I'm taking a 2-day course called Executive Communication & Influence for Senior ICs. Here are some notes for me to consolidate learning and have a reference to come back to.
RLC Framework
"Always be selling" - practice all the time. Treat each stakeholder and each communication as important, because they are. That includes slack messages, emails, texts, presentations, etc. Play like it's game day all the time, and get a ton of practice in to raise your baseline for communication.
Most communication issues boil down to:
1. Poor framing around your recipient
2. Poor logic / unexplained logic
3. Too much cognitive load
A framework to improve communication - RLC:
Most communication issues boil down to:
1. Poor framing around your recipient
2. Poor logic / unexplained logic
3. Too much cognitive load
A framework to improve communication - RLC:
- Recipient-focused - frame 90% around the other person. Don't be selfish about why something is useful for you. Framing around the other person is not about being flattering.
- Logic - share rationale, thought process, data points, assumptions, facts, evidence, examples
- "I think we should do [idea] because [rationale, data, first principles, examples]. The potential risks are Y, but we can address by doing Z. If you agree we can start by doing [first step]."
- How much logic to share? Start by using the minimum effective dose and gradually ramp up. Share enough to prevent pushback and motivate the person to do what you want them to do
- Cognitive Load - reduce the mental effort required to process information
You have to do all three part of RLC - they're all important.
Main point, context below (MPCB)
Same as TL;DR. Provide the main question, recommendation, stance or reason for sending the note upfront, and follow up with useful context. This is helpful for longer memos and complex topics because it gives your reader agency and autonomy on how to engage with your communication. Don't make people wade through a bunch of words to find the nugget that you're trying to communicate.
Don't over-use formatting
This is one I'm guilty of. Rather than helping, over-formatting adds cognitive load and makes the message more difficult to parse. Instead, use prose and connective tissue, and establish logical flow between ideas. Bolding and formatting will not save you from lack of clarity in your thinking.
Don't be afraid to offer a point of view
Share your point of view, or your recommendation to reduce cognitive load on your recipient. Most people are overly worried about anchoring peoples perspectives on their point of view. Don't worry - people love to disagree, so there's low risk of that. Put skin in the game by offering a point of view of implications, conclusions, how to go forward, etc... Sharing your point of view takes courage, but it makes the conversation more productive because it gives people something to respond to. Weave together a narrative that supports a perspective.
Don't punt the discussion
If you can have a discussion on slack, there's no reason to have a meeting. When you speak in person then you'll have to have clear thinking anyways, so you won't be saved from having to do the clarifying thinking work.
Verbal Communication
Verbal Communication is different from traditional public speaking
Presenting, especially to an executive, is not a tidy space where you're given the ability to navigate a well crafted presentation. Instead it's a conversation. You have to prepare for those conversations, and aim to be concise.
Presenting, especially to an executive, is not a tidy space where you're given the ability to navigate a well crafted presentation. Instead it's a conversation. You have to prepare for those conversations, and aim to be concise.
- What is the most important thing to share?
- What am I really trying to say?
- What do they need to understand?
Assume you'll be the leader of every meeting, so spend a few minutes of time preparing as such.
Frame the conversation up front
- Don't just dive into the details. Your counterpart doesn't know what we're talking about and why. If you dive right into the details you're going from 0 to 100.
- Instead do this:
- "The thing I want to discuss is X. What I need from you is Y. Here's some context..."
- "I know we only have 30 minutes, and we have a lot to cover. The goal for today is to X and I'll start by sharing a bit out Y then Z. Feel free to raise your hand if I'm going too far down a direction you already know. Is there anything else we want to make sure we cover?"
- Share the overarching goal of what you're talking about and why
- Remind people where you left off
All this makes you seem strategic and focused.
Start right before you get eaten by the bear. Don't give too much lead up context. Cut out unnecessary backstory.
Addressing questions
2-3 sentence rule - try to answer each question on 2-3 sentences. This is a simple way to force yourself to answer concisely. 1 sentence is too short, 7-10 sentences is too long. Offer a concise nugget and afterwards offer to elaborate on a few areas, so that your audience can select whether they want to dive deeper.
Address the Question behind the Question (QBQ)
Identify the underlying concern behind the question that's being asked.
How do you do that?
- What feels risky to them? What would make them feel safe?
- What is the context in which I'm being asked the question?
- Use proxies like their role/function
- "It sounds like you're asking X. Is that right, or did you have something else in mind?"
- "Could you share a bit more / Do you have an example? I could go in a bunch of directions and I want to cover what's most relevant for you."
What to do when you're caught off guard?
You don't need to have the perfect answer to every question. Instead you can be clear that what you're offering is initial thinking.
"Hmm interesting. I'd want to think about this a bit more, but my initial reaction is ___. What do you think?"
Don't come from a place of moral high ground when someone asks something that goes against what you've agreed on in the past. That's very passive aggressive. Instead, be supportive of their perspective, but be clear about implications.
Written Communication
The average knowledge worker spends 19 hours per week on written communication. It behooves us to get better & faster at writing.
Clear thinking is clear writing. The hardest part of writing is the thinking. Before you start writing you should have an end goal in mind. What type of writing is this? Discovery writing or summarizing writing?
Summarizing writing - the goal is to share information. Examples include updates, FYIs, recaps, context. The challenge in this type of writing is what to prioritize and how to distill the words down to their minimal effective components while being comprehensive.
Discovery writing - the goal is to solve a problem. Examples include strategy, proposals, decisions, early analytical work. The challenge is that you're not yet sure what you think. Discovery writing is tougher than summarizing writing because you have to decide what to do. It's important to build in time to debate with yourself. The goal is to build conviction and develop your point of view. The process of discovery writing is quite chaotic. There's lot's of jumping around as you're building conviction in a certain direction. Lean in to that, because it's supposed to be messy. Don't try to fill in some kind of template prematurely because that stifles creativity. It's okay to let the process be more organic. Once you've clarified your thinking, you can summarize it and make it flow in a logical and coherent narrative.
Ask yourself prompting questions:
Clear thinking is clear writing. The hardest part of writing is the thinking. Before you start writing you should have an end goal in mind. What type of writing is this? Discovery writing or summarizing writing?
Summarizing writing - the goal is to share information. Examples include updates, FYIs, recaps, context. The challenge in this type of writing is what to prioritize and how to distill the words down to their minimal effective components while being comprehensive.
Discovery writing - the goal is to solve a problem. Examples include strategy, proposals, decisions, early analytical work. The challenge is that you're not yet sure what you think. Discovery writing is tougher than summarizing writing because you have to decide what to do. It's important to build in time to debate with yourself. The goal is to build conviction and develop your point of view. The process of discovery writing is quite chaotic. There's lot's of jumping around as you're building conviction in a certain direction. Lean in to that, because it's supposed to be messy. Don't try to fill in some kind of template prematurely because that stifles creativity. It's okay to let the process be more organic. Once you've clarified your thinking, you can summarize it and make it flow in a logical and coherent narrative.
Ask yourself prompting questions:
- Is this true? How might it not be true?
- Is this the fastest/best way to do this?
- etc...
Don't be too concise. Concise does not mean short. Being clear is better than being overly concise.
Use Signposting
Use key words or phrases, formatting, and overall structure to signal what the rest of your message is about.
- "The most important part to point out is..."
- "What this means is..."
- "Surprisingly, customers said..."