Skip to main content

Suggestions, givers, and takers!

How we deal with suggestions we receive depends on how we listen and process the exchange. Our actions on recommendations largely depend on openness to ideas and belief in them being meaningful and progressive.

In the absence of that, suggestions are brushed aside.

Who has the onus to make suggestions implementable? Answer to this question that requires two to tango.

The onus is upon those making suggestions to make them most relevant, application-worthy, and safe for recipients.

The onus is also upon those receiving them to believe that the suggestion maker has the best interest in their mind for theirs. Their stature and experience will need recognition for the suggestions to be accepted.

The impact of suggestions is fruitless discussion without ownership. It leaves a large gap because there needs to be more intent!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Checks and balances!

Defining a good purpose, setting a target goal and getting people working on them is usually not enough! There are too many aspects involved in getting the results we want. For example, there is an aspect of painting the big picture, working on motivation management, productivity tracking, building experimentation labs, and erecting resilient systems that systematize the workflows. Just putting bodies to work and defining milestones rarely achieves the right results. The other aspects that help march towards the milestones in an orderly manner, they are equally important. At the very least, they make objectives widely understandable and results more attainable. The job of a thought leader is to enable progress and enable recovery. Therefore, it is never enough to have just ideas. Those with ideas also have the responsibility to assemble the work environment in such a way as to create situations containing the energy disperses. Energy dispersal from lack of clarity, loss of motivation, ...

Choking the communication channel.

There are instances where everything looks in order. Structures are rightly in place. Right roles are defined. Responsibilities are distributed. Bi-directional open communication is expected to take place. And with that, collective work is expected to turn out productive. Yet, when the action begins, everything breaks apart. Productivity dwindles, cooperation is missing, and ad-hoc interactions are common-place That creates chaos. No one appears in charge even though there is someone responsible. It clearly is a sign of broken communication channels. A well-orchestrated workplace focuses on methods to communicate grounds-up and top-down. It encourages patient listening, internalizing and responding rather than reacting. All effective open communication channels are a result of making such communication possible. Often, the structures are set such that you centralize communication of every bit of your activity to someone in the hierarchy. Over time it turns into a permission-based inter...

Top up.

An effort of any kind will stop without a top-up mechanism. The cooking range doesn't work without gas. When petrol runs out, vehicles don't work. In the absence of solar panels, green energy is just a dream. Such issues apply to us humans too. Our ability to work hampers seriously if we don't have an energy replenishment plan. We think we enjoy the most when we do work involving our passions. We think tirelessly doing the same activity will keep our enthusiasm. Like writer's block, there comes a day when our ideas don't work. Monotony dries up the fun. What used to be the reason to be at work feels like the most dreaded place. When we encounter such a situation, it's time to check if our energy tank is emptying out fast enough that we need to land to refuel. Top up is a vital periodic part that recharges us. Different activities, places or people might refuel us with new energy and ideas. But first, be open to knowing you will run out of fuel. Sooner or later, ...