We were very interested to discover this month

Until quite recently, city slang dominated the financial market, which was a rich amalgamation of Cockney rhyming slang, market banter and horse-racing expressions. The demise of this special argot will be missed, according to the article, and is seen as evidence of a dying heritage as electronic trading is now the norm and there is less room for the personal touch.

An example of city trading slang?

“The Old Lady just bought half a yard of cable and there are plenty of bids for Bill and Ben.”

or:

“The Bank of England just bought half a billion British pounds against the US dollar and there’s interest to buy the Japanese yen.”

How many of these slang words for numbers do you recognise?

A Spaniard: 1
From the Spanish name Juan

A prickly: 2
A prickly pear

A carpet: 3
UK prisoners used to be allowed carpet in their cells after 3 years

Lady Godiva: 5
Rhymes with fiver

But office slang is not!

But many of us work in an office, rather than a trading floor, and  we have our own language too, or more often one that is thrust upon us!  Yes, that considerably less colourful beast called “office jargon”, which has evolved to offer us a lnaguage we can use to ‘communicate’ without ever saying anything.

We have talked about office jargon before and it’s grip is just as stong as it ever was.  To be honest, we suspect, going forward, if someone were incentivised to leverage some blue-skythinking to action the death of that particular language, then at the end of the day,not too many people would lose sleep over it!  However, as that’s not likely to happen anytime soon, we’ve devised a little game of LJA bingo to keep you entertained while everyone around you is using it!

© Cristapper | Dreamstime.com

You don’t necessarily need to be a football fan to be aware of the two high-profile racism cases that have surrounded English football over the past few months, particularly as both have taken spectacularly controversial turns in the last week.  And as we regularly run diversity workshops, we have been watching events unfold with growing interest.

The background

The first case, involving John Terry, ultimately became the catalyst for the very public disagreement between then England Manager, Fabio Capello, and his employers, the FA, resulting in Capello’s resignation. However, it is the second case which concerns us more. Liverpool player Luis Suarez was accused of racist abuse towards Manchester United’s Patrice Evra back in mid-October. After an investigation in which he was found guilty of almost a dozen counts of racist language, Suarez was given an 8 match ban and a £40,000 fine.

This weekend saw Suarez play his second game after serving the ban – and a game in which he came face to face with Patrice Evra and Manchester United again. Evra, wishing to put the matter to behind them, offered his hand to Suarez in the pre-match respect handshake – which Suarez ignored.

Denial

What is particularly interesting  here is not just the actions of Suarez, but the way  the situation has been handled by his manager, Kenny Dalglish. A couple of weeks after the investigation started, he bemoaned the length of time it was taking, and stated, “whoever is the guilty party, whether it’s the person who said it or the accuser, [should] get their due punishment … For me, I don’t see racism, as far as this football club is concerned, apparent in any way, shape or form.”[i]  Many people found his initial reponse to the situation poor and ungracious.

Suarez was found guilty just before Christmas, and in his defence did not deny using the racial reference – rather, his explanation was that in his home country he uses the term affectionately and, indeed, addresses some of his own Liverpool teammates by the term. 24 hours after the guilty verdict, Suarez’s Liverpool teammates warmed up for their next game wearing shirts with Suarez’s picture on them, as a show of support for him – and furthermore, so did manager Dalglish.[ii] Upon Suarez’s return from the ban a week ago, Dalglish praised his performance and said it was good to have him back in the team, unadvisedly declaring, “He should never have been away.”[iii]

Support the man, not his actions.

Dalglish’s unwavering but misguided public support for his employee has quite justifiably been misconstrued as supporting his behaviour. It is entirely possible for him to have supported his player and still said, “Suarez was wrong in what he said, he accepts that, he’s served his punishment, and as a club we will act to ensure this does not happen again.”

The chairman of football’s anti-racism group Kick It Out was certainly able to tell the difference between the man and his actions, “This charge is not saying Luis Suarez is a racist. It’s saying, on this occasion, he used racist language. It doesn’t make him a bad guy – he needs to learn what is acceptable.”[iv]

Lack of education

Ultimately, it appears the whole saga began with a lack of education. Suarez’s employers failed to educate him on what is unacceptable and inappropriate in this culture and the ban should have been a hard, but lasting, lesson to Suarez. However, the continued indulgence by his employers has led Suarez to believe he is the victim in the current situation, and the lack of a handshake at the weekend indicates absolutely no lessons have been learned.

