Nelson Tan asked:


I have a feeling some niche marketers found success in a way that is not publicized on the Net.

What is typically publicized is the way of the “niche blitz”: Cover as many niches as possible en masse and monetize related information. This aims for quantity. Under the duress of time, strategization is sacrificed, and the emphasis is on a repetitive pattern of setting up online systems for monetization through product sales, paid clicks and lead generation, but each one of these niches or systems are not going to pay highly by itself because of a certain ‘herd’ factor pertaining to this idea of a “niche blitz”. Moreover, the maximum human effort that can be possibly expended comes most likely from only 1 person, the marketer himself.

In the Internet Business Manifesto, Rich Schefren had stressed you’re going to hit a limit with all the work done solely by yourself. That’s not how companies grow. I’m already lying to myself when “I AM the company”.

Not only that, the end of your “niche blitz” can come when your niche sites become stale and die down because of one-time setup-and-leave-it effort or “repetition fatigue”.

Of late, because of the expertise I’m known for, business associates have come to propose ideas and work in need of a collaboration to generate leads online. So instead of chasing niches, I’m attracting them. Second, the economy of these offline businesses my associates are involved in definitely deals with a lot more money and possibly have a lesser degree of competition due to its lack of Internet pre-eminence (it may be the same case with competitors in the same industry), but if I should bring the business online, it will certainly be presented from a unique angle and with a unique taste.

The crucial characteristic to note is [b]any form of business that requires a team of players to run it is certainly big enough to share substantial profits for everyone even while your role within the team is a small bit part.[/b] It is what you should be looking for in evaluating a business because you can then fully focus on exercising a specialty skill (for example, lead generation) to the fullest instead of “doing everything from A to Z”, leading to fatigue and aimlessness.

So don’t be embarassed that you don’t consider yourself successful via the “niche blitz” method. Being more selective can be the more profitable way for you.

With this being said, perhaps there are highly profitable businesses within your neighborhood that with your help as an Internet Marketer and if the business permits, they can bring in a lot more profits online! You are merely piggybacking a business and injecting it with a new momentum towards Internet pre-eminence. If you’re not attracting opportunities then you should proactively approach the business owners instead and propose a win-win situation.

I was able to obtain a sample copy of a local businesses approach letter that Paul Evans has used to create an extremely successful business serving as the local Internet expert for businesses in his hometown. I want you to have a free copy.

This is the perfect complement to Andrew Cavanaugh’s special report, “Offline Gold For The Online Marketer”, about selling your Internet Marketing skills to businesses in your local city. The report starts by presuming the reader as a total stranger to business owners and how s/he goes about the process of striking a business partnership to the point when they would be happy to put checks into the reader’s pocket.

Years ago I did a little research out of curiosity and I reprint my personal summary: Out of the 95% of all US companies which are small businesses (categorized as having less than 100 workers), 66% do not believe the Web offers significant opportunities to fuel their growth just because they are local businesses. Only 23% anticipate that online sales will affect their bottomline. So if people say there’s still a lot of potential in online marketing, imagine what’s still being ignored in the REAL world!

If you know very well you would like to take the path of forging alliances with existing offline businesses, read Andrew’s special report to find out how to go about it in the most effective and efficient manner.

Matt Somers asked:

A wise man once said that apart from the spelling there is no difference between counselling and coaching. There’s a shade of truth in this but for the sake of the clarity I’m trying to achieve in this piece I am going to illustrate the differences such as they are. In fairness, it’s relatively easy for me to do this as I am concentrating on coaching that takes place at work; usually delivered by a line manager. We’ll see later on when we come to look at the different types and branches of coaching activity that the lines of distinction do become far more blurred.

As with mentoring, the skills of the coach and the counsellor are the same. They each listen attentively, ask probing questions and offer non-judgemental observations in the spirit of helping their ‘clients’ find their own answers. I don’t think either a coach or a counsellor would go down the “You should…”, “You must…” route. The difference does not lie in the skill set; it has much more to do with the content of the conversation and the desired result.

