The Responsiveness Paradigm

Why are some people respected in the workplace, and others not? Is there something that distinguishes people who are thought of highly from those that are not? What about managers and leaders; are successful respected leaders different from those that are less successful?

The answers to these questions are not so simple. But perhaps they aren't so complex either. And the answers may also extend to regular employees, who gets promoted, and who is seen as an effective employee.

Our work in interpersonal communication has brought us to pay attention to these questions. And we have a tentative hypothesis; something that people can build on to become better leaders, managers and employees. We call this approach The Responsiveness Paradigm.

The Responsiveness Paradigm is a way of looking at how people influence and get along with each other. Based on our work in defusing hostility, it suggests that a primary characteristic of successful and respected people, be they leaders, managers or line employees, is that they have an ability to respond to others in a way that takes into account the needs of both people.

You Can Preview our help card on Responsive Managers by clicking here

What Is Responsiveness?

We characterize responsiveness in the following ways:

An individual (or organization) can be considered responsive if:

s/he identifies both the explicit (clearly stated), and implicit (unstated or below the surface) needs of another person or people s/he interacts with.

s/he uses the understanding of those needs to fulfil those needs when possible.

s/he acknowledges and works in partnership with other parties to find some means of fulfilling needs that IS possible, even if only partial fulfilment results.

s/he uses a family of communication techniques and skills (cooperative communication techniques) that serves the following functions:

indicates interest and concern for others
indicates willingness to work together and not in opposition
indicates acceptance of responsibility for communication and follow-up behaviour

The Responsiveness Skill Set

Your work success hint!

Did you know that most people habitually deal with conflict in a "usual way" even when the technique they prefer just doesn't fit the situation? You probably do the same.

The trick is to deal strategically with conflict and make conscious choices about which strategy to use. You can learn about the strengths and weaknesses of the five major conflict management approaches inUsing Your Head To Manage Conflict . Click here for more.

In terms of learning how to be responsive, we need to translate the above into a set of skills that people can learn. After all, it isn't helpful to know about successes if we have no means of making more successes. The Responsiveness skill set is a collection of elements, that when learned and applied, make people more able to meet the needs of others, and to be perceived as helpful, supportive, accomplished, etc.

First, the responsiveness skill set is composed primarily of thinking and emotional type skills. Second responsiveness requires a set of language/communication skills. We are going to state both types in terms of competencies we believe can be developed in most people.

Competencies

• Active/reflective listening (communication skill)
• Empathetic and acknowledging communication (communication skill)
• Use of cooperative language (communication skill set) eg. use of non-confrontational ques tions to build understanding
• use of qualifiers as opposed to absolute statements
• focus on problem solving vs. blame
• consistency between talk and behaviour (walking the talk) (thinking/emotional skill)
• ability to extract other person's needs from the interactions (communication skill)
• problem-solving skills (thinking skill)

These competencies give us a good starting point to look at some case situations that will illustrate the difference between responsiveness and unresponsiveness. This month we are going to look at responsive and non-responsive managers.

The Responsive Leader/Manager

The Responsiveness Paradigm outlined elsewhere in this newsletter is applicable at a number of levels. For example, it applies to organizations in general, and the ability of the organization to respond to the needs of customers, staff and other stakeholders (eg. politicians, etc). It applies to non-supervisory staff, and their ability to respond to the needs of their managers, customers and co-workers. This month we are going to look at responsiveness as it applied to managers, leaders and/or supervisors.

Influence Of The Responsive Manager

The responsive manager tends to succeed by building bonds of respect and trust with those around him/her. Staff respond positively to responsive managers; they work more diligently, work to help the manager and the organization succeed, and will go the extra mile when necessary. That is because responsive managers act consistent with the principle that their jobs are to help their staff do their jobs. So, a basic inter-dependence emerges based on behaviours that show concern, respect and trust.

