Knowledge Advocate

We make memory mistakes all the time. Modernly, it’s gotten really bad because our memories simply cannot keep up with all that we now see, hear, and experience. One researcher notes that it is incredible we remember anything accurately at all! Here is the kicker, we personally are hard wired to believe our own memories are accurate, true and sound. Yikes!

So what are we supposed to do?

OK. If you agree with me that our individual memories really stink, what can we do about it? How can we stop the inaccuracies of our individual memories from messing with our corporate minds and outcomes? Let’s think some about that.

Before you get me thinking, mind telling what the point of this post is?

Sure. This post is about well-intentioned individuals who have faulty, wacky memories and the clear instruction that they should never rely on their memories as proof for any outcome when more than one person shares responsibility in the outcome. When people invoke their memories and recollection as true and accurate, they can really mess with the best available outcomes for their companies.

How so?

If a person relies on his or her own memory (which by nature fills in gaps poorly and makes stuff up), that reliance may cause them to ignore other resources available to them, like the recall and memories of others or the software and data systems that companies buy to help retain information and reuse it.

Is there science behind these claims about faulty memories?

Of course. Researchers identify over three dozens ways each of us fill in gaps in our memories to fill out what we believe is true. They call these “memory biases,” and prove we all have them. These memory oddities exist to make us feel better about what we know and help us understand things on our terms and in our best light.

Can you give us an example?

Sure, “I knew that was going to happen!” Heard that one before? When we say it of course it is true. When others say it, we say, “Yeah… right.” What I am saying is that we swear we knew it would happen when it happens to us, and at the same time make fun of others when they do it. This particular bias is called “hindsight bias” and it happens to all of us, all the time.

Is it a control thing?

You betcha. That is exactly what it is. To keep control of how we personally sense things, and to ensure we don’t freak out all the time, our brains help us out by letting us fill in gaps of information in a way that helps us make sense of it. In other words, our memory system helps us make sense of things regardless of the impact our gap filling ways have on others.

Are you saying that individual memories can be bad for the company?

Exactly right! When it comes to individual memories, blind reliance on them without a reality check can have terrible and sometimes fatal business impact. Because we are all prone to recall error, relying heavily on what we can remember to make company decisions can mess with the best available company outcomes.

So what’s the decision maker with the goofball memory supposed to do?

Easy; ask around. Check in on the pulse of what others believe. Experience first hand their own faulty recall. Put enough different recollections together and hone in on what the facts truly are. This kind of inquiry will help a decision maker get a sense of how others recall and see things, and gauge what to do based on all the best available information.

So, what’s the outcome of all this?

The outcome of acknowledging our own faulty memories is a clear mandate to call upon others to make sure we have a well-rounded awareness of the facts. Doing this instead of relying on the one memory system we are hard wired to trust most can produce staggeringly better business results.

Give it a try, let me know how it goes!

QNA stands for “question not answered.” Have you had any happen to you lately?

Can you give an example of one?

Sure. Question: “How’s John doing on the project?” Answer: “The thing is, we didn’t set things up as well as we could at the start.” That response answer’s another question (asked to themselves, such as, is there a reason John is doing poorly, or, how did John get assigned to the project). That second question shows up in the person’s head, maybe triggered by the first question (in this example, the question about how John is doing). Because the second (never vocalized!) question gets answered, the person who asked about John (1) doesn’t know exactly where the answer came from, and (2) still doesn’t have an answer to his or her first question!

For what reasons do questions go unanswered?

I don’t know! You don’t know. Often, the person answering does not know! More importantly, when we fail to follow up… we may never know the answer.

Do you have a process for how to deal with QNAs?

Yes. Here it is:

First, know QNAs happen. You might even add the idea to your frame of reference, “Is that a QNA?”, next time someone does not answer the question you asked.

Second, do something about them. You have options when a QNA shows up. For example, be persistent with the question you did ask, focus on it until you get it answered. Or, go with the flow a bit and remember in your short term memory that you still did not get that question answered (harder to do and easier to deal with from the other person’s perspective). Another tactic is to set the stage for the question a little better by asking questions in and around the one you need answered. Another way to get at the answer is to ask a different and similar question that gets close to what the answer may be.

Third, let whatever happens happen (i.e., don’t get mad at QNAers!). Frequently, people will still not answer a QNA. No surprise really because that’s why they did not answer it in the first place. That’s ok. At least you tried!

Is there an outcome to knowing about QNAs?

Yes, there is. It turns out, if you actively pursue QNAs, and get good at it, they happen less. Explaining for what reasons that happens would remove some of the magic. So instead, just try it for yourself and see what happens!

