‘feedback’ Articles

Parenting and Behavior: Examples from Real Parents

CB106473I want to start by saying ‘thank you’ to those who sent me stories of how you applied the tools and principles of behavioral science to your parenting challenges.  I wish I could recall all of the stories I’ve heard through the years but in the end what is most satisfying to me is seeing people light up about how well the behavioral technology worked and how it leads to positive behavior where previously it had been problematic, and in their view, unresolvable.

With that, I share the following stories, from real parents, about the positive impact the science of behavior has had on their personal lives:

Learning to Drive

When my son, Sam, was learning how to drive, even though I knew better, I found myself only calling out the things he did wrong. Once I realized what I was doing wrong; I had to force myself to pay attention and identify the things he did right, and then specifically tell him about it.  The first behavior I made a point to notice was following the speed limit.  After watching him drive across town for a little while, I told him I noticed how well he did in following the speed limit.  He was so happy and proud that I noticed, and said “I know! I do it all the time!”   His response reinforced me to start noticing more of what he does right.  I then made a list of specific driving behaviors to remind myself to observe them such as, maintaining 3 second following distance, making complete stops, or stopping with enough space to see the bottom of the tires of the car in front of you.  I only picked one at a time so that I wouldn’t overdo it.  It really made me realize the strong tendency to fall back into the pattern of only noticing the things he does wrong. Without a deliberate effort to watch for specific behaviors (that I had to write down and look for), I would have fallen back into the old ways.

Household Chores

Pinpointing seemed overwhelming to me when I thought about my work environment but it became more manageable after I first applied it at home. I learned its importance when working to teach my son John to wash the dishes when he was about 7 or 8.  It was his task at night to wash and my task to dry.  When we first started, I was confused when he left the kitchen with several dirty pots and pans in the sink and went to play.  I said “Wait a minute, you’re not done!”  He said “Yes I am!”  I said “What about these?,” pointing to the dirty pots and pans.  He looked at me begrudgingly saying “You said I only had to do the dishes!”

What Makes Them Happy

My daughter used an approach to identify things that were reinforcing to her twin daughters when they were 18 months old. She wanted to determine effective reinforcers for behaviors associated with toilet training and also for other toddler behaviors. Individually, she placed several objects in front of the first child and whatever item the daughter picked first was identified as a reinforcer. She then placed the remaining items in front of the child and repeated the process until 3 items were identified. She then went through the same process with the second child. Once she did this with both girls, she had effective reinforcers. It’s worth noting that reinforcers do change so the process, or a modified version, will need to be repeated over time. By the way, the twins picked different objects.

Seeing Eye to Eye with Your Teenager

While I thought I had tried everything to improve my relationship with my teenage daughter, our relationship still felt strained.  After learning about the 4:1 Rule (four positive comments to one negative), I thought it was worth a try.  Over a one week period, I consciously worked at applying this rule, and did so as genuinely as possible.  I saw improvement in the first day and kept at it.  By weeks end, our conversations had significantly improved, and were even enjoyable. This not only taught me how to improve my personal relationships but it also taught me that when you focus on the positives, you see more things you would have otherwise not seen.

Twitter: More than a Social Platform—An Effective (and cool!) tool for building fluency in Pinpointing

Guest Post by John Green

twitterWithout fail, one of the most challenging tasks managers and leaders face in building coaching fluency models is developing pinpointing skills. I see it consistently with my new clients during their upfront training sessions, as they struggle with being clear about “what they want”.  What they come to learn is that guiding them from the global high-level, often-subjective “feedback” to something that is a bit more specific and objective is probably the most important skill they need to build.

As I check-in with these same clients over the years I consistently hear that “pinpointing is hard” and a skill that they have to continuously work on.  It is no surprise that the more they practice the better they get.

As coaching models continue to move to an increasingly virtual environment, this skill becomes even more critical in shaping the behaviors that will have the desired impacts. Effective virtual coaching models should emphasize increasing both the quantity (do more coaching) and the quality (improve the value of your coaching) of their fluency.

