Skip to main content

Author: Cynthia Low

Five Mistakes People Make Reading Body Language at Work

Human beings are genetically programmed to look for facial and behavioral cues and to quickly understand their meaning. We see someone gesture and automatically make a judgment about the intention of that gesture. The gesture and our interpretation of its meaning can profoundly affect team dynamics.

And we’ve been making these judgments for a long, long time. As a species, we knew how to win friends and influence people – or avoid/placate/confront those we couldn’t befriend – long before we knew how to use words.

But our ancient ancestors faced threats and challenges very different from those we confront in today’s modern society. Life is more complex now, with layers of social restrictions and nuanced meanings adding to the intricacies of our interpersonal dealings. This is especially true in workplace settings, where corporate culture adds its own complexities and unique guidelines for correct behavior.

No matter what the culture at your workplace, the ability to “read” nonverbal signals can provide some significant advantages in the way you deal with people. You can start to gain those advantages by avoiding these five common mistakes people often make when reading body language:

1) They Forget to Consider the Context.

Imagine this scene: It’s a freezing-cold winter evening with a light snow falling and a north wind blowing. You see a woman sitting on a bench at a bus stop. Her head is down, her eyes are tightly closed and she’s hunched over, shivering slightly, and hugging herself.

Now the scene changes . . .

It’s the same woman in the same physical position. But instead of sitting outdoors on a bench, she’s seated behind her desk in the office next to yours. Her body language is identical – head down, eyes closed, hunched over, shivering, hugging herself. The nonverbal signals are the same but the new setting has altered your perception of those signals. In a flash she’s gone from telling you, “I’m really cold!” to “I’m in distress.”

Obviously, then, the meaning of nonverbal communication changes as the context changes. We can’t begin to understand someone’s behavior without considering the circumstances under which the behavior occurred.

2) They Try to Find Meaning in a Single Gesture.

Nonverbal cues occur in what is called a “gesture cluster” – a group of movements, postures and actions that reinforce a common point. A single gesture can have several meanings or mean nothing at all (sometimes a cigar is just a cigar!), but when you couple that single gesture with other nonverbal signals, the meaning becomes clearer.

For example, a person may cross her arms for any number of reasons. But when that action is coupled with a scowl, a headshake, and legs turned away from you, you now have a composite picture and reinforcement to conclude that she is resistant to whatever you just proposed.

3) They are too Focused on what’s Being Said.

If you only hear what people are saying, you’ll miss what they really mean.

A manager I was coaching appeared calm and reasonable as she listed the reasons why she should delegate more responsibility to her staff. But every time she expressed these opinions, she also (almost imperceptibly) shuddered. While her words declared her intention of empowering employees, the quick, involuntary shudder was saying loud and clear, “I really don’t want to do this!”

4) They Don’t Know a Person’s Baseline.

You need to know how a person normally behaves so that you can spot meaningful deviations.

Here’s what can happen when you don’t: A few years ago, I was giving a presentation to the CEO of a financial services company, outlining a speech I was scheduled to deliver to his leadership team the next day. And it wasn’t going well.

Our meeting lasted almost an hour, and through that entire time the CEO sat at the conference table with his arms tightly crossed. He didn’t once smile, lean forward or nod encouragement. When I finished, he said thank you (without making eye contact) and left the room.

As I’m a body language expert, I was sure that his nonverbal communication was telling me that my speaking engagement would be cancelled. But when I walked to the elevator, the executive’s assistant came to tell me how impressed her boss had been with my presentation. I was shocked and asked how he would have reacted had he not liked it. “Oh,” said the assistant, her smile acknowledging that she had previously seen that reaction as well. “He would have gotten up in the middle of your presentation and walked out!”

The only nonverbal signals that I had received from that CEO were ones I judged to be negative. What I didn’t realize was that, for this individual, this was normal behavior.

5) They Judge Body Language through the Bias of Their Own Culture:

When we talk about culture, we’re generally talking about a set of shared values that a group of people holds. And while some of a culture’s values are taught explicitly, most of them are absorbed subconsciously – at a very early age. Such values affect how members of the group think and act and, more importantly, the kind of criteria by which they judge others. Cultural meanings render some nonverbal behaviors as normal and right and others as strange or wrong. From greetings to hand gestures to the use of space and touch, what’s proper and correct in one culture may be ineffective – or even offensive – in another.

For example, in North America, the correct way to wave hello and good-bye is palm out, fingers extended, with the hand moving side to side. That same gesture means “no” throughout Mediterranean Europe and Latin America.  In Peru it means “come here,” and in Greece, where it’s called the moutza, the gesture is a serious insult. The closer the hand to the other person’s face, in fact, the more threatening it is considered to be.