We explore case studies like this on our Diversity workshops.  If you want to reduce the chances of being faced with a similar situation at your workplace, why not book a place for your company on our Learning Lunch, “Diversity and Inclusion at Work”? It’s a great way to get everyone up to date on the latest legislation, good practice and new thinking on diversity and inclusion in the time it takes to eat a sandwich.

Call us on 01784 605005 or email info@ljalearning.co.uk

We are hearing from our clients and suppliers that people are really in the mood to party after the tough year we’ve had, even though the business climate remains difficult, so we thought some quick guidelines on surviving the office party might be timely!

Whilst some of you will be looking forward to the opportunity to glam up and relax with colleagues, we know that others will be cringing in advance as they anticipate their colleagues or (worse!) their boss having one cocktail too many and belting out a Gloria Gaynor number before taking the unofficial award for the worst dancing of the night.

Here is our top ten for coming out the other side of your office Christmas party intact:

1. Maybe avoid the punch bowl – it’s impossible to know how much you’ve had to drink.  You should probably only attempt multiple glasses of whatever is in there if you know all the words to Roll Out The Barrel
2. This is probably not the night to ask for a promotion or a raise even if you do feel emboldened by your last trip to the punch bowl
3. Only eat what you actually like – not everything  you are offered – you are not being performance managed on this one!
4. Work the room – try to speak to everyone and have a plan B for a colleague to rescue you if there’s a chance you’ll be cornered by someone and forced to talk too much shop
5. Be a friend and look out for others – if you see one of your colleagues getting out of control why not get them some snacks or take them some water and perhaps help them find somewhere quiet where they  can gather themselves
6. Mistletoe – hopefully not, but if you see any, head in the opposite direction
7. It might be called a ‘party’, however this is a business function – on Monday morning you still have to work with these people.  If you act inappropriately you can guarantee everyone will remember!
8. Are your colleagues  ready for your impersonation of Noddy Holder?
9. It’s not nice to shout out “cheapskates” if you are given a goody bag or Christmas gift!
10. Er…a gentle reminder to keep away from the photocopier.  Trust your learning provider on this one

Differences between what is said and what is actually delivered is ‘very simple and very lethal’- in personal relationships and even more so in professional circumstances. Closing this ‘Promise Gap’ must become an obsession for any business hoping to regain trust and commercial success, and more importantly, as a way of creating your own ‘Unique Value’.

‘The organisations that are succeeding today, and which will succeed in the future, are the ones which focus on under-promising and over-delivering’. It is not about perfection, because- be honest- in business and in life perfection does not exist. Instead, valuing your staff, valuing your consumers, showing ‘respect, recognition, good value and honesty’ creates one-to-one relationships that will be ‘the dominant factor determining success in the post-recession era’. Your Unique Value will not be found by focusing on the best profit for the business, or pay package for the employee, or price for the consumer, but on these ever evolving corporate relationships that ‘are just as deep and take as much work as the ones in your personal life’.

If your entire enterprise focuses on protecting, nourishing, re-evaluating and maintaining these relationships Hochman believes that together you will create ‘Unique Value’- and a ‘Value for Life’.

If you missed part 1 and part 2, read it here first!

Hochman believes that, in part, the recent recession was a ‘crisis of bureaucracy’. Distance between the decision maker and responsibility of the action, lack of accountability, confusion over which of the many faceless cogs in the wheel could or should or would be blamed. Yet conferring a sense of individual responsibility and alignment with a ‘Common Purpose’ provides employees with the ‘polar opposite of bureaucracy- empowerment’.

How empowered do you colleagues feel right now? Do they have a firm understanding of what the company stands for- and how aligned are their ethics and purpose with that?

Likewise, when interviewing, how much are your decisions swayed by their intelligence rather than their passion for what you stand for?