Challenge the next QNA you hear. Let me know how it goes!

Has this happened to you: you share how you experience things and nothing registers with the other person, no one seems to be home?

What’s happening?

This situation can be exasperating, true? Why doesn’t the person care to listen? Why doesn’t he or she just “get it”?

More to the point: what can you do about it?

Next time ask: “Would you like to hear how I make sense of it?”

Why this question?

Asking the other person if he or she wants to know how you make sense of things clears the air. If the other person says “No,” or looks away, or disregards the question, then you know he or she is not interested in your viewpoint. Right then you can stop trying to make sense.

Stop making sense, are you crazy?

Whoa…. I am not asking you to stop making sense completely! Rather, next time just refrain from offering your sense when the other person makes clear they don’t want to hear it. mostly, repetitive sense making in non-receptive ears goes in one and out the other. Nothing sticks and you might get a sore throat!

Then what can you do?

Well, you can stop talking altogether as you maintain a positive attitude and energy level. You can offer something like, “We can revisit this later.” Alternatively, you can persistently inquire how he or she makes sense of the subject and connect what he or she says with what you sense about things.

What should you not do when people don’t seem to be listening?

Whatever you do, do not share your sense of things once the other person makes it clear he or she doesn’t care to hear it. They might be listening for other things, and you can explore those, they just don’t care in that particular moment to hear how you make sense of things. If that is the case, then give the conversation some patience, try a different tact, and over time see what happens.

Let me know how it goes!

Here is a question I ask in my communication skills classes:

Does anyone “make sense” like you do, just like you do, day in and day out?

The answer is almost always, “No, not even close!” Sometimes I get, “Yes, my spouse” (what a lucky couple); or, “My dad/mom/daughter/son” (understandable given how genes and environment are dominant reasons why we are who we are); or rarely, “People in my trusted circle kind of make sense like me” (trust forms more easily with people who share like-minds).

With so few folks who make sense just like us, why keep making sense our way?

There’s the $64,000 dollar question. Will it ever make sense to use the exact way we make sense to help us settle arguments, talk about plans, or discuss different people and new places? No wonder we hear this alot, “That makes no sense, why would you say that?”Argh!

We love to “make sense” and there are near seven billion ways to do it!

As many people as there are on the planet: that’s how many ways there are to make sense. So, making sense can get real confusing, real fast. Keep making sense and see how far you get with another person, who keeps making sense his or her way. Those two ways of making sense might never meet, and in the least, it could be a long talk before you get to mutual understanding and common sense.

So what can we do, make no sense!?

No, of course not. We like to make sense because it usually makes sense to do that over time. Here’s the point of this post: just don’t try to make sense right out of the gate. Chill out a bit instead. Realize you are talking with folks who do not share your own unique way of making sense.

What should we do?

Consider how other people you talk with take in things with their own senses. Explore their way to experience things. Find out how they make sense. Watch their non-verbal cues. Pay attention to how they learn and process stuff. Whatever you do, just remember to avoid making sense at first. It’s that simple. Remember, this works because if you make sense exactly your way from the get go, more likely than not no one else will even come close to understanding how you got there! And again, that’s because no one makes sense just like you. So, try not to make sense next time you talk, on the way to finding common sense. I reckon it will work great.

Seek sense first, that’s the answer!

So instead of making sense at first, seek it. Actively go out and question others about their sense making. Seek sense first. Actively investigate how others get to their senses. This will work wonders for your talks, I promise.

Let me know how it goes!

I left my law firm this month after ten years. The process of saying goodbye has been harder on me than I had imagined. Here are some musings about my path from law to business.

What’s different about trial work and business consulting?

The difference between law and business? Not much, in terms of outcome. Litigators use communication skills to discover, uncover, filter and focus. Those verbs help process what people have to say when stories conflict. In court, witnesses share facts and opinions. That’s evidence that helps juries right wrongs. The best lawyers help juries see, hear and feel the story that makes the most sense for them. Juries then act on that knowing to make the hard decisions that end lawsuits.

So, what’s the same about law and business communication skills?

Like business consultants, trial lawyers are facilitators and moderators. They have one basic job: help decision makers make the right decisions by making sure the flow of information is clear and compelling. When trial lawyers manage that flow well, they drive smart decisions. Lawyers unclog the flow, improve it, and condense it down so that the jury can decide things with the right evidence in mind.

