LCP Global

''How' you communicate affects 'what' you communicate

  2. Share
Glenn Williams Glenn Williams
0 0

Donald DePalma describes the Internet as similar to “discovering the Eighth Continent,” because it –

“…confounds legislators and cultural purists worldwide who do not know what to make of the Web-based globalization phenomenon that threatens to make their geographic, political, economic, and cultural boundaries almost meaningless.”[i]

Of course, there are many benefits of an ‘interconnected world’ through the medium of the Internet. Rob Salkowitz, author of Young World Rising, points out a new breed of entrepreneurs whose growth and spread of their “social networks is helping to catalyze the potential seeded by capacity-building investments, bringing people into contact with ideas, opportunities, and markets.”[ii]

While many organizations are still trying to come to terms with how their businesses should interact with the Internet, Lisa Gitelman and Geoffrey Pingree acknowledge how the emergence of new media throughout history has shaped culture. They provide a healthy discussion on the place of media: how it is introduced, managed and how their meaning and function is shaped over time from its use.[iii] Insights include how:

  • Communication and media frame our context and collective sense of time, place and space, often defining what is public, what is private and what is or isn’t accurate.[iv]
  • Different types of media provide a structure to organize and transmit knowledge.
  • Media has the power to discriminate.[v] Cory Doctorow talks about the implications of this in detail in his book, Content, where he states that many of the poorer economies in our ‘information economy’ can’t afford access.[vi]
  • Media raises questions about the status and reliability of vision.[vii]
  • The medium used to convey a message communicates a certain reality through a particular lens that has the power to inform and shape what is seen and heard.[viii]

What’s the bottom-line?

If culture continues to create new ways for us to communicate, understanding their limits while leveraging their potential will be important for shaping your leadership and the message you and your organization want to be known for. Consider the following insights –

  1. Media is a powerful tool of communication, and awareness of its benefits and limitations (rather than ignorance or resistance) will improve your ability to use it well as a leader;
  2. Don’t assume the message being conveyed through the medium is the message being received by all recipients. The context of the content (including how other media can alter the meaning) can easily be distorted or misread by the degree to which recipients are familiar with the medium being used and the biases and perceptions they bring.
  3. Establish a) clear communication protocols for yourself and the organization you lead and b) create an intentional strategy to explore the breadth of new emerging media. Ignoring new emerging media conveys a lack of understanding and discipline, exposing your leadership, and the organization’s reputation, to unnecessary risks and missed opportunities.

 

[i] Donald A. DePalma, Business Without Borders (Massachusetts: Globa Vista Press, 2004), vii.

[ii] Rob Salkowitz, Young World Rising: How Youth, Technology, and Entrepreneurship are Changing the World From the Bottom Up (New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2010), 81.

[iii] Lisa Gitelman and Geoffrey B. Pingree (eds.), New Media 1740-1915. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004), xv.

[iv] Ibid., xvi.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Cory Doctorow. Content: Selected Essays on Technology, Creativity, Copyright and the Future of the Future. San Francisco: Tachyon Publications, 2008, 40.

[vii] Laura Burd Shaw. 2004. From Phantom Image to Perfect Vision. In New Media 1740-1915. eds. Lisa Gitelman and Geoffrey B. Pingree, 114. Cambridge: MIT Press.

[viii] Ibid., 131.

Community tags

This content has 0 tags that match your profile.

Leadership Insights

Brand
Communication

Comments

To leave a comment, login or sign up.

Related Content

0
Influence & power: the best story wins
Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Joseph Nye looks at two primary types of change in relation to political and economic power.[1] The first, he describes as Power Transition. Literally, how it transfers from one state to another state (e.g. from west to east). The second change he calls Power Diffusion. Simply, how power is moving among all states, to non-state actors on the world stage, not merely from one player to another. He debunks the common theory today that there is a key power transition from the U.S. to Asia, as he believes we should emphasize the ‘Recovery or Return of Asia.’ For example, in 1800, more than half of the world’s population lived in Asia and produced more than half of its products. In 1900, more than half of the world’s population still lived in Asia, but it only produced about 1/5 of its products. The Industrial Revolution was the catalyst behind this significant change. Europe and America became the dominant economic centre of the world. It is projected that in the 21st Century, there will be a return to Asia producing more than ½ of the world’s products. Power Diffusion centres on the removal of traditional restrictions. For example, computing and communications costs have fallen one thousand-fold between 1970 and the beginning of the 21st Century. If the same change had occurred in relation to automobiles, then you would be able to purchase a car today for around $5. Traditionally, you needed to be wealthy. Today, you need to be connected and have access to networks and the flow of information. Influence and power have become diffused. Whereas traditional power tended to focus on coercion (‘sticks’) and payment (‘carrots’), Nye believes it is time to think more innovatively about getting others to want what you want. He describes this as ‘soft power’. We achieve this by focusing our efforts around creating a new narrative, rather than on 'who wins'. What’s the bottom-line? Nye argues that we need to change the narrative away from the rise and fall of countries—and for that matter, which company wins—as it is often misleading and unhelpful. New narratives are established through organizing networks and building collaborative alliances that require groups to define their interests first and become transparent with their desired outcomes. The focus is on a win/win scenario, rather than ‘I win, you lose.’ This reality is just as important for organizations attempting to build partnerships across cultures. With today’s dominant, all-encompassing media and online social networks, compelling narratives are fast becoming more powerful than the traditional uses of power in acquiring new markets. How well are you and your business using the art of storytelling to convey the value of partnership?   [1] Joseoph Nye, “Global Shifts of Power” (video). http://www.ted.com/talks/joseph_nye_on_global_power_shifts
0
When leadership means something different
Culture significantly influences how the following statements are made, and how people respond to them. “We should take the initiative” “We should wait until we are asked for help” “This could turn out to be a great political manoeuvre” “Let’s not do anything, as it might be seen as a sign of weakness” “We should take control” Learning how other cultures define and express leadership is crucial in gaining and maintaining market share for any business trying to expand its operations beyond its own borders. While it is often easier to emphasise specific leadership attributes we believe a particular situation might need, this is sometimes inadequate as we interact with organizations in different countries. Wibbeke highlights the importance of valuing intercultural perspectives and compares leadership definitions between eastern [collective, holistic, spirituality-based] and western cultures [hierarchical, authority-based, and individualistic] [i] .  For example, In French, leadership (‘conduite’) means to guide one’s own behavior, to guide others, or command action. Although the French are famous for protesting, in France, authority holds deference and respect In German, leadership (‘Führung’) means guidance. In organizations, it is construed as a way to reduce uncertainty. The leader guides action and motivates others through guiding by certain rules In Chinese, leadership means ‘the leader and the led.’ The leader is one who ‘walks in front’ and guides the group through teaching ‘the way.’ The implication is that leadership can only occur through relationship In Arabic, the word ‘Sheikh’ has different meanings according to the regional culture within the Middle East. Literally, ‘Sheikh’ means a man over 40 years. However, in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia it means a person from the Royal Family, and in Egypt, a scholar of religion. In Lebanon, ‘Sheikh’ means a religious leader, even among Christians. All of this to confirm that leadership is not the same in every culture.   What’s the bottom-line? It should come as no surprise that the words we use to define leadership in our own culture can often cause confusion and offense when dealing with people from a different ethnic origin. Understanding this reality has wide-reaching implications for how effective we are in building strategic business partnerships outside our current borders, and how we respond to a culturally-diverse workplace.   [i] E. S. Wibbeke, Global Business Leadership (Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemanne, 2009), 18.
LCP Global
Powered by Cause Machine. All rights reserved.