Responsive managers also influence those above them in the hierarchy. Because responsive managers have the ability to read and act upon the needs of their "bosses", they are perceived as helpful and reliable, or in a simple way, very useful. This allows them to get the "ear" of people above them in the system, and further helps get things done when needed.

Contrast this with the limited influence of the UNresponsive manager. The unresponsive manager is restricted in influence because those around him/her do not respect or trust them to look out for their welfare. Influence is more limited to the use of power coming from the formal position, and fear, a motivational component that is hard to sustain over time. Unresponsive managers tend to be perceived as self-interested, or at best uninterested in the needs of those around them. They also tend to be perceived by those above them as less reliable and less useful due to their focus on empire building, organization protection, and self-interest, rather than getting done what needs to be done.

How Do They Do It?

Responsive managers apply a number of specific skills and abilities to the task (as outlined generally in The Responsiveness Paradigm article). Above all, they appear to be "withit". Withitness

has a number of components. First withit managers are able to put aside their concerns to listen to (and appear to listen to) those around them. As a result, they know what is going on, and know what is both said, and said between the lines. They have the knack of appearing to know what people need even if those needs are not expressed directly.

However, knowing what is going on, and identifying the needs of those around them is not sufficient. The responsive manager also acts upon that knowledge, attempting to help fulfil the needs of employees, superiors, etc. Responsive managers wield influence to solve problems for those around them, often before even being asked.

Here's an example:

I was responsible for automating an office system in a government department. As happens sometimes, the Management Information Systems people were not keen on our going our own way on the project, despite the fact that they had indicated they could not do it for us in the near future. As a result their cooperation (needed for the project) was patchy. As team leader, I faced a number of roadblocks, despite the fact that our Assistant Deputy Minister wanted to see this project come to fruition. I regularly reported back to our Director, outlining progress and roadblocks. Every time I communicated roadblocks to the Director, they were removed within a short time, despite the fact that I did not request direct action. In addition, the Director advised and counselled me on how to deal with the "systems people" so I could have maximum impact. Despite the roadblocks, the project was completed on time and was very successful, much to the chagrin of some of the systems people, who I think were hoping we would fail.

This is a simple story, but one full of meaning. In this situation the Director was able to identify the project leader's needs with respect to the project, listening carefully, and identifying actions she could take to "smooth the path". Not only was the Director able to remove obstacles and fulfil the need of the project leader, but the Director responded on a deeper level, helping to teach the Project Leader methods of becoming more effective, fulfilling yet another need. All of this was assumed to be the proper role of the Director, and was done without expressing all of the needs specifically or explicitly.

We can contrast this with the unresponsiveness of the MIS people. They lectured, they fussed, they predicted dire consequences, rather than offering consistent, responsive help. They focused not on responding to the needs of their clients, but on some other factors having to do with control, and their own needs. Eventually, their lack of responsiveness resulted in the very thing they did not want; loss of control of the project. As a result of this project their overall status in the organization suffered, simply because at both an organization and individual level they were seen as barriers, rather than useful.

Let's look at one more example.

An employee had been working for a government branch for about a year, having moved to the city as a new resident. In a casual conversation, the supervisor noted that the employee wasn't looking at his best, and asked how he was feeling. The employee explained that he hadn't been feeling well lately, and sounded very tired and overwhelmed. The supervisor determined that the staff member didn't have a local family doctor, asked if he would like the supervisor to arrange an appointment, and proceeded to do so immediately. The problem turned out to be a minor one.

In this example we see again the ideas of "withitness" and responsiveness. The supervisor was able to identify that the staff member was in need of some help, despite the fact that the staff member did not state this explicitly. Note that the supervisor didn't pressure the staff member to go to the doctor, but identified needs, checked them out, and then acted upon them. In this case, help consisted of direct, helpful action.

Conclusion

Your work success hint!

