HOME — I used to have a Klingon cookbook.  No, it was Lt. Uhura’s Cookbook.  But there was Klingon it it.  That was in university.  More than 20 years ago.

I never cooked anything from it.

Are you kidding?

But I moved it from dorm to dorm and house to house.  I thought its simple existence was funny [...]]]>

HOME — I used to have a Klingon cookbook.  No, it was Lt. Uhura’s Cookbook.  But there was Klingon it it.  That was in university.  More than 20 years ago.

I never cooked anything from it.

Are you kidding?

But I moved it from dorm to dorm and house to house.  I thought its simple existence was funny enough.  (Yes, not everyone shared my sense of humour then either.)

However, my daughter has just brought the world of Fan Fiction to my attention.  It seems that Star Trek was even a pivotal modern outburst of it.  Followed by Star Wars… And today people like Stephenie Meyer and JK Rowling, for the Twilight and Harry Potter series, even actively encourage it, saying they read it.

It’s a really interesting phenomenon.  And not one without it’s legal and copyright implications.

So my question today is: Why don’t brands do it more?

People write Star Trek cookbooks because they are obsessed with the show.  And one assumes they buy other people’s Star Trek cookbooks.  But what about great brands and companies? 

Imagine some of the great BP fiction that could come out of the Deepwater Horizon situations?!

Okay, maybe that’s not the best example.

But what about other, more day-to-day examples?

I think it’s a heck of an idea.

I think I’ll talk to some clients about it this week.

/df

LONDON — I am not sure who else really does this.  It’s the essence of what we do.  We help organisations to ensure that their programmes work by managing change and communications.

Quite often we are called in to help with programmes like business transformation or HR / IT initiatives, when they have started to go [...]]]>

LONDON — I am not sure who else really does this.  It’s the essence of what we do.  We help organisations to ensure that their programmes work by managing change and communications.

Quite often we are called in to help with programmes like business transformation or HR / IT initiatives, when they have started to go wrong.  Or sometimes we are invited at the outset of new change programmes like brand or values renewals. 

The strange combination of skills that we bring to a job are communications, strategy, planning, organisational development, leadership communications, change management, employee engagement and more.

Some of our clients are communications directors.  Some or heads of internal communications and some are programme managers who know very little about communications.  We often work with strategy, IT and HR managers.  Sometimes it’s Chief Executives. 

The biggest problem with programme change communications is that most programme managers don’t know that they can have it.  People who have programmes to plan and company initiatives to manage, get well underway before they realise that they can and should manage communications and change effectively.

If we could get access to every corporate change programme we could save the economy billions.  Maybe that sounds like an over-statement.  Maybe it is.  But to us it seems real.

Wanted: Programme managers needing programme change communications.

/df

TCR — There’s a great French expression ferme ta gueule.  Maybe because it’s in a foreign language I think it’s a bit less harsh than the English equivalent.

I worked in politics many years ago.  Almost 20 years ago.  But long enough to realise that you need equal measures of two things to succeed:

1) Enough ambition [...]]]>

TCR — There’s a great French expression ferme ta gueule.  Maybe because it’s in a foreign language I think it’s a bit less harsh than the English equivalent.

I worked in politics many years ago.  Almost 20 years ago.  But long enough to realise that you need equal measures of two things to succeed:

1) Enough ambition to change the world
2) Enough vanity to believe you can

I know that sounds like an indictment, but it’s not.  If we don’t have good enough people willing to go into politics then we have a real problem. 

I am even stroppy enough on this point to say that I have little patience for business people who complain about government.  They are no better than the radicals who want to drag everyone else to the extreme right, left or loopy.  Good politicians need to balance many different interests.  And that’s hard.

You need to help find effective people and support them.  If you don’t participate, you have no voice.  You can’t complain.  (The UK has more or less the lowest turnout in Europe.  About 1 in 3 people!)

Starting tomorrow (in the UK and Netherlands) and in the four days that follow, there will be European elections across the continent.

This week you have a chance to vote, and you must use it…  Particularly if you are in any way sane. 

The media and others are saying that the ‘traditional parties’ will be punished in this election.  And when it comes to EU elections they often are.  But mostly because only radicalised people can be bothered to vote.

Let’s be honest we have all sent some real characters to the EU.  The few people who vote seem willing to vote for people who they wouldn’t let sit their dog.

Vote for someone who has the competence to do something intelligent once they are there.  Sending radical parties of one hasn’t helped.

