that has happened.  Did I observe the raging temper?  Some of you might be saying ‘yes’, but what did I actually observe?  I saw the person enter the room, their face was contorted, they had tight closed fists held stiffly at their sides.  They were walking briskly and were mumbling about something I couldn’t quite make out.

I inferred from my observations that they were in a raging temper.  Inference?  Let’s check the definition.

In-fer

  1. to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence.  ” They inferred form his cool tone of voice”
  2. to guess; speculate; surmise
  3. to hint; imply,suggest

That inference, the conclusion about the meaning of the observations, says as much about me the observer as it does about the person under observation.  I cannot prove that the person was in a fowl temper, I can only use the specific examples of their behaviour that evidence my conclusions.

So what does this mean?  Why is it important to note this differentiation?

Conclusions about attitude or personality are subjective, and people are very easily offended when their attitude or personality is attacked.  Focusing on your conclusion or judgement of the behaviour very rarely results in improved performance.  In fact, it’s one of the best possible ways to achieve ill feeling.

So what do we do?  You think (due to observations of behaviour) that someone has a bad attitude…how are we to let them know (because without feedback we cannot expect an improvement) without including our own perceptions and judgements?

We concentrate on the observable behaviour.  OK, an example.  You think John has a bad attitude and that it’s affecting the quality of his work.  When providing him with feedback, you need to ask yourself which of his behaviours is causing the problems…his lateness and arguing with his colleagues…and let John know about those, don’t mention attitude.

This way, we avoid building barriers to be heard and provide specific information about behaviour that can be improved.  John can concentrate on being on time, which is measurable rather than be offended and wondering what exactly a bad attitude means.

Remember, feedback is supposed to be helpful.  Determine whether what you want to say will help or not by asking yourself, ” Will my comments be specific enough and non-threatening enough to help them improve?”

Distinguish between what you observe and what you infer… This distinction is very important.

Easy to read? Must be easy to do…

February 8th, 2010

How much of an effect does the print font we use have on the reader?  Does the ease or difficulty of reading text have an impact on our view of the information?  How do we process information?

Recent experimental research shows that the print font we use can have a profound effect on our understanding of information.  This happens because the print fonts influence how fluently we process the information, even though the font has no actually relationship with the information it is displaying.  How much consideration do you give to the font that you use?

Take for example a recipe…how easy the steps are to read will have a significant effect on how easy we presume the recipe is to follow and meal is to prepare.  This is above and beyond the link we place on complex recipes being difficult to prepare.  A recommendation than would be for restaurants to display their menu in a harder to read font as customers will presume that they are more difficult to prepare, taking additional skill and effort.  It might even prevent the hobby cook from trying the dish at home.

Another point is highlighted with regards to how quickly the reader will make a decision related to the information.  The more difficult to read, the longer the reader will take to make a decision based on it adn they may not make a decision at all.  Novemsky and colleagues presented the same information about two cordless phones in easy to read or difficult to read formats.  They observed that 17% of their participants deferred choice when it was easy to read whereas 41% did so when the font was difficult to read.  Pretty clear results!  So if you want your reader to act on what you are writing about, you need to ensure the print font is clear and easy to read.

The effect is also evident when the name of a product or offering is difficult to pronounce.  For example, amusement park rides with difficult to pronounce names are perceived as being more adventurous than rides with easy to pronounce names…and are also perceived as more likely to make you sick!  The fluency of the name having a effect on how we understand the product.

Taking this knowledge into the stock market the effect is repeated.  Companies that had difficult to pronounce names were seen as more risky than company names that were easy to say.  In fact Exchange, Alter and Oppenheimer found that companies with easy to pronounce ticker symbols actually performed better than those with difficult to pronounce ticker symbols.

Next time you need to present written information…how much care will you take to make it easy to read…and thus be seen as easy to implement and understand?

PS. If in doubt use Ariel print font…its known to be the easiest to read!

Origins of Creativity

January 19th, 2010

Edward de Bono is regarded as the leading international authority in creative thinking.  He coined the term ‘lateral thinking’ and is well known for his ’6 hats’ method.  It was while dipping into his book ‘Serious Creativity’ that I noticed the section on sources of creativity and thought how interesting it was to investigate where creativity comes from and from what does it originate.

