Virtual or remote communication can impair your ability to influence others. But planning and preparation can help maximise your long-distance impact. All the behaviours and styles that form the core of the Positive Power & Influence Programme – asserting, persuading, bridging, attracting and disengaging – are as relevant in remote communication as face to face. At the same time the potential for misunderstanding and misinterpretation is magnified. Face to face, we communicate using body language and gestures, by regulating the volume and tone of speech – the ‘music and dance’. Subtleties that might be lost during a phone call or email, can be sensed and reacted to instantly. Therefore, any kind of long-distance influence requires planning. So whether you’re preparing for a vital video-conference, an important phone call, or a key email, here are some of our top tips. Before you start Consider which mode of communication you should choose. An informal instant message would be perceived very differently to a phone call or an email. You might be tempted to choose the easiest option, but the art of influencing in the virtual realm requires you to consider how the recipients of your message will see it. Ask yourself how the target would like to be contacted – based on their personality, your message or the circumstances. E-influence Research shows the best times of day for emails being opened are 8am, 9am, 3pm, 8pm Make the subject line informative, brief and make it stand out. End by making it clear what action (if any) you’re requesting, how and by when. Pay attention to the ‘verbal’ components of your email message. It’s critical in an influencing situation that you choose words carefully to convey your message without ambiguity. Conciseness is essential – you can avoid the trap of appearing abrupt by making it more personal or varying your style. Be creative when putting an email together – as well as Push Styles where you outline your views, consider using Pull Styles: disclosing that ‘I am uncertain about how we should proceed . . .’; emphasising common ground by saying ‘in the past we agreed on . . .’; or demonstrating that you have listened to what has been previously agreed . . . ‘from your last email I see that x, y, and z are important to you.’ Without the ability to interpret signals, a turn of phrase, a misplaced comma, can quickly lead to ruffled feathers. Occasional use of exclamation marks can indicate a lightness of tone, although they are obviously not appropriate for all communications. On the phone Listen carefully for pauses or changes in intonation. You’ll also be picking up clues about what they’re really saying by...

We recently ran an article on how to tackle a troubled work relationship via a 7-step influence planning process. But what to do when someone comes at you from out of the blue? Here’s the Positive Power & Influence Rapid Response Toolkit, for when you need to quickly and effectively influence a colleague on the warpath. Calming things down Your initial goal should be to bring down the temperature in the room through bridging and attracting behaviours – to listen, to guide the conversation by seeking clarification, to withhold your disagreements and highlight areas of agreement. 1. If someone is pushing you hard, move into a pull style ‘Ok so let me just check I understand where you’re coming from . . .’ ‘It sounds like you . . .’ Notes: If someone is on the attack, you can defuse some tension by showing that you are actively seeking to understand their position, by listening to what they say and inviting them to clarify their views. 2. Quickly find common ground ‘In the past we’ve worked well together on . . .’ ‘We both want this project to succeed . . .’ Notes: There may be issues of lack of trust or agreement that are causing the conflict. Don’t dwell on these initially, instead focus on where there is common ground – previous work together or a common goal.  3. If it isn’t working, be prepared to disengage Notes: If tensions are running too high, if there seems to be no room for negotiation, recognise this fact and clearly and decisively postpone the conversation to an agreed time and place.   Understanding and reasoning Normally people are angry because they are not getting what they want. So you need to be clear about what they’re after. So, if someone says to you, “the thing is, I just don’t know where you stand on this issue,” they are very clearly inviting you to persuade, to explain your position. 4. If asked for your opinion, move into persuading Q: ‘I’d like to understand your opinion . . .’ A: ‘I think we should . . . My reasons are . . .’ Notes: In an unexpected pressure situation, you may not have all arguments prepared. But in the short term, try to focus on just one or two key points. Don’t water down your argument with less important factors that might easily be countered.  5. If you’re persuading and they’re not being influenced, ask what data they would need to see to be convinced ‘I’d really like you to agree to my proposal . . . What’s missing in my evidence?’   Changing course Alternatively, if the person says “I just...