It's not IF you fight or disagree. It's not how often you argue. It's not WHAT you argue about. It's about HOW you argue, fight or disagree, whether at home or at work. Learn to disagree, argue and fight fairly and you WILL see a difference in your relationships, and how others perceive you. Learn the rules of fighting fair and fair disagreement by clicking here.

These two examples are the stuff of loyalty and commitment. They are remembered years and years after the fact, and continue to extend the influence of managers. In this sense responsiveness is a critical component of management success, because it allows managers and supervisors to get things done, for the benefit of all players.

In the limited space we have, we have attempted to give you a feel of what responsiveness means. You might want to extend your own understanding by considering some of the following questions.

1. If you are a manager or supervisor, how can you modify your own behaviours so that you become and are perceived as more responsive by a) your staff, b) your boss and c) your customers?

2. Again, if you are a manager or supervisor what is your definition of the "responsive employee"? Can you identify your "favourite employees", and consider how they are responsive to you? Our bet is you will find that your most valued employees are responsive.

3. If you are non-management, what would you need to do to be perceived as more responsive by the people around you?

For Managers - How Constant Change Affects Managers And Wears Them Down And Out

One of the least mentioned effects of change relates to how it affects the manager leading that change, and his or her ability to undertake the leadership role. We have already talked about the effects of change on the individual employee, and of course managers are subject to the same reactions, resistances and strains. Some types of change, such as restructuring, or downsizing can put considerable strain on the leaders of an organization.

Stress, Stress & More Stress

One primary concern regarding change is the stress it imposes on those undergoing the change. Managers, because they have obligations to their staff, not only have to deal with change as employees but also need to carry some of the concerns of their staffs. In the case of downsizing, the stress levels can be extremely high, because the manager is charged with conveying very upsetting information.

Stress is part of the job, but in times of change, it is critical that you recognize that it may cause you to act in ways that are less effective than usual. As with anything connected with change, the major concern is not short term but long term. If your stress levels result in marked loss of effectiveness, the risk is that a vicious cycle will be set up, where ineffective leadership results in creating more long term problems, which increases your stress, which reduces your effectiveness even more.

Avoidance -- A Common Response

Your work success hint!

It's not IF you fight or disagree. It's not how often you argue. It's not WHAT you argue about. It's about HOW you argue, fight or disagree, whether at home or at work. Learn to disagree, argue and fight fairly and you WILL see a difference in your relationships, and how others perceive you. Learn the rules of fighting fair and fair disagreement by clicking here.

A common response to unpleasant change is to ignore the situation. Avoidance can take many forms. Most commonly, the avoiding manager plays only a minimal role in moving the organization through the swamp. After announcing the change and doing the minimum required, the manager "hides" from the change, through delegation, or attending to other work. This tactic involves treating things as "business as usual".

The outcomes of this tactic can be devastating. By avoiding situations, the manager abdicates any leadership role, when staff needs it most, during and after significant change. In addition, the avoidance results in the manager becoming out of touch with the people and realities of the organization.

While avoidance serves a need for the manager in the short run, it destroys the manager's credibility, and results in poor decisions. The long term consequence of such action is that the organization tends to deteriorate in terms of morale, effectiveness and productivity. Sometimes this deterioration is irreversable.

Denial -- Another Ineffective Tactic

Sometimes the manager deals with change by denying its impact. Usually, the denying manager takes a very logical approach to change. Decisions get made, systems are put in place, or new procedures are developed. Unfortunately, this "logical" approach denies the impact of change on the people in the organization.
The denying manager tends to refuse to understand "what the big deal is", and shows little empathy with employees in the organization.

As with avoidance the denying tactic tends to drop the manager's credibility and destroy any personal loyalty on the part of employees.

Key Points

1) Managers are put under stress by change, and that stress, if mishandled can result in loss of managerial effectiveness. Managers need to be alert to the signs of stress upon their performance.

2) A common management tactic is to avoid involvement in change when that involvement is unpleasant. The affects of this withdrawal can be lethal to the organization and to the manager.

