Posted on

The art of being heard

An audience is listening and engaged with a great speaker present.

If it’s true that 90% of of career progression success relies on personal impact and exposure, your ability to be heard is crucial. Janie van Hool, author of The Listening Shift, offers some advice

In 1996, Harvey Coleman published Empowering Yourself, a candid and refreshing insight into what it takes to progress at work. His findings were impactful – just 10% of career progression success, he suggested, came down to being good at your job. The other 90% relied on personal impact and exposure. In the second edition, published 15 years later, nothing had changed, and I have no doubt it still holds true in today’s workplace. Your ability to make yourself, and what you are doing, known about is the art of being heard.

I use the word ‘art’ intentionally – art is an expression of skill and imagination, and to achieve the most from your talent takes dedication and discipline. It often involves the repetition of skill, practicing until it becomes core, and laying the foundations of confidence in our ability. So, what should you be working on to develop the art of being heard?

Are you making it too hard for your peers to listen?

Firstly, establish a connection between what you want to say and what others want to hear. We speak at around 160 words per minute, but we process at between 400-800 words per minute creating a gap that allows our listener’s minds to wander. Relevance is key to managing this challenge.

If your content is not relevant to your listeners – whether in presentations, meetings, or conversations – then you are making it too hard for them to listen. Invest time in finding out what is on your listeners’ minds. What matters to them? What do they want and need to hear from you?

For a presentation, ask your audience (or a proportion of them) what they’d like to know from you. For a meeting, have some targeted conversations beforehand so that you can be sure of focusing on the priorities of those attending; In a conversation, start by asking what would be helpful to the other person or what outcome they are looking for. This might feel like spending time you don’t have – but if you are granted the attention of your listeners, and are heard as a result, then it’s time well spent.

How concisely can you express what’s important?

Secondly, practice brevity. There are few things that switch a listener off more than someone who talks too much and for too long. While we might acknowledge the sentiment of ‘less is more’, being succinct in practice takes work.

To improve at this, you will need to put in some planning time. For presentations, test yourself by imagining a scenario in which you are asked at the last minute to present for two minutes only. What would you strip out? What really matters and must be heard? Look at each slide in your deck and apply the same thinking and then be disciplined about what you choose to add back in from your original content.

For meetings, decide on a point you’d like to make and distil it into one sentence. Practice it so that when you get to speak up, you will sound clear and confident. When it comes to introducing yourself, think long and hard about how you could make an impact in 50 words that cover who you are and what you do, as well as how and why you do it. In conversations, pay attention to how long you speak for… As a practice, have a go at limiting yourself to 20 seconds before asking the other person a question to test how concisely you can express your thoughts.

Make your emotional intention clear

Finally, work on how you sound as much as you work on crafting what you say. In a hybrid working world, your voice will become the most valuable tool to influence your listeners. Tone of voice reveals so much – from self-belief and confidence-level to your emotional response to what you are saying, along with many other inferences.

To make an impact, you need to make sure your intention is clear. How do you want to be heard by your listeners? Should they hear excitement? Challenge? Reassurance? These are very different voices, so choose your emotional intention – whatever is appropriate – and practice how it will sound by recording yourself on your phone. This is an important tactic in building awareness and skill as what you hear conducted through being in your head when you speak is not what others hear conducted through air as they listen. Recording yourself will help you hear your voice as others hear it – and there may be a big difference. Keep doing this, adjusting your delivery until you like what you hear.

If you can’t be heard, you can’t be trusted

With all this in place, it will be audibility that matters. Audibility correlates with credibility… If you can’t be heard, you can’t be trusted. Working online solves this to some degree, but back in the world of communicating in-person, you’ll need to make sure you are speaking at a volume level that is easy to hear. Among people aged 50 years and older, 42% have a hearing problem, according to the UK’s Royal National Institute for Deaf People, and they will switch off if they can’t easily follow you when you speak.

Again, recording yourself will help you understand where you might ‘tail off’, which words sound less clear and the level of energy and conviction you hear in your tone. Consider your audience profile and, when you speak, commit to doing so clearly with confidence and conviction to make it easy for them to hear you.

If you’re serious about being heard, ask people what you could do to communicate more impactfully, asking specifically about the relevance of what you shared, how brief and succinct they thought you were and how they felt when listening to you. Consider asking actionable questions about your voice for ideas to add to your skills practice. While your focus is on helping them listen, you will benefit by using their observations to improve your art and, ultimately, progress your career.

Janie van Hool is the author of The Listening Shift (Practical Inspiration Publishing, 2021).

Posted on

Creating a high-performing hybrid workplace: what should leaders do?

A person is having a remote team meeting on the laptop. The individual is working from home engaging with peers. Next to her laptop sits a small shot of espresso.

Making the shift to a successful hybrid workplace demands a different leadership approach – one that moves away from micromanagement and towards a culture of trust and transparency, says Hult Professor, Vlatka Hlupic

The global economy has been left in a fragile state following lockdown measures, many of which have been prolonged at the time of writing this article, leaving further uncertainty on how businesses will recover. What is certain, however, is that business leaders and organisations must adapt and recalibrate to survive and thrive in the post-pandemic world and create high-performing hybrid workplaces.

Instead of a traditional top-down leadership approach based on command and control, hierarchical decision-making and micromanagement; high-performing hybrid workplaces will need a different leadership approach which is more shared and distributed. This type of leadership corresponds to levels four and five of a framework, called ‘The Management Shift’. In this framework, there are five levels of an individual mindset and a corresponding organisational culture at every level. Each level is characterised by specific thinking patterns, behaviour, language used, leadership style and organisational outcomes.

Five levels of overriding mindset and organisational culture

At level one, a dominant mindset is ‘lifeless’; culture is ‘apathetic’, based on fear and employees are isolated and disengaged. At level two, the individual mindset is ‘reluctant’; culture is ‘stagnating’ and people do the minimum they can get away with, just to get paid. There is a blame culture, and employees feel overwhelmed. At level three, the mindset is ‘controlled’ and culture is ‘orderly’. The leadership style is based on traditional command and control, employees are micromanaged, and they do what they are told to do, but they are not purposeful, fully engaged, or passionate for their work.

At level four, the dominant mindset becomes ‘enthusiastic’; culture is ‘collaborative’ and there is a strong teamwork ethos. Collaboration, integrity, purpose, transparency, accountability, and a caring culture are embedded in this level. This is also the level where a ‘Big Shift’ takes place and where highly engaged and inventive performance begins.

At level five, the mindset becomes ‘limitless’; culture is ‘unbounded’ and anything seems to be possible to achieve. This is where great innovations are developed and big problems for humanity are solved. However, this level can only be sustained for a limited time, as employees will ‘burn out’ if they work continually at this pace.