Golf is a very individual, self-orientated sport, writes Jonathan Scott. A round of golf involves a player doing battle with his or her own game, as much as competing with the leader board. But every couple of years a group of individual professional players come together to face off against another team. The event is the Ryder Cup, and the last two in particular, both won by the European team, have been close. In 2010 at Celtic Manor in Wales, the American team mounted a late charge and came very close to stealing an unlikely victory, only to be pipped by Graeme McDowell’s win over Hunter Mahan in the last of the 12 singles matches. It was one of the classics and it seemed unlikely such drama could be repeated. Then in 2012, this time on American soil at Medinah, the European team were 10-4 down at the end of the penultimate day, with the Americans only needing four-and-a-half points from the 12 on offer to secure victory. Nevertheless, the Europeans emerged triumphant, matching the previous record comeback, set by the US team at Brookline, Massachusetts in 1999, but this time they did it without home advantage. In short, the European players won eight of the 12 singles matches on that final day, beating the USA 14½-13½. Afterwards all the European players quoted the belief they had in the team, and in their captain José María Olazábal. So how was it achieved? How were these self-orientated, individual sportsmen brought together? Ian Poulter, who on the penultimate day birdied the last five holes of his four-ball match to earn a vital point and keep Europe in the hunt, explains: Seve Ballesteros, who won 20 of his 37 Ryder Cup matches between 1979 and 1995, died in May 2011 following a brain tumour. Team captain and close friend of Seve, Olazábal, told reporters beforehand that the spirit of Seve would be with his European team “every step of the way”. “Seve was an important part of the Ryder Cup because of the way he played and conducted himself from his opening match in 1979,” Olazábal told the Daily Telegraph. “He set a wonderful example to generations of golfers and for me there are many, many memories . . .” The players’ bags and final day sweaters were embellished with an image of the Spaniard – a clenched-fist salute to the St Andrews crowd after sinking the putt to win the 1984 Open Championship. Olazábal: “He has meant a lot to me and the team, and I wanted to have something that was present to each and every player.” And so Olazábal led Europe to a remarkable comeback, and afterwards his team...

We all have colleagues we find difficult. Sometimes it can feel like you constantly disagree, leading you to avoid situations with that colleague, or attempting to force things through, feeding resentment and negativity on both sides. When dealing with a troubled relationship, the most important thing is to use a task-oriented approach to identify possible systemic problems, writes Jonathan Scott. Achieving a balance between objectives and relationships may be difficult when you and a colleague have strong personal differences or competing objectives. Maintaining this balance can be even more delicate when you and the other person have a history of personality clashes or deep interpersonal conflicts. Relationship problems can also make you reluctant to use some influence styles. If you frequently disagree with the target’s logic, you may be reluctant to use Persuading as you have no interest in hearing the target’s proposals and reasons when you so frequently find fault with their underlying facts or data. If you distrust your colleague, you may avoid Bridging behaviours – disclosing your own anxieties in particular – for fear of losing control of the situation or being taken advantage of. And Attracting may not seem useful if you and the target have deep value conflicts or a troubled history. Such fundamental problems may make you reluctant to engage in any influence attempt at all – the potential benefits of trying to influence the target may be outweighed by potential costs. Plus tricky relationships can make it hard to determine a clear Influence Objective – you’re so focused on the incompatibility issues, that it becomes impossible to see a way through. In short, a dysfunctional relationship can lead you to completely avoid situations with the colleague, to the detriment of your business targets. Therefore the relationship must improve before you and the other person can take any concrete steps, and you need to reach a position of mutual respect and acceptance to ensure genuine commitments can be agreed and acted on. When project assignments, business priorities, or other situational factors driveyou together, the first tactic should be to focus on the task, the collaborative nature of your work, to hopefully increase your chances of improving the relationship. Character flaws or incompatibility factors are not the sole reasons people do not get along – sometimes in can be down to a systemic flaw. So while your first inclination might be to dismiss a person as difficult, rigid or egocentric, the real problem may have to do with the system or structure in which you work. Perhaps the organisational policies and procedures create antagonistic or misaligned working agendas, or perhaps there’s a problem with a more informal organisational system that you have failed to...

