|
|
| Home - Industry Article - Mar 03 Issue |
The Danger of Underestimating Communication Strategy
continued... page 2 |
Another example I recall is when I was in a planning session some years back regarding a potential acquisition. By mid-morning we had plans laid-out on a series of flip-charts: market diagrams, routes-to-market, organization structures, etc. About mid-day the CFO of the acquiring company walked in un-announced, looked around, and stated that it all looked very confusing. He looked unhappy, and then summarily left. But later that same day we had distilled the diagrams down into a series of tables that outlined the tasks, revenue milestones and costs – in rows and columns. Around dinner-time the same CFO walked in, looked around the room and stated…”oh, now I get-it.”
Now let’s combine executive “A” with CFO “B.” Here’s another real-life scenario: John and Sarah were the CEO and CFO, respectively, of a successful privately-held company. They had a long-standing personal relationship, founded their company together and wielded heavy influence in their executive team’s decisions. Their company had entered a difficult transition period, during which time a raft of managers had come – and gone while unsuccessfully trying to get their plans approved for going forward. As a conceptual thinker, John loved to make decisions based upon intuition. He was a charismatic, quick decision-maker, and dealt well in the abstract. Sarah, on the other-hand, loved facts and proof. She did not “suffer-fools” easily, could not stand unprepared managers and had instructed the team to only bring ideas forward once they are “baked.” No “big-elephant pictures” for her.
In theory, John and Sarah believed they were quite complimentary because of the ways in which they viewed the world. In practice, managers cowered to present to their executive team because one of two things generally happened: (a) John checks-out when a presentation is too detailed while the presenter engages with Sarah. John sees the presenter as not being able to ‘get to the point.’ Alternatively, Sarah gets frustrated with conceptual presentations and frequently interrupts to ask detailed, fact-based questions in support of the presentation. This keeps the presenter from getting through the material he desperately wants to present to John, but Sarah wants to see that the presenter “knows his stuff.” The presenter gets completely distracted, can not immediately process and return the very deep data required, and Sarah concludes the presenter is inept and unprepared. At the same time John has become bored with the detail dialog and has mentally decided that the presenter is not senior enough for the role…. and the beat goes on…
Now let’s see the same scene played out in an early stage fund-raising presentation to a Venture Capital firm. The fund only seeks ‘platform-plays’ and the sponsoring partner has coached the entrepreneur that he likes the business plan because it is broadly scalable and applicable to a very large market. He coaches the entrepreneur to be brief and present a high-level overview. On the first slide, the questions and drill-down begin. The entrepreneur expects a high-level overview but instead gets the Spanish inquisition from one partner. At the end of the first formal presentation to the partnership the feedback from the other partners is that the entrepreneur seems to have a total lack of focus.
Downtrodden, the entrepreneur goes away and now adds detailed market focus information into the presentation and the detailed facts in support of the financial model. In his follow-up meeting he diligently describes the research that justifies the market entry strategy. The result: several partners now feel the firm is too narrowly focused and that the entrepreneur has no “fire in the belly.” “We don’t invest in niche markets.”
Whether you laugh or cry at the above scenarios, you’ve probably seen them repeat themselves like a bad screen-play. Unless you happen to be personally blessed with the kind of charisma that can strip away the various filters people carry around with them, I suggest the following:
(i) Know your audience in-advance. As possible, know the filters that each decision-maker carries around with him/her.
(ii) In groups with individual who carry around dramatically different filters from one another, you must socialize expected decisions in-advance of a group meeting to avoid disaster. You can communicate individually in-advance using a different style than in a group. Many people look at this process as “corporate politics.” It is not. Rather, it is simply taking the time to make sure you communicate in a way that the receiver can understand.
(iii) Have three different sets of materials for the group you are presenting to. You may choose to not leave all three behind, or any for that matter. But having these three sets of materials prepared in advance will streamline your communications while forcing you to prepare effectively for detailed as well as abstract communication:
a. A detailed, fact-based plan. For the folks that require the drill-down, you can refer them to a document or simply use it as reference information that you may find difficult to remember. Most of your audience may never even read it but just flash it to others as proof that diligence was done. But those that do read the details would have otherwise derailed you had you not provided this information.
b. A very high-level executive summary (1-2 pages). This is often what will be read by everyone. Be very concise, write powerfully and include “did-do” examples wherever possible.
c. A summary presentation. This is your TV spot. Rehearse this and consider the slide as a collection of “sound-bytes.”
Mike Tanner is a Managing Director at the Chasm Group, where he provides advisory and consulting services in the areas of new venture development, market development strategy, operational planning, portfolio investment strategy and market positioning. Mike holds board seats for Apexion and Savi Technology, and sits on the advisory boards of Entivity and Unicru. He can be reached for comment at: mtanner@chasmgroup.com
 
|
|
|