By increasing touch points, coaches can increase the quantity of their coaching and therefore, how the skill of clear, objective coaching (pinpoints) influences the quality of these interactions.

For example, many of my clients are using text messaging as an effective tool for increasing touch points. Both coaches and performers like the flexibility and ease of using this technology to “communicate” on critical performance issues.

Twitter takes it a step further to enhance pinpointing skills. Because Twitter has a 140 character limitation per “tweet” it is an excellent tool to shape the pinpointing skill.  Here are two real life client examples:

A Pharmaceutical Sales client moved towards a virtual field trip model in lieu of the infrequent and highly formalized traditional Field Visits.

  • Pre-call Planning: “What is the one thing you want your physician to do or say today?” (65 characters)
  • Post-call debrief: “Tell me one thing you learned today about your physician’s prescribing habits?” (77 characters).
  • Touch Point: Who is your most important call today? Can I add any value to your call plan?” (77 characters).
  • Pinpoint: “Develop a question that will allow your physician to share her view of your product,” (87 characters).

A Banking/Financial Services client implemented a customer-centric selling model that is a key component to their strategic planning process. Coaches focused on shaping the behaviors that will result in clients perceiving this organization as “different” than other firms vying for their business.

  • Touch Point: “What was the next best step for your client identified in your strategy session today?” (87 characters).
  • Touch Point: “What was the impact of sending your team the client profile data 2 days prior to the strategy session?” (104 characters).
  • Post Call debrief: “What was one thing you learned was important to your client that was not part of your pre-call plan? (101 characters).

Both of these clients have reported that building this tool helps (forces!) them to practice pinpointing. Both the coaches and the performers are becoming increasingly comfortable with this dynamic and appreciate the level of specificity and objectiveness that comes along with it.

The next challenge is to help the performers shape their responses to “fit” the Twitter requirements. (More on this phase in my next posting).

Give this approach a try and let us know how it goes @greenjohnj and @aubreydaniels

Can you Speak Up? I Can’t Hear You

Guest post by Bart Sevin, Ph.D.

CB051666Maureen Dowd recently wrote an Op Ed piece in the New York Times entitled Giving Doctors Orders, in which she discusses the importance of speaking up and asking your doctor to wash his or her hands in front of you prior to beginning an examination. She cited CNN reports and book authors who all recommend saying something to your physician if you don’t see them wash their hands with your own eyes. Sounds like a good idea, right? So what’s the problem? Well there are actually two problems: 1) getting people to start speaking up, and then 2) getting them to keep doing it. I have seen this all too often in working with clients, particularly on the safety side (but also on the non-safety side). Dowd’s article echoes one of the biggest challenges employees at all levels face, speaking up and giving feedback to others about their behavior, particularly those in authority.

Why is it so important for people to speak up in the moment when they see someone either engaging in a desired behavior (e.g., doctors washing their hands in front of patients) or an undesired behavior? And, why do people sometimes remain quiet even when they observe someone engaging in behavior that could (or will) negatively impact others or themselves? Why won’t they speak up more often, and what will it take to get them to start speaking up and doing so on an ongoing basis? The answer to all these questions is consequences.

First and foremost, it’s important to speak up in the moment (rather than saying something to the doctor later as you’re leaving the office) because the immediacy of the feedback increases its effectiveness.  By interrupting the at-risk behavior and helping the person begin practicing the correct behavior now, it also holds the performer personally accountable for doing the correct behavior.  Unfortunately the consequence history of people who typically say nothing when they should is one of being punished or penalized when they have given feedback in the past or they have ‘rules of conduct’ about respecting authority learned at an early age. The rule might be “respecting doctors means not questioning them about their practices”. In Dowd’s example, for instance, the negative consequences for asking your doctor to wash his or her hands might have been the doctor dismissively telling you his or her hands are already clean and even anticipating a sideways look that screams, ‘You dare to challenge me?”

