The Art of Introduction

Posted on by
Reply

By Caroline M. Cole

Poking others on Facebook and sending connect invites on LinkedIn, we have more opportunities to extend our social and professional networks. Yet while connections and interactions increasingly take place online, there are times we need to make face-to-face introductions, such as client meetings, professional conferences, office parties, networking events, interviews, and social gatherings of all kinds. To the dismay of participants on both sides of the handshake, however, the art of introduction is waning.Hello My Name Is The Art of Introduction

Meeting others is the foundations of all relationships, and those who make strong first impressions are more likely to start those relationships on solid footing. Considering that first impressions can impact both initial and subsequent exchanges, this discussion examines how to establish and build reputations with a well-executed introduction.

Sensitive to social and professional hierarchies, conventional introductions dictate that subordinate individuals are always introduced to those with more status, prompting many to dismiss introduction rituals as elitist and discriminatory. To be fair, various introduction protocols—like many modern day manners—are tied to centuries old courtly behaviors, where individuals of all ranks were “presented” to a monarch. As such, we do find traces of royal ceremonial customs and their corresponding prejudices in this courtesy, but most of the ornate and haughty components have faded if not disappeared all together, leaving a practice that, as its core, uses deference to acknowledge and build esteem between and among all participants.

Letitia Baldrige, chief of staff for Jacqueline Kennedy and author of Letitia Baldrige’s New Complete Guide to Executive Manners, observed that deference is a form of respect and, consequently, the foundation of protocol: “There is nothing artificial and foppish about it,” she writes. “It is rather a plain and simple recognition of hard work, quality, and achievement.” It is this recognition that informs who is introduced to whom that some people, especially in an “everyone-gets-a-trophy” culture, consider off-putting.

Context matters, of course, but we demonstrate deference and, hence, respect for the older, more experienced, or more senior individuals by introducing others to them, prompting us to introduce:

junior executives to senior executives,
employees in our company to its customers and clients,
children to adults,
colleagues in our organization to colleagues in another organization,
students to faculty members,
non-board members to board members,
non-officials to elected officials,
laypersons to religious dignitaries,
lower-ranked military personnel to senior-ranked military personnel,
guests to host, and
younger individuals to older individuals

All things being equal, we would introduce the person we know best to the person we know least.

Contrary to what some may believe, gender is not a status driving introduction order. Historically, men were introduced to women but, nowadays, introductions between the sexes are guided by seniority in position or title in a given context, or by age; some countries, however, do use gender to guide the introductions of ambassadors and other dignitaries.

For ease in making introductions, it can help to mention the senior person’s name first, thereby identifying that individual as the person to whom others will be presented, as the following examples demonstrate:

“JoAnn, I’d like to introduce (you to) Andrew Rodriguez, our intern for the summer. Andrew, this is JoAnn Mosley, AmiCorps’s director of marketing.”

“Bill, this is Tyler Rossi, managing director of our technical division. Tyler, this is William McGregor, who’s with Energy Source; he accepted our invitation to today’s software demonstration.”

“Mom, please meet Samantha Hardy, a friend from college. Samantha, this is Amanda Dixon, my mother.”

In the first example, the words “to you” are implied, making them unnecessary in the introduction itself, but the reference here makes the presentation of one person to another more evident.

Later we will examine how to build upon this basic structure to enhance the rapport between those being introduced but, for now, the ability to offer matter-of-fact details in our introduction demonstrates the esteem that we have for each person and that we encourage between them in this and later exchanges.

When introducing individuals to larger groups of people, we may need to modify our phrasing, but the overall structure of who is introduced to whom remains the same:

“Paul, I’d like to introduce some of our senior engineers. Daniel Patterson, Cassondra Lee, Victoria Martin, and George Roth, this is Paul King, of Devonshire and Martin, our newest client.”

or

“Daniel, Cassondra, Victoria, and George, please meet Beverly Thompson, our newest hire. Beverly, this Daniel Patterson, Cassondra Lee, Victoria Martin, and George Roth, some of our senior engineers.”

When individuals are of comparable rank, we would introduce the group to the solo person(s) coming into the discussion. For instance:

“Michael, I’d like for you to meet some of my friends from the building. Susan Wang, Mary Costello, and Tim Perry, this is Michael Devon, a friend from work.”

If, however, the group contains six or more individuals, we should only introduce a segment of the group to the newcomer, starting with those who are closest to us. Similarly, we should never lead someone around larger gatherings, introducing that person to everyone at once; instead, we should introduce the individual to one segment at a time, and then check in at a later point to introduce the individual to more people, as necessary.

These principles, encompassing the fundamentals of introductions, can encourage connections in most contexts, helping us develop a reputation for promoting networks that can be of service or interest to others. Yet even these efforts can be strengthened with the following actions.

• Use full names and, if relevant, titles. Allowing us to single out individuals from larger clusters of people, names make it possible to interact on a more personal basis, but individuals should decide how familiar they are willing to be with others. Therefore, when introducing others, we should always use their full, professional name—even if we may know them by more informal references. For example, even if we address or refer to Patrick, Elizabeth, and Charles as Pat, Beth, and Chas, respectively, in our own exchanges, we should still introduce them as Patrick, Elizabeth, and Charles. Such introductions may seem fussy, but they give others the opportunity to decide how they would like to be viewed by the people they have just met.

When relevant to the context, we might also offer the person’s title to clarify the person’s role or affiliation to others. For instance, it would be appropriate to note that someone is the CEO, Director of Human Relations, Managing Director, Senior Analyst, Dean of Academic Development, and so on at work, at a conference, or in some other professional forum. Beyond such venues, however, social titles would be more appropriate—except when introducing elected officials and medical doctors; these individuals are introduced in professional and social contexts with their professional titles, such as “… this is Senator Dianne Feinstein,” “…this is Judge Madison Kilmer,” or “…this is Dr. Robert Goodly.” Doctors of philosophy, on the other hand, are not called “Dr.” or “Professor” beyond academic forums.

• Offer a context-appropriate detail about each person. The most effective introductions allow participants to have a conversation in the absence of the person who introduced them. To help in this effort, we should offer a detail or two about each individual during the introduction. Yet, because the details we provide are often the starting point for people to discover a common ground, context matters when deciding which details to offer.

If, say, we are introducing people in the office or at a professional event, we might mention each person’s title, organization, expertise, or professional interests to help spark a connection, as evident in the following examples:

“Claire, I would like to introduce William Tsing, a recent graduate of Stanford who will be working in Gurdip Sugumaran’s lab for a few months before heading to med school in September. William, this is Dr. Claire Harper, our Director of Research, who oversees all of the labs in this division, including Dr. Sugumaran’s.”

“Julius, please meet Harper Fallon, from marketing; he was just brought onto the Genevieve Project team to help Nicholas with the social media components. Harper, this is Julius Harlow, from media development; he’s presently exploring ways to use Facebook to increase the feedback we get from customers.”

“Michele, I’d like for you to meet Mary Stieglitz and Jack Dreyfuss. They just left Newberry and Associates to open a design firm in Atlanta, specializing in commercial properties. Mary and Jack, this is Michele Greer, senior designer at Rafael Interiors.”

“Arthur, I’d like to introduce Calvin Redmond, a programmer at Hagerty Technologies that’s helping to move his company’s data to osCommerce. Calvin, this is Arthur Doi, one of the founders of BuyItNow; he’s in town for a planning session with the organizers of next year’s Internet Retailer Expo.”

Whereas work environments tend to promote quid pro quo professional alliances, making work-related details of value, social contexts tend to downplay opportunities for “shop talk” so as to encourage a more light-hearted, congenial atmosphere. Therefore, although references to work can help clarify relationships, it can be more strategic to promote conversations about topics beyond the office in more general forums; mentioning hobbies or other interests can encourage such discussions:

 “Rob and Leann, I’d like to introduce Pat Shapiro, a colleague from work, who just returned from a 12-city tour of Eastern Europe. Pat, this is Rob and Leeann Muller, Tom’s coworkers at Smidgen, and they are avid travelers.”

“Ruth, may I present Beatrix Miller, a friend since high school. She is been doing glasswork for a few years but has recently taken up oil painting. Beatrix, this is Ruth Schultz, one of my neighbors, an art enthusiast with a growing collection of twentieth century American lithographs.”

Granted, conversations may ultimately shift to work-related topics, but participants should decide whether to move the discussion in that direction.

In deciding which details to use in an introduction, we should consider the people we are introducing. The details we might use when introducing someone to a sports fanatic may be different from the details we use to introduce that same person to a philatelist; however, whichever details we provide should be appropriate to share in public. Similarly, we should give only enough information to help make a connection, thereby allowing the newly introduced individuals to learn more about each other on their own and move the conversation in the ways they choose.

A final note about contextualizing details concerns the order in which we provide that information. In making introductions, the temptation may be to offer details before providing the person’s name, especially when introducing people who may be related to us. For example, we might say, “Jane, I would like to introduce my brother, Todd Jenkins.” Such introductions, however, emphasize our relationship with the person, rather than the person on his or her own merit. By providing contextualizing details after giving the person’s name, we emphasize the identity of the individual and subordinate supplementary details:

 “Jane, I would like to introduce Todd Jenkins, my brother. Todd, this is Jane Healy, my supervisor at Picco Ltd.”

“Mark, please meet Christopher Griffin, my assistant. Christopher, this is Mark Jasper, Operations Director and my mentor during my early years at the company.”

• Make eye contact and enunciate. Eye-contact is a subtle way of conveying respect, indicating that we are focused on the people in our immediate presence. Therefore, when making introductions, we should look at the person needing the information, rather than the person about whom we are speaking or, worse, other people in the room. Furthermore, we should enunciate to ensure others get the information we’re providing about the people they are meeting.