There is an unprecedented opportunity for businesses to become a magnet for the vast pool of talent left in the wake of the recession, and once found, true talent is ‘as precious as oil’. Look after them, confer responsibility. Encourage ideas. Get rid of the inhibiting bureaucracy of old and give them ‘freedom.. to communicate, collaborate and participate’. Check in with them through Corporate Awareness Programmes. Think about ‘your internal social networks and what the people who work with you are for you are saying’. The best people rarely stay because of the pay package and unless you evaluate and cherish the best they too, like your consumers, can easily walk away. ‘Like any other revolution, success will depend on the commitment, solidarity , sheer drive and consistent actions of the people who work with you and for you’ and it is up to you all to ‘bring about the necessary changes to survive in the post recession era.’

‘The recession has changed what people value’ and businesses are under pressure. There has been a transfer of power, a re-shuffling of relationship paradigms, we live in a ‘culture of mass collaboration and participation’ and businesses have to recognise that ‘the passive customer is an endangered species’. The explosion of mass collaboration and participation thanks to Twitter, Google, Facebook and other blogs, social networks, and search engines that exist today (and that will continue to grow in the future) means that ‘What people think and say about you matters more than ever before’. If customers don’t like something, they will tell people. The speed in which word can now get out about poor service or faulty products or average value is unprecedented. What businesses have to do is ‘be obsessed with this reality’, and recognise that where once a reputation could be ‘sold’ through advertising and clever PR, today’s consumers have ‘information, choice, power and control’ at their fingertips. ‘They can walk away from you, but you can’t walk away from them nearly as easily.’

So how can businesses regain trust, win customer attention, and keep hold of their loyalty?

Ironically, although culturally we are more dependent on technology than ever before, frustrations are often borne out of a sense of businesses being detached from reality and the individual. Technological efficiency is great, but when something goes wrong, how often have you heard the cry “I just want to talk to a real person?!” Once again it comes down to customer relationships. Hochman urges businesses to ‘get closer and get smarter’. Know what your customers want- don’t guess. Practise small kindnesses. Show loyalty. Be transparent in everything you do. Appreciate the individual. Admit when you are wrong. And remember- this is ‘not about a one night stand. It must be about a relationship that has the potential to last a lifetime’.

Notwithstanding the collapse of job and financial security, Hochman argues that it is the consumer’s loss of faith and growing sense of anger that is the real challenge to businesses today. The consumer is ‘let down, exhausted, feeling out of control’. Consumer trust and confidence has been replaced by cynicism, and ‘as marketing and advertising have become more and more sophisticated, promising the consumer a better life and better value, customers have come to believe this less and less.’

Your customer has had his fingers burnt, and ‘when the trust and confidence in a relationship vanishes, it can be hard, almost impossible, ever to get it back.’ Today, businesses have to realise that ‘taking for granted even one single customer is a huge risk’ and they have a huge task ahead to convince a deeply distrustful market that they are deserving of their custom.

Ironically, within the colossal sense of betrayal felt by the consumer lies an unprecedented transfer of power. Businesses have to work harder than ever. Where once the consumer was at the mercy of businesses, it seems businesses are at the mercy of their consumer.

They were called to Kismot Restaurant’s curry-eating challenge in Edinburgh, after competitors started writhing on the floor in agony, vomiting and fainting during the contest.

What amazed us was that one participant, “Currie Kim”, was so ill after sampling the “Kismot Killer” that she had to be taken by ambulance to the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary not once, but twice in a matter of hours.  Having made herself so ill she needed the hospital once, what on earth drove her to go back and do it again on the same night?

We probably learned to compete in school – there are only so many gold stars to go round, after all. Then as we entered the business world, we learned to compete with others for recognition, jobs, promotions, pay raises, etc.

But does it always have to be that way? The implication is that we are always alone and there will always be a winner and a loser.  Why?

Cooperation and Teamwork

If cooperation and working together feels better, why is it necessary to have a winner and a loser?  Why can’t there be two winners?

Going for a win-win approach isn’t about being nice and it’s not a quick-fix technique (sorry!). It isn’t always just a compromise, either.
It’s not news when we say that most of us learn to base our self-worth on comparisons and competition – and that often means that we think about succeeding in terms of someone else failing:  I win, you lose; or if you win, I lose.  Like the gold stars we mentioned, there is only so much pie to go around, and if you get a big piece, there is less for me; it’s not fair, and I’m going to make sure you don’t get anymore. We’ve all played that game, but for most of us it’s not much fun.