Run, vote or ferme ta gueule.

/df

P.S. In most countries (including the UK) you don’t even have to register for these elections.  It’s been done for you if you have voted in the past.

P.P.S. This site will tell you more about your candidates etc.

HOME — I had a good chat with a nice guy named Paul this week.  He asked ‘how we worked’, and again I recognised that buying consultancy can be a daunting experience for people.  And I hate to think that.

I can’t say that every experience will be the same, but here are a few of [...]]]>

HOME — I had a good chat with a nice guy named Paul this week.  He asked ‘how we worked’, and again I recognised that buying consultancy can be a daunting experience for people.  And I hate to think that.

I can’t say that every experience will be the same, but here are a few of the things that we at Able and How see as fundamental anyway.

1. You can’t be charged for talking to us

You’ll never be billed for giving us a call.  We will talk to you any time, about any thing.  Before anyone can ask you for any money you’ll need to agree a ’scope of work’ and sign a contract.  There’s probably a lot of talk that will happen before that.

2. We love talking to people

Consultants (probably even lawyers, doctors and accountants) learn a lot by talking to people who are interested in what we do.  So every conversation is good for us.  It’s only by talking that we learn about you and about what our client-base might require.  In one case I talked to one lovely lady for 4 years before we started working together!  There are many of you I have been talking to a lot longer than that… and I still love it.

3. We never start work without a contract

We can’t start billing you or working for you without your permission.  That means if you even want to talk about working with us, we would spend time discussing cost, timing, how we’ll work together, and many other things.  (Don’t worry, we can talk about money without making anyone uncomfortable.)  More often than not it’s our clients who want us to start without a contract.  But we find things always work better once we’ve had a contract conversation and signatures all around.

4. That doesn’t have to be painful

Don’t let all the foregoing make you think that we can’t start working for you today!  We can do that.  We have ’scoped’ out work, agreed everything and started working in 30 minutes before.  (Believe me, we’d make it happen if you needed it!)

Since I have been in the consultancy business there has definitely been an increase in the involvement of Procurement Departments.  And I don’t mind that.  Procurement Departments are professional buyers.  That’s not a bad place for us to be.  We can handle it.

5. It doesn’t have to be expensive

I know this is always a concern.  And professional services of any sort are never sold at Pound-saver, but there’s no need to assume that you can’t afford it.  Just ask.

6. Try it… you’ll like it…

Hopefully some readers who have worked with us in the past can attest to this, but I can’t see how businesses can lose from employing consultants judiciously.  We can bring ideas and insights that are much harder to create in-house.  We can tell you what we have seen work in the thousands of instances we’ve done things before.

No one will hypnotise you and pick your pocket.  We report weekly in writing on what we have achieved and keep you up to date on costs.  We’ll start with a plan that tells you when we stop working, and we’ll spend a lot of time making sure that we transfer as many skills as we can to you and your colleagues.

Questions?  Call.  We can talk.

/df

LONDON — What I like most about this blog on the Harvard Business website, is that it could have been written by me!

Not that I am vain or anything…!

But I think these ‘employee relations’, or internal communications, or (my preference) organisational communications issues are ones that will return to haunt us.  They are also issues [...]]]>

LONDON — What I like most about this blog on the Harvard Business website, is that it could have been written by me!

Not that I am vain or anything…!

But I think these ‘employee relations’, or internal communications, or (my preference) organisational communications issues are ones that will return to haunt us.  They are also issues that may well define this recession for future generations:

“We thought we lived in a world that we didn’t.  When the going got tough, our organisations forgot everything about communications that we thought they had learned in the decades that had past.”

However, the most interesting part of this article — which is a companion, or plug, for a longer one in HBR — is the comments that it is receiving from readers.  At the time of writing they are 50/50 in favour of GM and Chrysler’s poor attempt at letting anyone know about their future before they read it in the paper.

That can’t be right.

There is no real merit in kicking companies when they are down.  And no one can be more down that Chrysler and GM in 2009.  But lots and lots of Americans have put a lot of faith in these companies.  The public wants to support these brands.  We genuinely want them to succeed.  Except that stories like this try our faith.  And the brand may not be strong enough to withstand the chipping away that this represents.

That is a shame.