So how do leaders make the ‘Big Shift’ in their leadership styles to ensure their organisations are led in a way that gets the best out of their people in this new hybrid workplace?

Practices and behaviours that leaders should embrace

Leaders should support autonomy and collaboration and encourage experimentation with new ideas. They can influence employees indirectly through empowerment and inspiration, and create the conditions for change, where they delegate responsibilities, not tasks. Delegating tasks is micromanagement. When leaders delegate responsibilities, they show that they trust their employees to do their work well and employees will decide when, where and how they are going to do their work. They will be accountable for the deliverables – this is the key because, during a time of remote working, it is impossible to micromanage and control how and when the work gets done.

Leaders should also decentralise decision-making based on knowledge rather than a formal position in organisational hierarchy. People with the best knowledge, with the best insight into customer’s needs and requirements are best suited to make certain decisions, rather than somebody at the top of the hierarchy who doesn’t interact with customers.

Leaders need to develop cultures based on trust and transparency. This is particularly important for the hybrid world of work. It is vital to give a clear strategic direction for employees and communicate that well. That will create a sense of security and resilience, which will then also support the wellbeing of employees. Leaders also must support reward mechanisms that are based on contribution and meritocracy, especially as they cannot closely control employees that work remotely. They should focus on the results achieved, not on the time spent in the office or time spent at work.

Leaders need to use, and act, on feedback – and that should go both ways. In hybrid workplaces, feedback is even more important, not as a traditional yearly performance review, but rather as a continuous feedback conversation. Leaders should hone and use their social intelligence and emotional intelligence to get, and act on, the clues when something is not right even if employees are not directly sitting with them in the office all the time.

Successful leaders of hybrid workplaces allow some flexibility with procedures, rules and regulations, within reason. Even in heavily regulated and compliant environments, such as financial industry, there are still parts of the business that need to be creative.  Here, leaders can relinquish control and allow employees to take their own initiative, make decisions and pursue some of their own initiatives for the benefit of an organisation, especially when innovation is important part of what organisation does. Without that, no progress and no innovation will emerge.

Leaders that embrace a level four mindset and behave like level four, and occasionally level five leaders, will create the conditions that are conducive to successful, highly productive and engaging hybrid workplaces.

To this end, it is important to allow people to work from home for at least half of the working week. At the same time, leaders should create office environments which entice people to spend some time there, interacting and networking. Human connections often lead to the creation of the best ideas.

Every change starts with one single step that creates ripples. What is one action that you can start implementing from next week to help create a high-performing hybrid workplace?

Vlatka Ariaana Hlupic is a Professor of Leadership and Management at Hult Ashridge Executive Education, Hult International Business School. She is the founder and CEO of the training, coaching and consultancy firm, Management Shift Solutions as well as the author of The Management Shift and Humane Capital.

Posted on

Feedback is the foundation of high-performing teams

Here are two casually dressed individuals in a closed meeting in a creative office environment. The individual has short black afro hair with a black beard dressed in a maroon tee shirt and a denim long-sleeved on top.

A true culture of feedback is rarely seen in organisations, yet how can we know what we’re doing well and where we need to improve without it? Julie Nerney, co-author of Own Your Day, offers tips for building feedback into your daily practice

There were so many things I enjoyed about doing my MBA. As I was doing it part time while I worked, I also had lots of opportunities to put the learning immediately into practice. Decades on, I can now see that the one thing that wasn’t covered on the syllabus is something which has been seen to have the biggest impact on teams and organisations: feedback.

That’s right; feedback. Why is it that this one word creates a sense of fear whenever most people hear it? Then there is that slightly sarcastic inference that ‘feedback is a gift’, when the process of providing and receiving it is something that most people dread.

Like all things we do, those that become habitual get easier. And like all habits, that starts with practice. When you think about all areas of management and leadership, some things come so naturally that when you’re asked how you do it, you really have to stop and think about it. It is so well ingrained that it has become a subconscious competence. In others, you’ll have had to practice and learn from experience – especially when things haven’t gone well – and it’s much more of a conscious competence that you step through every time you do it.

The detrimental impact of a lack of feedback

A true culture of feedback is rarely seen in organisations, largely due to the dread that the word creates. This means the habit doesn’t get formed and the viral impact of learning from each other continuously is lost. This is such a shame. Feedback isn’t just a gift, it is – as Boris Becker once said – ‘the breakfast of champions’. How can we know what we’re doing well and where we need to improve if no one tells us? Where are the opportunities for personal development and growth if that insight is denied?

Think about your own experience. How many times have you worked in a team when it’s obvious that someone is being carried by others, yet no one is addressing this? Can you remember the impact? The drain on morale and motivation of the rest of the team. The resentment that builds. The feelings of negativity that this creates towards that individual.

It works the same way for star performers. Those people doing well, but rarely having their contribution acknowledged. Having no opportunities to celebrate their success. No visibility for their achievements in a way that might aid their development or career progression. There is a palpable dip in motivation caused by this, both for the individual and their contribution to the team.

Not only does this have a detrimental impact on the individuals concerned, it also undermines team cohesion. It creates an implicit acceptance of a reduced sense of transparency and openness. An unwillingness to tackle difficult issues. Ultimately, this will start to reduce the value that group of people adds, so that its members are no longer greater than the sum of their parts in whatever endeavour they’re applying themselves to.

Three top tips for building a culture of feedback

If you accept the premise that culture is an accelerant of performance, cultures with excellent feedback practice at their heart are those that make the biggest difference. Conversations between managers and direct reports are richer and more valuable. Successes are acknowledged and captured. Areas for improvement can be coached and supported. Where we’ve seen it work well in all types of teams, there has been an overt conversation between team members as to both the importance of feedback and how they’ll hold each other to account.

So here are three top tips for starting to build feedback into your daily practice and helping others to do the same:

1. Make it frequent, in the moment and brief

Feedback shouldn’t need to be a big conversation which you need to prepare for – that tends to mean that things have gone too long without any feedback. It should look like this: ‘The way that you opened today’s presentation today had real impact, I could see that the example you used really engaged the audience and made the rest of the session flow much more easily’. Or: ‘The way that you opened today’s presentation lacked impact compared with how I’ve seen you do it before; perhaps changing the example didn’t work as well as you thought it might.’ Simple. Short. Constructive. Objective. The best kind of feedback.

2. Stop thinking of feedback as positive or negative

There is no such thing as positive or negative feedback, there is just feedback. Just think of feedback as information which will help someone improve. From good to great. From under par to good enough. The only consideration is to make sure that when the feedback is provided it is done so with positive intent. With kindness. And in the spirit of encouraging learning and growth.