What is needed to get people to speak up more often and keep doing so, is more positive reinforcement (R+). There are strategies that help to build in more R+ for speaking up and giving feedback. The first is to make sure that the person giving the feedback focuses on giving positive feedback for desired behavior, not just correcting undesired behavior. Dowd’s article focuses on correcting doctors when they fail to wash in front of you, but she doesn’t mention what patients should do when doctors do wash their hands in front of you. I’m sure we all can think of a number of times we’ve witnessed physicians washing their hands in the examination room just before beginning the examination. That’s an opportunity to speak up and strengthen that behavior!

Secondly, when giving constructive or negative feedback, plan before you do it. By doing this you help build in positive reinforcement for the giver. A very common strategy in sales is to anticipate the objections you’ll get from customers and plan what you’ll say to overcome the objections so you move one step closer to closing the sale. In my experience coaching frontline workers, I use the same approach: anticipate the push-back a co-worker (or your doctor) will give when you speak up about their undesired behavior, plan what you’ll say to overcome their resistance and move them closer to beginning to practice the desired behavior now.

Successfully overcoming resistance and getting people to demonstrate the correct behavior are usually very reinforcing to the person giving the feedback. In fact, many sales people begin to see objections as reinforcers because they represent an immediate opportunity for them to address any concerns and move the customer closer to saying yes.

Finally, it’s possible to build in more R+ for the person giving feedback by coaching the person receiving feedback on how to accept feedback well, such as thanking the person giving it and demonstrating strong listening skills by attempting the correct behavior. Apply these lessons to yourself as well.  Learning to speak up about others’ behavior may require that you look at your own at-risk behaviors, addressing the feedback you get from co-workers, reinforcing them for providing you corrective feedback, and inviting feedback in the first place.

We have many opportunities in our everyday environment to speak up when we see both desired and undesired behavior. By understanding the science behind reinforcement, you can positively impact your own behavior and the behavior of those with whom you interact.

Are Googlers really that different from the rest of us?

GoogleplexwelcomesignThis is not the first blog I have written about mistakes I think Google is making in how they are managing the company.  It will probably not be the last.  This blog was prompted by an article a friend sent me from the New York Times by Adam Bryant, Google’s Quest to Build a Better Boss. 

It appears that Google has invested quite a sum to determine what kind of boss they need to manage their company in the future.  As Bryant says, “So as only a data-mining giant like Google can do, it began analyzing performance reviews, feedback surveys and nominations for top-manager awards,  they correlated phrases, words, praise and complaints.”  He also reported, “Once they had some working theories, they figured out a system for interviewing managers to gather more data, and to look for evidence that supported their notions (bold italics are mine).  This activity involved more than 10,000 interviews and over 100 variables.

With this kind of “research” it is no wonder that the results were “so forehead-slappingly obvious.”  They found—get this—that managers had a greater impact on employees’ performance and how they felt about their job than any other factor.  How many thousands of employee hours and company resources did it consume to come to this conclusion?

Google now trains managers based on the results of this study.  Quotes from a couple of managers who had been through the training speak to what they learned.  One said, “…two of the most important things I can do is just make sure I have some time for them and to be consistent.  And that’s more important than doing the rest of the stuff.”  Another said the training helped him understand the importance of giving clear and direct feedback. 

While I understand that someone who is inconsistent and does not give clear and direct feedback will be less effective than those who do, those things will not create a company that brings out the best in its employees.   Even spending time with employees does not guarantee an improvement in morale or performance.  It is possible that spending time with the boss can be a punishing experience.  Many managers who give clear and consistent feedback are also very punishing, and can therefore create employees who are only willing to give just enough do get by.

The most important thing Google can teach its managers is how to deliver contingent positive reinforcement.  They are not likely to do that since their culture is built on non-contingent reinforcement.  Indeed one of their 10 Golden Rules for managing knowledge workers is to cater to their every need. I think they have misinterpreted Peter Drucker who said to strip away everything that gets in their way.  I think Drucker meant that a company should eliminate all the unnecessary administrative goobledegoop.  What Google has interpreted it to mean is to provide things like first-class dining facilities, gyms, laundry rooms, massage rooms, haircuts, carwashes, dry cleaning, commuting buses—just about anything a hardworking engineer might want.   The problem is that they are also all the things a non-hardworking engineer might want.  The assumption is that having these things available for employees will cause them to spend more time in productive work.  I know of no research to support this notion.