Blurting out ideas rarely leads to change, writes Nicola Lincoln. Resistance to new ways of doing things is a fact of organisational life and many logical innovations are lost in the rush of a working week. With a clear influence strategy, however, you’re much more likely to see your brainwave put into practice.  1. Asses your idea Begin by being honest with yourself. You need to take time to assess your idea as objectively as you can. Imagine someone else thought of it, and then constructively critique it. Ask yourself whether it can be improved or developed. Have you considered all the potential ramifications?  2. Identify stakeholders Who do you need to support your idea for it to be implemented? Put yourself in their shoes and ask what will they find most appealing about your idea, and what objections they might have. Figure out how you can avoid triggering concerns or resistance and plan to present your idea in the most favourable light possible to each stakeholder. You could also identify someone you trust, but who actively disagrees with the idea. Try to understand all their objections.  3. Find allies It’s time to assemble allies who could help persuade stakeholders to back the idea. Go first to people whose thinking you respect and whom you trust to listen to your idea with a favourable ear, or at least an open mind. Test your idea with your friends and confidants. Solicit their views and actively listen to what they say. If they like it, ask them to help you advance it.  4. Influence upward When you come to present your idea, it’s likely you will be attempting to influence someone who has higher positional power. Whenever you need to influence upward, clarity is key – keep your proposal clear and concise. Think about your target’s standpoint – what are their objections likely to be? Prepare for any roadblocks he/she may be likely to put in your way. You may need to use a blend of ‘push’ and ‘pull’ influence styles, and you should also be prepared to postpone, to disengage, if the conversation isn’t going in the direction you...

We all use combinations of influence styles to meet our business objectives. But some situations will call for you to stay rooted in a specific style. There are certain words and phrases associated with each style or behaviour, and just learning these phrases or prompts can help trigger the kind of conversation you want to have. If you’re being assertive, you’re likely to start a conversation with words like ‘I want you to . . .‘ or ‘I expect you to . . .’ Whereas if you’re trying to attract a colleague to your way of thinking, you’re more likely use phrases such as ‘I share your concern about . . .’ or ‘What I see us doing is . . .’ This of course is only half the battle – it’s all very well having the language of influence, but your delivery, tone of voice and body language, will be the key factors in whether you are successful. On the Positive Power & Influence Programme delegates practise their influence skills through exercises that focus on one style, and more complex role plays that require more subtle combinations. To illustrate the styles we have taken what might be called a standard peer-to-peer situation. In this scenario, the speaker is trying to make meetings more efficient and productive by speeding up a colleague’s team meeting reports. It shows how you might tackle the same problem in a variety of ways. PERSUADING “I’d like to suggest that you prepare your team meeting reports so that they can be presented in ten minutes or less.” “Your past reports to the team have been accurate. In fact, concerns that you have raised have pointed directly to problems that needed to be fixed. However, the minutes of our team meetings indicate that your presentations consume more than 50 percent of available meeting time. In two of the last three meetings, we were unable to cover our entire agenda. As a result, the team was unable to settle on an implementation plan to handle your recommendations. You yourself have voiced this concern about vague action plans.” “I believe that a short, highly focused report will drive the team to action on your recommendations and still allow us to cover our entire meeting agenda.”  ASSERTING “I really enjoy how thorough and well organised your presentations are in team meetings.” “But you take up so much time that I lose momentum and feel under pressure to concentrate on other agenda items.” “I need you to cut your report time in half.” “If you’ll cut your actual report time, I’ll work hard to make sure the other team members give you their full attention at each meeting.” “But...