Word Choices Matter

Mark Twain once wrote, “The difference between the right word and the wrong word is the difference between lightning and lightning bug.” Unfortunately, Mr. Twain’s words apparently did not make it to the eyes or ears of Carl-Henric Svanberg, the current Chairman of BP. On June 16th, Mr. Svanberg upset residents of the Gulf Coast when he told reporters, “I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don't care, but that is not the case with BP. We care about the small people.”

Granted, Mr. Svanberg’s first language is not English, so criticism of his “small people” comment might be unwarranted, but nevertheless, what is important for Mr. Svanberg and all corporate executives to understand, is that word choices matter. In fact, a recent study published in Health Communication, a scientific journal on healthcare communications, shows how the use of subtle word choices can influence and persuade the behavior of an individual without changing the meaning of the message.

If BP wants to survive the backlash of their numerous PR gaffes, they need to start becoming more sensitive with the choice of words they use to convey their messages. With their stock prices down nearly 50% in the last two months, they better hope it is not too late.

Are you paying Attention? Why not?

Many inquiries have come lately about this past season’s television hits, Lie To Me [Season 2 Premiers on Fox, September 29, 9:00 PM ET] and The Mentalist [Season 2 Premiers on CBS, September 24, 10:00 PM ET]. What both have in common is that someone is paying attention. Not the kind you fake in a weekly staff meeting; occasionally nodding, smiling and asking a follow-up question. This is scoping the room, the players and everything in between for clues. What are you seeking clues for? You might not know until you see them. On The Mentalist, Patrick Jane (played by Simon Baker), who was a psychic before his current job as an independent consultant to the California Bureau of Investigations, is little more than a great watcher. He solves the crime by noticing things others do not notice. Lie To Me is based on the well-researched findings of Paul Ekman. The main character, psychologist Dr. Cal Lightman (played by Tim Roth), serves as a human lie detector as he watches micro-facial expressions to detect incongruencies in a person’s story.

Neither of these talents is so unique that you could not be practicing them at home, at the office or in the bar. You may not reach expert status right away, but you can easily train yourself to have more information about a person or situation than you do now. Use these behaviors to weed out job candidates, avoid bad dates, know if your children are going where they claim. Or not. It is up to you if you want to be more clued-in to the goings on around you. Pick up Paul Ekman’s book Emotions Revealed to learn seven simple facial expressions that you think you already know how to detect. With only one percent of the population able to pass his ‘test’ on the first go around, you will be surprised. Web search “notice my surroundings” and you will find a land of plenty on being in the moment, paying attention to what is around you and other similar such titles.

Today, make a commitment to notice ten things you failed to see before in your daily routine. Write them down and draw a conclusion from each clue. It is fun, it is brainwork and it will open up new opportunities to learn, give assistance and be the life of the dinner table when you get home.

Be Careful What You Hear

Another guest post from another talented ZMF colleague - enjoy! Talk soon, TZ

Effective communication relies not only on good listening, pronunciation of words, and reading nonverbal signals; it also requires awareness of assumptions that exist among us. Factoring in subconscious stereotypes and effective communication can get a little tricky. What made me think of this was a recent encounter I had while walking my dog.

So, I was walking my dog, and another guy was walking his, and as many city dwellers would not be surprised to learn, the two dogs sniffed each other and I engaged in small chit chat with the other dog's owner. Then a third guy was walking past us, without a dog, and seemed to have an important message to relay.

He approached both of us, sounding not frantic but concerned about danger lurking. He said what sounded like, "Watch out across the street over there (he pointed) because there's black guys." The guy I was talking to and I were dumfounded. I know racism still exists in society but I could not believe this guy (by the way we were all white, except for the other dog owner's dog), in downtown Chicago, would find it alarming there were black men walking the streets, let alone feel the urge to warn others about this. I sought clarification. Again he said, "Be careful if you walk in that direction there's some black guys. Stay away." This couldn't be. Just as I was about to ask him where he was from to try and get a sense of why he was petrified of black guys, and enable me to warm up to my lecture on the stupidity and ugliness of his comments, he said it again but this time his nonverbals suggested he was saying something else. As he pointed to the ground, and made a gesture showing what could happen on an unsteady surface, he said, "The black ice is really bad." Plus, he said it in singular form which made me realize he was talking about black ice. Ah, black ice! The ice without air bubbles that makes it transparent and hence taking the color of the material it lies on top of – often wet asphalt.