/df

LONDON — This may be the month of some riotous annual meetings.  These regular, champagne fuelled events in which the Board deigns to talk down to the blue-haired shareholders, and a few ‘institutional investors’ drop by to show how important they are.  They are not going as smoothly so far in 2009 as some people [...]]]>

LONDON — This may be the month of some riotous annual meetings.  These regular, champagne fuelled events in which the Board deigns to talk down to the blue-haired shareholders, and a few ‘institutional investors’ drop by to show how important they are.  They are not going as smoothly so far in 2009 as some people continue to expect them to.

Shareholders (‘the people whose money owns the company’) have been being silly enough as to show up with a sense that they can have a say in how the business is run.

Surprised?  Moi?

Executives are shocked and awed.

Except for the fact that even though the system is set up so that shareholders keep an eye on what the business does… it is still so stacked in the favour of executives that in most western countries shareholders hold little real sway…  but the AUDACITY they have of thinking they might be able to influence things.  Really!

How to fix it

I believe that the time has come for executives and boards to start to take shareholders a bit more seriously.  The management–shareholder relationship ought to be less transactional, and more relationship-like. 

Shareholders are an important part of your business.  You should be building a relationship with them by helping to understand each other better.  They should be saying to each other “I used to have shares in XX, but they didn’t really seem interested in their shareholders, so I have moved all my money to YY.”

[Ask Ken Lewis at Bank of America is it's worth paying attention to shareholders.  Look at what the EU thinks about shareholders and their roles.]

Your business can start to build relationships with shareholders by offering them a real education in business… in your business even.  You can explain policies and procedures to them.  Tell them about the market.  Tell them about your strategy.  Think how much money and time you spend with analysts.  Why not spend that much time on your shareholders?  It will take a bit longer and require you to answer some simpler questions.  But after all it is their money that just lost 60% of its value because they believed in you.

/df

P.S. You shouldn’t be surprised to hear that we think we can help with this.  It’s a question of business education after all.

ORIANA — Did you know that an estimated 670,000 Chinese businesses failed last year?  Bankrupt. 

I didn’t even know that could happen.

The Sunday Times last weekend ran a survey that compared views and trends between 1989 and 2009.  Did you know that on average we are twice as cynical as we were then? Our trust in [...]]]>

ORIANA — Did you know that an estimated 670,000 Chinese businesses failed last year?  Bankrupt. 

I didn’t even know that could happen.

The Sunday Times last weekend ran a survey that compared views and trends between 1989 and 2009.  Did you know that on average we are twice as cynical as we were then? Our trust in politicians, and other social institutions has dropped by half.  But our standard of living has increased by 60%!

That’s radical.

In 2006 there were 106 billionaires in China.  One hundred and six…  in the world’s most populous and most communist country.

How cynical are they?

I read an article earlier this week about the shifting economies in the world.  It spoke of the shift of global power from East to West. And suggested that the leaning towards America over the past 80-100 years has on large part been a result of it’s economic dominance.  As that dominance fades, we will begin to see cultural and social interest move along with it.

We can already see that in Africa, where China holds sway that is quite surprising to outsiders.  The locals aren’t always happy about it.  But, like many years of visiting American dignitaries, they put up with it and carry on.

This recession.  The swine flu… even the September 11 bombings of eight years ago… has taught us that the world still has lots of surprises for us.  Just as we start to think we understand it, it makes up new ways to show us that we know nothing!

There’s lots for us to pay attention to.  And yet we seem to be continually convinced that we know everything there is to know. 

How silly is that?

/df

LONDON — There’s a reason why I love the New Yorker.  Every few years I rediscover it and read something I hadn’t thought about.  Earlier this year it was an article I read my daughters about the civil rights movement and Obama.  Today it’s about Plastiki.

Have a look at this video.

The story itself is out of [...]]]>

LONDON — There’s a reason why I love the New Yorker.  Every few years I rediscover it and read something I hadn’t thought about.  Earlier this year it was an article I read my daughters about the civil rights movement and Obama.  Today it’s about Plastiki.

Have a look at this video.

The story itself is out of a boy’s adventure story.  At the centre is a driven young man and an ambition to bring attention to a plastics sinkhole in the middle of the Pacific Ocean: The Easter Garbage Patch.

What I love about this is that it is an initiative that is supported by corporations.  Hewlett-Packard are involved on the technology side.  And it is built on the ambition of helping educate people – school children in particular — about the state of the ocean, recycling (‘upcycling’, even) and the environment.  But why not big people too?  Why not employees and customers?