It seems to me that Google has spent a lot of time and money to learn that employees at Google are just like employees everywhere else.  They all respond to the laws of human behavior.  Googlers are not so special that they follow their own set of behavioral laws.  By learning those laws, executives and other managers at Google can save a lot of time and money and develop truly effective managers who bring out the best in all employees.

“Let Me Speak to Your Supervisor”

Guest post by John Green

MP900438367Does customer service have to be a thing of the past? Even the Superbowl ad from CarMax, an online used car buying service, brought to light the strong and effective customer service standards we used to have. In the CarMax ad, a man can be seen pulling into a gas station where a 1950s type service team approaches his car. He is being treated to window washing, a look under the hood, and a car cleaning; all the while the man believes he is being carjacked!

As a consumer of products and services in today’s contemporary society, I am frequently frustrated by the seemingly impossible task of getting good customer care. As a matter of comparison, I find myself being overjoyed when I receive service that would have been considered standard not so long ago. Have Americans lowered their standards? Or has the current service “crisis” shaped our expectations and created this customer care void?

Having worked for more than 20 years managing all levels of a call center organization, and through the last decade as a performance consultant/coach, the key thing to understand is that frontline supervisors/coaches play a critical role in the success of the organization. I know that sounds like a clichéd platitude—everyone knows that coaching and developing frontline employees is the most important part of the front-line supervisor’s job, but how they go about their daily management activities and more importantly how they engage and observe their front line employees is key to the level of care their customers receive.

The following questions can help any manager assess where service fixes are needed and where excellent customer care should be celebrated:

  • How many times a day do you hear these comments/requests from “valued” customers?
    • “Let me speak to your supervisor!”
    • “Give me someone who can actually help me.”
    • “You keep saying you are “sorry,” but are not offering any resolution to my problem.”
    • “You sound like a robot—I don’t think you are hearing me.”
  • How many “take-over” calls do your frontline supervisors handle on a daily basis?
  • Are the customer requests that become escalated of an unusual nature? Do they require specific technical knowledge or a level of authority to resolve?
  • What could your frontline coaches be doing in the time they are spending in customer escalations?
  • Have you built an entire escalation or customer care unit to handle those “difficult “customer requests?
  • Do your frontline coaches complain about how “busy’ they are yet never seem to get to do their “real” job?
  • How is the frontline coach’s job described by your HR group? What is the primary responsibility of this role?
  • How much time does a coach spend in “coaching” their employees on a daily basis?
  • How are frontline coaches supported in your organization?

If the answers to any of the above question are troubling or cause you to question your training or support, perhaps your coaching model is not producing the results you need. Through behavioral coaching, organizations can not only optimize the customer experience, they can also create a performance culture where people want to do their work, and do it well.

Building coaching fluency in an organization is hard work but has an exponential impact on key business results.


For more information, read Coaching for Impact  or visit our website www.aubreydaniels.com.

Survey Says?

surveySurveys can uncover a lot, but it’s what you do with that information that counts. While organizations commonly use surveys to gather information and identify opportunities for improvement, very few organizations capitalize on the investment of their people’s time and trust. Let’s face it, everywhere you look someone is asking for input on your experience with someone or something. Whether it’s at the checkout line, from a service department, in your office or on the phone, people want to know what you think. But how often do you ever hear back on your feedback? Organizations that properly prepare and follow up with survey respondents will gain more in the long run.

The following tips will help you take care of those who are making the effort to provide you with open and honest survey feedback.

Tell them why: Properly prepare your survey respondents by telling them why you are looking for their feedback and what you plan to do with it. Ideally this explanation will specify a future benefit for them such as improved customer service, enhanced product features, or simpler online tools.