Counsellors are concerned with identifying root causes. They will guide us on a journey through our history to identify critical incidents and problems that have left a mark and cause us problems still. With such issues identified, the work of the counsellor develops into one of exploring ways of dealing with those problems and making changes. We can easily see that relationship counsellors, substance abuse counsellors, bereavement counsellors, etc. focus on dealing with what’s happened.

Coaches are concerned with moving forward. Coaches help the people whom they coach to identify a desired set of circumstances, to examine how that contrasts with current circumstances and then to plan out a series of steps to get from one point to the other. The coach starts from the here and now and, although aware that situations in the past can cause problems today, is more focused on creating mobility and momentum and on getting people started. Coaches focus on dealing with what must happen next.

Picture the scene: you’re three-nil down at half time. The team counsellor would examine the mistakes of the first half, but the team coach would set out the tactics for the second. Both are useful, and as ever are often combined. As always, the needs of the people we’re helping must override any semantic debate around the differences.

However, getting the positioning right is crucial. I’ve seen many a coaching programme get off to a shaky start because staff perceived that they were going to be counselled and were obviously uneasy about how well their managers were qualified to offer this kind of help and whether it was appropriate to talk about potentially emotive personal issues in a work context. Of course there may be a time for counselling at work, and what starts out as a straightforward coaching session may move in that direction. With this in mind it is worth checking out your organization’s welfare and access to counselling policy if you have the slightest suspicion that a coaching approach may uncover a deep seated issue and thus need a professional intervention.

The statements below are an attempt to put these comparisons in simple terms

Managing “Do this.”

Instructing “Here’s how to do this.”

Training “Have a go at doing this.”

Mentoring “My advice would be to….”

Counselling “What feelings does this invoke?”

Coaching “How do you think you could…?”

I wonder if in the end these differences are purely academic and of more interest to people like me who muse on these things, than to people like you who have the harder task of getting people to be the best they can at work.

Having said that, an appreciation of the similarities and differences is useful when it comes to positioning coaching in your team and in your organization. You may well find that if your team is unclear about what coaching involves and have confused it with other things, then they may not engage as fully as you’d wish.

Jonathan Senior asked:

Being a new manager In the UK at least, people tend to be promoted on the basis of technical knowledge rather than management skill.

Quite often you hear from ex soccer players who have gone from playing to managing say that it is a big change going from “one of the lads” to telling someone they aren’t in the team for the cup final.

So how can a new manager get started with a management career without alienating previous colleagues and friends?

1. Remember the relationship has changed forever and there is no going back. People will look to YOU to bail them out of problems.

2. Don’t go mad celebrating. Some colleagues may have failed miserably at the interview or even worse, may not have been given an interview.

3. Think about how you talk to these people and how they reply. Depending on the nature of your workplace, shouting over the office may no longer be acceptable. You might have a desk or even move offices completely. Never under estimate the power a desk or office move!

4.Think about how and where you socialise with people who still do your old job. Getting drunk every Saturday night is probably not all that clever if you want respect on Monday morning (but that depends on the jo you do…)

5. Try to sport when they are testing you. Like it or not, people you used to sit alongside will try to test you out. Will you let everyone go home early the day before the holidays start? Who will cover the office if you do?

6. Work out a plan to deal with being “tested”. Your new staff will “test” you – work out (even subconsciously) how far they can push you. You must work out how to cope with this or they will take control from day 1. You could pick several issues which you will not move on. These could include, office cover after 5pm or maximum number of tea breaks. Don’t tell anyone what these are though and they won’t work you out as quick.

7. Make sure your subject matter knowledge is up to date. “If you don’t know something, know where to look” You will get tested on this also.

8. Praise in public, criticise in private. This is basic and you will need to be on your guard not to be drawn into a public debate or discussion on a controversial subject or one you are not confident discussing.