Juries and leaders all make better decisions when the right evidence appears at the right time. They all benefit from access to a free flow of relevant information. Finally, great outcomes happen when the information flow is swift and smart because that’s when the best choices become obvious, even under hard conditions.

So, what has trial law taught you about communications consulting?

This post offers some personal reflections about the practice of law as I consider my transformation from trial work to business consulting. I hope the post offers you some helpful insights that can aid your own journey. Below are five key learnings, my top take-aways from law as I head further into the field of communications work. I hope these learnings trigger some useful thoughts for you.

1) It’s all about the story

Great litigators tell stories and stories win lawsuits. Litigators rely on three basic elements of great story telling: hooks; headlines; and burning questions. They set those out in themes, introduce actors, define settings, and keep things moving along without giving away too much at one time.

Juries want to know how to help and need the context for doing so. Stories let juries learn better because they connect past experiences to the current facts of the case. Juries tend to see things in the story like they’ve seen things in the past (visual learners), or heard (auditory learners), or felt (kinesthetic learners). How juries learn helps them know from “inside out” what really happened to cause the lawsuit.

Business can miss story lines, neglect engaging hooks, and get off track from burning questions in the pursuit of ROI, quarterly returns, and office politics. Business benefits from powerful stories that, when told, drive smart outcomes based on filling in the story line. Business fills the story in with evidence that proves which next steps make the most sense and why. Well told stories frame the stout proof that delivers business success.

2) Edges of knowledge are as important as the centers

I learned a painful lesson in law school over a footnote. The footnote was hidden deep inside a judge’s opinion so I missed it. That one footnote made all the difference in the opinion’s outcome. That day my reading style changed and so did my daily fact gathering, including how I question others.

Everything matters until we know better. Because that’s true, lawyers tend to leave few stones unturned, few footnotes unread, and few talks undiscovered. That’s not always so in business. Leaders can say, “Don’t tell me what I need to know, tell me what I want to hear!” Tell it to me in 60 seconds, they say, give me the top three bullet points.

It would be nice to get things done without having to hear and see the important stuff. Sadly, it doesn’t always work that way. Bullet points and elevator pitches can neglect small, really important facts. Law taught me to explore the deepest areas of what we know at the edges of our knowledge. Business can benefit from this lesson too. No surprise to me: solutions often live near the outer limits of what we know.

3) Question more, answer less

The number one tool of trial lawyers is the question. With it, they can understand what witnesses say on direct examination and cross. Questions also help them pick jurors during jury selection, frame issues during opening statements, and clear things up during closing statements.

Questions are so powerful, in fact, that the law restricts their use with lots of rules. Those rules let adversary lawyers object to questions as they desperately emote and seek to confuse the questioner. Sometimes the judge sustains the objection and rejects the question. This process can be humiliating the first couple of times you experience it!

That’s why trial lawyers get great at asking tough questions. Practice makes perfect and lawyers ask folks a lot of questions under terrible conditions. Where else does another professional get paid to interrupt the questions and needle the questioner about language form and content? And another thing, the adversary lawyer also “prepares the witness in advance.” This is lawyer code for creating a deviously unhelpful witness whose practiced answers do nothing for the other side’s case.

By contrast, when folks are not obstructed and interrupted, questions help the flow of information move fast to get things said with best choices in mind. Questions serve another purpose too, they make things stick. That’s because folks who answer for themselves own those answers and adopt them faster then when the same things are told to them without their independent consideration. Law teaches that when it comes to conversation choice: ask don’t tell.

4) Match word choice and body language for one complete message

Trial work is performance art. As a young lawyer, my mentors instructed me to stop fumbling with my notes, calm my expressions down, and look presentable. “We’ve got the ‘looking good defense’ going,” my law partner would point out. Most lawyers don’t study body language; they do, however, practice it and get better at it through trial and error.

The outcome of matching words with body language is powerful because it forms a complete message that is more authentic. That type of message influences others without the extra noise of mixed-messages. Business works better when it combines body language with word choice to form one authentic, complete message. The best communicators combine non-verbal cues with their words to form one message.

5) Knowledge is a flow and a place; it’s more flow than place

When I would return from a bad day at trial I would sometimes feel like everything was lost. Bad evidence came in, an argument failed, or some other calamity struck. Here’s the good news: one bad day, one unfortunate “place” of knowledge, almost never completely sways the flow of knowledge on its path to the logical outcome.

We win or lose over a period of time because of the power or weakness of the flow of information, not because of any one bad day. Great litigators know that it’s better to honor the flow even when it takes unsuspecting turns. The best at business also respect the information flow and treat knowledge more as a flow than a place. With practice and patience the flow of information will always drive the best available outcomes.