• Be honest. In making introductions, we may find that we have forgotten someone’s name—in full or in part. If it’s possible to discretely inquire about someone’s name before making introductions, we should do so. If, however, our mind goes blank in the middle of an introduction, we should admit it; for instance, “I know we have met before, but I can’t recall your name at the moment.” Everyone can forget names on the spot, so recognizing our humanness can keep the mood livelier than stalling or otherwise trying to cover up what becomes increasingly noticeable during the awkward pauses.

If we’re the forgotten party, we should resist calling attention to that fact with responses like, “You’ve forgotten my name?!” or “I’ll wait… .” Instead, we should help the person save face by jumping in, giving our name, and offering a brief reference to how we know the host—who may or may not be the person making the introduction. For example:

“Hello, I’m Ken Tompkins, one of Dean’s sales reps.”

“Hi, I’m Jenny Maverick. Dana and I met last summer while playing in the Oakland softball league.

This strategy also works in contexts where there may be no one to introduce us, say at a networking event or in contexts where unfamiliar people join a conversation in progress. In such cases, we should wait for a pause in the discussion and take the initiative to give our name and a context-appropriate detail that connects us to the event or its host, such as:

“Hello, I’m Emma Greenstone, one of the incoming analysts that will be working in the Chicago office.”

“Hello, my name is Jeremy Brett. I’m a senior in microbiology interested in talking with companies that specialize in biotech.”

“Hi, I’m Brendan Davenport. I’ve been a friend of the groom since middle school.”

Offering a confident, sincere handshake as we are being introduced or as we introduce ourselves can reinforce our image during the exchange (see “Shake Hands with Sincerity and Confidence”).

• Receive and make corrections graciously. If someone notes that we have made a mistake during an introduction, we should gratefully and amiably accept the information to help us make subsequent introductions correctly. If we have been miss-introduced with the information that does not concern our name (for example, being introduced as Joan, rather than Jean), the most appropriate response is a subtle, one-on-one correction to the person who received the incorrect information; for example, “I prefer ‘Thomas’ rather than ‘Tom,’” or “a minor correction… I am at Norco Ltd.” If inaccurate information does concern our name, we should immediately and matter-of-factly make the correction to minimize repeated inaccuracies that could further embarrass the person making introductions.

• Make them. Because successful communication is built on common ground, it is challenging for people to engage in even the most mundane conversations when they are unsure of who is their company. Introductions encourage a common ground by explicitly inviting people to learn more about each other. Therefore, to promote the smoothest communication from the beginning, we should resist presuming that everyone knows each other and introduce the individuals in our company.

* * *

Introductions provide an opportunity for people with mutual interests to meet and, ideally, leave the exchange in a better position than when they entered it. Some introductions, for instance, can lay the foundation for a business alliance or partnership down the road. Some might encourage a friendship, and others may simply provide an enjoyable conversation between individuals who may never meet again. Whatever the outcome, the introduction aims to enhance the participants’ lives, if only for a moment.

In the process, introductions allow us to express our esteem for the people we are introducing. The order in which we introduce people, the details we share about each party, and the attention we give each individual during an introduction say as much about ourselves as we do about the people we are connecting. Therefore, by engaging these practices as we make introductions, we not only help other people shine in the presence of a new acquaintance, but we indirectly establish and enhance our own reputation.

Working toward Areté…
Use the space below to share your comments and observations about introductions and ways to make the best impression in this exchange.

Share Button

Everyone Can Use the “What Are Your Weaknesses?” Question to Advantage

Posted on by
Reply

By Caroline M. Cole

Wanting to gain an edge in interviews, job hunters solicit advice on how to answer the token curve ball questions that recruiters and hiring managers increasingly ask: If you were to eliminate one of the planets, which would it be and why? How many ping-pong balls could fill a train car? If you were to invite three of our competitors to dinner, who would they be? Which kitchen utensil describes you best? How many people in New York City are logged into LinkedIn at 4:30p.m. on Friday? Yet one question continues to stump prospective employees who are trying to sell their talents and abilities: What are your weaknesses?

Job applicants often think it’s a trick question, goading them to offer information the company could use to disqualify their candidacy. As such, they look through interview guides, conduct Google searches, and talk with career counselors to find the “correct” response to this question and its variations, only to discover a range of possibilities.glass half-empty to address what are your weaknesses

Well-meaning friends and career consultants might encourage interviewees to focus on skills that are not important for the work the candidate aims to do; for example, a candidate might discuss computation as a weakness when applying for positions that stress soft skills. Others suggest candidates offer up presumed weaknesses that are actually strengths in disguise, like “I’m a perfectionist,” suggesting the candidate has little tolerance for sloppy work. “In my eagerness to secure new clients, I have stepped on people’s toes,” could also serve some candidates well in light of the fact that companies may be hesitant to turn away applicants who are willing to pursue business.

Some advise candidates to use their alleged weaknesses as opportunities to discuss areas of improvements, such as “Because I’ve struggled to find the balance between work and play, I’ve been strengthening my time management abilities,” while others propose that candidates make their weaknesses context specific; for example, “I have difficulties working in offices with undefined reporting structures, prompting me to look for a position where there would be more explicit guidance and mentorship opportunities.”

In its myriad forms, the question asking candidates to talk about their weaknesses can give companies a heads-up about prospective employees, but there is something compelling about this question that all of us—regardless of our employment prospects or desires—can learn, as evident in the comments that Sunny Gupta, the cofounder, President and C.E.O. of Apptio, made to New York Times “Corner Office” columnist Adam Bryant.

When asked how he hires, Gupta replies that a favorite interview topic is “asking people about the three to four things they need to work on, or the things they are just not good at,” adding that he’ll “ask that question three to four times from different angles until [he is] satisfied with the answer.” Like other recruiters, Gupta seems to use the question to gauge a candidate’s self-awareness and where the company would need to fill in the gaps; if applicants “cannot internalize the things they need to work on,” he observes, they’ll “need too much patting on the back.” He goes on to explain, however, that this question also offers insight into how the candidate might align with the “glass half-empty” management style that drives his company. After all, recognizing that most things in a business may be working on any given day, Gupta says he’s more concerned with the areas that are not working, where the glass is not at maximum capacity, because, he says, “that’s how you become great.”

Several business managers use the adage that their companies are only as strong as their weakest link, perhaps explaining their interest in the ways prospective candidates discuss their weaknesses. Yet rather than simply recognizing that weak links exist, we might all do well to identify the half-empty glasses in our professional and personal lives and to focus on filling those glasses so that we, too, can become great.

Consider, for example, Benjamin Franklin’s “bold and arduous project of arriving at moral perfection.” In his autobiography, Franklin explains that awareness and interest alone are insufficient for improving the deficiencies we see in our lives; we must be proactive in developing alternative behaviors. Therefore, he devised a system that would help him purposefully and strategically acquire the habits of thirteen moral virtues he thought worthy to obtain:

1. Temperance. Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation.
2. Silence. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation.
3. Order. Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time.
4. Resolution. Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve.
5. Frugality. Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e., waste nothing.
6. Industry. Lose no time; be always employ’d in something useful; cut off all unnecessary actions.
7. Sincerity. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly.
8. Justice. Wrong none by doing injuries, or omitting the benefits that are your duty.
9. Moderation. Avoid extreams; forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve.
10. Cleanliness. Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, cloaths, or habitation.
11. Tranquility. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable.
12. Chastity. Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dulness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another’s peace or reputation.
13. Humility. Imitate Jesus and Socrates.

Using this list, Franklin proposed to focus on one virtue at a time and, once he mastered that virtue, he would move on to another, and so on, until he acquired all of the characteristics on his list. To help in this effort, he gave “a week’s strict attention to each of the virtues successively…leaving the other virtues to their ordinary chance” and tracked his progress in a book in which he would “mark, by a little black spot, every fault [he] found upon examination to have been committed respecting that virtue.” At the end of the thirteen weeks, he would repeat the exercise, actively working to keep the pages “clean of spots.”

Running through “this plan for self-examination” four times a year, Franklin writes “I was surpris’d to find myself so much fuller of faults than I had imagined.” As such, Franklin wasn’t able to master all of these virtues as he set out to do. He was, in his words, “incorrigible with respect to Order,” despite seeing substantial benefit to its practice in his later years; he also writes he did not have much success in his acquisition of humility. Nevertheless, by seeing the glass half-full in areas he thought important to develop, Franklin became more of the person he aspired to be: “tho’ I never arrived at the perfection I had been so ambitious of obtaining, but fell far short of it, yet I was, by the endeavor…better and happier…than I otherwise should have been if I had not attempted it.”

As Franklin demonstrates, self-assessment and self-improvement should be goals for everyone—not just eager job applicants wanting to make a good impression—because the ways we think, act, and engage with others reveal more about who we are than anything we might say. Therefore, in addition to identifying the areas in which we are successful (see “Document—and Celebrate—Your Contributions in the Sweet Spot”), we should register the areas we could improve and work to address those areas with greater purpose and consistency.

In taking such inventory, we may discover that many of our professional and personal behaviors are sufficient, or even better than sufficient, as validated by what we have accomplished, by what others have said about us, or by what we see when comparing ourselves to those around us. Even so, we should resist propensity toward “cumulative advantage” (which suggests that something beginning with a favorable impression will build upon that popularity, regardless of original or ongoing quality) and remain cognizant of the potential effects of behavioral contagion—ideas that come together in the work of Sinan Aral, assistant professor at NYU’s Stern School of Business.

