When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
It also sets them up to notice something different.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
When we repeat something, people remember it.
As the political rhetoric heats up, it’s interesting to see which messages are insightful and which simply incite.
Does this candidate’s ad really tell you anything new about him, his platform, his party, his opponent? Or does it simply stimulate something you’ve always believed? Does it stir emotions and feelings? Or does it change the way you think about something?
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with inciting. In fact, I think your message is much more potent if it connects on an emotional level.
What IS dangerous is incite without any insight.
By attaching a new perspective… a new way of thinking… a powerful idea… to an emotion, you do more than just PUSH people. You push them in a different direction.
Push them in the door.
Push them in front of a mirror.
Push them in front of a train.
Big difference.
Alex requested I expand on the effects of collaborative communication vs. conspiratorial communication
Collaboration creates teams of teams.
Organizations that encourage collaboration will see greater interdepartmental and interorganizational teamwork. A sense of interdependence creates a desire to involve others in on the work at hand.
Conspiracy creates lines and sides.
Information is held in silos. The grain is harvested, then stored where it simply rots.
Teams do not grow from shared experiences. They fight to steal from each other’s silos of information, recognition and reward.
Conspiracy divides individuals, centering them around lower goals and agendas.
Myopia causes conspirators to focus on self-centered goals which don’t benefit the larger organization(s). Consequentially, they do not rally followers around them because their vision is narrow, short-sighted and low on impact.
Collaboration unifies individuals around a common, higher goal.
By collaborating, individuals and teams discover common goals held across the divide. By broadening horizons, collaborators broaden their vision and hold onto the higher goals that impact the BIGGER picture. Consequentially, collaborators attract followers who desire belonging to something bigger than themselves.
Collaboration stimulates growth.
Individuals must be empowered in collaborative environments. Collaboration encourages delegation as the vision and input of direction is bigger than one person.
Conspiracy stunts growth.
Long-term, conspiracy mindsets eventually stifle growth. Conspiracies may have early growth spurts, but are midgets as adults when compared to their potential through collaboration.
Thanks for throwing down the gauntlet Alex! I hope you and others find this stimulating, and perhaps generate your own beliefs on the effects of collaboration vs. conspiracy.
There are two models of communication at play today.
Conspiracy or Collaboration
There are times when conspiracy is a necessary evil. Most of the time though, conspiracy is a detriment to our relationships. It limits us and pits us against one another.
Which do you use in your business?
… in your church?
… with your friends and family?