3. Open questions encourage ownership

You can tell people something, as in the example given in the first point. Or you can ask people: ‘What do you think was different about the way you delivered the presentation today?’. When you ask people it forces them to engage in the process of thinking about the question, and deepens ownership of the answer. Providing feedback by asking a series of open questions so that the recipient arrives at the point by themselves is a way of supercharging ownership and action on the back of this information. Sometimes telling people works just fine, other times you need to ask. The best kind of feedback conversations tend to start with a simple tell and, if it is more complex, continues with a series of asks.

If you’ve read this far and are now thinking, ‘yes, that’s all well and good, but I can’t do that,’ you should try to reflect on what it is that is getting in your way. And then do something about it. Getting good at this will accelerate your own performance and that of others.

If the only barrier is yourself and you find it hard to get started, then find someone you trust, share your desire to do this and ask them to hold you to account. Sometimes making a commitment public is all it takes to make a start on developing a new skill.

Julie Nerney is a serial entrepreneur, transformation expert, Chair, and guest lecturer. She holds an MBA from London Metropolitan University.

Together with Diana Marsland, Julie Nerney is also the author of Own Your Day (Practical Inspiration Publishing, 2021) 

BGA members can benefit from a discount on copies of Own Your Day, courtesy of the BGA Book Club. Please click here for details.

Posted on

Addressing hidden identity threats in the diverse workplace

Here is a single penguin standing away from a group of penguins.

There are challenges concerning both minority and majority groups in the workplace that organisations must be aware of and act on, if diversity, equity and inclusion policies are to be effective, say UCL School of Management’s Clarissa Cortland and Felix Danbold

As workplaces become more diverse, many companies are already seeing great gains. Increased diversity in organisations has been linked to improvements in innovation and profitability, and it also plays a vital social purpose in reducing inequalities between demographic groups.

However, those who work at the forefront of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) in organisations know that growing diversity also brings its share of challenges. Being around members of different groups can activate deep psychological anxieties for members of minority and majority groups alike. Our research shows how group identities (for example, gender, race or nationality) can lead employees of any background to feel a sense of threat, and how this threat may undermine employee wellbeing and the ability to work together harmoniously. Critically, because these threats are rooted in identity, rather than more tangible sources like competition over material resources, they can be challenging to put a finger on. Without understanding and addressing these often-overlooked threats, DEI efforts are likely to fall short of their goals.

Threats for members of minority groups

Groups that are historically underrepresented in many organisational contexts, such as ethnic minorities, or women in historically masculine industries and professional roles, often face both the burden of being relatively isolated, as well as the stigma often tied to their group membership.

For example, women are often stereotyped as communal (for example, warm, kind and sympathetic) and more suitable for support roles, as compared to men, who are more often considered for leadership positions. Because of this, as women start to progress in their careers and climb the corporate ladder, they can face increasing pressure to disprove the negative and discouraging stereotypes about women and leadership success. The pressure mounts the more underrepresented women are in comparison to men – such as at the top levels of many organisations – as their numerical minority status exposes them to heightened scrutiny and judgment from others.

This fear of confirming negative stereotypes about an identity you hold is called ‘stereotype threat’. Stereotype threat can be experienced as in-the-moment distracting anxieties and concerns that can undermine performance on a given task or activity (such as giving a high-stakes speech or presentation). It can also be experienced as chronic long-term disengagement, where the constant pressure and burden to not confirm stereotypes can eventually take their toll.

Threats for members of majority groups

Members of majority groups often enjoy something akin to the opposite of stereotype threat whereby their group identity serves as a consistent source of inclusion and comfort. For example, while women in historically masculine professions may worry whether, by virtue of their gender, they can belong, men in these contexts rarely have to think of their gender as a factor in their sense of ‘fit’ at work. In academic terms, we say that majority groups are ‘prototypical’ – being strongly associated with the broader context in which they exist (for example, in their organisation or profession) and setting the norms to which other groups are expected to conform to.

Although being prototypical affords members of majority groups a sense of comfort, this can quickly fade when change is on the horizon. If members of majority groups see the representation of minority groups increasing, they may experience prototypicality threat. Members of majority groups experiencing this threat may fear that their default sense of belonging will be lost and that they will soon be the ones who feel like outsiders. This fear that their comfort and security may be lost is a powerful driver of members of dominant groups’ resistance to diversity efforts and prejudice against minority groups.

Recommendations for reducing identity threats

Once organisations become aware of these identity threats, they will want to act to reduce them. Fortunately, the awareness of these threats alone is a great first step.

Research shows that members of minority groups who experience stereotype threat are more motivated to improve diversity climates. Organisations might think about giving minority voices a safe forum to acknowledge and share these firsthand experiences with stereotype threat. This is one way to raise awareness, normalise these discussions, and galvanise change.

Visibly highlighting the success of various minority employees can also be helpful, as role models have been found to have a protective effect against the pernicious effects of stereotype threat. This is due to the inspiring and empowering effect of seeing someone who looks like you achieve success. Additionally, visible examples of successful minorities can relieve the burden of any one individual having to prove negative stereotypes wrong. While these are good measures to include in DEI efforts, the responsibility to reduce these threats shouldn’t fall solely on the minority groups who are already facing an undue share of barriers.

To reduce prototypicality threat among members of majority groups, and thus forestall backlash against DEI efforts, organisations must also act proactively. Research shows that the more members of a majority/dominant group believe that their overrepresentation is legitimate, the more susceptible they are to feeling threatened by an increase in diversity.

One way that organisations may unintentionally lend legitimacy to dominant group prototypicality is by defining success in terms of traits that are stereotypically associated with the dominant group. For example, historically masculine professions might overemphasise the importance of assertiveness and strength, etc., in things like employee evaluations and recruiting materials that communicate what it takes to be a good employee. Making sure the definition of the organisation as a whole doesn’t align with the stereotypes of the majority group will help dispel myths that the majority group is naturally better suited for their job.

As we move towards more diverse and inclusive workplaces, organisations should be aware of these identity threats and strive to reduce their impact. By focusing only on highly accessible and obvious sources of tension, such as explicit prejudice, or anxiety about competition over jobs, organisations run the risk of overlooking the powerful undercurrent of identity threats and the negative psychological and interpersonal outcomes that can follow.

Clarissa Cortland and Felix Danbold are Assistant Professors in the Organisations and Innovation Group at University College London School of Management.

Posted on

Top tips to be a better daydreamer – and how it will help you

A white robot is sitting on the rooftop ledge of a building with the view of a city with lights, holding a red balloon.

When daydreaming becomes a practice, it can bring surprising benefits and help us become better entrepreneurs and leaders, says Nelisha Wickremasinghe, an Associate Fellow at Saïd Business School

Daydreaming was something most of us were told off for doing at school,  and if we do it now people say we are time wasting or that we have our head in the clouds. However, certain kinds of daydreaming can help us become better entrepreneurs, leaders, innovators and creators.