Drawing upon his research of social contagion (that is, how information is diffused in social media forums, thereby affecting employee productivity, consumer demand, and viral marketing), Aral explains that human behavior clusters in network space and time, developing the potential to influence an individual’s choice in various forums. Behavioral contagions, for example, can affect an individual’s product preferences, social interests, health practices, political views, career directions, work behavior, and so on—perhaps irrespective of the quality of a given option. In addition to helping businesses become more strategic in selling their products and services, Aral suggests that understanding how behaviors travel and where they will go next may have the potential to help us promote socially advantageous behavior and contain less desirable ones.

The work in and possibilities for behavior contagion research continues to grow, yet it is the inclination of how one person may be spontaneously and uncritically copying others that is relevant to this discussion of self-improvement.

Herd mentality can motivate and encourage behaviors that push us to become better and stronger than we might otherwise become on our own, as evident in healthy competition. Following the crowd, however, can also lead us on paths that do not have our best selves in mind—certainly by encouraging us toward behaviors that may not reflect our values, but also by allowing us to remain content as a lesser version of our ideal self. Although Aral’s proposal that we may be able to promote or discourage socially advantageous behaviors could help mitigate these concerns, it also raises questions as to who (or what) will determine which behaviors to support, which behaviors to deter, and for whose benefit. Here, then, is why proactive self-development can be invaluable.

We may not be angling for a job offer, but by establishing the habit of asking “What are our weaknesses?” we can choose which characteristics and behaviors we would like to develop in light of the person we aspire to be. And by actively filling the half-empty glasses we want to fill, we can move closer to that ideal and, in the process, toward greatness.

Working toward Areté…
To identify and track areas for improvement, download the “Using the ‘What Are Your Weaknesses?’ Question to Advantage” .pdf or let us know your system for strengthening aspects of your professional and personal life in the space below.

Share Button

R.S.V.P. and Enhance Your Reputation

Posted on by
Reply

R.S.V.P. and Enhance Your Reputation

By Caroline M. Cole

Those familiar with Jane Austen novels have inevitably read about the importance of an invitation. Whether to a private ball, a wedding, or an afternoon tea, invitations were a token of the sender’s esteem for their recipients, prompting recipients to return the admiration by responding immediately—either through a letter or in a verbal message that was conveyed to the prospective host by the one who delivered the invitation. By expressing gratitude for the honor of having been invited and indicating availability for attendance, the recipient’s response demonstrated “good breeding,” an awareness of the civilities and graces of society. And though tempting to dismiss these exchanges as fussy or elitist, such courtesies were not exclusive to the wealthy. Reputations in all social classes were contingent upon the ways a person responded to and interacted with others, creating environments that made RSVP notations superfluous. Yet even today, when invitations explicitly ask recipients to confirm their availability, conference coordinators, wedding planners, holiday party organizers, and hosts of all kinds find themselves anxiously waiting for prospective guests to respond.

Perhaps believing the RSVP reference is a quaint notation that must appear pro forma on the bottom of all announcements, some invitees say nothing upon receipt of an invitation only show up at the last minute—often to the chagrin of the host and to the disruption of the guests who did respond. Trying to stay ahead of drop-in attendees, some hosts have resorted to using the phrase “RSVP, regrets only,” only to find themselves stuck with excess food and expense resulting from myriad no-shows. The latest trend is for hosts and event sponsors to send out “save the date” announcements and to distribute invitations earlier than they might have otherwise; attempting to build in opportunities for a host to call the invitees who have not replied, these well-intended efforts likewise waste resources and further muddle the meaning of an RSVP.

An abbreviation for “Réspondez, s’il vous plaît,” RSVP literally means “respond, if it pleases you” or, more colloquially, “please reply.” As such, an RSVP requires a response from those who plan to attend, as well as from those who must decline, yet many invited guests continue to act as if responses are optional.

Some people wonder if the growing trend to bypass RSVP requests is a generational problem, claiming that Gen X, Gen Y, and Millennials have not been raised with the manners and social niceties of their elders; this argument loses credibility, however, in light of the fact that members of other generations are also unresponsive to invitation requests. Others suggest that we have become so overwhelmed by social events and opportunities that it’s impossible to respond to every request in a timely manner. Others claim that cellular devices have transformed us into a culture of complacent procrastinators, allowing us to act as if we can text someone with our last-minute decision or change of plans. Some suggest it’s a Fear Of Missing Something (FOMS) that makes us afraid to commit to anything, lest a better opportunity be on the horizon. And for some, it is simply a lack of familiarity with the protocol.

Whatever the reason, silence is neither a courteous nor a neutral response to an invitation. In fact, one need only hear or read comments by event sponsors, wedding coordinators, and party planners to understand the impressions left by prospective guests who do not reply to invitations; in countless forums, these individuals are referred to as inattentive, lazy, selfish, clueless, disorganized, unable to prioritize or commit, dismissive, and arrogant.

Considering that most people work to avoid such labels, this discussion focuses on how to minimize what Letitia Baldrige, public relations expert and executive manners specialist, referred to as the disease of social selfishness and, in the process, build our reputation through our responses.

* * *

Individuals and organizations that host events assume the responsibility of engaging all participants in a way that ensures their comfort and enjoyment. To succeed in this effort, hosts must know how many individuals plan to attend their meeting, wedding, ceremony, party, or other sponsored event in order to arrange for sufficient space, seating, food or beverages, and other contracted services. Yet, because hosts should neither presume nor infer guest availability—even when those guests are friends or family—an RSVP works to secure this information by asking guests to explicitly confirm or decline their attendance. Therefore, upon receipt of an invitation, we should check our schedule, prioritize any potentially conflicting events, decide where we will be, and pass that information along to the host in a timely manner. The information below explains how to do so in ways that enable others to succeed in their role as host and, simultaneously, enhance our reputation.

• Respond. According to a 1929 addition of Vogue’s Book of Etiquette, “the letters R.S.V.P. are not necessary between good-mannered people. It is understood that one answers a dinner invitation and, in general, any invitations that ‘request the pleasure.’” Yet while the hand-delivered invitations of yore made replies inevitable, invitations that have been delivered through seemingly more efficient and convenient modes—such as the Postal Service, telephone and, now, social media—have struggled to obtain a 100% response rate.

Online invitation and social planning website Elite, for example, boasts a 63% response rate, which is substantially higher than the estimated 50% response rate that paper invitations receive today. But what does it say when 37% or more of a guest list remains silent when a family member, friend, colleague, or acquaintance extends an invitation?

Responding is courtesy in action, so we should work on the premise that a response is necessary for invitations to gatherings in which we know the host. To that end, if the invitation provides an RSVP date, we should give our response by the designated deadline. If the invitation requests a response but does not list a reply date, we should respond within 24–48 hours or, depending on the date and type of event, within a week of receiving the invitation. If an invitation does not specify the need for a reply, we should respond anyway within 48 hours. Such replies confirm receipt of the invitation, convey our enthusiasm for the event, and allow the host to finalize the guest list.

At times, we might receive an invitation for an event we wish to attend but, at present, cannot give a definitive response. In such contexts, we should convey as much to the host to see what might help with scheduling demands, as the following examples demonstrate:

“Thank you for the invitation to join you and Susan at the convention next week. I may be flying out the night before to connect with a client who’s planning to be on the East Coast at that time. I should know either way on the first day of the convention and could let you know then, if joining the two of you would still be possible… .”

“I am very interested in attending the social on September 15, but tentatively have relatives coming into town that weekend. Could I let you know by Wednesday of next week?”

“Thank you for the offer to meet some members of the Bartleby team for a round of golf and then dinner while I’m in town next month. I have appointments scheduled until 4:30pm that day, but I would be happy to meet up with you after your game, if that works for your schedule… .”

As these examples show, we should not expect the host to revise plans to accommodate our particular needs. Moreover, depending on the nature of the event, the uncertainty of our schedule may require us to decline attendance altogether, but explaining these constraints recognizes the organizer’s effort to include us in the event and allows that person to identify how, or if, modifications would be possible.

To be clear, noting that we cannot confirm our schedule until something in the works has been resolved is not the same as delaying a response in case a more interesting event or opportunity emerges. In other words, we should never treat someone’s invitation as a backup in case something else does not come long. If an event is not a priority for us, we should decline the invitation, rather than suggest it’s of interest only as an alternative to staying home. Ultimately, we may wind up doing nothing, but we allow others to make plans with people who would value the opportunity to participate.

In the same way, we should resist conditional responses. For example, “Who else is invited?” suggests we will attend on the condition that certain people will (or won’t) be present. “I’ll come if…” is equally problematic. Time management gurus suggest that people give their time to people and projects they consider important. Therefore, if a host or an event is a priority, we should be willing to attend without qualification.

If we must decline an invitation, it is not necessary to offer an explanation; indicating that we are unable to attend is sufficient. If, however, the host is a friend, we might offer a brief reason for our absence, privately. Gracious hosts, regardless of their connection to the guest, should never probe for a reason, replying simply that the person will be missed.

By explicitly accepting or declining the invitations we receive, we convey our appreciation for being included among the potential guests and allow the host to finalize plans efficiently and accurately.

• Respond in a like manner. In light of the various modes of communication today, people express concerns about the best way to reply to an invitation, perhaps contributing to their silence. In brief, we should respond in the same manner the invitation was delivered.

Formal, written invitations, for example, require a written response. Assisting in this effort, reply cards with self-addressed, stamped envelopes often accompany formal invitations nowadays. In addition to helping recipients verify their attendance, these cards can help hosts be more responsive to their guests. For example, guests may be asked to note dietary restrictions (not preferences) for events that include meals, thereby allowing the host to make arrangements that would better accommodate a guest and, thus, enhance that guest’s experience.

