THE 70 PERCENT RULE

Shame on us communicators and advertisers and content developers (ad nauseum).

Our learning and development colleagues know this principle of knowledge acquisition by heart:  10 percent relies on actual training, 20 percent, from others.  And the 70 percent?  From on-the-job experiences.

Recently, the experiential part of learning has been ramped up. 

Thanks in no small part to start-ups and tech businesses, blackboard-painted walls and tables on wheels act as inspiration and experience vehicles. 

Software developers, eager to understand why clients do what they do and what they want, hold what’s been called ‘participatory market research.’ 

And august institutions such as Harvard regularly conduct hands-on courses, from a prison studies project learning about criminal justice (in tandem) with prison inmates to re-engineering medical devises with doctors close at hand.

Why don’t we practice first-hand learning?  In other words, when there’s an issue that demands not just awareness but also the action to do something, communicators and colleagues need to seriously consider increasing the do-it-yourselves and how-tos. 

Take performance management, for instance.  A number of today’s more progressive organizations are killing the old ranking system and mid and year-end talks, replacing both with ongoing dialogues between boss and individual, team and individual.  At the same time, our high-tech reliance means many employees aren’t accustomed to conversations, with many preferring text, Instagram, Twitter, and email over traditional face to face.

The solution?  Show them how to talk, to handle difficult encounters, and to really listen and hear and learn.  It’s as much our goal as it is our L&D colleagues.

EAVESDROPPING

Sometimes a mere conversation says it better than we do.  Here’s what we overheard one day in the coffee shop queue:

Barista:  “I wanted to let you know:  We won’t have any more of these tea bags in a few weeks.  Our warehouse is out.  Like, permanently out.”

Customer:  “Why?”

Barista:  “We’re changing to looseleaf tea.  Tea that will brew for a few minutes while customers wait.  And that will be interesting!”

Customer:  “Why is that?”

Barista:  “Because corporate hasn’t figured out yet that many of our shops attract buy and run customers, especially before work.  Customers here simply won’t wait five minutes for tea.”

Customer:  “I don’t understand … .  Isn’t tea the up and coming beverage?”

Barista:  “Yeah, I guess it is.  But we haven’t yet reached the trendy point, where customers, like in Asia, will stand on line for many minutes for a cuppa.  Don’t worry, we’ll change back to tea bags as soon as corporate sees the numbers!”

Sound like any of your clients or employers? 

WHAT WE LEARNED FROM THE 2012 ELECTION

Numbers fascinate us.

Political pollsters live (and die, metaphorically) by them.  They’re the center of accountants’ and actuaries’ work.  PR professionals create news through numbers.  And Web sites and social media attempt to  measure impressions and results in some form of credible numerics.

At the same time, numbers can be manipulated.  Just because only a teeny percentage of Millennials isn’t bored by advertising – or so trumpets an Edelman survey of 4,000 of these cohorts  – doesn’t mean that the vast majority of them don’t fast-forward their Tivos during ad segments.   Any reported quantity of Facebook likes, even in the high double digits, only reveals that many folks are clicking in to participate in a promotion, win a prize, or share information for points.

In short, we’re jaded number crunchers.  The mother/daddy of all statistical generators, the election researchers, showed their true selves this fall, with the U.S. Presidential election.  Instead of guiding and advising candidates, pollsters allowed for the churns and flip-flops of their clients.  [No, it wasn’t just Mitt Romney, trust us.]  A majority of West Coast voters favor gay marriage?  Then, our to-be representatives replied “aye” with vigor.  Healthcare the number-one issue on Easterners’ minds?  You bet, at least some form of Obamacare was sanctioned by all.

Polls, to us, are real opportunities to listen, to guide our behaviors, to refine our actions.  Sure, they’re grist for our external relations colleagues to drive awareness.  We’ve done the same in previous lives.  Consider this:  The best of researchers use carefully planned statistics as an architecture, the foundation for causes and reasons and emotions.  They pore over every word, every question, then copy-test to ensure that the clarity of the question will produce answers of meaning.    When responses appear, they’re sliced and diced and cross-scrutinized to ensure accuracy of reporting, then mapped to indicate future trends and issues (and needed metrics).

That kind of care with numbers is our true North Star, whether driving change or marketing or brand campaigns.   Say it’s so, Mark Twain.