Daydreaming is supported by our imaginal capability (which some people associate with right brain activities) whereas being logical, verbal and orderly is supported by our rational capability – often associated with the left brain. To be at our best in business and in life, we need both capabilities – and brain hemispheres – working well together. 

This happens when, for example, we allow our minds to roam and dream actively before opening our laptops each day or when we take a moment each morning to remember our dreams before looking at our phones. Albert Einstein famously said he lived his daydreams in music. He was a rational scientist who was hugely influenced and inspired by his  imagination, and he frequently allowed himself to be carried away by music and dreams. For Einstein, these moments were the source of his brilliant ideas and theories.

Daydreaming as a practice

Daydreaming as a means of improving the way we understand people, or think and innovate, is different from the kind of daydreaming we do when we simply drift off in pleasant thoughts about, for example,  winning the lottery or moving to a place in the sun.  When daydreaming becomes a practice – like yoga or mindful breathing – and is something we do regularly and intentionally, it can bring surprising benefits.

We can experience inspiration, ideas, and insights that would not have occurred to us had we remained in our usual rational, problem-solving, hyper-busy routines. The conscious practice of stimulating both hemispheres of our brain means that those ideas and insights arise ‘around the clock’ – not just when we’re daydreaming. Although they will tend to arise more at particular moments – in the bath or shower, out walking, or on waking without an alarm.

Unfortunately, many of us do rely almost exclusively on our rational capability because as children we were not taught to use our imagination as well as we were taught to use our intellect. On top of that, our culture rewards rational logic and behaviour over intuition and feeling, which makes us value these things and shapes the way we relate to others and the way in which we solve problems.

People who are oriented to rational thinking are often are less empathic, less comfortable with novelty and the unfamiliar, less spontaneous, and tend to divide up the world around them into parts and categories. As a result, they fail to see the deeper meanings and connections between people and situations. Rational people might appear to be smarter but actually their thinking and behaviour is less complex than those whose rational and imaginal brain muscles are working well together. Rationalists will often struggle to ‘think out of the box’ or engage in creative ‘blue sky’ activities at work because their imaginal brain, rarely used, doesn’t have the skill or ability to help out on demand.

The reason our rational capability is less effective on its own is because it is a closed system that can only work with the contents already in it. If nothing new is offered then it will simply re-hash the same old ideas and theories to explain things and make decisions. But ‘explaining’ – which the rational brain is good at – is not the same as ‘understanding’.  The word ‘mansplaining’ is familiar to many of us and refers not just to a male habit of patronising women but also to the rationalist tone of talk with its preference for intellectualising, describing and explaining. When we understand something we see it in its context and experience it more fully and deeply.

Day (and night) dreaming dissolves the hard boundary between the rational and the imaginal and enables us to truly understand ourselves, others and situations. When we dream, we allow the contents of our unconscious mind to influence us and it is from the ‘Mind Palace’ of our unconscious that the clues and suggestions for solving life’s mysteries will emerge.

Five top tips to become a better daydreamer

  1. Give yourself permission to daydream and remind yourself that daydreaming is going to increase your potential and performance.
  2. Once or twice a day, lie back and stare at the ceiling or out of the window and practice the soft gaze. This is when we look into the distance but don’t focus on any one thing. Focusing stops our mind from wandering – which is what we want it to do when we dream. 
  3. Once you have mastered the soft gaze, practise ‘open attention’ by being interested in the comings and goings of your thoughts and feelings without getting stuck on them. If you do get stuck, turn your attention to your breathing. The in-and-out rhythm of your breath is soothing and can help detach your thoughts from worries and overthinking.
  4. Exercise your imagination by resting your gaze on an object – the tree outside or a coffee cup – and imagine yourself to be that object. What do you as tree or coffee cup want to say?  Engage in a conversation with the tree or cup.
  5. Practice ‘freefall writing’. Take a stem sentence from anywhere – a book, or a magazine, or even just words in your head. Examples might be: ‘all aboard the night train…’; ‘Some children…’; or ‘there’s a joke about…’ Now continue writing from that stem sentence. When you feel stuck it’s very important to keep writing. If you stop, you’ve been hi-jacked by left brain rationality that wants you to make this writing tidy and logical. Instead, just keep writing the stem sentence over and over again until you unblock and your imagination flows again. Write like this for at least three minutes (time yourself) and practise daily. You’ll be surprised at what comes out when the ink starts to flow!

If daydreaming exercises leave you feeling cynical or frustrated, remind yourself that much of our greatest literature, mechanical and technological inventions, medical breakthroughs and understanding of the universe has come from open-minded daydreamers who have embraced the novel, the absurd and the unintelligible. If more of us became daydream believers our workplaces and relationships would thrive as we start to see the possibility, mystery and beauty of the everyday and the ordinary.

Nelisha Wickremasinghe is a Psychologist and an Associate Fellow at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford. She is also the author of Being with Others: Curses, spells and scintillation (Triarchy Press, 2021).

Posted on

Why the pandemic should drive sustainable business

A person is peeling the sky like a chapter from a book, from dark, gloomy clouds to bright sunshine; symbolic to revealing positive change to sustainability.

The fallout from Covid-19 gives governments a degree of leverage over corporations. They should use it to impose the sustainability agenda, says Rotterdam School of Management’s Frank Wijen

With the ongoing rollout of vaccination campaigns, governments are now in a significantly better position to plan for our economic recovery, and hopefully a new and better future. 

There is no doubt that the spread of Covid-19 will continue to cause distress and chaos globally – in addition to the immediate impact on human health, the future continuity of millions of firms is on the line, threatening massive unemployment. Yet, although there are redundancies looming and the pandemic continues to cause havoc – amplified by constraining government measures – the fallout from Covid-19 has actually created an exceptional opportunity to change the world for the good. 

Many governments have provided massive levels of support to affected firms and their workers to stave off a tsunami of bankruptcies and job losses. This is truly laudable, since we have learned from the crisis of the 1930s that non-intervention will entail a vicious circle of further economic sliding. 

Halting economic decline is an important, yet insufficient, public policy objective on its own, because an upcoming economic crisis is likely to be followed by an even larger environmental crisis, with disastrous effects dwarfing those triggered by Covid-19. 

While many environmental issues threaten continued economic prosperity, the cost of inadequate efforts to curb climate change will be huge and will undermine future economic activities – as has been outlined by noted economist, Nicholas Stern, whose 2006 Stern Review on the economics of climate change covers the intertemporal costs and benefits of (in)action. Therefore, to best protect our economic futures, governments need to kill at least two birds with the huge stone they are throwing into the economy. 

Rethinking and reinventing

In my opinion, firms with sizeable carbon footprints should be required to vastly reduce their emissions in return for state support. In other words, governments should demand a quid pro quo, in that recipients of state aid promise to clean up their act, literally.

