Author Archives: ven00kat

#157 The Random Question

Send to Kindle

This is probably the biggest productivity loss in the workplace. The “random question.” The question that comes out of the blue, seems unrelated to the task at hand, to the priorities, or to a corporate initiative. The question that is asked to satisfy a curiosity.

People ask questions in an attempt to be helpful. But they don’t realize the corporate overhead being added when the receiver takes time to decode the question. Not to mention the frustration, or wasted time in answering frivolous questions.

The person asking the question will not feel it is random (of course not!). The person asking the question has the duty to be simple and clear when asking the question. If you are not getting an answer, it is likely you don’t have the attention of the receiver, or the receiver is simply out of bandwidth to answer your question. Don’t ask a question just because you can.

In a busy and fast moving workplace, the person tasked with answering the question has mere seconds to decide whether to ignore, deflect, or answer the question. A wrong choice could be career limiting.

Action items handed out by executives and senior managers sometimes fall in this category. The “problem of the day” is not as important as the strategic choices made in the planning phase.

You did have a planning session, right?

Share

#156 It’s Academic

Send to Kindle

The ultimate insult in the corporate environment is to call an idea or a speaker “academic.” This implies the speaker is in an “ivory tower,” out of touch with reality, or being speculative. Or, the ideas proposed are too general to be useful. Or, the emphasis is on “knowing,” and not “doing.”

This insult is problematic because it intends to put down the receiver, and fosters conflict. If the idea is to release emotion, it will work! Both parties will exchange barbs and stray from the topic. For me, the worst thing about this insult: there is no clear call to action. And it does not reveal the real problem.

  • Is the proposal unclear? Does the listener not understand? Which portions are unclear?
  • Does the listener not believe the speaker? Is this a visceral reaction or is there data that shows a different picture?
  • Does the listener not agree with the speaker? Why? Its usually one of the above points?
  • Is the proposal not practical or not feasible? Are there specific capabilities missing? Is the proposal premature?

It also insults the real academics, whose value add is increasing the body of knowledge, to improve understanding, and drive “doing” from a foundation of awareness, as opposed to ignorance.

Share