3) Another common tactic is denial of the effects of change. Managers who do this tend to under- estimate the impact of the change, and demonstrate an inability to respond to employees' emotional reactions to change.

Leading Those That Remain After Downsizing Or Job Loss

Downsizing...Right-sizing, lay-offs or workforce adjustment, whatever the current "correct" terminology, the fact remains that it is the most difficult thing that managers will deal with in their careers.

There are two (only two?!) issues regarding downsizing. First, the period of downsizing brings with it incredible anxiety for everyone. Both managers and employees have to "get through" this period where downsizing is announced and individuals are notified. While this is the period of greatest short term stress, it is an acute situation.

The second problem, and one of much more long term significance is the issue of those that remain. Somehow managers have to deal with the fall-out from the downsizing process, and move their organizations beyond the grief, the anger and the loss of morale that characterizes these major organizational events. It is those that remain that will determine what happens to the organization. We are going to talk about the long term issues here.

The First Few Weeks

In the first few weeks after downsizing even those who still have jobs will feel a lot of difficult things. Grief, anger, sense of betrayal, and depression are common "normal" reactions. Typically productivity drops as people work through their feelings by talking with each other.

This applies to you as the leader of your organization. However, as a leader you have an important role to play in helping employees get past the initial reactions.

During this time, it is important that you do not pressure employees unduly, either in the areas of increasing productivity, or in expressing feelings about the change. Some people want to talk, others not. Some will work harder and some will not. Your job is to help by gently talking to them, both in group settings and individually about their reactions, and how you can help.

Listening is key here. Ask questions and keep your own comments to a minimum, and don't exhort or pressure people. By showing concern and interest, you will be working towards repairing the sense of broken trust that accompanies downsizing.

During this period, you need to take stock of your own emotional situation. Your ability to lead people through the tough times will depend on your own physical and emotional health. Try not to cut yourself off. Talking to colleagues outside your organization is a good idea, or at least, venting your own feelings with someone unconnected with your organization. If you find yourself plagued by sleeplessness, mood swings and depression and guilt, don't hesitate to take advantage of support services that are available.

Normalizing

The initial shock of downsizing is likely to linger for some time, certainly for more than the two weeks mentioned. Unfortunately, you and your staff have goals to accomplish, people to serve. At some point there is a need to get on with it, to normalize the situation.

It is difficult for leaders to determine when it is time to start sending the message that "business as usual" must prevail. Too early and you alienate and anger staff...too late and you end up wallowing. It is best to start normalizing slowly and gently.

Your work success hint!

We won't tell your boss if you don't. You can make quantum leaps in productivity, morale, employee motivation through learning how to delegate effectively. It's not hard to learn but it's a bit more complex than most managers think.

Learn to delegate properly and when your department hits on all cylinders, the trick will remain our little secret. More on delegation...click here.

The situation in your organization can be helped if you start to address any operational problems that might have been caused by the downsizing. Any shifting in staff will result in new challenges in terms of doing business, and there can be some confusion and chaos regarding how you are going to go about doing "business" with a smaller staff complement.

It is important that the chaos be reduced. Normally this will mean clarifying with staff any concerns they have about getting the business done, and problem-solving around the issues. The longer that there is confusion, the more likely there will be permanent effects on organizational health and morale.

During this period, both group problem solving meetings and individual discussions are appropriate and recommended. Bring ALL staff into the discussion, and make sure everyone is clear what they should be doing.

While the feelings of employees are important during this phase, staff need to be slowly moved back to getting the job done. By getting clear understandings of the changes, you will create a climate of stability, which is necessary for the "recovery" of people in the organization.

Futuring

The first part of adjusting to downsizing is to address the feelings of those that remain. The second is to focus on dealing with the operational problems stemming from the changes, and the third step deals with the future.

