BLOG

As I indicated in my last blog posting, I recently had an opportunity to read closely Fisher, Ury and Patton’s edition of the business classic, Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2011). It’s a remarkable, foundational text on how two or more parties can set aside their positions and negotiate for interests which they have in common–so long as they devote time and energy to investigating what they are.

Shortly before the latest edition of Getting to Yes was published, one of its co-authors, the internationally-renowned negotiator, William Ury, gave a TEDTalk, whose insights illustrate the usefulness of creatively negotiating for agreement and peace. Whether one’s a freelance copywriter or marketer negotiating fees; an international rights’ activist or mediator in the Middle East, striving to find some common ground; Ury’s insights are worth listening to, in the “walk from ‘no’ to ‘yes:’ ”

Just as all human beings are part of the 15,000 tribes on earth (as Anthropologists tell us), we are all part of one family. And in that context, Ury says, “the secret to peace is us” – the community that surrounds any conflict, a “third side” beyond the major players, which consists of family members, friends, allies, neighbours. That “third side” restores a fair perspective to negotiators, when so many of us react automatically (and in hostility). The “third side” in the context of the conflict in the Middle East, refers to Christians, Moslems and Jews, who all feel personally involved in its intractable war.

As Ury eloquently says, “Four thousand years ago, a man and his family crossed the Middle East and the world has never been the same since.” The man was of course Abraham, who stood for the unity of family, the father of us all. And whose basic value was respect and kindness (esp. hospitality) towards strangers. Ury says that Abraham is the “third side” of the Middle East and governs our position within a greater whole.

Some 10 years ago, thinking of how Abraham stands as an antidote to terrorism and conflict, Ury contemplated the usefulness of re-living Abraham’s story, of walking in his footsteps, in a common direction and in a side-by-side manner that would embody no threat to either party. With fellow negotiators, Ury plotted a path that followed Abraham’s footsteps, from his birthplace to his grave (from “womb to tomb”). They did this despite others’ claims that such a project was impossible, that is was unthinkable to cross the boundaries of some of the 10 most hostile geographical countries the world.

On the contrary, the first set of travellers in 2008 found that people in the local villages offered them food and hospitality, in the name of Abraham. The prophet and shared ancestor continues to be a living presence to the people of the Middle East. And with that walk as inspiration, “Abraham” walks and runs uniting different communities from countries as disparate as the U.S. and Brazil, have since been held.

Organizers have found that Abraham influenced not only the psychology of the welcome and hospitality, but also the economic welfare brought to poor residents who live on the path. Those residents began regularly to cook and serve delicious food to passing tourists. For many locals, financial survival, after lifetimes of abject poverty, ensued. From “hostility” comes “hospitality,” Ury observes. And “terrorism” is transformed into “tourism.”

And why not?

Ury observes that iIf Europe was able to rebuild from the devastation of 1945 to peaceful prosperity, common identity and a common currency, why not the Middle East, too?  Abraham as the progenitor of community and the daily transactions of tourism offer the common economy. Self-interest among nations gives way to sharing.

Ury closes his talk with three insights: (1) The secret to peace is the “third side;” (2) The third side is each of us; and (3) “Each of us, with a single step can . . . bring the world a step closer to peace.” Continue reading “William Ury: Walking the “Abraham Path” to Negotiate Peace”

Since I did not study Business (but the Arts) in university, I find it interesting to read and think about some of the classic texts that business majors (or MBA students) have read, as a part of their training. Often there are tremendous insights to be mined for my work, as a freelancer.

One such study, Roger Fisher, William Ury and Bruce Patton’s Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Revised Edition, 2011) makes a very powerful case on how to negotiate agreement well with another party or parties, however different and dissenting the two or more groups in negotiation may be.

The authors are pillars of the Harvard Negotiation Project, which has worked together in print and in world-wise settings of negotiation, in state and industry, since 1977. The project is based on a method of “principled negotiation,” that aims to “decide issues on their merits rather than through a haggling process focused on what each side says it will and won’t do” (xxviii).

One of the authors’ foundational arguments in this book is that behind opposed positions are shared and compatible interests, and not only conflicting and different ones. A shopkeeper may haggle with a customer over the cost of an antique bowl, until both parties are blue-in-the-face and further from agreement than when they started. Participants’ egos become identified with such positions, until both parties are at an impasse and have lost all amity (not to mention time and energy).

Two men in a library quarrel over whether or not to open a window (their positions are yay/nay). “They bicker back and forth about how much to leave it open: a crack, halfway, three-quarters of the way. No solution satisfies them both. . .