Energy company, Shell, for example, should be told that it will receive help for hydro, solar, and offshore wind projects, but not for traditional oil exploration, production, refining, and distribution. Similarly, airlines should only be rescued if they cease short-haul flights for which public transport alternatives are feasible, invest in highly energy-efficient aircraft, and accept substantial carbon taxes on all flights.

Farming is another sector that needs to rethink its environmental attitude. We need food, of course, but not at any cost. European farmers have been generously subsidised for decades but continue to burden society with the environmental costs from intensive farming practices, such as huge freshwater withdrawal and nitrogen oxide emissions. Construction is also a highly conservative sector in need of reinventing itself. We need homes to live in, but wooden-framed houses can be just as solid and robust as those erected from brick and concrete while involving much lower levels of carbon emissions. 

Some governments have understood the necessity to make their financial support to distressed firms contingent on environmental measures, while others keep on delaying as the ice melts. Two months after France decided to grant €7 billion EUR to airline, Air France, the Netherlands came to the rescue of KLM with €3.4 billion EUR in state aid. The French government attached green strings to its support of Air France, but the Dutch government still seemed to consider the sky the limit and asked only for symbolic environmental measures. 

Lack of leadership

The importance of attaching sustainability criteria to financial support needs to be interpreted against the backdrop of a lack of business leadership in making sustainability transitions that adversely affect their vested interests. While businesses are great at implementing practices that stimulate both environmental and financial gains (the ‘win-win’ opportunities, such as serving environmental consumers), they shy away from those that adversely affect their ongoing business. And they often focus on the short term. 

For instance, companies owning huge unexploited oil and gas fields will not voluntarily abandon these assets. Shell beats the sustainability drum, and its investments in renewables have recently taken off, but the amounts involved still dwarf those it dedicates to new fossil fuel projects.

History teaches us that huge reductions in greenhouse gas emissions have never resulted from climate change policies alone. They have often been a by-product of public policy decisions or political events, including the UK’s closure of unprofitable coal mines and privatisation of the electricity sector (with the related transition to less-carbon-intensive gas, known as the ‘dash for gas’), German reunification (and the related investments in more energy-efficient factories in Eastern Germany), and – indirectly – the German safety-driven phasing out of nuclear energy after the Fukushima disaster (and the ensuing scaling up of renewable energy, whose plummeting production costs in solar and wind power fuelled a global demand for renewables). 

Environmental strides

Since the corporate world is unlikely to adopt game-changing environmental improvements of its own accord, governments must take the lead and impose the sustainability agenda as they rescue firms damaged by the pandemic. 

Necessity is the mother of invention and change, and business will only walk its sustainability talk when forced to do so by ineluctable government requirements. The sustainability transition will only materialise, therefore, through targeted government support, in which economic and environmental recovery operate in lockstep. 

Since governments virtually always prioritise economic stakes over environmental interests, the sustainability agenda will need to piggyback on economic interventions. The exceptionally large amounts of public funding that are about to be poured into the economy provide a unique opportunity to make significant environmental strides while also propping up the economy. In this context, the EU is showing leadership by publicly pledging 30% of its €750 billion EUR post-coronavirus restructuring emergency fund will be financed by the issuance of sustainable bonds. 

Governments can save work, without necessarily saving existing jobs. A significant number of positions will almost certainly cease to exist over the next few years and others that we cannot yet even imagine will emerge. For example, new jobs in developing circular business and managing smart grids. 

One of the key challenges for sustainable growth is to help people and firms adjust to this series of dramatic changes. Business Schools and universities will become vitally important in ensuring a smooth transition here. 

A major threat is that governments will take short-term measures as they give in to powerful business lobbies and eschew measures that might displease their electorates. Unfortunately, unconditional business support is a short-term remedy that fills one hole by deepening another one. The failure to address major environmental problems head-on could well drive the next global disruption, such as a climate crisis of an even larger magnitude. The actions of governments in the next few months will clearly have important implications for the long run. As the French dictum goes: ‘To govern is to anticipate’. Governments with foresight must therefore ensure they attach solid environmental strings when pouring public money into distressed businesses.

What can Business Schools do?

Senior Business School leaders need to recognise the impact climate change will have on businesses and their personal lives, and should work together with their students and the wider business community to help find solutions. 

Companies can provide a powerful incentive for greater Business School focus on sustainability. When executive education directors and careers service directors see this is a serious issue for business clients, action will follow.

Business Schools are training the leaders of tomorrow and have to take responsibility for that. Systemic thinking is about considering the wider and indirect effects of business actions, beyond the direct cause-effects we are used to. These effects are not just financial, and we need to teach good metrics that comprehensively capture socio-environmental outcomes.  Business actions need to go beyond the upcoming quarterly earnings, implying that the mindsets of students need to be adjusted to consider the longer-term implications as well. 

Furthermore, Business Schools with course materials that are predominantly based on North American and European ideas and practices need to develop the openness of mind to understand and support other managerial styles. This includes appreciating that eastern and southern businesses may be run differently while working towards the same sustainability goals. Finally, corporate responsibility needs to be duly incorporated into existing mainstream courses, rather than relegated to standalone ethics courses. In short, Business Schools will need to embrace a much more integrative approach, in which students develop the mindset and skills of systemic, longer-term, and open-minded thinking, acting, and measuring. 

Frank Wijen is an Associate Professor at the Department of Strategic Management and Entrepreneurship, Rotterdam School of Management (RSM), Erasmus University, Netherlands. 

This article was originally published in Ambition (the magazine of BGA’s sister organisation, AMBA).

Posted on

Why businesses must develop greater integrity

A white and brown dog propped up with his two front paws looking outside a window.

There is a need for more integrity and a greater depth of character among leaders, says B-Corp Ambassador, Paul Hargreaves, pointing out that SMEs often get away with not doing the right thing because of their size

If you were described as an integrous person, you may wonder whether it was a compliment or not, but it simply means a person full of integrity. I heard the story of a man called James Doty, a neurosurgeon, entrepreneur and university professor, who early in his career was involved in developing the Cyberknife, an invention that netted him millions of dollars. At the turn of the millennium, he promised $30 million USD out of his $75 million USD net worth to charity – just before the dot-com crash of 2000 to 2001, which brought his wealth down to around the $30 million USD he had already pledged. Doty’s lawyers advised him that he could renege on his promise and get out of the pledge; surely people would understand the change of circumstances and he wouldn’t lose his standing in society. However, Doty was a man of his word and decided to do the right thing and go through with his promise, giving away the last of his fortune to charity.