People need a vision of the future, a sense of what they are trying to achieve, and they also need to know that they are part of a goal-oriented team pulling in the same direction. While we have talked above about "getting through", futuring involves people in trying to create (or confirm) a vision of the organization, and it's goals, values, purpose, etc. It is the creation and commitment to these things that will work to revitalize an organization that has been downsized.

The futuring process is usually a group process, and can extend to undertaking strategic planning, re-examination of priorities, operational planning, and review of role and mission. By doing these kinds of things you promote a sense that the future will bring positive, exciting things. Organizations that have lost staff need to have that sense if they are to rebuild.

Recap

Leading staff through downsizing requires the leader to exercise superior judgement and decision-making. It's a complicated task that involves the leader in recognizing the natural reactions of those that remain in the organization, and determining the right timing for moving the organization from the emotional reactions to a focus on the present and future. While it is difficult, the consequences of mis-managing or under-managing the situation are severe. Both management and staff will suffer if the timing is wrong, or managers deny or avoid dealing with the fall-out from downsizing.

The Importance of Leadership In Managing Change

When change is imposed (as in downsizing scenarios), clearly the most important determinant of "getting through the swamp", is the ability of leadership to...well, lead. The literature on the subject indicates that the nature of the change is secondary to the perceptions that employees have regarding the ability, competence, and credibility of senior and middle management.

If you are to manage change effectively, you need to be aware that there are three distinct times zones where leadership is important. We can call these Preparing For the Journey, Slogging Through The Swamp, and After Arrival. We will look more carefully at each of these.

The Role of Leadership

In an organization where there is faith in the abilities of formal leaders, employees will look towards the leaders for a number of things. During drastic change times, employees will expect effective and sensible planning, confident and effective decision-making, and regular, complete communication that is timely. Also during these times of change, employees will perceive leadership as supportive, concerned and committed to their welfare, while at the same time recognizing that tough decisions need to be made. The best way to summarize is that there is a climate of trust between leader and the rest of the team. The existence of this trust, brings hope for better times in the future, and that makes coping with drastic change much easier.

In organizations characterized by poor leadership, employees expect nothing positive. In a climate of distrust, employees learn that leaders will act in indecipherable ways and in ways that do not seem to be in anyone's best interests. Poor leadership means an absence of hope, which, if allowed to go on for too long, results in an organization becoming completely nonfunctioning. The organization must deal with the practical impact of unpleasant change, but more importantly, must labor under the weight of employees who have given up, have no faith in the system or in the ability of leaders to turn the organization around.

Leadership before, during and after change implementation is THE key to getting through the swamp. Unfortunately, if haven't established a track record of effective leadership, by the time you have to deal with difficult changes, it may be too late.

Preparing For The Journey

It would be a mistake to assume that preparing for the journey takes place only after the destination has been defined or chosen. When we talk about preparing for the change journey, we are talking about leading in a way that lays the foundation or groundwork for ANY changes that may occur in the future. Preparing is about building resources, by building healthy organizations in the first place. Much like healthy people, who are better able to cope with infection or disease than unhealthy people, organization that are healthy in the first place are better able to deal with change.

As a leader you need to establish credibility and a track record of effective decision making, so that there is trust in your ability to figure out what is necessary to bring the organization through.

Slogging Through The Swamp

Leaders play a critical role during change implementation, the period from the announcement of change through the installation of the change. During this middle period the organization is the most unstable, characterized by confusion, fear, loss of direction, reduced productivity, and lack of clarity about direction and mandate. It can be a period of emotionalism, with employees grieving for what is lost, and initially unable to look to the future.

During this period, effective leaders need to focus on two things. First, the feelings and confusion of employees must be acknowledged and validated. Second, the leader must work with employees to begin creating a new vision of the altered workplace, and helping employees to understand the direction of the future. Focusing only on feelings, may result in wallowing. That is why it is necessary to begin the movement into the new ways or situations. Focusing only on the new vision may result in the perception that the leader is out of touch, cold and uncaring. A key part of leadership in this phase is knowing when to focus on the pain, and when to focus on building and moving into the future.