Understanding where the roots of creativity are will help put it in perspective, just as an increased understanding of any process  helps us improve our capability in it.  I’m hoping that some of these sources will surprise you and maybe even encourage you to utilise them more often.  So here goes….Edward de Bono’s Sources of Creativity….

Innocence

If we do not know the usual way of doing things,  the usual solutions or approach then we come up with our own.  A fresh approach.  If you are not restricted by knowing the constraints in a given situation then you will come up with something novel.  It’s difficult to be creative in your own industry – you might be able to be novel in another.

Experience

The creativity of experience is really about seeking to build upon and repeat past experiences.  We amend, add to or repackage things that we did previously.

Motivation

Most people who are creative derive their creativity from Motivation.   This means a willingness to spend hours instead of minutes coming up with a better way of doing things or taking the time to look at things that no one else has looked at.  It’s all about time and effort.

Tuned Judgement

The person who is skilled in tuned judgement does not initiate ideas.  They recognise the potential of an idea at an early stage.  They base their judgement on feasibility, the market etc…  An idea that is developed is more important than an idea that exists only as an idea.  Seeing value in an idea is in itself a creative act.

Chance, Accident, Mistake and Madness

I’m sure you can think of a time when things were going along swimmingly but due to a mistake or accident they take a different swing.  Many of the greatest advances were the result of mistakes.  The first antibiotic, immunology and Columbus heading to the Indies to name but a few.  Post-it notes to name a lesser advance :-)   This type of creativity takes thinking out of the reasonable and pushes boundaries.

Style

Working within a particular style can generate products which are new but only due to the style being applied.  High in practical value but not the same as generating new ideas.

Release

Releasing yourself from fears and inhibitions can generate creativity.  This only goes so far though and to be truly useful it is necessary to gain a quick appreciation of new values in order to be of practical sense.

Lateral Thinking

Systematic techniques can be used formally and deliberately to generate new ideas.  You’ll have heard of de Bono’s 6 hats for example.  The important point about applying techniques is that these techniques can be learned and used.

What do you think?  Given you some pause for thought? For creativity? How many of the sources do you currently use?

Behaviour maketh the person?

November 30th, 2009

What is your opinion of Daniel O-Donnell?  Like his music?  Find him an appealing songster?

Take a minute to come up with a few adjectives to describe him.

What came to mind?  I speculate that the adjectives were not entirely positive.  Perhaps you used words such as ‘boring’, ‘banal’…perhaps you said he’s only liked by the ‘blue rinse brigade’ and sings ‘old stuff’.  Yet, is this completely fair to him as a person?  To be judged on only a few elements of his persona?  Personally I’m not a fan of his music and find his photo shoots amusing for the simple fact that he has only the one pose but… he makes a special effort for his fans.  He insures that there are rows at the front of his concerts reserved for the disabled, he takes time out of his schedule to meet many of his fans….and has even (upon request) signed a birthday card for my aunt who has Downs Syndrome.  This is all above and beyond the call of duty.  I cannot deny that Daniel O’Donnell has many excellent qualities.

Why am I droning on about Daniel O’Donnell you might ask?  The reason, because he made me think about the way I judge others and question the values on which I rate him.  How many of us presume to know someone based on one small element of their personality?  If someone behaves in an inappropriate manner towards us or others do we jusdge the person on that behaviour?  How would you feel about someone making persumptions about you without understanding the context?

When we are providing feedback to others it is important to concentrate on the behaviour not the person.  It is possible to like the person but not the behaviour.  I’m sure you can think of many examples of this.

How interesting it is to look at people through fresh eyes.  To see someone in a different light.  Take a moment now and think of someone, your colleague, your boss…your partner.  Write down 3 adjectives to describe them.  Now think about their physical characteristics, their hobbies, their interests, their dreams, ambitions…the way they relate to others.  Write down 3 more adjectives.  Refreshing isn’t it?  I wonder how many of us stop seeing the attributes of another because we have already made up our minds about what we think of them as a person.

I might not appreciate Daniel O’Donnell music but I can’t wait to see my aunts face when she opens that card…it’ll make her year…and that it definitely worth appreciating!

As soon as possible!