So just remember: Body language cues are undeniable. But to accurately decode them, they need to be understood in context, viewed in clusters, evaluated in relation to what is being said, assessed for consistency, and filtered for cultural influences. If you do so, you’ll be well on your way to gaining the nonverbal advantage!


Carol Kinsey Goman, Ph.D., is an author and keynote speaker who addresses association, government, and business audiences around the world. Carol is the author of 10 business books. Her latest is The Nonverbal Advantage – Secrets and Science of Body Language at Work.

Estimation Software Helps Heuristic Negotiate Larger Budget for Software Project

When can an increase in project costs be a good thing? When it saves a company’s business and meets project delivery dates at the same time. That was the experience of Heuristic Solutions, a software development company that specializes in custom applications, in working out a project estimate for a new business opportunity.

Based on intuitive expert judgment, Heuristic thought the budget for the project would be around $600,000. But, intuition can be the bane of business decision-making, and Heuristic decided that a more scientific approach was in order. This represented a very large opportunity, so they wanted to be sure their judgment was correct.

Up until then, their methodology for generating budget estimates relied on complicated spreadsheets that each member of the team would complete. For the new opportunity, they used project estimation software, SLIM-Estimate, from QSM. The outcome was eyebrow-raising, to say the lease.

After sizing the project, Vaughan Moore, a Heuristic business analyst, was surprised to see that the projected cost would actually be more than $1 million, as opposed to the $600,000 they had initially budgeted. He wondered how his client would react to his findings.

Moore decided to use SLIM-Estimate from QSM, Inc., during his final presentation to show the client how the budget was developed. By pulling up the industry productivity trend lines from the QSM database, as well as their own historical data, he showed them the Heuristic team was actually more productive than the industry average. This evidence gave the client confidence the budget was in-line with industry standards and allowed them to present to their board a budget with their own “management reserve”.

Process
Without SLIM
(using in-house estimation process)
With SLIM-Estimate
With SLIM Gain in Budget

Initial Budget
$600,000

$1,000,000
$400,000

 

As a result, the client awarded them the first phase of the project. Without the formal estimation process, Heuristic would have under-bid the project and missed deadlines trying to complete a project with unrealistic constraints. A miss of this magnitude could put some companies out of business. With the larger budget, they were able to hire more people which will allow them to stay on schedule.

CIOs Report on Hiring Expectations for Second Quarter

Toronto, ON — Twelve per cent of chief information officers (CIOs) anticipate adding information technology (IT) personnel in the second quarter of 2009 and four per cent plan staff reductions in the next three months, according to the latest Robert Half Technology IT Hiring Index and Skills Report. This represents a net eight per cent increase. The majority of respondents, 78 per cent, plan to maintain current staffing levels.

The IT Hiring Index and Skills Report is based on telephone interviews with more than 270 CIOs from companies across Canada. It was conducted by an independent research firm and developed by Robert Half Technology www.rht.com, a leading provider of IT professionals on a project and full-time basis.

Key Findings

Help desk/technical support and data/database management are the job areas experiencing the most growth.

Desktop support is the technical skill set most in demand, overtaking network administration, which also led as the top skill in the first quarter.

One in five IT executives who plan to add staff will hire a mix of full-time and contract workers.

“With the current economic environment, it is not surprising that companies are being more prudent with their hiring”, said Sandra Lavoy, a vice president with Robert Half Technology. “To improve efficiencies and manage expenses, companies are looking for help desk and technical support professionals as well as data/database management specialists”.

Twenty per cent of CIOs who plan to add staff will hire a mix of full-time and project workers, while 41 per cent plan to make a full-time hire and 33 per cent plan to add contract workers. One-half of executives cited high or increased IT workloads as the primary factor driving hiring demand, followed by routine hirings for vacant positions at 28 per cent. Corporate growth or expansion was the third most cited answer with 15 per cent of the response.

CIOs cited company-wide layoffs (57 per cent) and the impact of the financial crisis on their company or industry (25 per cent) as the reasons for reductions in IT personnel during the second quarter. IT projects being put on hold received 4 per cent of the response.

Skills in Demand

When asked which technical skill sets were most in demand in their IT departments, 76 per cent of CIOs cited desktop support. Network administration (LAN, WAN) and Windows administration followed closely, with 75 per cent and 74 percent of the responses, respectively. (Note: CIOs were allowed multiple responses.)

Help desk/technical support was the job area experiencing the most growth, cited by 15 per cent of CIOs. Data/database management and networking followed closely, each receiving 12 per cent and 11 per cent of the response, respectively.

Industries Hiring

CIOs in the professional services and wholesale sectors are most optimistic about hiring in the upcoming quarter. Twenty-six per cent of professional services executives interviewed plan to add staff while no one plans on reducing the size of their IT workforce, for a net 26 per cent increase. In the wholesale sector, 20 per cent of CIOs anticipate hiring more staff and 2 per cent expect staff reductions for a net 18 per cent increase.