After Arrival

In a sense you never completely arrive, but here we are talking about the period where the initial instability of massive change has been reduced. People have become less emotional, and more stable, and with effective leadership during the previous phases, are now more open to locking in to the new directions, mandate and ways of doing things.

Your work success hint!

Did you know that a high percentage of conflict at work and at home is a result of ineffective use of language? It's true. The best part is that you can learn to alter your communication and language so that what you say is perceived as more cooperative, and less confrontational.

The result? Less conflict incidents, and less severe conflicts. More info...

This is an ideal time for leaders to introduce positive new change, such as examination of unwieldy procedures or Total Quality Management. The critical thing here is that leaders must now offer hope that the organization is working towards being better, by solving problems and improving the quality of work life. While the new vision of the organization may have begun while people were slogging through the swamp, this is the time to complete the process, and make sure that people buy into it, and understand their roles in this new organization.

Conclusion

Playing a leadership role in the three phases is not easy. Not only do you have a responsibility to lead, but as an employee yourself, you have to deal with your own reactions to the change, and your role in it. However, if you are ineffective in leading change, you will bear a very heavy personal load. Since you are accountable for the performance of your unit, you will have to deal with the ongoing loss of productivity that can result from poorly managed change, not to mention the potential impact on your own enjoyment of your job.

Understanding The Cycle of Change, And How People React To It

Managers often make the mistake of assuming that once a change is started, that employees will see that it is going to take place, and get on side. This is rarely the case. Because change causes fear, a sense of loss of the familiar, etc., it takes some time for employees to a) understand the meaning of the change and b) commit to the change in a meaningful way. It is important to understand that people tend to go through stages in their attempts to cope with change. Understanding that there are normal progressions helps change leaders avoid under-managing change or over-reacting to resistance.

As we go through the stages, you will probably find many similarities with the process a person goes through with the loss of a loved one.

Stage I: Denial

An early strategy that people use to cope with change is to deny that it is happening, or to deny that it will continue or last. Common responses during this stage are:

"I've heard these things before. Remember last year they announced the new customer initiative? Nothing ever happened, and this will pass."

"It's just another hair-brained idea from the top."

"I bet this will be like everything else. The head honcho will be real gung-ho but in about six months everything will be back to normal. You'll see."

"I'll believe it when I see it."

People in the denial stage are trying to avoid dealing with the fear and uncertainty of prospective change. They are hoping they won't have to adapt.

The denial stage is difficult because it is hard to involve people in planning for the future, when they will not acknowledge that the future is going to be any different than the present.

People tend to move out of the denial stage when they see solid, tangible indicators that things ARE different. Even with these indicators some people can remain in denial for some time.

Stage II: Anger & Resistance

When people can no longer deny that something is or has happened, they tend to move into a state of anger, accompanied by covert and/or over resistance. This stage is the most critical with respect to the success of the change implementation. Leadership is needed to help work through the anger, and to move people to the next stage. If leadership is poor, the anger at this stage may last indefinitely, perhaps much longer than even the memory of the change itself.

People in this stage tend to say things like:

"Who do they think they are? Jerking us around"

"Why are they picking on us?"

"What's so damned bad about the way things are?

"How could [you] the boss allow this to happen?

Actually people say far stronger things, but we need to be polite.

Stage III: Exploration & Acceptance

This is the stage where people begin to get over the hump. They have stopped denying, and while they may be somewhat angry, the anger has moved out of the spotlight. They have a better understanding of the meaning of the change and are more willing to explore further, and to accept the change. They act more open-mindedly, and are now more interested in planning around the change and being participants in the process.

People in this stage say things like:

"Well, I guess we have to make the best of it."

"Maybe we can get through this."

"We need to get on with business."

Stage IV: Commitment

Your work success hint!

We won't tell your boss if you don't. You can make quantum leaps in productivity, morale, employee motivation through learning how to delegate effectively. It's not hard to learn but it's a bit more complex than most managers think.