Next steps for my work

I conclude this post with a pledge. I commit to continue my path toward better communication through training and practice. I will devote massive energy and resources to improve the flow of information in the hallways and conference rooms of our businesses. Technology, science, and new understandings frame our opportunities and light our path in new and unsuspecting ways. We are in exciting times and I am honored to be part of the new knowledge advocacy. I will continue to heartily advocate for the flow of knowledge that surrounds us all.

Lastly, a thank you.

I end with a special offer of thanks to all the friends and colleagues who have been here for me and who join with me along this exploration of knowledge as a flow. Their companionship continues to be invaluable during this period of transition. They are my wellspring of creativity and the source from which my own energy renews. I thank them for their aid, assistance, and friendship.

This post makes one point: we can avoid “Why?” when we question others because “Why?” is a lazy question and there are ways to craft better questions.

Why not use why?

When we only ask “Why?”, the person who will answer is left wondering: “what part of what I said is he/she curious about? Which things can I say to help him/her better understand me?” So, a seemingly harmless little “Why” leaves massive gaps in how one person makes sense compared to another and can cause someone to answer in a way that makes no sense to the person who asked the “why” in the first place!

Asking “Why?” without more leaves the answering person with lots of unknowns

When we just ask “Why?”, the other person is left filling in lots of assumptions and unknowns about the intent of our question. Are we asking why did the other person say what was said, or why one thing said follows from another thing said, or perhaps why the thing said connects to something else we are thinking about. So many ways to direct the intent of a “Why?” question, it can be daunting to keep up with them all. And as a result, asking “Why?” often leaves room for misunderstanding and a failed effort to reach common ground in our talks. Reflect on a little child’s fifth or sixth “Why?” in a row: not an appealing vehicle for mutual exchange of ideas, is it?

Do you agree “Why?” frequently comes across as a challenge?

If we are not careful, “Why?” can also be taken the wrong way, as a challenge or worse, a judgment. For example, it can come across as accusatory, the short form of, “Why would you say that, it make no sense!?” Or sometimes we say “Why?” with a hurt look on our face, and let the other person sort out the reasons that line of talk just hurt our feelings. “Why,” in short, masks all sorts of intent and meaning. It’s a lazy question and we can avoid its use from here on out.

“Why?” doesn’t work hard enough to connect our thoughts in talks; let’s stop using it!

There are very few times when “Why?” is essential. To avert a helicopter accident is one good exception I have heard. Now, how often do we have a helicopter pilot error pushing us to make a quick assessment by asking “Why?” Not often I bet, so absent impending death, surely we can craft better, more time consuming questions that get our point across better. Instead of “Why?”, for example, go ahead and ask “For what reasons?” Its a good start on the way to crafting better questions that need not go lazy with a simple “Why?”

Let’s stop using “Why?”– in its absence we can watch the quality of our talks skyrocket!

May I? It is a delightful little phrase, isn’t it? A question, which serves as a cue and recognition that there may be sound reason to not go into a certain part of our talk.

Talks love to begin with permission

When we begin a talk we do not know where the other person’s state of mind is, or where his or her expectations and intentions lie, and it is hard to pinpoint that person’s emotions without further inquiry. If we proceed without permission we can gunk up the talk and make it flat and energy-less. To avoid talk troubles we can simply increase our requests for permission throughout the talk with a generous “May I?” before diving into any new area of inquiry. This includes starting a new topic with a question, or, with a transitional statement (in another post, I point out that statements always have a hidden question underlying them, and that question may trigger an area that is off limits for the other person in our conversations).

People appreciate multiple requests for permission throughout a talk

In important conversations, asking for permission once is not enough. That’s because conversations that seem perfectly safe can veer quickly into uncharted territory that for many can feel risky and unsafe. Because we often do not know the boundaries between safety and risk for those we talk to, a continuous string of requests for permission will work wonders for the other person and therefore, for us as well. With permission ever present instead of just at the start of a talk, each big turn in the flow of the conversation gains a pause to let the other person consider the merits of entering into that new part of the conversation. If the permission is denied, that’s ok, there is plenty more to talk about!

Through permission we gain the right to explore critical thoughts and feelings

That’s it, the point of this post: with appropriate and continuous permission we gain the right to explore important areas of talk filled with core thoughts and feelings. Those are the areas that build strong, lasting bonds. Those thoughts and feelings let us get to know each other intimately, so we can work and play together with mutual understanding.

Permission helps us deeply understand each other; let’s ask for it often!

