Archive for the ‘Communication’ Category
Rebuilding Trust
Worth Reading: Harvard Business Review, June, 2009, special section: Rebuilding Trust
I’ve been teaching ethics in graduate business and communication programs at New York University for more than 20 years, and every semester we lament the decline of trust.
But this year seems to be worse than most. Trust in US corporations is at an all-time low, 38 percent, according to the 2009 Edelman Trust Barometer. And most other measures of trust in institutions also point to continuing declines.
The June issue of Harvard Business Review takes on the issue of trust with a 25-page special report, Rebuilding Trust. It’s worth reading. The package includes a forceful critique of business school curricula, a 100-year timeline of highlights and lowlights in the public’s trust of business, and a counter-intuitive piece on how despite recent events people may still be trusting too much.
But the real payoff is the first piece in the package, by James O’Toole and Warren Bennis. O’Toole is the Daniels Distinguished Professor of Business Ethics at the University of Denver’s Daniels College of Business, and Bennis is University Professor at the University of Southern California. The two are co-authors (with Daniel Goleman and Patricia Ward Biederman) of Transparency: How Leaders Create a Culture of Candor (Jossey-Bass, 2008).
The special report opens with O’Toole’s and Bennis’ conclusion:
“We won’t be able to rebuild trust in institutions until leaders learn how to communicate honestly — and create organizations where that’s the norm.”
Apology Update: Compare and Contrast
A public apology is a good way to express remorse and offer reconciliation to an affected party. But the very act of apologizing can be daunting.
If delivered effectively, an apology can mend relationships and restore trust between two or more parties.
If delivered effectively, an apology can help maintain company’s competitive advantage, reduce litigation costs and minimize business disruptions.
If delivered effectively, an apology can create a perception of genuine regret on behalf of the offender and mend his or her reputation.
But here is a question:
Can an effective delivery distract the audience from an insufficient apology?
And,
Can a weak delivery diminish a powerful message of a genuine apology?
I invite you to look at three recent apologies and share your opinion about the effectiveness of each apology is in terms of its message and its presentation.
On Apology
“Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future. ” Paul Boese
A significant increase in public apologies over the past months could be seen as a positive trend.
We saw the most senior leader of this country apologizing to the American public: “I screwed up.” We watched two prominent athletes A-Rod and Michael Phelps issue painful apologies to their fans.
We saw four bosses of British banks saying sorry to the Treasury Select Committee, and watched Japan’s Finance Minister announce his resignation along with a formal mea culpa.
And finally, in the last couple of weeks we heard the words of regret from Rupert Murdoch and Bishop Richard Williamson.
And yet many of these highly visible apologies failed to earn public forgiveness. Some were criticized for being too shallow and insincere, others could be hardly recognized as apologies at all.
So, what does it take to make an effective apology that comes across as true and genuine? And what are some examples of ineffective apologies that failed to resolve conflicts or earn forgiveness?
(more…)
My Year in Review Comes Down to One
This time of year is ripe for reflection about the year past and prognostication about the year to come. Best-of lists, predictions for the new year, goals – many good & inspiring thoughts and ideas, but they’re so numerous it can become hard to digest even one more.
But I hope you will take just a little time to digest this one.
As I thought about the year past, all of the power of social media came down to one thing.
It wasn’t new in 2008, but it was new to me.
The most truly powerful communication and social media tool I used last year was CaringBridge. It’s a free, non-profit service for individuals or families during times of illness or treatment. It allows you to create a personalized website (either public or private) with a journal/blog-like feature, a section for photographs, a welcome or background page, and a guestbook for people to sign and leave messages.
It’s a service I hope most of you will never need, but it’s important, and it’s important to know it exists should you, or anyone you know, find yourself in need.
I was referred to this service during a time of intense family crisis last spring. During family crises, just like business crises, it can become difficult and burdensome to communicate. Have we communicated with everyone we need to? Have we forgotten anyone? Does everyone have the same information or the information they need? These questions are pretty universal, during any crisis. But all the updates, all the repetition – it can be crushing during a personal crisis.
CaringBridge was a lifeline for my family. The founder of CaringBridge describes it as a kind of “compassion technology,” combining “the human elements of care and concern with the Internet’s ability to connect people.” The private site we created gave us one central place to keep far-flung family and friends informed, and we drew strength from the messages of support from around the world.
Often with social media, we focus on what the tool or service is, versus what it does.
This is a powerful example of the doing. And something I will try to take with me into the new year.
Journalism Isn’t Dying, but It Will Never Be The Same Again – It Will Be Better
First In a Series: The State of Journalism Today
I’ve had a lover’s quarrel with journalism most of my adult life.
As in any lover’s quarrel, I get pretty heated when journalism lets me down. But only because the love burns deep within me.
I so want journalism to thrive; to prosper; to fulfill its stated mission, and to deliver the value it promises. But too often, and seemingly with increasing frequency, journalism fails to live up to its stated ideals.