Ask fewer questions: Have you ever started an online survey that fools you into thinking that the survey is short but then ends up asking what seems like 20 sets of five questions? Surveys, like conversations, should end before someone starts to think, “I’ve had enough of this.” The fewer questions you ask, the more likely the survey respondents will be to complete future surveys, and the more you will carefully consider what you’re asking and why you’re asking it. This applies to comment questions too. By including fewer questions that ask for comments, you’ll get better quality written feedback and avoid respondents being burned out before they get to critical questions. (Of course, you’re only asking critical questions, right?)

Ask the right questions: Before you write a single question, clearly identify the objectives of your survey and the information that you’ll need to plan meaningful follow-up. Be certain to ask questions that provide you with objective data.  With objective data, you can pinpoint behaviors that you want more of (those that are contributing to better performance) and those you want less of (those that are keeping you from the results you want). If survey respondents are scratching their head when completing the survey, wondering why in the world you are asking some of your questions, they are likely to begin thinking that you are wasting their time. If your survey is well crafted, it will tell you what you think you need to know and what the respondents think you need to know—what is important to them. If the respondents never think, “I’m glad they asked that!” when completing your survey, you’ve probably missed the mark.

Keep it confidential:  Be sure to administer your survey in a way that provides strict anonymity for the respondents. If you are administering the survey internally, ensure those involved in the survey administration process understand the importance of keeping data confidential, including written feedback. Nothing will shut down responding to surveys faster than fear that responses and comments will be traced back to individuals.

Close the loop:  Thank respondents when they complete the survey. At the end of the survey period, announce the overall response rate and thank those who completed the survey.  As soon as possible afterwards, provide a high-level summary of the survey results and your plan to make improvements where necessary.

Act on the data: You’ve got the data, now do something with it! Identify what is working and what is not.  Prepare specific plans for improvement and define measures for success. Responding to surveys will extinguish if the respondents feel like no one ever acts on their feedback.

Communicate your progress: Let the survey respondents know what you are doing and how it is going.  By communicating along the way, you’ll help reinforce their speaking up and create an engaged workforce or customer base that feels like it is making a real difference.

Check your progress: Your survey results are only as good as your last survey.  Take time to respond to what you learn from your initial survey but be sure to follow up in 6 to 12 months and survey again.  The more you ask your employees for input, and then take action on what you learn, the more your employees will offer feedback for improvement.


If interested, I suggest you learn more about ADI surveys and take a free survey demo.

A World without Whistleblowers

whistle-blowerWhistleblower.  The word often carries with it the stigma of a tattle-tale from childhood.  Few children liked those who tattled as they might eventually tell on them.  Although there is often a negative carry-over effect from childhood to the whistle-blower, the whistleblower’s tale is much more serious in that some wrongdoing has occurred or that dangerous or unhealthy conditions have been allowed to exist, despite efforts to correct them. 

The fact that there are whistlebolwers at all is a telltale sign that leadership is either corrupt or punishes those who call attention to operational irregularities and unsafe conditions. While many  whistle-blowing incidents go unreported, there can be significant consequences associated with whether or not someone blows the whistle – many of which affect the safety of workers and/or the American public.  Recent events include the Upper Big Branch mining accident in West Virginia, the BP Oil Spill, and, most recently, the GlaxoSmithKline product contamination settlement (which did in fact earn one whistleblower $750M). These events shouldn’t raise the question whether or not to blow the whistle on wrongdoing, they should force us to ask the real question, “Why don’t organizations create the kind of culture that doesn’t need whistleblowers?”

In our just released book, Safe by Accident? Take the Luck out of Safety – Leadership Practices that Build a Sustainable Safety Culture, Judy Agnew and I take a focused look at safety leadership and how to create an organization where all employees are empowered and positively reinforced for calling attention to variations in organizational practices and conditions that put employees and the organization at risk. Organizations that create workplaces where employees feel safe to report problems will find that they are safe by design – no whistleblowers necessary.