About the Survey

The quarterly IT Hiring Index and Skills Report was developed by Robert Half Technology and conducted by an independent research firm. First published in 1995, the study is based on more than 270 telephone interviews with CIOs from a random sample of Canadian companies.

Project Management That Works

Companies translate their business plans into a series of projects. Some of the projects are relatively simple and others quite complex and involve multiple departments, activities and suppliers. But all need to be led and managed. Most companies have project managers to head up these projects. Actually, what is really needed to lead teams and manage projects are project leaders. Leaders who have the responsibility to make the team effective in delivering the objective of the project, solving the problem that has been identified and delivering the results that compensate for the expenditure of human and financial resources. Leaders!!!

The reality is most projects have become administrative nightmares for the project managers and team members. Instead of having a laser sharp focus on the project and what needs to get done, the focus has blurred and is buried in layers of administrivia. Gantt charts, status reports, teleconferences, updates, meetings and forms have become the norm. Some of these are necessary but are they effective? Tracking projects is taking up too much of the leader’s time. Often progress is less than originally expected and costs are higher.

So how do successful companies utilize project management effectively?

We have been working with a colleague who has a great deal of experience in leading projects and with project leaders. Dr. Margery Mayer is part of the 4Views, a consulting group, in which we also are principals. She created a simple form that forces the thinking up front and keeps the daily focus on the action that needs to take place and not on the massive reports.

Margery created and has used the One Page Project Charter found below. It is developed by the project leader and sponsor before the project gets started and is used by the leader, the team, the sponsor, the finance organization and anyone else involved up through the executive team, if need be, to drive action and maintain focus. You will note the emphasis on ONE PAGE. This forces crispness of thinking and keeps the team from being led off track by “add ons” or other distractions. It provides a snapshot of what is expected, when it is expected and the progress being made. If the team should fall behind, the appropriate action and effect on the project are clear. The team time is spent in thinking, and taking action for success and not in the administrivia of report writing or updating. This does not replace Gantt charts as they have a more granular level of detail. This is a quick snapshot of how the project is progressing.

Feel free to copy the format and use it on your next project. We have seen success with it across a broad range of industries. Let us know how you use it.

Project Charter

Date____________ Revision # ______________- © Dr Margery Mayer

Project Objective

A concise simple statement of the objective of the project to ensure that everyone is clear and the information is consistent. This object should support the goals and objectives of the company.

The Problem

State EXACTLY is the problem that the project will solve.

Benefits

The specific revenue, profit, cost savings, efficiency increase etc that will result from this project.

Scope

What is going to be included? This also may detail what is not included. The more extensive is the scope, the greater the cost and risks.

Completion Criteria:

Clearly specify what will be achieved, what is the expected result or outcome.

Deliverables and Major Milestones

# When What Date complete
1
2
3

Assumptions

This could include among other items

  • What resources will be provided and by whom? Availability of members, etc.
  • Changes to scope or resources may incur additional costs
  • Turn around time for approvals must be stated
  • Escalation process might be identified

Resources

Project Leader: Margery Mayer Contact info
Sponsor: Exec/Mgr.
Team Responsibility Contact info
A Analyst
B Engineer
C Programmer
D Customer Service

Definitions

For example

  • Revisions – reexamine, alter or correct existing work
  • Change orders – substitute one thing for another, add new ideas or concepts, variation on original work or idea.

Scope Changes

Changes bring costs and these are to be documented.

Change Orders Rev
# Date $ # Date $
667 8/1 3,000

Dr Margery Mayer and John Maver are Principals in The 4Views consulting group. The 4 Views is a team of senior consultants who provide clients with breakthrough business results by identifying the root causes of problems and then providing the solutions that drive profitability. Our systematic approach covering plans, processes, people and profits (the 4 Views) generates measurable results across a broad range of industries. Leading change that drives efficiency and profitability has led to the creation of upgrades across the organization such as increasing the impact of project management.

When Talk Fails, So Do Projects

Fifty years ago, Peter Drucker – widely considered the father of “modern management” – coined the term “knowledge worker.” Today that term is frequently attributed to software engineering and quality professionals, whose mission is to infuse their knowledge of a particular domain into creating today’s modern computer software. Software is what puts the smarts into today’s smart devices, whether they are iPhones or Blackberries, GPS navigation systems, or supermarket scanners and the like. Without smart software, hardware is mostly dumb.

In recent times, it’s become apparent that a major contributor to success or failure on software projects has to do with team communication, both internally and externally. From a systems view, creating great software is about taking expert thinking and domain knowledge, and then efficiently moving it around the team in short feedback loops. This rapid-fire collaboration and conversation is what blends the minds of a team in both an additive and combinatorial process to create high-quality killer apps. Killer apps are essentially software models of the thinking mind, in order for an otherwise dumb device to mimic the logic of intelligence beings.