9. Don’t take everything on yourself This is easier said that done (especially if the ). Pause a while- (if the vacancy HAS been there some time, another couple of days won’t make much difference. If you work out what needs to be done BEFORE jumping in, YOU are likely to remain sane and healthy rather than buckling under the pressure with a few weeks.

Being a new manager is exciting, daunting but very rewarding. To summarise,the key thing is managing the changing relationship between yourself and your former colleagues.

Tom O\’Dea asked:

Introduction

The challenge of better communication skills has spawned books, seminars and many a consulting company.   How can it be addressed in a short article like this?

Treat this, and other articles like it, as a tip.  This is a brief education in a couple of important aspects of effective communications.  No theory here; this is real observation and advice.  Put it to use, and you’ll be a more effective leader.

The Communications Mystique

“What we have here is a failure to communicate”.  Are you old enough, like me, to remember that line from the movie Cool Hand Luke?  Even if you’re not, you’ve heard some version of that line if you’ve been in business.

Hardly any missed milestone, production problem, or customer service failure hasn’t been at least partly explained as a communications problem.

What’s so difficult about communications?

Nothing, really.  Whether it’s one to one, one to many or many to many, communication is nothing more than conversation.  Somebody’s speaking, and somebody’s listening (hopefully).

Gaining better communication skills involves developing the ability to observe the conversations taking place, and make adjustments so that the speaking and the listening are both being done effectively.  That doesn’t sound so tough, does it?  Well, it’s a little harder when you’re observing your own conversations.  But it’s still possible!

The First Secret to Better Communication Skills

Have the conversation!  It’s amazing how often the “failure to communicate” is just that — a failure to even hold an important conversation.  Leaders assume people know what needs to be done.  People assume leaders understand the obstacles they face.

Or if assumptions aren’t getting in the way, sometimes the problem is reluctance.  After all, some conversations are tough to have.  It’s not easy to tell someone that you disagree with them.  Worse yet, maybe you’re angry with them because you feel they’ve let you down failed to live up to an agreement.

If you’re the leader, your team may be reluctant to bring you bad news.  They may be very reluctant to disagree with you or challenge your position.  After all, career ******* is not usually on the path to success and happiness.

The Leader’s Role in Fostering Better Communication Skills

Make it safe.  Encourage people to bring you bad news, and to challenge you.  Let the organization know when it’s done and done well.  Acknowledge the people who stepped up and took the risk.  Do this even if you disagree with their points.  In fact, do this especially when you disagree with their points.

If people see that they can make an argument and be appreciated for it, even when they don’t win the argument, the level of dialogue will step up.  You as a leader have become a better communicator by exhibiting the behaviors that reward just holding  the important conversations.

The Next Level of Better Communication Skills – Observe

Look around the organization.  Pay attention to the dialogue.  You’re looking for one of three things:

Silence — People withdrawing and not contributing to the conversation.  Some are shy and need their confidence built.  Some are avoiding conflict and need to know it’s ok. All need to understand that they’re on the team because they bring needed talents.  And their talents need to be part of the dialogue.

Violence — People dominating the conversation and not allowing others’ views to be heard or considered.  Counsel these people.  Help them understand that dialogue is not a contest to see who wins.  It’s a process to get out as much relevant information as possible.  This is especially important because when you have people who are prone to go silent, someone who dominates or goes violent makes it easy for the others to hide.

Real Dialogue — The free flow of ideas, effective debate and discussion, and ultimately a team that stakes out a position and where the members support one another.  It sounds ideal and not everyone gets there, but work at it by creating an environment that’s safe for dialogue, and you’ll be amazed at the results.

Tom O\’Dea asked:

Introduction

Leaders need to seek better communication skills not only for themselves and their leadership teams, but as part of the organization’s culture.  Successful change management requires getting everyone moving in one new direction.

People will be talking with one another while you’re trying to drive change.  As a leader, you want to make sure those conversations are out in the open so that objections can be addressed and people will grow confident in your leadership.