In the absence of such cards, recipients should write a response that mirrors the language used in the invitation itself. Consider, for instance, receiving an invitation with the following announcement:

Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
requests the honor of your presence
at the marriage of their daughter
Isabelle Grace Hooper
to
Michael David Murphy
on Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
The Russian River Resort
129 North Vintner Avenue
Napa, California 

R.S.V.P.

Depending on our availability, our response might be as follows for an acceptance, decline, or split acceptance, respectively:

James Bonney and Elizabeth Grainger
accept with pleasure the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening

* * *

James Bonney and Elizabeth Grainger
regret they are unable to accept the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening

* * *

Elizabeth Grainger
accepts with pleasure the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
James Bonney regrets that he is unable to attend

Responses to informally written invitations, as well as to emailed and verbal invitations, should likewise match the invitation’s method of delivery and level of formality. When informally written invitations provide the option to RSVP by email or phone, invited guests can default to the mode they use most frequently when interacting with the host.

Whatever the method, invited guests should always respond to an invitation. Contrary to what some people suggest, silence is not the same as, “No, I will not be attending.” It simply leaves the host wondering what to do. Similarly, responses must clarify whether the invitation’s recipient will or won’t be attending. Replying “Here’s my RSVP” or “As requested, I’m RSVPing” are not appropriate responses; they merely call attention to the fact that the recipient does not know the meaning of RSVP.

By responding in ways that echo the method and tone of the original invitation, we indicate that we both recognize and acceptance the subsequent, corresponding protocols.

• Resist modifying the invitation. The people hosting or sponsoring an event get to decide who makes the prospective guest list, and who does not. Often guided by the purpose and desired tenor of the event, these decisions may also be dictated by budgets, space constraints, and alliances between and among the various guests who may be in attendance. As such, guests should resist trying to substitute, broaden, or otherwise dictate the participants in someone else’s event.

Some invitations, for example, specify the names of those being invited, say spouses or partners. In such cases, if one of the named parties cannot attend, the other person does not have an open ticket to invite someone of his or her choosing. Because guest lists are often culled several times, members of originally paired guests that suddenly find themselves solo should decide if they are willing to attend the event alone; if not, declining the event would be most congenial as it would open two places the host might be able to fill with those who have been edited from an earlier list.

If the guest would be willing to attend the event alone, the guest should call the host to say the other person named on the invitation is unable to attend. The host may ask if the now-solo guest would like to bring someone else, but that discussion should be initiated by host—not the guest. Guests seldom like this possibility but, unless the invitation says “and guest,” invited guests should resist assuming that substitutions for named invitees are welcome.

Similarly, guests should resist expanding the invitation. Many wedding planners, for example, discuss the challenges of guests who to bring children to adult-only weddings or, worse, simply show up with children in tow. But other events have also struggled with guests who treat the invitations they receive more as guidelines than as host-defined parameters. Those sponsoring or organizing professional conferences, corporate parties, company picnics, anniversary dinners, graduation celebrations, and so on have all experienced invited guests putting them on the spot with requests to add one or more individuals to the list of attendants; others have found strangers simply crashing their events.

Some guests suggest such expansions are no big deal. But aside from additional expense that may arise from invitees commandeering the guest list, other factors may come into play. For example, hosts often finalize guest list with a sensitivity to the relationships between and among those in attendance; last-minute or unannounced alterations to the list, therefore, can unintentionally place acrimonious individuals together in ways the host sought to avoid.

Of course there may be times a host is willing to alter the guest list. For example, if a guest were to respond that she would love to attend but has a cousin coming into town during the event, the host might be willing to accommodate the out-of-town visitor, depending on the nature of the gathering. Similarly, if it’s a casual, pay-your-own event at a local restaurant or other public venue, it may be possible to ask if bringing a friend would be possible. Guests, however, should neither assume nor expect hosts to agree to these alternations, nor should guests embarrass others by putting the host—or even the uninvited guest—on the spot as they try to work out the details at the event itself.

By respecting that it’s the host’s decision to open, and close, invitations, we allow hosts to maintain control over their vision of the event.

• Follow through. Having responded to an invitation, our final obligation is to follow through. In other words, we must show up if we said we were going to attend, and stay away if we declined the invitation. To do otherwise, especially without notice, introduces potentially uncomfortable interactions that may embarrass the host, or even ourselves.

Certainly emergencies rise, which may prohibit us from keeping our commitment to appear, yet being a no-show is worse than telling the host that something has come up—especially if we may have a visible role in the event. Thus, if we find ourselves unable to attend, we should notify the host or event coordinator as soon as possible to streamline any last minute changes.

If we find ourselves in such a situation 24–48 hours before the event, we should call the host and, perhaps, notify the restaurant or reception hall to ensure the message is received. If an emergency happens hours before the event, we should call the host (and maybe text, too, in order to cover all bases) to say we are no longer able to attend but that we will follow up the next day. At this time, we should resist going into detail about the reason, since the host may be starting to welcome guests or otherwise finalizing details for the event; however, we should follow up with the host the day after the event to explain briefly the emergency and apologize again for the last-minute cancellation.

On the flip side, if we have declined the invitation because of something that has since fallen through, we may be able to call the host and, explaining the change in plans, ask whether it might be possible to turn our regrets into an acceptance. The nature of the event, the amount of notice we can offer the host, the reason we declined the invitation in the first place, and our history in accepting or declining invitations can all affect whether the host would be able or willing to make accommodations; therefore, in making such calls, we should not assume or, worse, push hosts to alter their present agenda in order to accommodate our newly revised schedule, for they may have made alternative plans.

* * *

Claiming we’ve become a culture that’s not big on etiquette, people criticize hosts trying to finalize their guest lists as uptight, overly pushy, or insecure. Yet, as many retort, it only takes hosting a formal event once to become more appreciative of and responsive to an RSVP on invitations. But people should not have to sponsor an event to recognize that successful gatherings require respectful exchanges between and among all participants–and some of those exchanges occur before the event itself. Therefore, by replying to invitations in a timely manner and by following through on what we say we will do, we can help others perform their roles and succeed in the venues of their choosing while, indirectly, enhancing our reputation for being respectful of and responsive to others.

Working toward Areté…
What are your thoughts on the RSVP, either as a guest or as a host? Share your thoughts and experiences in the space below.

Share Button

Connection, Communication, and Intimacy Among Strangers

Posted on by
2

Connection Communication and Intimacy Among Strangers

By Caroline M. Cole

A yeshiva student with his hand on the wrist of a fish market worker, who’s touching the student’s shoulder. A young African-American male wearing a yellow bandana and baggy clothes clutching a Caucasian bride. A towering male wearing a red hoodie, grey sweat pants, and knit cap kneeling to be at eye-level with an elderly woman whose hands he’s grasping. A Latino male carrying a Caucasian girl with long, blond hair. A young woman wearing shorts, a t-shirt, and gladiator sandals leaning against a man in a business suit carrying a briefcase. An elderly Caucasian man with his hand on that of a younger Indian woman, who’s wrapping her arm around his shoulder as they sit side-by-side at a diner. A bearded male wearing combat boots, cargo shorts, and a leather chest harness wrapping his arms around the waist of an older, clean-shaven man in grey pants and a yellow dress shirt. A Caucasian teen wearing a red polo, khaki shorts, and docksiders standing behind a woman in a purple sari, holding her shoulders. A woman in jeans kneeling beside a Bengali woman sitting on a chair, their heads leaning against each other’s. An African-American youth resting his hand on the right shoulder of an older Caucasian male wearing a cowboy hat.

Unusual combinations of people on streets across America, they are some of the images captured by New York photographer Richard Renaldi for his series “Touching Strangers.”

Emerging from an earlier project in which Renaldi photographed individuals in bus depots, the images in this series depict two or more total strangers that Renaldi would ask to physically interact with each other in some manner for a photograph he would take with an 8″ x 10″ view camera. In doing so, Renaldi sought to capture an intimate yet ephemeral moment—one that existed only for the camera—in an effort to break down ethnic, religious, socioeconomic, and age barriers.

In various interviews, Renaldi discusses the difficulties involved in his “Touching Strangers” series. Aside from the work he must do as a photographer to capture a moment in an engaging manner, he mentions the negotiation that’s involved in getting two or more unacquainted individuals to agree to be photographed together. Then, he adds, there’s the challenge of getting those individuals to “push past comfort levels into a physical intimacy normally reserved for loved ones or friends,” if only for a moment.

Unsure of what he was after when he began the series, Renaldi notes that he encouraged the “least amount of touching possible” at first but, over the years, has become more aggressive in encouraging interactions. The result: a visual commentary on the ways people connect to and communicate with strangers. Some photographs, for example, reveal a noticeable hesitation between or among participants, while others depict an easiness shared by friends, lovers, or family members.

Individually and collectively, Renaldi’s photographs remind us that we move through a world of diverse individuals who hold the potential to touch our lives, yet routines, assumptions, and attitudes often make us reticent if not resistant to interacting with people beyond our chosen or preferred circles. Consequently, when strangers do appear in a frame with us, we may work to crop them from the picture or simply register them as part of the scenery—people who dot the landscapes through which we travel, but who are negligible on our journey.

They are the people distributing fliers announcing a lunch special, personal service, or theatrical event; they are the people asking for spare change on a corner, peddling candy on a subway line, or soliciting signatures for the latest cause; they are the people waiting next to us at the bus stop, at a taxi stand, at the ATM, or in line at the coffee shop; they are the people clearing our tables, collecting our tolls; and bagging our groceries; they are the people washing widows; watering lawns, picking up trash, and pushing carts overwhelmed with cans and bottles meant for recycling.