In a much less costly example, at Cotswold Fayre, we announced in the spring of 2019 that we were going to become carbon neutral from August that year; this was based on some logistical change we had made to vastly reduce the carbon impact of our distribution network, meaning that the carbon offset figure for the carbon used in the distribution of our goods was attainable. The data came from our new logistics company, and either we misunderstood the data at the time or we were just given the wrong figures, but the amount we had to pay to sequester our carbon was considerably higher than what we had budgeted for within the business plan. However, there was never any doubt within our management team that we would go ahead and pay the higher amount, even though no one outside the company would know any different. Money doesn’t make decisions for us; doing what is right does.

These days, many companies want to link a social purpose to their products and make great claims about the percentage of their profits they are giving to social justice projects, such as charities working with street children in Brazil. They often push back when I challenge them and ask them how much they have contributed so far. Of course, many startup brands don’t make a profit for a few years, yet these brands’ products often carry such claims during this time. To my mind, this approach lacks integrity. Surely, it is far better for a young company to say that it will give 5p for each product sold, for example.

In many cases, SMEs can often get away with not doing the right thing because no one notices what small companies do. That is the great advantage of a certification process such as B Corp, where businesses must provide evidence of what they are doing and be analysed on how good they are for the world: both the people and the planet.

Doing the right thing when no one is watching

The Urban Dictionary definition of ‘integrity’ is based on a quote often attributed to [author of The Chronicles of Narnia] CS Lewis, but which might actually paraphrase a line by author, Charles W Marshall: ‘Integrity is doing the right thing when no one is watching.’ It is all too easy to trumpet a high moral standing on social media yet not follow through when the heat is turned up a little. I am concerned that occasionally even renowned ethical companies and their leaders sometimes present a better view to the outside world than what is really happening inside of their organisations. There is a need for more integrity and a greater depth of character among leaders.

People detest hypocrisy more than absolutely anything in a leader, and it has been the downfall of many political figures – as seen by the huge furore caused when the UK prime minister’s closest advisor broke his own rules with regards to the Covid-19 lockdown restrictions on at least two occasions. Imagine a stick of Blackpool rock that you can cut through at any point to reveal the word ‘Blackpool’. Would people see integrity running through us and our businesses if they were to figuratively cut through us at any point?

The wonderful message from the James Doty story is that even though he ‘lost’ personally, he still went through with his promises. For some of us, winning is too important and can come at the cost of all else. I know the appeal of this, as, like many entrepreneurs, I am very competitive and hate losing, and I have had to temper that competitive streak to maintain my integrity. The former tennis player, Andy Roddick, provides a great example of this. He was once awarded a match when a second serve from his opponent was deemed to be out. However, Roddick saw the ball’s mark in the clay himself and made the umpire reverse his call. Roddick went on to lose the match, but he maintained his integrity.

The danger of overpromising and underdelivering

So, how, do we develop our integrity? Well, probably the most important factor is silence. If we speak too hastily and make promises, we are in danger of overpromising and under-delivering. It is best not to speak hastily and to even learn to say ‘no’ on some occasions, where we may risk losing our integrity and disappointing customers, suppliers or, worst of all, team members. One of the most common reasons people leave employers is when they have been promised promotions, money or bonuses that haven’t been forthcoming.

In these instances, circumstances may well have changed – as they did for James Doty, to the tune of being $45 million USD poorer; but he stuck with his promises all the same. Incidentally, Doty claimed to be happier than he had ever been after he had given that money away, saying: ‘At that moment I realised that the only way that money can bring happiness is to give it away.’ Being integrous, or full of integrity, is not only the right thing to do, but we will almost certainly be more fulfilled and happier as a result.

Paul Hargreaves is a B-Corp Ambassador, and the Founder and CEO of food and beverage company, Cotswold Fayre. He is also the author of The Fourth Bottom Line: Flourishing in the new era of compassionate leadership (2021).

Posted on

Shedding light on MBM admissions and delivery worldwide

Here is a fibre optic lamp in neon pink with a deep blue background.

Exclusive AMBA & BGA research throws light on the performance of MBM programmes on offer at leading Business Schools across the world. Ellen Buchan delves into the details

A major driver behind students’ enrolment on master’s in business management (MBM) programmes is the desire to develop a better understanding of technology and its impact on management practices. This was a standout finding of AMBA & BGA’s study of application and enrolment data for MBM programmes around the world last year, as reported in Business Impact in February 2020. The significant demand for MBMs in India was another result highlighted in this research.   

A year on, and for the second iteration of this research, Business Impact was able to analyse data from Business Schools in relation to their MBM application and enrolment data from the calendar years of both 2018 and 2019. This offered a fresh opportunity to identify trends in the sector on a like-for-like basis. 

A total of 46 Schools – all of which are accredited by BGA’s sister organisation, the Association of MBAs (AMBA) – submitted MBM data for both 2018 and 2019, and it is the data from those Schools on which the following research is based. 

Continuing demand in India

Applications per Business School were up by 5% between 2018 and 2019 across all responding MBM programmes. There was no change in the volume of applications per programme received in the same timeframe.  

The sheer scale of demand for MBMs in India continues, as applications received by programmes in the south Asian country represented 88% of all applications to MBMs in 2019, worldwide. Applications in India, meanwhile, grew 10% per programme and 5% per School between 2018 and 2019. 

Elsewhere, Business Schools in the UK also reported a substantial increase, with applications up by 22% per programme and 34% per School between 2018 and 2019. Schools in the UK accounted for 3% of overall volume of MBM programme applications reported in 2019. 

Between 2018 and 2019, there were also rises in the number of students enrolling globally, by 5% per programme and 10% per School. MBMs in the UK reported the world’s largest increase in enrolments, with a 10% increase per programme and a 21% increase in enrolments per School. 

Blended learning on the rise

There was no significant change in the mode of delivery for MBM programmes between 2018 and 2019. Globally, the majority (83%) of AMBA-accredited Schools’ MBM programmes were taught in the classroom in 2019. Almost all of the remaining programmes were taught using a blended approach (16%) while 1% of programmes were delivered fully online in 2019. This represents a three-percentage point increase in the use of blended learning, at the expense of classroom delivery from 2018. 

In North America and the Caribbean, 92% of programmes included in the study were delivered using a blended approach in 2019. Among MBMs in Europe, the equivalent figure was 24%. This represents a four-percentage point increase in the use of blended learning in both these regions from 2018. 

Gender diversity in MBM programmes 

Globally, the proportion of women among those applying to MBM programmes in 2019 was 37% – an increase of one percentage point on 2018. The global enrolment rate was far more gender-balanced – 47% of those enrolling globally in 2019 were female, although this same figure was also applicable in 2018. Looking regionally, however, shows that Business Schools in India and Europe were the only Schools to enrol a minority of women on their MBM courses in 2019. In Europe, 48% of those enrolling identified as female, while the proportion among Schools in India was 33% – significantly lower, but an increase of three percentage points on the country’s equivalent figure for 2018. 