Did you answer any unasked questions today?

If you made a statement you did since every statement answers an unasked question.

Think of a statement you made earlier today. Got it? I bet you made that statement because it was in line with where you were in your conversation. Let me repeat: where you were, not necessarily where the other person was with his/her thought waves.

Our statements make complete sense to us, don’t they?

So when you made your statement, of course it made a lot of sense to you. And to your credit, you thought it made sense to the other person too. As a matter of fact, just to confirm your hunch, after making the statement you might have even checked in, “You know what I mean?”

You know what I mean?

You know what I mean is a terrible question, isn’t it? Who ever says, “No, I really don’t know what you mean so stop talking!” Or as my friend says, “No, so just shut your pie hole!” Instead, the person pauses and valiantly processes what we said and hopes to figure it out on his/her own. So we can stay on the same wavelength.

What question were we answering in our statement, anyway?

What question in our heads prompted us to offer that statement earlier today? More to the point, what if we had shared the unasked question right before we made our statement, what effect might that have?

Here’s the deal: if we reveal the unasked questions first before we state anything, we will clean up a ton of our talk problems.

From what I can tell, we’ve got massive talk problems. Been caught saying one of these before? You misunderstand me; that’s not what I meant; you’re not following along; you don’t understand; this point is not that hard; you’re not on the same page; you’re making this harder than it has to be. Any of ‘em sound familiar?

Every statement answers an unasked question.

Because every single one of our statements answers an unasked question, when the person we talk with is not on the same wavelength, we can blame that darn unasked question. It’s the one that gets us off track, or “off wavelength” so to speak.

Talks gone wrong start with statements that answer unasked questions.

That’s it, the whole point of this post. Talks gone wrong start with statements that answer unasked questions. Unasked questions create gaps in the wavelengths of the people we speak with in our talks. Those gaps can be real bad for good talks.

Before your next statement go ahead and reveal the unasked question first!

When we are busy, this is the best question of all to hear. This is particularly true when a friend or co-worker states it with sound intention and a keen ability to follow through on the offer.

The maid of honor offered this question on the eve of a bride’s wedding

What a wonderful friendship these two women share. I know first hand the promise was kept. This maid of honor and best friend took on several critical responsibilities that added to the picture I saw: a happy, care free bride by night’s end. What a wonderful gift this question is to hear, music in the ears of someone who is overloaded with errands and obligations.

Next time you see a friend or co-worker with a full plate offer to take something off!

Questions and answers want to be in relationship with one another. This post is about that relationship and the need for time between questions and their responses.

How much time passes between a well-asked question and a responsive answer?

It depends. In great conversation the Q&A goes fast and responses freely follow questions with little process time required for most questions.

What do we make of long process times between question and answer?

Long process times between the question and answer challenge our notion of the relationship between those two. The questioner generally asks the question hoping for an immediate response. A few seconds later, ok; a few minutes and a long pause later, strain. A couple of hours or days after the question first arrives, hard on us.

What can we do about this?

Build process time, and the awareness of its need, into our conversations. Some questions are easier to answer than others. Acknowledge that. Here are some examples that take place after a string of answered questions. These examples are what can happen when we arrive at a question that generates a long pause.

Example 1

Would more time to process that one help?

Yes, thank you.

[flag the question, ask it again later...]

Example 2

You may have some incomplete thoughts on that last one?

Yes.

Are you comfortable sharing your top of mind considerations?

OK, bear with me. I think…

Example 3

There has been a long pause, are their some missing facts that make answering right now hard?

Probably.

Can you share some of those as you are considering them?

[Be patient, this is a tender area of a person's thinking process]

Example 4

I have a hunch, that question needs more time to consider before you answer?

Yes.

Is an answer possible?

Right now I am not sure (or, yes, it just needs more time for me to consider).

Do you have a notion of how long it will take to gather up an answer?

[This is a push tactic, be ready for resistence here]

Example 5

I sense you do not currently have an answer you are willing to speak out loud?

No, just give me a second (or, yeah, you are probably right).

Ok, take your time, let me know when you are ready (or, is there anyone who would have good ears to hear the answer).

These are examples that fit a pattern.

First, sense that the question will take time to answer. Second, encourage the person to take more time. The acknowledgment of the need for more time can make all the difference in maintaining a relationship between our question and the answer we are looking for. Third, persist with the need to hear the answer and give a variety of options for how the answer might arrive, as a guess, partially formed, deconstructed from bits of information, etc. The key idea is to keep that relationship between your question and his or her answer intact!

Good luck! Let me know how it goes.