They are the people moving alongside us, passing us or, at times, hindering us on our way to be with people we really want to see. And while these individuals may bump into us by accident and jar us from our thoughts, by and large they are, and remain, inconsequential.

Perhaps, as Renaldi found in the people he asked to participate in this series or as implied by the comments people have left on various websites promoting Renaldi’s exhibit, we, too, find it difficult, undesirable, or even creepy to “touch” strangers; after all, it can be easier to redirect our lens to other subject matter or put the camera away all together than to focus on or engage with people we might not choose to see in our viewfinder or have in our pictures—especially if doing so captures our own awkwardness or uneasiness.

To be fair, there are times we must interact with strangers, and we may even be skilled in doing so. For example, we know how to ask the server for our check and the valet for our car; we know how to secure a seat on an overbooked flight; we know how to redress an overcharge on a credit card statement; we know how to get into a crowded club; we know how to network and interview; we know how to solicit customers and how to pitch our products and services to new clients. In brief, we know how to connect and how to communicate when we feel it matters.

People should always matter, but sometimes our interactions or the lack thereof suggest that’s not the case. Granted, we are busy. Our days are packed with commitments that leave little time even for the people who matter most to us. But is does not take much to connect with the people who enter the frames of our lives with a genuine, albeit brief communication act. It does not, for instance, take much time to say “good morning,” or “thank you,” or “excuse me,” or “I’m sorry, not today.” It does not take much time to make eye contact, or to nod in recognition, or to smile. And it does not take much time to treat those who travel along the same road with civility, compassion, or respect.

American poet Paul Eldridge wrote in a 1948 article entitled “Lanterns in the Night” that our character is most evident in the ways we treat “those who are not in a position either to retaliate or reciprocate.” Strangers often fall into this category.

We might not aspire to increase the numbers in our network by interacting with strangers, but we should recognize that each encounter—even a transient one—provides an opportunity to enhance our communication. By opening ourselves to the possibilities within these moments, we might discover that the strangers we come upon throughout the day are actually touching our lives by showing us how to have better connection, communication, and intimacy with the people we seek out in our journey.

Working toward Areté…
This week, engage with a stranger in a way that pushes you beyond the conventional and the comfortable, or share your thoughts for ways to use communication to connect with a stranger who can neither retaliate nor reciprocate.

Share Button

What Racking Wine Can Teach Us About Communication

Posted on by
2

By Caroline M. Cole

Among the steps in making wine, fining or “racking” is one of the most important. Known as soutirage (in France), Abstich (in Germany), travaso (in Italy), racking is the process of separating the juices from the sediment that accumulates on the bottom of the vessel during the various stages of a wine’s production.What Racking Wine Can Teach Us

Using a flexible plastic hose attached to a racking cane, winemakers employ gravity to extract the wine from one barrel, tank, or carboy into a second, clean container, siphoning the liquid away from the “lees,” or sediment comprised of residual yeast that has helped in the grapes’ fermentation and other particles that have developed as the wine undergoes malolactic conversion (the production and releasing of carbon dioxide). Each racking increasingly filters and refines the liquid, helping the wine develop greater clarity; softer tannins; deeper, richer flavors, textures, and colors; more aroma; and greater sophistication and elegance.

Clarification and stabilization are signs that the winemaking process is complete and that the wine is ready for bottling but, during the various rackings, the wine is drinkable. Certainly it would be unwise to actually bottle the wine prior to clarification, for if it’s still undergoing fermentation, the wine would prematurely brown and spoil. Nonetheless, as the acidity mellows; the fruit, alcohol, acid, and tannins meld; and the aromatics round out, the wine itself becomes increasingly recognizable as a finished, refined product. And it’s from this process that we can learn much about our development as communicators.

The following discussion highlights some of the lessons that racking wine offers individuals who are interested in improving their oral and written communication.

• Know that sludge is inevitable. In order to extract the juices from the grape, fermentation is necessary to convert the sugars in the grapes to alcohol. Yeast is the catalyst for this process. Yet by introducing microscopic fungi to help in this conversion, yeast creates lees. The inevitable byproduct of an essential ingredient for vinication, lees cloud and obscure the early versions of a product vintners hope to share with others.

Sludge is likewise inevitable in the initial drafts of a speech or text as people struggle to identify their message and the clearest way to present it to others. Therefore, like wine, communication must be refined. Rehearsals may provide fining opportunities for oral communication, allowing presenters to filter and modify elements of their speech before the final delivery. In written communication, revising is the equivalent of racking, as each draft aims to eliminate the dregs while retaining the most important, flavorful juices of the intended message.

By understanding that refinement is a vital component of the communication process, we can resist assuming that the initial or early versions of any given presentation or written document is inherently sufficient for public consumption.

• Learn when to address the sediment. Throughout the winemaking process, the juice itself is, in essence, “wine,” albeit murky. Therefore, the winemaker must learn when and how to intervene if the juices are to become a product worthy of distributing and consuming.

Vintners will have different theories, strategies, and advice about when to rack, depending on the quality of the grapes at harvest, the varietals, the desired product, and so on. Yet regardless of their system, winemakers recognize that, although inevitable, sediment must be removed before the wine’s final release if others are to appreciate the results.

Similarly, ideas, conversations, and written documents are, at their core, “communication.” Even so, speakers and writers must know when to intervene, as well as how to employ various rhetorical strategies, so as to separate the essence of their message from elements that may be obscuring it for the target audience.

• Be purposeful and methodical in the fining process. Racking wine 2–4 times before bottling, winemakers monitor the yeast that remains after each fining to ensure the yeast cells do not break down and begin rotting, putting the wine at risk. To help in this monitoring, some vintners keep detailed records of climate variations, additives, pH levels, turbidity measures, sediment levels, and other oenological components to identify optimal racking windows; others are less formal, racking every 45–60 days. Whatever their system, winemakers must be mindful of the wine’s development to help it move through each stage efficiently.

Communication requires similar attention if speakers and writers are to gain clarity and elegance; unfortunately, even those who recognize the value of ongoing improvement struggle with broad, vaguely worded goals like, “become a better communicator.” Recognizing that is impossible to address or “fix” everything at once, we might identify concerns we and others have about our speaking and writing, prioritize our findings, and then develop a system for attending to each concern in the most strategic manner.

One such system appears in Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, where the author, Ann Lamott, recalls the advice her father gave when her 10-year old brother found himself “immobilized by the hugeness” of trying to write a report on birds: “bird by bird, buddy. Just take it bird by bird.”

Because small, purposeful, and methodical steps can make the process of improvement easier, we, too, might develop a system that allows us to engage with manageable, nugget-sized tasks; see and track the progress; and apply lessons learned even as we look for ways to continue improvement. For example, we could gather hard copies of representative letters, memos, emails, and other documents that we write—using blind copies to retain confidentiality. Then, each week, we might select one document (or a portion of the document) and, using the benefit of hindsight for how the document worked, spend 5–10 minutes identifying and revising things that could be stronger, tighter, clearer the next time around to enhance the results. Perhaps there’s a better way to introduce or transition to a topic in a document, or maybe there’s a more concise way to describe something. Maybe there’s a more logical or efficient way to sequence or otherwise organize information. Maybe there are places to direct readers for supplementary resources.

By examining, testing, and honing the approaches we use to convey messages in the calmer moments, we can ensure more effective rhetorical choices when generating comparable information under pressure.

• Be consistent. Like winemakers who must remain attentive to the progress of their wines, making adjustments as necessary, we must remain cognizant of and responsive to the elements that could affect the target outcomes of our oral and written messages. After starting a sample document file, for example, we might commit to spending 5–10 minutes each week to improving one document in the file. Or, conversely, we could focus on “fixing” one or two things in a document, no matter how it takes to revise it. Whatever the method or practice, we should engage in it regularly so as to create a habit that moves us continually toward improvement even when we may not feel inspired to develop our skills.

Explaining impediments to writing improvement, science-fiction author Octavia Butler writes in “Furor Scribindi” to “forget inspiration. Habit is more dependable. Habit will sustain you whether you are inspired or not. Habit will help you finish and polish your [writing]. Inspiration won’t. Habit is persistence in practice.” Therefore, even when we think a document is “fine” and even when messages generate the desired results, we should get in the habit of asking where and how the document might be even stronger the next time around. Or, we might consider why the document succeed in light of its purpose, audience, and context in order to identify what changes might be necessary for a similar message to work in a different forum.

By building in opportunities to conscientiously improve our speaking and writing strategies, we can become more purposeful and, ideally, more successful in our communication.

• Be patient. It can take over a year to make one batch of wine, and most of that time is waiting: Waiting for grapes to be harvested, waiting for the must to meet designated Brix levels before pressing, waiting for juices to ferment, waiting for wine to “oak” between rackings, waiting for wine to clarify and stabilize for bottling, waiting for the wine to recover from “bottle shock” and, finally, waiting for the wine to age within the bottle for optimal flavor. Making the wait harder are the moments when a particular process may seem to be over but, upon closer examination, vintners discover more to do. Each racking, for example, makes the wine noticeably cleaner but—especially in the earlier stages—the more the wine sits, the more obvious remaining impurities become.

Monitoring, testing, intervening as necessary and, above all, patience are necessary to generate an extraordinary wine. With each season, winemakers become more knowledgeable in their craft and, hence, more proficient in their choices; however, each harvest also brings different combinations of variables, thereby introducing challenges that may require vintners to modify their approach, even modestly. As such, developing a mastery in winemaking is gradual, and the same can be said of mastering communication.

