Have you ever wondered why geese migrate in a V pattern?

Scientists have determined 2 reasons for this formation:

1. It conserves energy. Each bird flies just above the goose in front of them reducing wind resistance. They take turns being in front, and fall back when they get tired. Studies have shown that birds that fly alone beat their wings more frequently and have higher heart rates than those flying in formation.
2. It’s easier to to keep track of each other. The V formation inherently elevates communication and coordination.

But, when the geese are not migrating, they break into smaller family units. They mate for life and stay with their parents for at least the first year—but migration is generally a gaggle of related geese.

So… what?

The geese behaviors are an analogy to a few decade of patterns I’ve observed. Generally people are either inherently Collaborators or lean the ‘other’ way and are Competitors. As with any profile analysis — every organization needs both collaboration and competition! The trick is to establish tools and protocols; and communicate effectively to leverage strengths and mitigate weaknesses.

I’d love to develop a profile tool for this. Hypothetically, I’ll call it the Coll-Comp profile. I envision a 2-part score—first part for collaboration, second for competition, each with a scale of 1-10. I think I’m an 9-5. If you’re reading this blog, you know I am passionate about collaboration! I don’t consider myself particularly competitive, except with myself. I continually want to learn and just do better. But with a “Coll” score of 9, folks who are strong competitors may not relate to my heavy focus on collaboration. So it’s important for me to recognize this and make an extra effort to connect with strong competitors.

Let’s take this concept a different direction. Someone with a 9-2, might sound appealing as a solid team player. BUT – if they are so collaborative that they don’t act until there is group consensus, team productivity could be challenging. Similarly, someone with a 2-9 may race ahead with little concern for stakeholder impacts.

CONCLUSION: Let’s learn from the geese. Know when to work as a single unit; share the burden; shift roles; and when it’s not necessary to work as gaggle – work in your teams to be productive .

NOTE: If anyone would like to partner with me to put some structure behind the concept of a Coll-Comp Profile, please reach out!

Too many of us fight the chains of chaotic email threads regularly.

How much time do you spend navigating email chains trying to gain progress?

• CC’s, BCC’s, Reply Alls, Forwards, Subject line changes…..
• Who said what, in what sequence?
• Did the right people respond?
• Was there clear agreement?
• Damn it—we need a meeting to get consensus….
  • It takes much time and effort to get the stakeholders booked.
  • Then 2 of the key stakeholders skip the meeting.

There’s GOT to be a better way, right?

THERE IS, and it is called the ‘Modern Workplace’. The Modern Workplace simply uses tools, and protocols – and facilitated user adoption to collaborate. It leverages transparent communication channels. The best way to explain is with a simple case study. Here’s my attempt to demonstrate comparing Email to a Microsoft Teams, Team conversation.

If you’d like some help triggering this transition – feel free to contact us!

Reactive thoughts in your head like these:

• “How MANY TIMES have we discussed THIS?”
• “How can he NOT understand the impacts?”
• “Why would she want to do THAT?”

Our first instinct may be to respond with these thoughts, or a somewhat filtered version.

What we forget is that communication is complex and few people are masters of saying what we truly mean. One incorrect word, inadvertent tone or even a misplaced comma can convey a very different message than we intended. (We’ve ALL done this too!)

SO – what can we ALL do to reduce the madness?
It’s really super simple. It just takes a little practice.

1. When you feel that reaction in your gut, recognize it and take a quick pause.
2. (THIS is the hard part!) Now—assume that either the sender miscommunicated OR you’re misunderstanding the message. This is a significant mental shift for most of us. Most of us naturally want to assume we are right and other are not. Most of the time, we’re all a little grey.
3. Once you’ve grounded your perspective on #2, THEN respond to clarify before any debate.

Here are a few examples:

• Bill, would you explain that again? I’m not sure I understood.
  Clarifying you’re not currently, but you want to be aligned; and this gives him a chance to restate with more clarity.
• Jessica, I want to support your recommendation but I’m unclear about the part where xyz occurs. Would you share more on that?
  Indicates general support, but targets the area where there is potential conflict.
• Jose, I heard you reference Project X, but I think you meant Project Y?
  If we assume people mean one thing when they say another, it frequently leads to trouble. Simple clarifications like this can help avoid future conflicts. Also using “I heard” vs “you said” is taking ownership instead of accusing.

Bonus Tip: When responding in writing to particularly challenging communications, have a trusted colleague “sanity proof” your response.

When you do this consistently, others will reciprocate. It will also encourage everyone to put just a little more effort into communicating clearly, carefully and kindly.