After realizing he was being helpful and not ignorantly hurtful, I thanked him and did not walk over in the direction he said contained black ice.

Thinking about it all I was struck by the misperception both of us dog owners had about what the third man was trying to warn us about. Was there a larger collective unconscious at work creating stereotypical (negative societal stereotypes about urban black men being dangerous) images out of what was a warning of danger? Or, did the third man just have poor pronunciation, which led to such a bad misunderstanding? Or both? Would his message have been interpreted differently if he were black? Or a woman? How does the "who" involved in communication interact with "what" is being said, heard and interpreted? The other guy with the dog also heard “black guys.” So, was it simply the way he said it that led us to think he was talking about black guys? Is there some unhidden stereotype of black guys that is evoked when a stranger comes up on the street and has a message of foreboding danger?

Listening is important and being aware of biases is too. I conclude that many times during daily interactions that consist of listening it is imperative to “check in” with those you are communicating with. Thinking through what you are hearing, and weighing it against nonverbal language, facts, etc., is key to not making rash judgments. I initially thought this guy was ignorant at best and racist at worst, so what if I hadn’t waited and decided to immediately confront his "racism?” That would have been a useless exercise and made me appear as if I was blindly looking for racism where it didn’t exist. So with that I say not only listen carefully but make sure there is some oversight to your listening by thinking about unchecked assumptions. Oh, and watch out for the black ice!

Alan Tuerkheimer, M.A., J.D. utilizes his background in psychology and law as a litigation consultant for ZMF. His experience conducting jury research has given him an in-depth understanding of people’s attitudes, biases and decision-making processes. He is highly sought-after due to his ability to deliver solutions that bridge the communication gap between trial team and jury. Alan earned his J.D. from the University of Wisconsin Law School and completed his graduate and undergraduate work in Psychology from Connecticut College and University of Wisconsin, respectively.

Is Your Reputation for Detail an Illusion?

Detail. What does paying attention to detail communicate? And whose detail do you pay attention to? Should you get to call yourself a detail person if the only detail you pay attention to is your own? Three people with three different reputations. Different detail scenarios - match them up.


Profile A:
30ish female, dresses nicely, jewelry is understated, works full time, is relied on heavily at her office to “keep things in order,” is praised annually for paying attention to the details.

Profile B:
50ish male, accounting background, a detailed self proclaimed “numbers” guy. Perfectionist with a strong routine gene. At the office is described as solid, reliable, “cuts to the heart of the issue.” Sees solutions where others don’t.

Profile C:
70ish, male, big picture kind a guy. Passionate. Uses terms like “slap it together” and is a committed do-it-yourselfer whether he knows how to do it or not.

Who does which?

___ Shows up at brunch with that little cross stitch on the new coat still connected

___ Keeps a “to-do” list and dutifully crosses off items as completed

___ Spends three days in kitchen and never notices a new piece of furniture

___ Is most comfortable in dress clothes

___ Spouse shows up at brunch with that little cross stitch on the new coat still connected

___ Remembers important dates such as birthdays and anniversaries

___ Notices new outfit on spouse immediately

___ Forgets or chooses not to comb the back of their hair even on a workday

___ Closet organized by activity – work/play/lounge

___ Organizes a calendar for both personal and work commitments

___ Balances checkbook every month

Let’s hear it readers – what do you think? Send me your answers either via blog@zmf.com or using the comments link below. Copy and paste the list above and enter in the profile letter to replace the _____. Good Luck!