Win-win sees life as a cooperative arena, not a competitive one. It means that means agreements or solutions are mutually beneficial and satisfying.
Someone with a win-win attitude possesses three vital character traits:

1. Integrity: sticking with your true feelings, values, and commitments
2. Maturity: expressing your ideas and feelings with courage and consideration for the ideas and feelings of others
3. Abundance Mentality: believing there is plenty for everyone

Many people think in terms of either/or: either you’re nice or you’re tough. Win-win requires that you be both. It is a balancing act between courage and consideration. To go for win-win, you not only have to be empathic, but you also have to be confident. You not only have to be considerate and sensitive, you also have to be brave. To do that, to achieve that balance between courage and consideration, is the essence of real maturity and is fundamental to win-win.  And you don’t have to eat a super-hot curry to prove it!

Chatbots are designed to emulate the conversational abilities of humans, usually in an attempt to pass the ‘Turing Test’ for intelligence.

Alan Turing was made famous for proposing that if a computer could fool a sufficiently adept human while conversing with them into thinking that the machine is another human, that computer could then be called intelligent.

However, once two avatars had been introduced, the conversation rapidly descended into inane bickering, outright lies and insults! Not unlike some human debate, in fact.

The male avatar claimed he was a unicorn, told his female counterpart she was a “meanie” and after criticising her for being mistaken, followed it up with the sarcastic line: “Which is odd, since memory shouldn’t be a problem for you.”

So the next time you’re struggling with saying the right things at the right time, just remember that even carefully programmed computers struggle to get it right!

Some of you may be aware of our new workshop, Talking Trans, which we been delivering to our clients.   Gender is fundamental to the way we understand the world and we’ve been having some very lively debates!  In the workshop, we encourage our participants to explore the nature of gender and to think about the ways that they and others identify in terms of their gender, as well as raising awareness of Trans people in the work place.

So we were very interested to read of new research* which shows just how deep our notions of gender run.  The research confirms that people are prone to assign gender to inanimate objects, referring to their computer or car with a gender pronoun (“She’s been running great these past few weeks!”), however it also suggests that our tendency to see gender in all things even applies to abstract ideas such as numbers. Across cultures, people see odd numbers as male and even numbers as female.

David Gal and James Wilkie of Northwestern University studied how people view gender in everyday objects, such as food and furniture. They found that people see food dishes containing meat as more masculine and salads and sour dairy products as more feminine. People see furniture items, such as tables and dustbins, as more feminine when they feature rounded, rather than sharp, edges.

Wilkie also partnered with fellow Northwestern psychologist Galen Bodenhausen to demonstrate that this tendency to ascribe gender to objects extends to even highly abstract concepts. They ran an experiment where they asked American participants to rate ‘foreign’ names (e.g. “Alekseev”) in terms of how masculine or feminine they seemed. When a name was paired with the number 1, it was more likely to be rated as masculine. When the same name was paired with the number 2, people were more likely to rate it as feminine. Wilkie and Bodenhausen asked people how they made their decisions, but none of their participants reported that the numbers had influenced their ratings of the names.

In another study, they found that when a baby photo was paired with the number 1, people were much more likely to think the baby was male. Once again, people reported no awareness that the numbers were influencing their perceptions. In a separate study, the researchers had participants rate the masculinity and femininity of the numbers themselves. People readily rated the number 1, as well other odd numbers, as being more masculine. They also rated the number 2, and other even numbers, as appearing more feminine. This last finding was replicated with a sample from India, lending their results cross-cultural support.

So what?

Well until there is evidence to the contrary, we are assuming this may have something to do with gender stereotypes and you know what we like to do with stereotypes at LJA!

Wilkie and Bodenhausen plan to explore thier hypothesis in future studies by seeing whether people associate odd numbers with more stereotypically masculine qualities, such as dominance and independence, and we await their findings with interest.

Our brains can’t help but see gender everywhere we look.  Our challenge is to stop and think about our assumptions before we act on them!

*Wilkie JE, Bodenhausen GV.

PMID: 21767039 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21767039