Sometimes we must be actively engaged in the process. At other times, we must wait and see if our presentations or written documents are moving us closer to the results we want. Learning to balance these roles takes time. Equally challenging is the fact that, once we become proficient in a particular genre or forum, we may find that different combinations of variables introduce new obstacles. Adopting a new convention, addressing an unfamiliar audience, or working in an unknown context, among other changes, can make us to feel like a novice once again. The secret is remembering that, like making wine, developing communication skills takes practice and time.

Seeing grapes in the early stages of “punch down”—when skins, seeds, stems, and other elements from the vineyard are muddled in an effort to extract the juices—people often express amazement at the ways such muck ultimately results in some of the finest wines in the world. The same is true of the ways we speak and write. At times, our communication style may seem sloppy and unrefined, yet by purposefully and consistently racking off the sludge, we become more masterful at developing clearer, stable products that are not only palatable, but respected by some of the toughest critics.

Working toward Areté…
Start a sample letter/memo/document file and, then, commit to spending 5–10 minutes each week to finding one or two ways you could improve a document. Or, share your own experiences and observations about refining your communication abilities in purposeful, effective ways in the space below.

Share Button

Letter Format Find and Fix Exercise, Part II

Posted on by
Reply

By Caroline M. Cole

In “Letter Format Find and Fix, Part I,” readers had the opportunity to identify format and layout changes they might make to a sample letter to improve its appearance. This discussion examines how traditional American business letter conventions would enhance that document’s aesthetics. (Readers who did not see the earlier post can still download and complete the original exercise prior to reading this discussion of possible changes.)tools2

To reference elements and areas in the original sample letter that this discussion calls out for revision, you can download an annotated copy of last week’s letter; the numbers in the annotated version correspond to comments below.

1. Date abbreviations. A document’s date is often among of the least important information on the page, yet dates formatted with Arabic numbers and virgules (for example, 7/21/2013) attract more attention than otherwise, simply because numbers, punctuation, and symbols stand out from the Roman alphabet that dominates a letter written in English. Even abbreviating months (for example, Dec. 13, ‘13; Dec. 13, 2013) introduces formatting variations that can be distracting.

Dates should include the month, day, and year, but to minimize the attention they receive, you should write dates out in full (for example, July 21, 2013; December 13, 2013) both in the document’s date line and within the document itself.

2. State abbreviation in mailing address. Although the United States Postal Service (USPS) preferred that mail include the full name of U.S. states and its territories to minimize confusion, in 1963, the USPS adopted the use of two capital letters without punctuation as the official postal code abbreviation to accommodate the maximum 23-character line of most addressing systems in use at the time. By using the abbreviations recognized by the USPS, you can simplify inside address details, demonstrate a familiarity with format conventions, and ensure more accurate delivery of your letters.

3. Subject lines in letters. Subject lines are conventional in memos, as well as email messages that mimic the memo format, but they are unnecessary in letters. The subject line’s information would be more strategic as part of the opening paragraph, which serves to identify the overall purpose of the document; this shift would help declutter the inside address area and enhance the visual presentation. If the document’s subject is potentially negative, moving subject line information to the opening paragraph likewise contextualizes the topic in a way that may not be possible in a stand-alone subject line floating above the salutation.

4. Inside address/salutation consistency. Discussions often challenge the use of “Dear Sir” in a salutation as a potentially sexist reference when writing to someone whose sex is unknown. Because the letter is addressed to a male reader, Peter Karalis, the salutation “Dear Sir” does not violate trends in gender neutral-language; it does, however, introduce an inconsistency between the inside address and salutation references.

If the inside address were to include a courtesy or professional title (for example, Mr. Peter Karalis or Dr. Peter Karalis), the appropriate corresponding salutation would be “Dear Mr. Karalis:” or “Dear Dr. Karalis:” respectively, but since the inside address contains no title, the salutation should read “Dear Peter Karalis:” for consistent reference to the target audience.

5. Opening paragraph and list introductions. Identifying the purpose of the entire document, the opening paragraph cannot simultaneously function as a “lead-in” to the list; that is, a sentence or phrase introducing the following entries. Even if it were only a sentence, your opening paragraph should be distinct from internal paragraph content.

6. Format redundancies. Conventionally, italics is a published manuscript’s way to denote emphasis. Yet because italics was not always available in the early stages of manuscript preparation, writers needed to help typesetters know what information to configure as italics using the tools they had—the most common of which was the typewriter.

Because early typewriters used a moving cartridge and stationary paper roller, the only way writers could indicate which text to italicize in the final printing was by underlining; writers would type a line, move the cartridge backwards, and then use the underscore key to mark book and newspaper titles, emphasize words, and so on.

In the early 1960s, IBM introduced its Selectric, a typewriter with interchangeable “typeballs,” giving writers the option to type in various fonts—including italics—simply by changing the font element, thereby eliminating the need for writers who had an italics typeball to underline. Today, computers make italics available to the masses, allowing everyone to create typeset-equivalent manuscripts, making it unnecessary to underline information to convey emphasis.

If, however, you prefer underlining, you should avoid applying format choices that duplicate the effect. In other words, underline or italicize, but resist applying both format options simultaneously.

7. List entries. Lists, by definition, require at least two entries, with a maximum of five elements so that a string of decontextualized details do not lose the impact writers aim to achieve by calling out information in the first place. Because this sample letter’s first list has a single entry, it is possible to delete the bullet all together and move the information to the end of the previous paragraph, immediately following the colon.

8. Ordinals in dates. When writing dates, it’s unnecessary to represent the day as an ordinal; that is, a number representing rank, such as first, second, third… or 1st, 2nd, 3rd… . After all, people reading dates tend to use ordinals for the day of the month, regardless of whether it is spelled out (“September 15, 2013” is pronounced “September fifteenth 2013”). By removing the ordinal markers, your date references are more concise and, without the superscript references, visually cleaner.

9. Paragraph length. The longer the paragraph the more readers have to wade through information to find salient points; on the flip side, multiple short paragraphs can suggest sporadic, disparate ideas. A rule of thumb, paragraphs that run 5–8 lines are most reader-friendly. Of course there are always exceptions, especially in light of the fact that varying paragraph length can increase visual interest. Even so, by ensuring that paragraphs are visually inviting, you can increase the likelihood of readers engaging with all of your ideas.

10. Exclamation points. Exclamation points convey strong emotions—something that industry documents work to minimize given the stakes that may be involved. Yet even in cases that might justify an emotive statement, two exclamation points can suggest hyperbole and indicate that the writer must rely on superficial means to compensate for the absence of a formal, audience-appropriate vocabulary.

11. Headers. Headers can create visual interest and simultaneously offer signposts for readers to move quickly through a document, providing readers know what the header introduces. In this sample letter, the header “floats” between two paragraphs, and while readers might assume that headers always introduce the discussion that follow, it’s possible that the information actually links to the previous section, but was misformatted. For clarification, place your headers on the line directly above the information it introduces.

12. Lead-in determining list markers. Elements within a list can use bullets or numbers, depending on the context. Bulleted elements are not obligated to follow to any particular order, though a writer might arrange listed items in purposeful, strategic ways (for example, weakest idea to strongest idea; strongest ideas at the beginning and end of the list, and weaker ideas in the middle). In contrast, numbering entries suggest either quantity, sequence, or rank ordering.

Because this sample letter’s lead-in uses of the phrase “the following three items,” readers expect a numerical list. By making sure your list element markers correspond with any lead-in references, you demonstrate an attention to detail.

13. Bullet options. When bullets, rather than numbers, are most appropriate for listed elements, writers should be attentive to the bullets or symbols they use, for images can suggest messages the writer does not intend. Checkmarks, for example, can imply a “To-do” list, while unfilled circles or boxes can bring to mind Scantron tests or surveys. Smiley faces, apples, hearts, lightening bolts, chunky arrows, pointing fingers (like the pictogram in this sample letter’s second list), and other whimsical images can suggest “unprofessional.”

Some people use asterisks for bullets, but doing so can introduce problems. Although readily available on most keyboards, asterisks are often used in footnote references, so using them as bullets can confuse some readers upon first glance. The same holds for hyphens and dashes, which serve grammatical purposes.

Solid-filled circles are the most conventional bullets. For variation, however, you could use solid-filled squares or even diamonds, keeping in mind that the more your choices deviate from the familiar, the more they will stand out and, possibly, redirect an audience’s attention.

14. Hanging indents. To help readers quickly identify the start of each entry in the list, bullets should adopt a “hanging indent” format, whereby the first line of the entry starts ¼”– ½” off the main margin, and subsequent lines are indented to align with the first letter of the entry. In this sample letter, the list uses a reverse indent, requiring readers to spend more time than necessary hunting for the first word of each entry. By hanging the bullets in your lists, you help readers quickly find and review each point.

15. Closing paragraphs and list close-outs. Similar to item 5, which notes that a document’s opening paragraphs must be distinct from a bulleted list’s lead-ins, the document’s closing paragraph must be separate from a bulleted list’s closeout. This sample letter’s formatting suggest that the document ends abruptly after the last paragraph of the main text, which happens to include a list. By distinguishing a bullet’s closeout from the last paragraph of the larger document, you can bring appropriate closure to each segment of your message.

16. Information emphasis. As explained in item 6, bolding and underlining information simultaneously is redundant, but the additional format element—all capital letters—screams at the reader. Adding to this concern is the nature of the information being yelled: a deadline. Considering that readers often view deadlines in an unfavorable light, calling attention to a deadline with various format choices will most likely attract attention to potentially off-putting information before the reader understands the larger context. Here, then, is one example of how formatting can distract and disrupt the order in which a reader receives and, therefore, responds to information.