International and domestic applications and enrolments

More than nine out of 10 (95%) of applications to MBM programmes included in the study came from domestic students in 2019 – the vast majority. However, this global percentage hides significant variations between different countries and regions. Business Schools in India received 100% of applications from domestic students – pushing up the overall average. Even so, Schools based in China (including Hong Kong, China), Europe, and North America and the Caribbean, all received more than 80% of their MBM applications from domestic candidates. However, at Business Schools based in the UK and Oceania, the reverse was true, with 97% of applications to MBM programmes in each region coming from international applicants.

The global picture on MBM enrolment is quite different, with international students representing a third of all enrolments in 2019, up from 30% in 2018. As such, the conversion rate for international students was far higher in some regions than for domestic students. In Europe (excluding the UK), for example, international candidates represented 16% of applications, but 28% of those who enrolled. In North America and Caribbean, 10% of applications came from international applicants, but 19% of students enrolling were defined as international.

Conclusion

The news is positive for providers of MBMs from within the AMBA network. Although there was no growth in applications per programme, there was a notable rise of 5% in enrolments per programme.  

In addition, applications and enrolments to a Business School’s full portfolio of eligible degrees were up by 5% and 10%, respectively – a sign perhaps of the increasing number of study options on offer to prospective students and the extent to which these resonated with their intended audience, ahead of the turbulence of the year 2020.  

Methodology

The AMBA & BGA Application and Enrolment Report 2020 outlines the current status of the MBA market. As part of the data compiled for the report, 58 AMBA-accredited Business Schools also provided data on their portfolio of master’s in business management programmes (commonly known as MBMs or MiMs). 

Of the 58 Schools that provided data on their master’s programmes in 2019, 46 had also supplied data for 2018 in the previous year, allowing for a year-on-year comparison between the same Schools. This analysis covered 140 programmes in 2019, rising from 133 programmes in 2018. MBM programmes in this like-for-like analysis were delivered at Business Schools based in the following locations: Europe (excluding the UK) (37%); the UK (28%); India (17%); China (including Hong Kong, China) (7%); North America and the Caribbean (4%); Oceania (4%); and Africa (2%). No data was collected from Schools in Asia (excluding India and China) and the Middle East.

This article is adapted from an original feature in Business Impact’s print magazine (edition: February-April 2021).

 

 

Posted on

The importance of purpose-led behaviour in tackling climate change

Here is a person with short blonde hair and dark skin wearing small hooped earing looking upwards with curiosity. This individual is wearing a silky sand coloured shirt with an unbuttoned collar.

Archaic perceptions of climate change are dwindling and now is the time for leaders to role model purpose-led behaviour and lift the curtain on bad practices, says Chris Bowden, HBS graduate and Founder of a B2B marketplace for clean energy

For c-suite executives, environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues have traditionally played second fiddle. Some have been hamstrung by board members and shareholders, who can often be blinkered by the lure of short-term results or bound to the archaic belief that companies which focus on ESG issues experience a drag on value creation. Concerningly, PwC’s 2020 Annual Corporate Directors Survey found that only 38% of board members think ESG issues have a financial impact on a company.

This negative perception of the climate agenda has resulted in many c-suite executives making unrealistic, unconsidered, and empty pledges; pledges that will still need to be met long after they have left the company. However, creating a poisoned chalice for future leaders is neither helpful nor ethical.

CEOs see opportunity in the ESG agenda

Fortunately, refusing to accept the greatest challenge of our time, climate change, has shrunk considerably among c-suite executives and sustainability is now firmly on the boardroom agenda.

While some businesses spent the past decade committing minimum resources to token programmes, curating outlandish claims of commitment, and for a questionable few, thinking they could buy their way to a greener world, a handful of clever companies already had the wheels in motion. It was these companies who had stopped experimenting and instead prioritised the development of much needed sustainable products.

At the turn of the millennium, the idea of an electric-only carmaker seemed like an eccentric fallacy, not just to consumers but to every other auto-manufacturer too. Tesla, however, was smart and, most importantly, it understood that the transition to a low-carbon economy was inescapable. Tesla understood that although EVs look the same as petrol cars from the outside and perform a similar function for consumers, they are completely different on the inside and require the fusion of software, electronics and manufacturing. They developed a product to meet the needs of social expectations, regulatory demands, investment and technology trends, while other industry titans put on their blinkers, kept their heads down and plugged on, business as usual. It was a dangerous strategy and one that’s left an entire industry desperately playing catch-up.

In more recent years, CEOs across all industry sectors have awoken to the power of ESG strategies in building resilience and securing commercial success. By way of example, a recent PwC survey showed that more than 50% of UK CEOs plan to increase their investment in sustainability and, according to a new report called Taking Stock: A global assessment of net zero targets, at least one fifth (21%) of the world’s 2,000 largest public companies have committed to meet net zero targets. Together, these companies represent sales of nearly $14 trillion USD. This is a victory of many years in the making.

So, what is the catalyst behind this shift? Study upon study has noted that today’s consumers will spend their money with brands that align with their moral beliefs and have no hesitation in snubbing companies which they believe are not pulling their weight. As I type this, Spotify tells me it has collaborated with O2 to launch the first sustainable audio campaign as part of the mobile operator’s commitment to be net zero by 2025. Spotify and O2 are to invest together in nature-based solutions to offset all carbon emissions from O2’s audio activity on its platform for the next 12 months. It’s a welcome reminder that change is afoot.

Employees have an important hand at the table, too; pushing the companies they work for to follow a moral imperative and punishing those which fail to speak out by taking their talent elsewhere.

The reality is that if you have waited for someone to tell you to prepare for climate change, you’re putting your business at risk. This is not only evident in the growing maturity of the ESG movement in capital markets and financial services but also with the improvement in the returns on stock for companies with higher ESG ratings. There is much potential in climate risk mitigation, but it requires a shift in perspective from being triggered by fear to planning for opportunity, and that is no mean feat.

The CEO as the role model for purpose-led behaviours

In the UK, a flood of government legislation has provided more certainty, more focus and more precedent. Sustainability professionals have long banged the drum for climate change with little audience. But there is no time left to explain the need to act to the naysayers, and no amount of peer-reviewed research will help either. Business leaders have been called up to join the cavalry and it is down to the CEO to lead the charge. They need to not only make it a priority, but then need to make it the norm.

Purpose-led behaviours are key to this transition and the unique position of the CEO can make this happen. It is this individual who can raise the ambition of its employees, reflect honestly on challenges and shortfalls, as well as to set a definition of responsible leadership. These purpose-led behaviours will then trickle down through middle management. After all, these are not only the people who split budget, develop products, and lead teams, but they are also our future leaders who will carry this weight of responsibility far beyond our days.

