The Articulate CEO

Subliminal Messaging - You Can't Hear What Ain't There!

Let's tackle an oldie but a goodie - subliminal messaging. Now to quickly put everyone in the picture the subliminal is below the liminal (the smallest detectable sensation). Obviously anything truly below the level of detectable sensation could not, by definition, be perceived. However, when people talk about subliminal messaging they generally mean messages that are below the threshold of conscious perception. There is a widespread belief, not strongly supported by empirical research, that without being aware of its presence or content, a person's behavior can be significantly affected by subliminal messages. Thus, it is believed that one can influence behavior by surreptitiously appealing to the subconscious mind with words and images. If this were true, then advertisers could manipulate consumer behavior by hiding subliminal messages in their ads. The implications are enormous. The government, me or even a small weasel by the name of Jimmy, could control our minds and bodies by secretly communicating to us subliminally. Learners could learn while listening to music embedded with subliminal messages.

Unfortunately, the research done in this area has shown us that the effects are somewhere between slim and zero.

The fact that there is almost no empirical support for the usefulness of subliminal messaging has not, of course, prevented numerous industries from producing and marketing tapes which allegedly communicate directly with the unconscious mind. There are tapes out there that do everything from stopping smoking to coaching the "listener" to have courage or believe in his or her power to accomplish great things. Consumers in the USA actually spend more than $50 million each year on subliminal self-help products!

It is true that we can perceive things even though we are not conscious of perceiving them. However, for those who put messages in tapes and then record music over the messages so that the messages are drowned out by the music or other sounds, it might be useful to remember that if the messages are drowned out by other sounds, the only perceptions one can have are of the sounds drowning out the messages. Get the message? There is no evidence of anyone hearing a message which is buried beneath layers of other sounds to the point where the message does not distinctly stand out. Of course, if the message distinctly stood out, it would not be subliminal.That's why advertisers rely on 'liminal' advertising - it has a much better hit rate.

The belief in the power of subliminal messaging to manipulate behavior seems to have originated in 1957 with James Vicary, an advertising promoter who claimed to increase popcorn sales by some 58% and Coke sales by some 18% in a New Jersey movie theater simply by flashing very briefly the messages "Drink Coca-Cola" and "Hungry - Eat Popcorn." Even though the claim has been shown to be a hoax, and even though no one has been able to duplicate the event, belief in the legend lingers.

So, for everyone who was worried that subliminal messaging might be impacting their behavior somehow you can relax - it's all the obvious messaging that is doing that. And for those of you who are hoping to change your behavior or become Superman by listening to something in your sleep you might as well save your money because you are probably already braindead.

Poor Communication - Symptom or Disease?

Poor communication seems to come up an awful lot these days when people are discussing workplace issues or analysing the reasons behind various disasters. But is it really the culprit, or has some underlying problem caused the communication breakdown? Is 'poor communication' becoming an easy catch-all that allows us to ignore the real problems plaguing the workplace? How often do organisations mistake 'poor communication' for a disease when in actual fact it is merely a symptom?

Let's say someone on your team has something to contribute to a discussion, but sits silently because you are known to talk over the top of people and shout down their ideas when someone appears to offer an alternative point of view. Poor communication is the result—but the cause is lack of trust based on previous experience.

What if professionals don't take the trouble to pass necessary information along to support staff? Poor communication is the inevitable result but the cause might well be lack of respect or consideration.

Today, as we have discussed in the Cultural Differences blogs, many workplaces contain employees of varying ethnic, religious and cultural backgrounds.

In such situations miscommunication is almost inevitable, but if it happens a lot you might want to examine whether the underlying cause is a lack of understanding or even intolerance. Poor communication may be the effect rather than the cause, and deep-set prejudice may be the real issue.

The point is when you hear poor communication cited as the cause of a problem, you would do well to probe a little deeper before deciding how to respond - communication issues are seldom ever just skin-deep.

'Freedom' of Speech - The Devil is in the Detail

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, signed by almost every country, guarantees freedom of expression. That basically means Freedom of Speech is a principle that pretty much everyone agrees with and yet debate rages over whether or not such freedom of expression should be allowed. Like so many debates in the modern world though the debate is centred on the application rather than the principle because when everyone agrees with a proposition chances are it is either enormously profound or totally meaningless. Freedom of speech is a case in point.

 

Where should freedom of speech begin and end? The debate is not in the concept but in the detail because even the covenant limits the scope of this right. Restrictions are possible for the respect of the rights or reputations of others as well as for the protection of national security, public order, public health or morals.

 

So it is easy to be for free speech in principle. It is far less obvious what this will mean in practice.

Even the straightforward exceptions are not so straightforward anymore. Take the oft-quoted example that nobody should have the right to cause a mass panic by crying ''fire'' in a packed theatre. Makes sense in a packed theatre but the Internet creates problems with even that rule. What is a virtual packed theatre? Would Wikileaks yelling ‘radiation leak’ online constitute the same thing for example?