By considering which details your format choices may be emphasizing, you can make sure it’s information you want readers to notice first.

17. Block formatting. Business letters may adopt one of several formatting styles, including the full-block letter format, modified-block format, and semi-block format. Each style comes with its own conventions for content, alignment, and element placement. Therefore, mixing styles can suggest the writer is unfamiliar with format protocols—a message that can have unintended consequences among those who do know the conventions.

This sample letter begins as a full-block format, whereby all of the paragraphs, as well as the complimentary close and signature block, are aligned to the far left margin. By indenting the signature block, the sample letter suddenly shifts to a modified block format, which indents the letter’s dateline, complementary close, and signature block. Regardless of whether you prefer one format or the other, you should apply the particular format conventions throughout the document.

18. Signature. Writers should confirm content of the letter and use a signature to verify their approval of the information going out under their name. By not signing the letter, writers miss the opportunity to review a document for which they might be held liable. In addition, omitting a signature can suggests the writer is inattentive to details. By developing the habit of signing your documents, you can maintain greater control over the information that’s linked to you.

19. Reference initial order. The initials, enclosure notifications, and copy references at the bottom of letters and memos, when appropriate, should appear in the following order: identification initials (the initials of the person typing the document, sometimes appearing after the initials of the writer); enclosure notification information, preferably written out as “enclosure” or “enclosures,” but sometimes abbreviated to accommodate the names of each enclosure; carbon copy or, nowadays, courtesy copy references; blind carbon copy or blind courtesy copy reference information, if any; and, finally, post scripts. In light of this information’s sequence, the reference initial details in the sample letter are in inverse order.

20. Blind copy reference. Blind copies are documents sent to an individual without the primary audience’s knowledge. In this sample letter, Blaine Chandler is receiving a copy of the correspondence, presumably without Peter Karali’s awareness. The “bcc:” reference lets Chandler know to keep the letter’s contents confidential.

This reference was flagged as a potential concern, depending on the recipient of this copy of the letter. If Blaine Chandler is the recipient of this letter, the “bcc:” reference is appropriate. If, however, this copy is intended for Peter Karali, the writer should remove references to the blind copy in circulation.

As noted in the instructions for this exercise, there were at least 10 format-related items that could be enhanced simply by applying traditional letter format conventions. In addition to the 20 items explained above, we can call out the fact that some readers might react to a smaller-than-conventional type size (the sample letter uses 9 point Times New Roman), which requires readers to strain their eyes more than necessary. By using reader-friendly typefaces and type size, you can enhance the reception your document receives.

Another concerns is the fact that there are two bulleted lists on a single page. Although the first bullet isn’t a list per se, writers should resist including more than one list on any given page, lest readers find themselves bouncing between the lists to see where to focus first. (Contrary to what people may think, readers do not always read documents in a linear, top-to-bottom manner.) By minimizing opportunities for readers to bounce around the page, you can promote a more sustained engagement with your document’s content.

* * *

In reviewing this list of elements to revise, you may find yourself agreeing or disagreeing with the explanations grounded in American business letter format conventions. In comparing these elements against your own list, you might also notice different or additional concerns. Regardless of the items you called out, and those you didn’t, ideally you are more cognizant of the ways format can affect how others read and interpret messages.

Reader-oriented content should be able to overcome even the most unflattering first impression, yet understanding where and how a document’s appearance can disrupt the reception of a message (or even ourselves) can help us be more strategic in the format and layout choices we make, ensuring that our document’s appearance contributes to, rather than detracts from, the exchange.

Working toward Areté…
What were your experiences in going through this exercise, or how does a document’s appearance affect the way you receive information? Share your thoughts in the space below.

Share Button

Letter Format Find and Fix Exercise, Part I

Posted on by
2

By Caroline M. Cole

Though less important than the actual message, a document’s format (the way text is typeset) and layout (the way text is arranged on a page) contributes to the reader’s impression and, hence, reception of the information. Some documents, for example, are visually appealing, catching our attention and inviting us to engage with materials we might otherwise dismiss. Other documents employ format and layout in ways that keep them in the background, barely noticeable, attracting attention for neither good nor ill. Then there are materials that look so cluttered, distracting, or discombobulating that we actually struggle to find or focus on what the message itself is trying to say.tool belt

To demonstrate the impact that format and layout choices can have on people seeing a document for the first time, this discussion invites readers to identify elements that work for and against their aesthetic sensibilities. As a starting point, readers will use a letter formatted in lorum ipsum—a placeholder text that graphic designers use to test layout and other visual presentation elements

After downloading the sample letter and accompanying assessment page, record your initial impressions. As you identify elements that attract your attention, for better or worse, consider what changes you would suggest to enhance the document’s appearance, as well as the basis upon which you would make those suggestions.

There is no right or wrong in the approach to this exercise. It simply aims to highlight seemingly superficial elements that can impact the ways an audience “sees” information, sensitizing us to format and layout decisions we can use in our own messages to enhance their reception.

Next week’s discussion will examine possible revisions to this sample letter.

Working toward Areté…
Download the “Letter Format Find and Fix Exercise” .pdf and see what you would revise for greatest visual impact. Then, check back next week for a discussion of enhancements according to traditional letter format conventions.

Share Button

How to Stand Out Even Among the Best and Brightest

Posted on by
Reply

By Caroline M. Cole

You’ve made it. Maybe you were accepted into your top-tier school, possibly you just landed your dream position, perhaps you survived the company’s latest reorganization, or maybe you were recently promoted. Basking in the moment, you feel excited, and relieved.Peacock

In retrospect, the path to this point was clear. Not necessarily easy, mind you, but the choices leading to this moment—at least in hindsight—seem more obvious today than they did when you stood on the precipice of each decision: you enrolled in the right institutions, programs, and courses; you joined the right groups; you aligned yourself with the right people; you took on or declined the right projects; you worked hard; you made sacrifices; and today you’re finding that all of these efforts have paid off. You’ve bested others and made it to the next level. But as you look around, taking in and enjoying the scenery of your new situation, you begin to notice those who likewise have succeeded in making it to this environment.

They are the crème de la crème, the ones who have proven themselves worthy in any number of forums against any number of challenges and opponents. Yet no matter how proud you may feel to be alongside them in this elite cohort, you begin to notice the ways they (and now you) are sussing out one other, for in addition to being your newest classmates, peers, or colleagues, they are now the latest competition.

Like the “tributes” in Suzanne Collin’s science fiction novel The Hunger Games, many people in such circumstances will begin to strategize on how to survive what they believe is a high-stakes, zero-sum game in a landscape of increasingly skilled competitors. The question, then, becomes “How can someone stand out among the best and the brightest?”

To answer this question, we might consider the ways children used to be divvied up into teams on playgrounds and in gym classes across the country. Before the self-esteem movement, children engaging in team-oriented sports would select captains, who alternated in selecting individual players to serve on their respective teams. Those deemed the stronger players were often picked first, while weaker players were generally picked last or, in some cases, assigned to a team with an acquiescent “you can have them.”

For good or ill, it was a system that validated and rewarded prowess on the field. Overall dominance in the particular sport usually trumped everything. Players who were capable of doing several things well—someone, say, with the ability to hit, run, catch, and throw in a game of softball—were usually selected regardless of their likability. Thereafter came players who might have demonstrated skill in a particular area; for instance, someone who was able to pitch could fill a valuable role in light of others being added to the team roster.

Friendship or other alliance may have played a part, usually when there were two comparable players vying to be chosen next, but such loyalty was often secondary, especially in contexts where the stakes of a game’s outcome were high. After all, captains were responsible for selecting people who were considered competent and capable of victory. Consequently, captains sought players who would step up, do their part (and whatever else was necessary), and help win the game; having team members who actually liked each other was merely a bonus.

Having been disparaged by parents, teachers, and playground monitors alike, this system is less common nowadays in education, but traces of it remain in industry—especially in forums that delineate winners and losers by the types of projects, positions, bonuses, and other incentives employees receive. Therefore, we might consider the lessons that emerge from this system of picking individuals for a winning team.

The most obvious lesson may be for people to be the best at what they do, ensuring they can, as the motto for the television show Survivor advocates, “outwit, outplay and outlast” the others. People should work to excel in their respective forums, especially considering that contexts which encourage friendly competition can generate mutually rewarding experiences for all participants; novice performers can learn and strengthen fundamentals, while advanced performers gain opportunities to hone their abilities.

Even so, forums that encourage relentless “king-of-the-hill” competitions—whereby firmly entrenched pecking orders can be disrupted only by toppling or even ousting those on the summit—can generate problems. For example, as employees become increasingly suspicious of others’ actions and motives, these forums can breed cultures of distrust and isolation. These environments also encourage employees to become more proficient at gaming systems for personal advantage, rather than company benefit. Continually rewarding “alpha” personalities likewise validates some behaviors that may be counter-productive in organizations, particularly if those organizations begin losing so-called “beta” personalities in the process.

In light of these advantages and disadvantages, we might turn our attention to another, more compelling lesson that emerges from earlier systems of choosing up sides: Be of value to others.

Whether they are captains choosing up sides on a playground, employers looking to hire staff members, a President looking to appoint cabinet members, or even world leaders on the verge of war, people want to surround themselves with those they think will help them succeed. And while competence is often a precursor to being able to help others accomplish their goals, competence alone is insufficient if people are unwilling to apply their talents in service of others.