Enter the librarian. She asks one why he wants the window open [his interest]: ‘To get some fresh air.’ She asks the other why he wants it closed [his interest]: ‘To avoid the draft.’ After thinking a minute, she opens wide a window in the next room, bringing in fresh air without a draft” (42). Here the librarian has effectively negotiated a settlement that meets both men’s interests, and has done so through a principled weighing and considering of each side’s interests. She has simultaneously sidestepped their polarized positions. Continue reading “Favourite Books: Visiting Fisher and Ury’s _Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In_”

A blog posting of B2B Marketing expert Louis Foong further confirms the potential power that I continue to find in e-mail and e-newsletter (or “email newsletter”) writing and marketing.  For B2B clients and campaigns, the stats are impressive, even if we communications’ types in Canada are wading through new legal anti-spam regulations!

Foong cites the US site “Position” as indicating that the ROI from B2B email marketing (in the US) is 127%! And a full 55% of B2B businesses last winter expected to increase their annual expenditure on email. True, these aren’t Canadian statistics, but they bear relevance, just the same, to “marcom” work in our country.

“Position” further reports that the key purposes of B2B email use is for customer retention (77%) and high quality lead generation (40%). The ROI for email marketing is about $44.25, per $1 spent!

Email marketing is a huge producer of intelligent, fact-based, content-marketing (so lately the thrust of marketing), and increasingly, content is going mobile.

Foong reports that for marketing and communications’ experts, mobile formats aren’t entirely positive: for instance, 80% of email users delete emails that don’t appear well on a mobile device. No second chance for that message, if it isn’t mobile-friendly. And a lot of companies currently have been missing out on their ROI, because they don’t consider mobile formatting.

When US companies implement responsive design to email campaigns, Foong reports that click-through rates fall between 21 and 25% — a convincing response.

So, closer to home: what is your company or organization doing to tap into B2B email marketing? Have you outsourced your newsletter production and related strategies to specialists like me? And what use are you making of a mobile platform (Apple? Samsung?)

Please share your observations and strategies with me. I’d be delighted to hear from you.

Fewer and fewer folk out there still smoke (huddling outdoors if you are addicted to nicotine creates challenges during Prairie Winters.) Everyone knows the dangers of smoking (even if people act in denial of them . . .  . )

But many more people sit all day, every day, five (or more) days per week, in front of their desks. Sitting is “the new smoking,” a friend recently commented to me.

Bolstered by reading various articles since 2013 in the Associated Press and by observing two mentors who are full converts to standing while they work, I have been transitioning over the past six months to a standing desk. On a day when I feel too tired to stand, I do sometimes sit down. But I find that having a stool that allows me to perch (or lean), near my raised computer when I feel fatigued, often provides the necessary support.

In part due to this change, I have lost about five pounds, drink more water (another health-giver), and concentrate much better over long periods of time. Standing also reminds me to get out and take a short walk each afternoon (especially when the weather’s good!), so that I don’t spend whole spring and summer days “cooped up” in my office. (Even the coops of chicken, on which that metaphor is based are being replaced with more humane living spaces, on chicken farms, these days.) Standing when one works leads to better overall health.

Doctors say that even three, hour-long workouts at the gym each week cannot counter the effect of prolonged weekday sitting. Some workers try slow walking and cycling on low-speed treadmills or stationary bikes, burning approximately 300-350 calories in the course of a work day. That’s like adding the benefit of a half-hour cardio session, for each day that you stand at work.

Now some critics complain that ergonomics can be a costly business. And it’s true that you should wear good sneakers or at least walking shoes (if you use orthotics, then obviously you must wear them at work). But you (likely) own those already, so footwear doesn’t really add to the bill. You should also stand on an anti-fatigue mat. And while they can run in the hundreds of dollars, some inexpensive and adequate models can be found via Amazon and other online sellers for under $40. The floor walkers and greeters at many stores use these, themselves.

Continue reading ““Sitting is the New Smoking”: Affordable Ergonomics Can Keep Us Healthy and Working Longer . . . .”

This week, some further thoughts on the longevity of electronic mail (which is also the format for e-newsletters) . . .

On his influential site, “Leadership,” B2B expert and industry leader Louis Foong observes that social media isn’t good when it comes to “delivering what B2B organizations [and companies] need—leads, conversions, customers and sales.” Despite the sparkle and glamour of social, Foong says, email persists and remains the best conversion tool after organic searching.

The stats are powerful: last October, he reported that email had more than three times the number of users of Facebook and Twitter combined and that email marketing outpaced “more than four times” all other web viewing, including videos and images (my emphasis).

He writes: “[W]hile email is no longer the preferred personal communication channel among the younger generation, for business communication, it still rocks.” The email list must be “segmented, target and frequently cleansed” (there’s no room for a stagnant email list) but it still rocks!

UK and US users in 2013 used email as the top outreach channel for all of the steps of a customer’s purchase.

The value of content-rich communication persists in email marketing and in digital marketing, as well.

It is also true that mobile technology presents the latest challenge to consumers, since messages that do not shrink to fit tiny screen-widths are easily deleted.

But Foong observes that social networks and tools “vanish or decline significantly” over time in ways that email has not. He cites many teenagers who years ago gave up on Facebook, leaving it to their mothers and grandmothers. Continue reading “Is Email Really Dead?”