Three key ingredients often determine project success or failure: domain knowledge, deadlines, and dialog. You can think of them as “The Three Ds.” Domain knowledge is obvious. It takes smart people with the right knowledge to create the right stuff. Deadlines are also critical – there has to be adequate time to make things right; under time pressure, haste makes waste. What is also vital is the last D – Dialog. In fact, if you examine the tenets of approaches like Agile software development, you find that collaboration and communication is an essential part of its philosophy, explicitly stated in the value statement known as the Agile Manifesto.

Creating good software is hard, especially under pressure. It gets even more difficult when what you’re trying to build is complex or when members of a team are dispersed, which is often the case in a flat world. Recently, as a management consultant, I had the opportunity to compare projects at two case study companies: one a remarkable success, the other a dismal failure. In many ways, the outcomes could be traced to how well or poorly they handled the Three Ds.

Since I tend to favor happy endings, let’s consider the failure first. In this story, the company brought in a new “green” team from an outside contractor to augment its staff for a medical IT application being rushed to market. These developers were learning about this product and its features for the very first time. But a critical problem existed: key players inside the company who knew the products had quit and were unavailable to help. Much of the brain of this company was hollowed out, as in a lobotomy because of low morale and attrition.

Score on Domain Knowledge: LOW

Next came the subject of Dialog. Members of the new team were on distant shores, a 12 hour time-zone difference. Processes necessary to move critical knowledge from one continent to another were not well established. They also skipped a critical co-located release planning meeting because it was perceived that “there was not enough time.” Thus, face-to-face relationships and a well-knit team weren’t established — quite different compared to a cohesive group where members know and trust each other like family.

Score on Dialog and Communication: LOW

Lastly, time pressure can often make or break a project. Just enough pressure and there’s a sense of challenge and manageable urgency, enough to cure an occasional dose of complacency. Too much time pressure and you get what’s known as a Death March project (the term is made famous by the book by Ed Yourdon), wherein teams feel hopeless resignation from trying to do the impossible in too little time.

After a few months, the project was cancelled. It never got off the ground because of the looming deadline. As Tom DeMarco and Tim Lister state in another excellent book, Adrenaline Junkies and Template Zombies, “Time removes cards from your hand.” This team never had a chance. The deadline was set first, and it was fait accompli that low domain knowledge and ineffective dialog would manifest in lower productivity. They missed every project milestone in quick succession. Management lost faith, pulled the plug, and the VP was asked to resign.

Score on Project: CANCELLED

Interestingly, projects like this often don’t make it into industry statistics. When projects disappear, no data is left behind. But what’s sometimes left is the lore among those who witnessed it. And in this project and many others is the lesson, “When domain knowledge is low, and dialog and communication fail under an impossible deadline, failure is virtually guaranteed.”

Somebody (‘most everybody) Does it Better

Stories like this have played out many times in my 20 years as a software industry consultant. But what about the blazing successes? Indeed, were it not for these, work would get pretty depressing. What if you were a doctor and most of your patients died because they didn’t heed your advice? You stay on because other times, there are those who do and they thrive and prosper, creating excitement, hope, and optimism.

One company that comes to mind does all the right things compared to the previous example. It dominates market share, prospers in lean times, and is by all accounts a fabulous place to work. Imagine routinely building killer products with twice the quality and in half the time, at a $1.3 million dollar lower cost (without off-shoring) compared to industry benchmarks. Imagine that management – all the way to the CEO – recognizes this success, expands work at home, growing innovation and the teams that produce it, while rewarding employees. What did they do around the Three Ds?

They kept their best and brightest people and executed a conscious strategy to hold onto their veterans. Domain Knowlede: A+. They built a brand new environment and pooled these bright minds into one large room, pairing programmers side by side, co-located with business analysts and doing the work in short feedback loops. Communication: A+. Group leaders were given autonomy when it came to release planning and estimating, using techniques designed to make sure that there was the right combination of project scope and the dates to deliver. Deadlines: A+.

Manage all Three Ds with aplomb and you get success, not failure, and a team that loves what they do and where they work. What an innovative idea!


Michael Mah is the Managing Partner at QSM Associates Inc., a company that helps solve deadline and budget challenges on software projects, through use of state-of-the-art software measurement and estimating tools combined with techniques from modern negotiation science. He is also Cutter Consortium’s director of the Measurement and Benchmarking Practice and senior consultant for the Agile Software Development & Project Management Advisory, and the Sourcing & Vendor Relationships Advisory. His writings (and blog) can be found at www.qsma.com.