Disruptor brands have already proven the return on initiating such leadership. Scottish brewery, BrewDog, and New Zealand-American footwear company, Allbirds, for example, were cited as inspiring organisations that have used product and services to create a deeper and meaningful connection to the planet and communities, in a recent report by media company, edie, in association with UK energy supplier, Centrica.

Perhaps the biggest challenge facing CEOs is the need to dig deep to unearth bad practices, seek clarity on myths and ensure any claims they make are indeed true to what they say they are. Only when the CEO holds up a mirror to see its true reflection will this important practice become the norm in all levels of a business.

Unfortunately, bad practices are not uncommon in the supply chain and that includes the renewable energy market. Some suppliers in the UK, for example, source energy from fossil fuels and then buy REGOS (Renewable Energy Guarantees of Origin) or even worse, European GOs (Guarantees of Origin) and then package this up as ‘renewable energy’ for their clients. Imagine claiming that your company has committed to green energy, publicised this to your employees and customers in the media, only to find that you’re buying fossil fuel energy. This is just one of the many bad practices we need to lift the curtain on.

Decades of tiptoeing around, ignoring the unequivocal science and embracing the type of box-ticking culture that encourages only standardised ESG issues has left everyone scrambling to avoid the irreversible impact of climate change.

Unless green-thinking, purpose-led behaviours and action runs through the veins of businesses, we will fail to prevent the catastrophic impact of climate change. This is not the time to experiment, this is the time to act. Titans of business may exist as a small collective, but remember, positive change has always been driven by the movement of the minority.

Chris Bowden is the Founder of Squeaky, a B2B marketplace for clean energy. He holds an MBA from Harvard Business School and has also attended Singularity University, the Business School at City, University of London, and the University of Manchester.

Posted on

How to make your brand likeable and increase your sales

‘A new type of millennial decision maker is in the ascendancy and they want you to be different.’ Discover the four types of likeability and determine which can best help your brand achieve its goals

It is well known that consumers buy from people they like. We often shop in stores or eat in restaurants because the staff give us great service, even if the prices are higher. When we buy in a business to business (B2B) context, it’s no different, except that the individual people behind the product aren’t always visible to us. This means that the brand has to do the likeability job.

Your customers make their buying decisions based on which company or brand they like the best – it’s as simple as that. This is especially important today. Over the past 10 years, there’s been a massive shift in the way that buyers in the B2B world think, act and feel about business brands. A new type of millennial decision maker is in the ascendancy and they want you to be different. This can already be seen in the gradual move away from macho, ‘alpha’ brands like Oracle and IBM, and towards ‘beta’ B2B brands like Salesforce which are more in touch with their customers’ emotions.

Popularity contests in a new era

In complex and digitised markets, such as technology and financial services, likeability is especially critical. For many years, companies relied on expensive salespeople to create the likeability factor, but today, when communications are usually online rather than face-to-face, they recognise that they need to invest in their brands to deliver a positive and friendly experience.

In the last year, the pandemic has accelerated this trend. People are buying from behind computer screens so they look for cues for likeability factors from a digital image of the brand more than ever.    

In this new era, you should think of business not as a sales game to be won or lost, but as a popularity contest in which you always need to be evolving, to have a voice and to be relevant. What’s more, brand likeability is about more than just attracting customers; it also gives a structure to how you embrace techniques, such as storytelling and measurement, to drive your future growth.

So, what factors can you focus on to create a likeable brand? This depends on where your company is at, the kind of brand you have and what else is happening in your sector. Which of the following four types of likeability is the one that would most suit your brand and product?

1. Instant likeability

You know how some people are instantly likeable? You only have to meet them for the first time, and you’re telling them everything about yourself. These people have an ‘X-factor’ for likeability, and they’ve most probably developed it unconsciously.

Some companies have this too – they’re intensely likeable in an instinctive way. Maybe they simply use a choice word here and there on their website, or a piece of imagery that strikes a chord with their audience. Sometimes the effect is all the more charming because not much thought seems to have gone into it. But as these businesses grow they need to find a way of scaling their likeability by becoming more deliberate about it, much like a startup has to consciously manufacture a culture as it expands. They have to manage their likeability in all aspects of their companies: their brand image, their product design, their people and their content – without losing the magic along the way.

2. Earned likeability

This is when your brand becomes likeable over time through the effort you put into it. Your company could have a dogmatic adherence to the truth no matter how unpopular it may be. You could show an over-commitment to a cause, or challenge the status quo, revealing a passion for what you believe in above all else, like The Body Shop did.

Or, you could demonstrate an amazing level of helpfulness to people, leading them to feel reciprocity towards your brand. This is especially effective if it’s both personalised (directly relevant to your audience) and unexpected. A good example is from car-hire company, Avis, and its campaign, ‘We try harder’.            

3. Compassionate likeability  

When you have a reputation as a compassionate brand, it means that people see you as a company that puts its own interests second and the wider good first. You view the world through a larger prism than pure profit, gearing your efforts towards making a positive difference through the enactment of your overarching purpose. This is a likeable position to be in because it generates trust; a company that goes out of its way to help others is one that can also be relied on to treat its customers well. It has a warm and caring glow around it.

Another way to look at this is to imagine that you bump into the CEO of a company that you want to do business with and have a minute to impress them. Do you reel off your usual elevator pitch, full of buzzwords and ‘benefits’? Or do you offer them something of value? Something that would be meaningful to them as a person, such as the opportunity for one of their teenage children to do an internship in your business? If it’s the latter, you’ve hit on a home truth. It’s emotionally intelligent to apply your brand in a way that creates a valued exchange – this is what creates compassionate likeability.        

4. Challenger likeability         

This is when you achieve likeability by virtue of the fact that you’re the non-conventional player in your industry. Instead of going with the crowd, you’ve identified an unconscious need – something your audience didn’t even know it wanted until it saw it – and jumped into a space that’s badly served by others. You’re challenging the norm.

There’s an inherent likeability involved with being a challenger because people love an underdog, and they can see you’re committed to serving your customers above all else. By doing the right thing rather than following the crowd, and by being a trusted educator who tells your customers what they really need to know, you become a likeable brand.

***

You’ll have noticed that each of these types of likeability inspires trust in its own way. Brands with instant likeability prove they understand you, those with earned likeability win you over through reciprocity, those with compassionate likeability show you they care about you and those with earned likeability gain your respect.             

You can also create different kinds of likeability throughout your marketing activity. Your website should create ‘instant’, your brand should create ‘earned’ (because you always deliver against your purpose and values), your customer service teams should create ‘compassionate’ and your sales teams ‘challenger’. Your job is to pull these elements together so that your business becomes unstoppable. 

This is an edited excerpt from Humanizing B2B: The new truth in marketing which will transform your brand and sales, by Paul Cash and James Trezona (Practical Inspiration Publishing, 2021).