We highly recommend Safe by Accident?  for anyone in a leadership role with the ability to influence safety performance.

Relationships & Safety: Is there a link?

relationshipsDoes your relationship with your boss or your employees have any effect on how safe the environment is?  My colleague, Judy Agnew, writes in her latest article “Why Relationships Matter in Safety” (PM eZine 10-10) that relationships in safety do have a direct effect on the type of safety culture that exists.  Those that build effective relationships also earn discretionary effort from their employees and therefore improved performance.  Don’t be fooled, though, into thinking that effective relationships mean always being nice.  Accountability and constructive feedback are very important to the relationship and help to build a trusting and safe environment.  Here are a few of the best practices she discusses for building effective relationships around safety:

  • Set Clear expectations: make sure you are clear but also that the recipient understands the expectations.
  • Ask for feedback about your own leadership: invite discussion about what you do well and what you may be able to improve on.
  • Listen: be sure to ask clarifying questions and paraphrase to confirm that you hear what is being said to you
  • Admit when you are wrong: it will go a long way if you admit to your own mistakes and model how to learn from them.
  • Follow through on commitments: if you say you’re going to do something, do it!  It is essential in building trust.

For more on creating a safety culture, read Safe by Accident?…

Creating a Culture of Safe Habits Begins with Identifying the Best Pinpoints: Hazard-driven Behavior Pinpointing in BBS

42-17261190Guest post by Cloyd Hyten,
Senior Consultant, ADI

 

All of the talk lately has been focused on ‘what went wrong’ to create what turned out to be disastrous work environments in the case of BP’s Deepwater Horizon well explosion in the Gulf and the Upper Big Branch Mine explosion in West Virginia. For the last several decades, many companies have turned to Behavior-Based Safety (BBS) systems to enhance their safety culture and reduce incidents and injuries.  When these systems are designed and functioning well, evidence shows that they are quite effective in improving safe habits, communication of safety concerns, and the resulting safety outcomes (see Turnbeaugh, T. 2010, March. Improving business outcomes: Behavior-based safety techniques can influence organizational performance. Professional Safety, 55(3), 41-49). But there are many factors that can reduce the effectiveness of BBS systems, and they can pop up early in implementation or many years into the process.  One of the key elements to an effective process is identifying sound behavior pinpoints.

BBS Systems are only as good as the behaviors targeted for improvement.  A common problem in BBS implementation occurs when participants select behaviors just because they are easy to observe (e.g., wearing safety glasses), or because they are easy choices in that failing to behave won’t draw management fire (e.g., keeping ladders properly stored).  This may mean that participants are avoiding the more serious behaviors – those that would help them be truly safer in their jobs – just to quickly generate behavior pinpoints to start working on.  Such practices might be acceptable in the first round of behavior pinpointing as a step in learning to observe fellow workers and give feedback to them, but if participants don’t quickly move on to more serious behaviors the entire process is at risk of being trivialized.

Hazard-driven pinpointingTM:  To pick behaviors worthy of everyone’s time and effort, the pinpointing process must start with the hazards present in the job.  Safety professionals together with workers from each functional area need to identify the most serious risks to personal safety or to process safety.  Many companies already do some form of Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) which identifies hazards and control measures that can be taken to eliminate or mitigate those risks.  Recent and thorough JHAs can supply the hazard lists for each job.  In the absence of a JHA, incident and near-miss data can reveal at least some of the more likely risks.  Of course, incident data tells you what has happened, not what might happen, and typical incident records tend to skew toward the more common but less severe injuries (e.g., strains and sprains).  Examining only incident data won’t reveal the less likely but potentially catastrophic risks (e.g. fires, explosions, leaks of harmful chemicals).

Hazard controls:  Once a list of hazards has been identified, participants need to examine existing control strategies.  If the hazard can be eliminated entirely through job or equipment redesign, and it is practical to do so, this should be the first choice.  If the hazard cannot be eliminated, other controls must be in place such as warning systems, interlocks, permitting procedures, equipment guards, special tools, personal protective equipment (PPE), safe job procedures, etc. It is crucial to realize that each of these controls relies on the behavior of operators and/or maintenance people to function properly and reduce the risk of an incident.  Therefore, the final safety control strategy must include personal protective behavior (PPB) as a component. 