To my kids, who see the civil rights movement as something that would obviously occur, the kinds of battles that Plastiki is trying to bring attention to will be the battle of their generation.

All power to those who can make it as compelling as this.

/df

My friend is a cheery and jokey sort and has a disposition so different to her mother’s, the nature/nurture debate [...]]]> FROM THE DESK OF EMMAJANE — Walking into a friend’s workplace recently, nothing hit me harder than then dark grey, medium grey and medium-light grey walls and carpets. Many of the employees were wearing grey too.

My friend is a cheery and jokey sort and has a disposition so different to her mother’s, the nature/nurture debate beckons every time I see her.

“We had to tidy up our desks the other day”, she said as she gathers her things from her desk. “Management thought all the pictures of pets and family made the place look a bit messy.”

Right.

Words like ‘exciting’, ‘fun’, ‘family’, ‘ambitious’ and lots of other lovely sounding words appear on the company Intranet and website. The brand itself has a colourful logo. The recruitment advertising (so I hear) is colourful and has lovely, smiley people in it.

The problem is that the external employer brand hasn’t been translated at all internally. So the employee brand is off key the minute an employee sits at their desk.

There’s nothing around the place that tells you where you are. You might as well be in one of their competitor’s offices. The company values contradict the behaviours going on. Companies that do this well, are often incredibly successful. No employee at Google thinks they’re working for Facebook when they’re at the Googleplex.

If they’re employing talent like my good friend – then all the processes and initiatives around attracting the best people are obviously working. But keeping the talent and impressing other people is equally as important. People like me, (the visitor), customers, shareholders and even ex-employees – we can all smell false wallpaper immediately. All of us form an opinion of that brand. Brands can look great on the surface – but scratch one inch below and you’re a bit disappointed. The employer brand has to be built inside out.

Granted, hints and tips from Elle Decoration aren’t going to improve your employer brand overnight. It takes good internal communication, a sound employee proposition, reward and recognition, training, learning and development and so on. But as a starting point, employee brand opinion is very emotional and people need to feel part of something, regardless of whether they are the employee or consumer. Building a brand on wholesome common purposes and values is a great start. People just need to see them for themselves and believe in it too.

Management have to take the words a brand is built on and make them real inside. Only then can they be valid, sincere and actually true.

[Emmajane Johnson is a consultant at Able and How.]

“Here are 16 reason why we will miss the gloomy time.

1. Role-play will be less pleasurable. We have split the world into two pantomimic parts: the evil (the bankers) and the good (everyone else).  In future, sorting out villains and victims will require more imagination.”

David Marsh, Comment in FT, 21 April 2009

THE WHITE [...]]]>

“Here are 16 reason why we will miss the gloomy time.

1. Role-play will be less pleasurable. We have split the world into two pantomimic parts: the evil (the bankers) and the good (everyone else).  In future, sorting out villains and victims will require more imagination.”

David Marsh, Comment in FT, 21 April 2009

THE WHITE HORSE — There’s something unappealing about this.  People who work in the financial services sector are tired of being singled out and they’re getting angry.  You can read it in the papers, hear it on the streets and (in my neighbourhood) talk about it in the schoolyards.

‘Why is everyone always picking on me?!’ seems to be the underlying sentiment.  And in that I think there is a problem.

Think of the professions that are regularly reviled and/or ridiculed: undertaker, plumber, dentist, (real) estate agent, headhunters, civil servant, military, pharmaceuticals, librarian, tobacconists, builders, farmers, politicians, fast food salesmen, and the list goes on.

The irony though is that for all the stick that these professions take, they are mostly paid a basic wage and few of them have brought about the collapse of the economy.

Some of the smartest people I know work in the financial services sector.  Many are now quietly admitting that they haven’t lost the money that they might have.  And their pay is being guaranteed.

So there’s quite a serious communication problem for these guys now.  Apologies like we heard from RBS’ senior people earlier in the year still come with a “but”.  And quotes like this one, still abound:

‘We greatly regret the fact that the total return on our shares during 2008 has been heavily negative.’

Easiest to do would be for bankers to become part of the solution.  Start to talk about what needs to be done so that the public and the economy will not be adversely affected again in this way.

If I were advising Sir Fred Goodwin, for example, I would write a 1,000 word piece for the FT explaining where it went wrong… And what should be done to avoid it in the future.

Become part of the solution.

Talk about it.

Communicate.

/df