 

What about the less obvious cases?

 

There are numerous cases where it is not so clear to determine where the balance should lie between the protection of free speech and the protection of other rights. Take advertising, for example. Free speech does not only apply to political opinions but to commercial ones as well. Nevertheless, we would probably agree that advertising aimed at young children needs limits.

 

That's fair enough. But what about advertising to adults? In opinion polls, most people say they are personally never conned by advertising. However, the very same people also believe that others regularly fall for misleading ads and therefore strict regulations were necessary. Many countries have banned advertising of products that have health consequences such as tobacco and alcohol. Where do we start and where do we stop?

 

It's the same story with political speech. In some countries there are limitations on political opinions. In parts of Europe Holocaust denial is illegal. In Turkey a ''denigration of the Turkish nation'' can land you in jail. Burning the flag is a valid protest in some countries and a hanging offence in others.

 

You would think that we could only support such restrictions on free speech if we believed that society could not handle it. However, in a society in which we all regularly have to make myriad decisions, why should we not also be able to decide how to respond to unpleasant or objectionable statements? Instead of banning them, why not choose to ignore or ridicule them? When it comes to freedom of speech the law often goes out of its way to prove itself an ass.

 

Realistically, freedom of speech cannot be limitless. Yet instead of relying on laws, perhaps we should trust common sense and civil society. Perhaps we should rely on weight of opinion rather than fear one opinion. Perhaps it’s too late.

Fast Thinking: Referral Selling is Just Sophisticated Begging!

Read my latest post from the Fast Thinking Think Tank:

Referral Selling is Just Sophisticated Begging!

Just about every course or book that deals with getting referrals teaches you one single referral method - "asking" for referrals. They'll tell you how you have to give good service and then they give you a formula for asking for referrals. As far as it goes that may be all well and good but there's a HUGE problem with this approach. People HATE to ask for referrals. You hate it, I hate it, and the people that get asked hate it.  

For the approach to work you have to not only get over your discomfort over asking someone for the referral but they then have to get over their discomfort in asking someone else on your behalf.

...

So have a referral system if you want but make sure that you are providing an experience that is interesting. Be different, be quirky, be fun, be weird, be whatever you want but be something more than the norm. Share your stories and tell the world what you are up to in every transaction.

 Read the full post here.

Show 19: Podcast - Why It's Important to Get Your Story Straight!

Word of mouth – the most cost effective and powerful form of marketing but is it achieving its potential?

In this episode we discuss the value of storytelling to get your message out via word of mouth. But don't rely on others' interpretations of what they think your business' story is.

To get the best results from storytelling it is vital to firstly figure out what your story is and what you want people to be saying about your business. And then you need to tell it in a way that people can easily remember and share.

If you have any feedback, questions or topics you would like me to cover please email me at [email protected].

To listen to The Articulate CEO podcast:

1) Click here to listen now

2) Subscribe via iTunes

Communicating Your Social Status Online

Given how important status symbols are in the real world it was kind of inevitable that they would start to be seen in the virtual world as well.

Being connected is suddenly seen as the thing to be and what started with showing off the number of visitors to your Flickr page or Wordpress blog now also encompasses the number of your Facebook friends, Twitter followers, YouTube Channel subscribers, LinkedIn connections and a host of other measures that tell the world you are tech savvy.

According to trendwatching.com, in the next 12 months you can’t go wrong supplying your (online-loving) customers with any kind of symbol, virtual or 'real world' that helps them display to peers their online contributions, 'interestingness', creations or popularity.

Just as people like to be seen consuming luxury products to show off their wealth, or driving a Prius to let us know they care about the environment, they also like their virtual offerings to be somehow recognised.

As more and more people invest in building a digital brand such as their own blog or online diary you can expect to see a greater demand for all sorts of digital endorsements of that brand.

Interestingly, one extra element to watch out for is new status symbols that straddle the 'real' and 'online' worlds.

From physical manifestations of digital status (think personalised Facebook and Twitter memorabilia), to online recognition of physical activities (status updates or badges based on real-world visits), consumers will seek to display their online status symbols in all arenas.

For example, Twournal enables Twitter users to transform their tweets and pictures into a real-life published journal. In addition to creating their own 'books', users can also buy and sell publications from other users. US based CrowdedInk offers an app that allows users to generate mugs filled with pictures of their Facebook friends or Twitter followers. Users only need to enter their username and a preview of the mug is automatically generated in minutes.

As more and more businesses look to create fans from consumers they are also going to need to be conscious of recognising those fans and rewarding them for their patronage in every world they might inhabit – real or otherwise.

Learn more about Twournal

 

Article on The Punch: Love in The Time of Tragedy

"As we take toll of the disaster that has engulfed the people of Queensland there will be a natural tendency to try and find reason amongst the chaos and to seek sense amongst the senselessness..."

Read my latest article published in The Punch today.

 

Who Does Gossip Really Hurt?

Ahhhhhh… is there anything better than shooting the breeze around the old water-cooler? 