I’ve made a pretty good living helping people navigate the vagaries of journalism – protecting them from its excesses, helping them capture the best of journalism to mutual advantage when they can. In the process I’ve gotten to know a lot of journalists and to care deeply about their craft. And to lament the deteriorating state of the business.
Today I begin a multi-part look at the state of journalism, its role in our democracy, and the challenges it faces.
My first post is about the future.
The Conventional Wisdom is Wrong
The conventional wisdom is that journalism is dying.
I think the conventional wisdom is wrong.
Journalism isn’t dying, but it is in the throes of a revolution that will transform it – for the better. (more…)
Emotions are Stubborn Things, Part 1
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
– John Adams, ‘Argument in Defense of the Soldiers in the Boston Massacre Trials,’ December 1770

By now, as we face the final run-up to the November election, most of us have heard more than enough about the presidential horserace. Lately, though, I can’t get a certain politically embedded mantra out of my head. So, with that as my mental soundtrack, I’ll share a few thoughts on politics and communication.
“Facts are stubborn things.” Have you heard this one?


It’s one “sticky” phrase. At least three presidents, including John Adams (see above), and one former presidential candidate (who will remain nameless) have warned us about the redeeming intransigence of facts, and legions of pundits and citizen bloggers have chimed in for the chorus during the current election cycle. Google “facts are stubborn things,” and you’ll get 71,800+ results, most of which landed in cyberspace in the last two years.
So, here’s my question: Are facts the only stubborn things?
Worth Reading: Countering Violent Extremism: Beyond Words, by Amy Zalman, Ph.D.
Countering Violent Extremism: Beyond Words
by Amy Zalman, Ph.D., EastWest Institute.
Words matter.
Words shape world views. Words provoke action and reaction, which in turn provoke more words. Getting the words right is critically important. Getting the action right is also critically important. And aligning the words and actions is even more important.
Much public diplomacy and other national and international discourse of the U.S. government in recent years has gotten it wrong.
A new policy paper by a Dr. Amy Zalman, published by the EastWest Institute, highlights the mis-steps of the recent past and prescribes solutions for future public discourse.
Dr. Zalman is a senior strategist at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), where she focuses on trans-culturally astute research for U.S. government clients. She also writes the “About Terrorism” reference website for New York Times online division About.com. She has a Ph.D. in Middle Eastern and Islamic studies from NYU and is highly proficient in Arabic. I met her when we were NYU faculty colleagues.
In reading Dr. Zalman’s assessment of and prescriptions for future public diplomacy I was struck by how much her underlying philosophy aligns deeply with Logos Institute’s own philosophy about communication as an instrument of strategy. And also how her assessment provides valuable insights not only on ways to counter extremism, but also on best practices in strategic communication across a range of disciplines. (more…)
Rumor Control: Keeping Momentum in a Presidential Campaign
Senator Barack Obama yesterday announced an effort to deal with rumors in a timely way, to prevent them from taking hold and throwing his campaign off balance.
He’s right to be so concerned. Rumors can throw a presidential campaign off its game, and provide adversaries, critics, and opponents with a first-mover advantage that’s hard to beat. The last 20 years teach a great deal about the importance of effective rumor control.
The Secret of Quick Response
What Happened? Propaganda
What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception, by Scott McClellan
Almost 20 years ago I was head of communication at a major company, and I spent much of every day speaking with reporters. The deal I had with the CEO was straightforward: “I won’t lie to you; I won’t lie for you; you can’t lie to me.”
At one point my boss lied to me, hoping I would pass the lie on to the press. I called him on it, and he promised not to do it again. Then he did it again. I unknowingly passed the lie on to reporters. They found out, and called me on it. So I quit.
Leaving my job wasn’t a hard decision, even though it was a painful one. Among other things, my wife was pregnant with our first child. And I didn’t have another job to go to. But it was one of the best decisions I’ve made.
Then as now I taught communication ethics in a graduate program at NYU. And one of the perennial questions of communication ethics is: When is it necessary to quit? I don’t suggest that there are easy answers. Every circumstance is a bit different. And it’s a highly personal choice. But there are consequences to making the wrong choice. And we all have to own the consequences of our choices.
Comes now Scott McClellan, in a tell-all book about his time as press secretary for President George W. Bush, that will be published next week. (more…)
Humility Update: Pope Benedict XVI
Pope Benedict XVI dazzled New York and Washington this week, both with the majesty of his office and with his personal humility. The latter confounded expectations.
I have not been a particular fan of the man who is now Pope. When he was known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he was considered by many to be the then-Pope’s enforcer. In November, 2002, some six months after the Boston Globe broke the story of systemic problems of child sexual abuse in the US Church, Cardinal Ratzinger said, according to the New York Times:
“’In the United States, there is constant news on this topic, but less than 1 percent of priests are guilty of acts of this type,’ he said in November 2002 during a visit to Spain. ’Therefore, one comes to the conclusion that it is intentional, manipulated – that there is a desire to discredit the church.’”