PPBs:   To maximize safety, workers will need to do things; things like, but not limited to:

  • Heed warning systems
  • Use proper tools properly
  • Follow safe procedures without taking risky shortcuts
  • Wear PPE
  • Ask for help when lifting heavy or awkward objects
  • Do safety scans before starting the job
  • Repair equipment critical to safety in a timely manner

BBS participants should select serious hazards to address and the critical behaviors necessary to make safety controls effective and reduce the risk of injury or incident.  Identifying hazards first can prevent falling into the trap of picking behaviors that won’t truly improve safety.  Hazard-driven pinpointing will take more time than simply asking, “Anybody have ideas for our next behavior?” but the payoff will come in a more robust BBS process that can lead to meaningful improvements in safety.

Fostering Creativity in the Workplace

creativityI read an article recently (ABC News) that reported on what the magical number of emails a person can “stand” a day before they feel overloaded: 50 emails! That is not the number they receive, only the number before they feel stressed. With an estimated 1.6 billion people globally using email, I have to ask, “What effect do all these emails have on productivity and performance, or more critical to a company’s bottom line, on creativity?”   While we certainly could not conduct business without email today, the promise of increased efficiency and creativity is in many cases unrealized.  While most emails seem distracting to organizational objectives, the opportunity to increase creativity is large.

Let me first clear up the myth that creativity is something that some people have and others do not; while most people think that some people are more genetically predisposed to creativity than others are, creativity is behavior, and as such it can be increased or decreased like any other behavior.  Email has tremendous potential to increase creativity but unless managers understand the science of behavior it can be more of a punisher than a reinforcer of creativity.

Here are a few tips for how you might approach creativity in an email dominated world.

  • Reinforce all ideas: Any behavior that indicates a person is thinking about how to do a job better or how to find a new or improved product or service should be reinforced. An idea that  seems trivial or outrageous may be the father to one that generates a more efficient process, product or service.  Email gives a manager many opportunities to increase behavior aimed at leading an organization and “thinking outside the box.”
  • Remove obstacles that are punishing or penalizing creativity: It has been proven that the shorter the time between the submission of an idea and the acknowledgement of the submission, the more willing employees will be to offer up suggestions or share their ideas. By responding quickly, you reinforce their efforts to think creatively.  Equally important is that the process for doing so not be cumbersome. The easier you make it to get an idea into the system, the higher the number of suggestion you will get.  Email automatically documents suggestions for improvement and speeds action; both increase participation in idea generation.
  • Form unlikely teams: Step away from traditional work groups and engage your employees to work with employees outside the usual distribution lists. By forming diverse teams, you will increase the opportunities and discover new ways to solve problems.  Changing teams with email is as simple as changing the distribution list.
  • Train performers to fluency: When employees are fluent (automatic, non-hesitant responding) in their jobs, they have more cognitive time to consider alternative ways to accomplish job objectives.  Most organizations train employees in such a way that fluency is not attained until they have been on the job for months or even years. Computer technology can produce fluency in days or weeks.
  • Look to unlikely people:  Robert Epstein, a prominent creativity researcher, says, “All behavior is equally creative.”  I agree.  We never do the same thing in exactly the same way twice – creating potentially creative variance.   This means that everyone has tremendous creative potential when properly managed.  When organizations think that only certain people have creative ability, most of the potential for change is lost and involvement is diminished considerably.    

In the final analysis, when creativity is understood as behavior that all can exhibit, it can be increased many times its current rates.  Modern technology, including email, increases that ability.


Additional Resources:
Bringing Out the Best in People, Aubrey C. Daniels, Ph.D.
Generativity Theory“, Robert Epstein, Ph.D., (chapter from) Encyclopedia of Creativity, Pritzker & Runco, Academic Press (1999).