Who doesn’t love hearing a bit of gossip or better yet having the opportunity to pass some on?

Most of us love to pass on the odd juicy bit of information about our workmates and our peers but have you ever asked yourself if it is healthy or wise to do so? Is there a downside?

It appears to go against common sense -- not to mention classic psychological theory -- but researchers writing in the April edition of the American Psychological Association's (APA) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in 1998 identified a common, but apparently mindless, psychological phenomenon that plays a previously unrecognized role in the way people form impressions of other people.

Specifically, they found that when someone attributes positive or negative traits to someone else, the listener would often attribute those same traits to the speaker.

"In other words," the authors wrote, "politicians who allege corruption by their opponents may themselves be perceived as dishonest, critics who praise artists may themselves be perceived as talented, and gossips who describe others' infidelities may themselves be viewed as immoral."

Malicious Gossip

The authors were investigating the downside of spreading malicious gossip. Participants watched videotapes of actors talking about a third party (a friend of the actor).

Some of the actor’s comments about his friend were very negative, such as ‘He hates animals. Today he was walking to the store and he saw this puppy. So he kicked it out of his way’.

Afterwards, the participants were asked to rate the personality of the speaker. Even though it was obvious that the person on the videotape was criticizing someone else, the participants consistently attributed the negative traits to the speaker.

This effect, known as ‘spontaneous trait transference’, reveals the pluses and minuses of gossiping.

When you gossip about another person, listeners unconsciously associate you with the characteristics you are describing, ultimately leading to those characteristics being ‘transferred’ to you.

It might pay to think twice before approaching that water-cooler in the future. 

Which Businessman Has the Emotional Intelligence of a Petulant 4 Year-Old?

Read more in my article in today's edition of The Punch titled 'Ralph...what we have here is a failure to communicate

 

The Top 5 Lies of Corporate Communication

The other day, fellow blogger The PR Warrior (Trevor Young) reminded me of an article by Guy Kawasaki “The Top 16 Lies of CEOS”. Although written in 2006 much of what Guy had to say still has relevance today and I thought I might add to his ideas with my own Top 5 Corporate Lies. 

These are the most common and most damaging corporate communications I come across on a daily basis and they seem to be becoming more and more frequent.

1.    Our people are our greatest resource

Oh, please…  the evidence just doesn’t support this contention. If it were true companies wouldn’t confuse personal loyalty with personal sacrifice. They would recompense their employees for every effort made on the company’s behalf, they would allow them to share in the profits and they wouldn’t have the massive disparity in pay between the lowest and highest rungs of the ladder. Public companies would be more concerned with their employees' well-being than their shareholders,and flexible workplace practices would be the norm rather than the exception. 

Capital remains the number one resource for the vast majority of companies closely followed by ‘brand’. Most companies continue to think of capital and brand as mutually exclusive from people and how they really feel about their people is actually hidden in the statement above:

    People are our greatest ‘resource’ – they are a commodity and traded in much the same way.

2.    Ours is an entrepreneurial culture

Rubbish. An entrepreneur is a person who has possession of a new enterprise, venture or idea and assumes significant accountability for the inherent risks and the outcome. It refers to the personality type of an individual who is willing to take on a new venture or enterprise and accept full responsibility for the outcome. 

Organisations are the antithesis of entrepreneurs. They are not about individuals taking on new ideas, they are about policies designed to suppress new ideas and the ‘corporate citizen’ never takes responsibility for much of anything. Rather, they either hide behind such concepts as ‘collective responsibility’ (code for no ones fault) or more commonly they find an appropriate individual and fire them.

3.    We are a values-driven organisation

For that to be the case there would not only have to be values but they would have to be properly defined and measured. They would actually need to be the decision-making framework for everything the organisation did and they would have to be non-negotiable. 

In other words, the values would have to translate into consistent outcomes and be reflected in the day-to-day operations of the organisation concerned.  Look – flying pigs!  Yes, it really is that rare.

4.    This is a rational business decision

There are no rational business decisions. All ‘business’ decisions are actually made by people and as a result are subject to the irrefutable law of the human condition - that it is physically impossible to separate our emotional and rational selves. 

Even the decision to remove emotion from the decision is, in itself, emotional. So those ‘rational’ business decisions are in fact biased, distorted, predicated on false assumptions, corrupt, self-serving and petty.

Not all decisions mind you… just the ones that feel the need to be justified as rational business decisions.

5.    We value your feedback

Whether your opinion is good, bad or indifferent hardly anyone wants to hear from you. That’s why they make it hard for you to give an opinion in the first place.

It’s amazing how many companies actually go out of their way to make it virtually impossible to contact them with automated phone systems that never include the options you want. 

If they truly valued your feedback there would be a direct line to someone important who could not only do something about what you have to say but would follow it through from start to finish. Anything else (such as forms and surveys) is designed to make you think your feedback matters rather than ensure your feedback makes a difference.

Source: Guy Kawasaki's original post