November 29th, 2009

Ever ask someone something and been answered ‘Probably’.  Not ‘yes’ or ‘no’ but ‘probably’.  What were your expectations?  What assumptions did you make?  How likely is it that you will get what you asked?  During training sessions I have often asked the group to write down what percentage likelyhood is attached to the word ‘probably’.  I have gotten anything from probably means something is 20% likely to happen (I fear this person has been disappointed often in life!) to 99%.

What is your understanding of the word ‘probably’?  Think it’s the same as your colleagues?  Ever checked?

Our understanding of words is impacted by the society we live in, our families…our workplaces…and ourselves.  Often we use language that seems to be understandable but have elements of flexibility in their meaning.  However, the consequences of this can be wide ranging.  You hear ‘probably’ and you assume that its more likely than not to happen but perhaps the person delivering the message had a different understanding of the word?

What about the line ‘I’m almost finished’? What does that mean?  How close to being finished is the person saying this?  What about ‘Not very often’?  How many times is ‘not very often’?

So much of our everyday language is non-exact.  We believe we know the meaning because they are familiar words but do we understand them int he same way other people do.  When we are providing instructions and giving feedback, it is vital that we are understood, in fact communication of any kind does not exist without understanding.

What happened the last time you misunderstood a message because of the language that was used?  How do you prevent someone misunderstanding what you mean?

WATCH POINT – Do you use ‘As soon as possible’ at the bottom of emails?  What does that mean? As soon as possible to you may not be the same as for the person you are sending it to.  They may prioritise differently to you.  If you need something completed quickly, but a deadline.  That was your communication is clear and expectations are managed!!

Mind Bending

November 18th, 2009

Fancy a challenge?  Need a diversion?  Up for a bit of lateral thinking?

No 1)

“My friend Sarah told me that her Grandmother was younger than her Mother.”   Could this be true?

No 2)

A carrot, a football scarf were found in a field.  If noone placed them there, how did they get there? (a hint? its coming up to that time of year!)

No 3)

On the table is a carton containing 6 eggs.  If six people each take one egg, how can it be that one egg is left in the carton?

No 4)

Add 2 to 171 and make it less than 18.

No 5)

A train was speeding down the track towards a woman who had fallen asleep on the railway line after a particularly rowdy party.  The train had no headlights on, there was no moonlight, and no overhead lighting.  How was the driver able to stop the train before hitting her?

No 6)

A woman has to cut a roll of ribbon into one metre lengths.  If it takes her 2 seconds to measure and sut a length and the whole roll is fifty metres long, how long will it take her to do it?

No 7)

You can use 3 identical digits in a simple addition sum so that the total is 12.  You cannot use the digit 4, so what is the answer?

And one for luck

You are driving down the road in your car on a wild, stormy night, when you pass by a bus stop and you see three people waiting for the bus

a-an old lady who looks as if she is about to die

b-an old friend who once saved your life

c-the perfect partner you have been dreaming about

Knowing that there can only be one passenger in your car, whom would you choose?

Each of the above take a little creativity to solve…and each need you to think about the puzzle in a slightly different way…from a different perspective… with unclear reasoning… so if you are having problems, check any assumptions you might have made…

How did you do?  Need the answers?  Want more puzzles?  Like to see an article on how to improve your lateral thinking skills?

All thing being relative…

November 16th, 2009

Discussing relatively recently with a local poet, a compromise of conversation was highlighted to me.  Having delivered some vibrant and thought provoking poetry he explained that he uses poetry to protray his thoughts and observations about life.  Out conversation swayed into the topic of relativity and how generalisations can never be taken as fact as all things are relative.  Happiness, success, good bad, all things are varying shades of grey.

I fervently agreed and we chatted about human nature, Richard Dawkins, life atheists (as opposed to religious ones) and Robert Anton Wilson’s desire to remove the word ‘is’ from the English Language.  It was an interesting and engaging conversation.  It was when he said, due to the extreme nature of his views, he now found it almost impossible to engage in one-to-one conversation because he could not accept generalisations.  That made me double check my own view point.

Without generalisations and probabilities, we would be unable to have reasoned, intelligent debate.  We would be unable to make decisions or maintain some control over our surroundings.  Without a ‘flexible’ understanding we would lose the ability to engage in many of our normal conversations.  Ok, we need to ensure that we understand a particular word or emotion the way the person delivering it intends. But we also need to use probability to gage what is likely to happen, in order to plan and engage.