Better Communication Skills at the Organization Level

What do we mean when we talk about the communication skills of an organization?  At the individual level, we know how to describe communication skills.  We talk about someone’s style, their subject matter knowledge, their ability to adapt their message to their target audience, their preparation, etc.

In an organization, better communication skills are something we seek to build in the culture.  To be specific, we’re seeking to create a cultural norm of frequent, open dialogue.  When that’s the norm, people feel safe in raising concerns and objections, knowing that they will be heard.

They also recognize that they are obligated to participate in dialogue, whether in meetings or less formally among their peers.  It’s part of their job, making sure they are contributing not only their labor but their expertise, insight and ideas whenever possible.

Leaders need to look out for the two biggest barriers to better communication skills in an organization: silence and violence.

Recognizing Silence

Very simply, silence means people are not participating in the dialogue.  Said another way, important conversations are not happening because people are choosing not to engage in them.

Why is silence a problem?

Hopefully you’ve hired smart people.  It only makes sense, then, that you want and need the insights of those smart people when you’re leading a change program.  Smart people always have thoughts and opinions.  When they go silent, you lose the benefit of knowing those thoughts and opinions.

Besides not having the input, when people are silent you don’t know where they stand.  Do they understand what you are trying to accomplish?  Are they committed to working with you and your team, or do they have reservations?  Without clear understanding and commitment, how will you bring these people along with you?

Addressing Silence

First and foremost, make sure you’ve created an environment where it’s safe to speak out.  Many people who turn to silence do so because they feel they may be ignored or worse yet criticized for speaking up.

Examine your behavior — what do you do when you are challenged?  Do you fight back right away?  Or do you give considered answers and act respectful when you disagree with the challenger?  Check the same behaviors in your leadership team, and within the organization in general.  You’ve got to make it safe for people to engage.  Your behavior will set the tone.

If you’re sure it’s safe and you see individuals are still reluctant to add their input to the dialogue of the organization, coach them individually.  Let them know how much their input is valued and needed, and thank them when they open up.

Recognizing Violence

In this context, violence can be described as the tendency of one or a few individuals to dominate conversations.  When there is violence, there is no chance for open dialogue.  The dominators, if there are more than one, may argue their points without effectively listening to one another.  And those who are not dominating the conversation will end up going silent, out of frustration or boredom.

So in the end, violence begets silence.  How do you address violence?

As a leader, maintain your own objectivity.  You’re a participant in the conversations taking place, but you must also be an observer.  Learn to step out of the discussion from time to time and assess what’s happening.  If you observe individuals dominating to the point where others are checking out, you need to intervene.

The degree of intervention depends on just how “violent” the dialogue is getting.  It can be as simple as reminding someone to ease up a little and open themselves up to push back from others.  Or it can go all the way to having to call a time out and taking people aside to help them see that their passion is overwhelming others and suppressing good dialogue.

The Result of Silence and Violence

One of two things is going to happen when you don’t have open dialogue in which everyone is actively engaged.

You’ll stall. Some strong people will argue and debate ad infinitum, while others check out.  And your change strategy goes no where.

You’ll move forward.  Not everyone will be participating, but strong people will drive and dominate the dialogue and the resulting actions.

Stalling will be very clear to you, and you’ll need to intervene to create safety, get people engaged, help break logjams, etc.

Moving forward might not seem so bad, but beware.  Depending on just how many people have gone silent, there may be a time bomb in your implementation plan.  When things go wrong, as they do in any change initiative, there will be a number of people who will have effectively positioned themselves to wash their hands of all responsibility.

As we noted earlier, just because they go silent doesn’t mean they don’t have input and opinions.  When the plan goes forward and they’ve been shouted down, or chose not to engage because they felt it wasn’t safe, they will be in a position to say “that wasn’t my idea”.

Even though such behavior should be unacceptable, it happens way too often.  Prevent it by setting expectations around organizational communication, specifically creating a shared value for open, honest dialogue without repercussion or disrespect.