Consider, for example, the work of Adam Grant, professor of management at Wharton. Though many in the field examine ways to become more productive, more efficient, and more financially stable, Grant advocates prosocial motivation; that is, finding ways to clear paths and help others move forward as the way to succeed and excel in our own work.

Classifying people as givers, takers, and matchers, Grant uses a range of studies to show how “givers” bestow more favors. Assuming those favors align with their own values, givers contribute to others’ well-being and success by solving problems, assisting with tasks, volunteering to do less popular or less glamorous work, sharing information, mentoring, offering to make connections, and so on—without expecting anything in return.

In addition to finding that givers demonstrate the highest levels of productivity with fewer mistakes, Grant shows how givers who can recognize “takers” (those who are willing to take advantage of others’ generosity) and adjust their assistance to become more like that of “matchers” (those who adopt a more quid pro quo approach in granting favors) are able to avoid burn out and achieve higher levels of success themselves. The reasons have to do with a giver’s ability to generate deeper relationships, broader networks, greater loyalty and trust, and more opportunities—elements that are the foundation of personal and professional advancement.

Recognizing the existence and components of zero-sum games that motivate numerous forums in which we operate, we can shift the variables in play by actively helping others achieve their goals even as we advance our own principles, values, and ideals. To guide this effort, we might ask the following questions in the professional and personal contexts in which we move:

• How can I contribute? Companies are finding that employees increasingly view their job as a series of unique, discrete responsibilities. Focused on completing work as quickly as possible, employees seek the fastest way to finish each task until they have finished all of the work they were assigned to complete. Viewing their work as “done,” these employees may remain unwilling or simply oblivious to ask what else needs attention. Unfortunately, most organizations have more needs and demands than people to meet them.

In The Charge, Brendon Burchard explains that, at our core, we are driven to contribute and, in doing so, we find ways to matter. Therefore, by looking around to identify places we could apply our talents, volunteer our time, offer our assistance, and be of use, we begin to identify ways we can be of service and value to others. As importantly, by making the contributions that only we can make, we enhance the meaning and purpose of our own lives.

• How can I approach this task in ways that would benefit others? Employees who aim to complete tasks as quickly as possible may be less attentive to how or if their results ultimately serve others, for such assessments generally demand more time. If, however, we were to consider how our contributions to a particular project, service, report, presentation, e-mail, conversation, and so on could help others move closer to achieving their goals or succeed, we can find a greater value in and inspiration for the work that we do.

• Is there anything else I can do to help? Answering the previous questions in a service-oriented manner would typically generate results that meet or exceed “sufficient.” Yet asking if there is anything more we could do reinforces our support of and commitment to one another, thereby promoting a more congenial climate for all participants.

These questions might prompt the skeptic within us to be cautious lest we become one of the givers whom Grant says takers are willing to exploit. Grant recognizes such dilemmas and even describes situations when people (knowingly or otherwise) seem to take advantage of his generosity; nevertheless, he argues that efficient, pro-social giving reaps professional benefits, for generosity begets generosity—and often in unexpected and significant ways.

By using our unique talents to help others succeed, we contribute to a culture that promotes greater success for all of its members. Along the way, we may even discover that it is this behavior that distinguishes us from those who adopt conventional dog-eat-dog models, for when people look to fill their team rosters, more often than not they will want individuals who are not only competent, but those who are likewise able to encourage productivity, innovation, and generosity in others. Helping others thus becomes one of the best ways to stand out.

Working toward Areté…
Commit to doing something that brings value to someone else today. What will it be? Record your thoughts in the space below.

Share Button

Document—and Celebrate—Your Contributions in the Sweet Spot

Posted on by
3

By Caroline M. Cole

At this time of year, many of you may be embarking on a new professional adventure in the form of a full-time job, an internship, or a volunteer opportunity. Or, perhaps, you’re gearing up to change your journey, setting your sights on a different, or better position. Whether it’s a short- or long-term endeavor, it is vital to take a moment each week (or more often) to reflect upon, record, and celebrate the contributions you’re making. Here’s why…The Sweet Spot

New opportunities offer infinite possibilities, and the enthusiasm that comes from being part of something bigger than ourselves or participating in a movement that’s making a difference in our families, in our community, and in our world can be infectious. But even within the most exciting and nurturing contexts, fear and uncertainty inevitably sow their seeds.

As you settle into routines, as supervisors and colleagues demand more, as you receive more projects and responsibilities you may not feel ready to take on, as you struggle to shorten your learning curve in the midst of new requirements, and as you continue to spin countless plates before myriad audiences, you may feel increasingly overwhelmed. You may even start to question your talents and abilities: Did I make the best decision in accepting this position? Am I even qualified for this work? Is this what I really want to do with my time or in my life?

There will be days you do not feel smart enough, productive enough, capable enough, or good enough. There will be days you feel like Sisyphus endlessly rolling a rock up the hill. And there will be days you wonder if any of it makes a difference. At such times it’s important to know that everyone goes through these cycles—even if everyone experiences them differently. But it’s also a reminder of why it’s critical to document the contributions you do make.

Whether you use a computer file, a tablet app, a diary or journal, a calendar, or note pad on your desk designated for this purpose, you need to get into the habit of writing down what you do and how: The projects you initiate, the endeavors you work on, the calls and emails you answer, the people you work with, the enterprises you complete… Big tasks, little tasks, one-time efforts, and long-term endeavors… write them all down at the end of the week, at the end of each day, or during your coffee or lunch breaks. It doesn’t matter when you write these things down; it only matters that you do write them down, regularly. For when you record and review the things you have done, the information you have learned, the problems you have solved, and the people you have helped, several things will start happen:

• You will see more clearly where you spend your time. Not all time is well spent, certainly, but when you, or others, wonder where the day went, you’ll be in a better position to answer that question. Sometimes you’ll discover that you spent the time effectively, even if it was differently than intended; sometimes you’ll find you got sucked into things that could have been postponed, or even left behind. In either case, you’ll become more aware of your time as a resource and begin to identify ways you can use that resource most productively.

• You will see places you’ve succeeded, as well as places to improve. Success is not always possible to see in the moment; it may only be realized days, weeks, months, or even years after the fact. Similarly, things we deem successful today may, ultimately, reveal themselves to be anything but. Because the components of success are not always clear, recording what you do creates a paper trail against which you can evaluate the short- and long-term results of your efforts: Was the entire project a success, or just components of it? What actions set the path for success, what actions led to unnecessary detours, and what could have offered useful shortcuts? Were there opportunities to encourage, redirect, hone, or even stop the trajectory of earlier efforts to better meet your goals? Memories are seldom accurate, so writing things down will offer a touchstone to help you continue successful efforts, and modify others accordingly.

• You will create a running record of your accomplishments, and the work involved. Familiarity can desensitize us to the nuances of what we do—what we really do. Think of work you do. If you’re a student, you might say you “study,” but “studying” involves different things for different students. For some, it’s reading scholarly books, journal articles, or trade publications. For others its working and reworking problem sets, or building computer modules, or writing papers, or participating in study groups. If you’re in industry, you “go to work,” certainly, but if and how you crunch numbers, process information, sell products, build structures, improve systems, save lives, and so on depends on the forum you’re in. By listing the tasks you do, how you do them, and the impact they make, you minimize the possibility of condensing, collapsing, and otherwise overgeneralizing the work you do and, by extension, downplaying or trivializing your efforts. Moreover, the information you generate can be invaluable for performance reviews, promotion requests, résumés, application letters, and other forums that need you to articulate what you have done as a precursor for arguing what you can do.

• You will see the contributions you are making. Contributions come in various forms and sizes. Not every contribution is a grand, public gesture. Some will be small and private; others may be unknown to everyone but yourself. But your contributions can, and do, improve lives—even if others don’t realize, or recognize your role in those efforts—and sometimes just remembering that we did step up and try to make a difference can be enough to carry us through the most challenging days.

Recording what you do in, on, and for your job may seem like “one more thing to do” in an already packed schedule, but once you commit to making it part of your routine, you will find ways to streamline your record keeping; you may even find the process becomes a meaningful way to decompress at the end of your day or your week.

While it may be tempting to file this suggestion under the “Yeah, one day I’ll…,” the time to start your list is now, when you’re poised in the “sweet spot” of such documentation.

In the newness of your adventure, you’re both hyperaware of the tasks you’re being asked to perform and, most likely, eager to identify what efforts result in success. Moreover, because the work itself is typically broken down into minutia at the earlier stages of a task, a project, or a position (by either those training you, or by you, yourself, trying to understand what needs to be done), you’re in a better position to record these discrete, concrete actions now, before the work conflates into that fuzzy, all-encompassing descriptor of “stuff” you do.

But even those who have been doing the same work for months or years can revitalize their interest by taking time to unpack what they do and marveling at the ways they may have streamlined, enhanced, or extended earlier contributions. And what better way to identify the type of work you’d like to continue than by calling it out and seeing where, and how, you’ve been able to make your greatest impact.

So use the momentum of being in the sweet spot, record your contributions, and celebrate those efforts on a regular basis. Such efforts can be enough to keep the fear and anxiety of your day-to-day challenges from taking root but, more importantly, they can reinvigorate and propel you forward.

Working toward Areté…
Download the “Document—and Celebrate—Your Contribution in the Sweet Spot” .pdf and commit to listing the work you do at the end of each day or at the end of each week. For those who have been on the job for a month or longer, you might consider how to combine this record with other files that can help you prepare for your performance review year-round (see “Starting Preparing for Your Performance Review Today“). And, if you have additional strategies and suggestions for going on record with the work you do, share them below.

Share Button