So, I accept that to understand behaviour we must assign probability…all things being relative, of course!

I sense that you…

November 16th, 2009

“You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself.  I sense that sometimes you are insecure especially with people you don’t know. While you have some personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for them.  You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. You’re having problems with a friend or relative.  At times you have serious doubts whether you have made the right decision or done the right things. You have a box of old, unsorted photographs in your house.  Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside.  You prefer a certain amount of change and cariety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations.  You also pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others’ statements without satisfactory proof.  But you have  found it unwise to be frank in revealing yourself to others.  At times you are extroverted, affable and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary and reserved.  Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic.”

Am I right?  Did you recognise yourself in the above description?

These statements may appear as if they were especially prepared for you alone but if you re-read the paragraph you may find that most of the statements are open-ended, providing some wriggle room for those who seek connections with their own personalities.  Most people fail to see that these type of statements could actually apply to almost anyone.  This is known as the Barnum Effect and it is a type of subjective validation.

As humans we are designed to look for interconnections, for links and meaning – and we find it.  We strive to find meaning or significance, where there may be none at all.  Do you watch ‘Deal or no Deal’?  Do you really think that number 22 is the ‘Deathbox’?  That because you brought a box to the table that means’ something to you, such as your birthdate, you are going to win big.  Yet, in reality you may be experiencing selective memory, only remembering the times when the number was successful and not those (probably numerous) times when it wasn’t.  The game is completely random.

We are very good at relating things to ourselves, in fact it is one of the differences that separate us from all other creatures.  By being programmed to find patterns, links and pictures from a collection of (perhaps) random items can lead us to behave in quite an irrational manner.  Our desire to find meaning, pattern and significance can be very powerful and as much as it is required for our survival….we need to watch for those times when we are creating meaning rather than observing it.

Have you ever behaved irrationally due to the significance you placed on something?  Do you always use the same numbers on the lottery because you believe those numbers to be lucky?  Do you carry a lucky charm?

Someone is watching you

November 13th, 2009

How much of an impact do you believe someone watching you has on your behaviour?  Does it matter who is watching?

Research completed by Newcastle university demonstrated that people put almost 3 times the amount of money into an honesty box for hot drinks when the poster with prices featured eyes rather than flowers.

As humans, our brains are programmed to recognise faces and even though the eyes were only on a poster, it still had the effect of modifying behaviour.  Those purchasing drinks had the feeling they were being watched so they were more likely to place anhonest amount in the honesty box.

The perception on the public of being watched clearly had an impact on their behaviour.

How can this research be used?  Can we apply this knowledge in organisations or in the public arena?

‘Doing a Ratner’

November 13th, 2009

How many of us speak before we think?

It is true to say that we all say things without first thinking them through. Ever answered an employee’s question only taking that individual employee into consideration and not the very likely probability that, that same employee may recount the conversation to others?

Gerald Ratner had makes jokes about his merchandise previously, just provoking friendly laughter but he didn’t consider the breadth of his audience during a speach to 6000 fellow members of the Institute of Directors in 1991.  He claimed that his stores sold earrings for under a pound, which is cheaper than a prawn sandwich from Marks & Spencer – but probably won’t last as long!  Not content with this he went on to describe his sherry decanters as ‘crap’.

The result? In two minutes the reputation of a company was in tatters, £500 million was wiped from its stock exchange value, Gerald Ratner personally lost £6 million and his £600,000 a year job and the company had to rebrand to try and save themselves from total disaster.

Clearly Ratner did not consider his audience, in particular the fact that the Daily Mirror were present.  When speaking to others we are often thinking of how we will answer them instead of listening carefully to what is being said.  We also, occasionally become so embroiled in what we are doing that we forget the outside world.  We are told that our brain thinks four times faster than we speak….so we use that time to consider what we will say next.  We should be listening to what is being said and considering our reply in relation to not only the current conversation but also in how it will be perceived by others.   If Ratner had taken his audience into consideration, had thought through who was listening and who would potentially hear his comments….he may not have been so quick to make his flip remark.

Learning point – always consider your audience, both immediate and future….and use that wonderful extra thinking time wisely!