Learn to delegate properly and when your department hits on all cylinders, the trick will remain our little secret. More on delegation...click here.

This is the payoff stage, where people commit to the change, and are willing to work towards making it succeed. They know it is a reality, and at this point people have adapted sufficiently to make it work. While some changes will never get endorsement from employees (downsizing, for example) employees at this stage will commit to making the organization effective within the constraints that have resulted from the change.

Concluding Points

Let's conclude with some key points:

1) The change process takes a considerable amount of time to stabilize and to work. Don't undermanage by assuming it will "work itself out" and don't over-react when faced with reasonable resistance.

2) Worry if there is no resistance. If the change is significant it means that people are hiding their reactions. Eventually the reactions that are not dealt with will fester and can destroy the organization. Likewise with anger.

Ideas: Home Businesses and the Ball Adage Policy

It has come to light that men (well most men), have somehow lost their balls. It's not just a tragedy, but also an epidemic. The John Wayne’s are gone. Who killed them? Can we get them back? Please? It seems that most men have been emotionally castrated in our society and I believe I know who did it. Women. That's right, women! What I really wonder is: do we like the new men of our society, the men without balls? Or, do we miss the balls? And, how the hell does this relate to your, home-based business? I’ll tell you, but first a story... So, I am a woman and am I guilty of this? Probably. Do I regret the emotional removal of one's testicles, maybe? My first husband came with no balls; his previous wife swiped them and ran. My current husband came with some still in tact, and I think after 7.5 years of being together he has at least one full one left. Which is still better than none. And, as of late I had a friend that I recently found out has none. That’s right his wife took his too. It's a shame really. His balls are so gone that his wife has him convinced that pursuing happiness in others is a sickness and that he needs to be treated for it. Her exact words were, "You like to be with women that make you feel good about yourself." Well, duh. Apparently, that wasn't her job. Or, if it was she wasn't doing it. Apparently he can only find happiness with her. And, if he’s not getting it from home, he’s not supposed to find it anywhere else. Period. As a result, he is now entering counseling for this "disease." OI! So, my question to us women is: do we like our men ball-less or do we miss the real MEN? Do we really like being so controlling and so micro-manage oriented that our male population are left scared to talk to anyone, scared to communicate with the opposite sex, and made to feel guilty when they have a good time without us? Don't you think that takes away part of his soul, that is, who he is as person or his inner peace and happiness? Or, do we really just not give a damn, because hey we have the "control." We have created a weaker man a man with no backbone. Is that a happy man, a man to be proud of? I don't think so. It was kind of flattering back in the day, when men stood their ground, and put their foot down. Damn, I think it is kind of sexy actually, if you see how men USED TO BE. Now, this doesn't mean they should "go off" half-cocked, as if they don't have to be good and control themselves. It does mean, that we need to treat them like MEN and let them be happy. Whether it’s scratching their balls, what's left of them anyway, going out to watch the game with their buddies, or having a conversation (maybe even a conversation with the opposite sex). It's Ok, because if you treat them like men and with respect, and remember to admire them and all the great things they do for us and compliment them. Then I can assure you, they will be good as gold and love you for it so much more. So, what is my point and what does this have to do with home-based business marketing? Well, if you are a man, and want to make money helping and selling to local businesses, show them you have the BALLS to make their business money, and that you’re the MAN for the job. Walk into the place of business and strut your stuff. Stand proud, push your shoulders back, push out your mid region and act confident. You can do it. Gina has given you the Ball "Adage" policy! If you’re a woman go be sweet, kind, and caring. By caring I mean, truly show you care about his/her business. Show the business owner that you will prove your worth and that you are the wo-MAN for the job. Remember to compliment the owner on something, show them the results they will get when they implement your services. Leave the business owner with his balls, and you can tell him that his businesses will be better because you are dedicated to making his business the most successful in his field, in his area.