Suffer from Completion Anxiety?

During the peak of my marathon running days, there were plenty of times I’d be facing a 20-mile training run on a humid Sunday morning. My legs were still heavy from my Friday speed workout, plus I often had a slight hangover and some annoying minor injuries.

 

Sweating out the next 2-1/2 hours alone with your thoughts can make even Navy SEALs want to throw the covers over their heads. But I’d tell myself: “Just get through the first 20 minutes and then call it a day if you’re not feeling a little better. At least it will speed up the hangover recovery.” Most of the time I’d make it to the 20-minute mark, trying not to look at all the happy people heading out to Sunday brunch, the beach or the air-conditioned mall, and convince myself to grind out another 20 minutes. At the 40-minute mark, I’d do another gut check. Get to the 60-minute mark and then reassess. “I might not make it the full 20 miles today, but at least I’ve got a respectable number to put down in my training log.” And then another 20 minutes would be behind me, and then the mindset shift to: “I’m more than halfway to today’s goal. Might as well keep going for another 20.” Rinse, repeat, spit.

 

I bring this up because the 4^th Quarter is underway, and we’re starting to hear more and more excuses from clients for not getting their weekly writing assignments done. Whether it’s your turn to do the firm’s weekly blog, or byline an article for a trade journal or finish the next chapter of your book, we’re seeing more and more zeroes in our weekly progress meetings.

I get it, this is the time of year when client obligations seem to increase, just as time gets compressed due to year-end deadlines, family obligations, travel delays and volatile weather.  

You vs. You

“In the battle of life, your toughest opponent will always be yourself. It's YOU vs YOU every single day,” explained motivational speaker, David Goggins. To win, you have to callous your mind, push past pain, and do the things you don't feel like doing.” See Goggins’ No Excuses Mentality [video]

Goggins’ approach might be too hardcore for some of you, but situations like these shouldn’t be tolerated at any professional services firm. For three weeks, one of our clients told us he didn’t have time to review our edits to his 800-word blog post – something that didn’t require more than five minutes of his time. Another client took almost a month to clarify two sentences (30 words) in the lead paragraph of her column for a widely read national trade journal. She missed the deadline and a very high visibility opportunity for her firm and personal brand. Another client took over two weeks to get his headshot and an up-to-date bio to the producer of a Top 100 podcast and missed the interview opportunity.

Ouch!

Are you busy or a perfectionist?

I get it. We’re all super-busy putting out fires and dealing with client emergencies. But if you don’t carve out a little time to work ON your business rather than always in it, you will never move yourself forward in the thought leadership ecosystem.

 

When it comes to writing, we’re here to do most of the mental heavy lifting for you. We just need a few minutes of your undivided attention to tap into your expertise. Otherwise, the end product won’t sound like you or ring true with your audience.

 

When preparing for your weekly Gut Check™ calls with us, just tell your assistant to hold your calls, turn off your mobile phone and set aside 20 minutes to focus exclusively on your next assignment for us. When 20 minutes is up, you might not have reached the end zone, but at least you moved the ball down the field and picked up a couple of first downs. You can build on that momentum for the following week.

Isn’t that a lot better than telling yourself: “I don’t have time for Berkowitz this week,” or “I’ll never get this done, so why bother?”

 

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, “Don’t let perfection be the enemy of progress.” Many of you are detail-oriented professionals. When you say you don’t have time to write/edit/review, you’re telling us you don’t have time to make it absolutely 100% perfect. We don’t need perfect, and neither does your audience. They just need authoritatively good and more importantly, they need to hear from you on a consistent basis.

 

As my college track coach used to bark at us: “Anyone can run fast when they’re feeling good; we’re going to teach you how to run fast when you feel like crap and your ass is falling off.”

 

Conclusion

 

You may not set a personal best every day, but by making consistent, incremental progress, you’re becoming the best professional you can be. That’s called the “Kaizen Effect,” named after the Japanese word for continuous improvement.

What are you and your colleagues doing to make incremental progress every day? I’d love to hear from you.

 

#goalsetting, #practicemanagement, #contentdevelopment, #thoughtleadership, #DavidGoggins

Back Up Your Facts with Real Sources, Not AI

If you’re finding it harder to get your content past the compliance department and trade media editors, it’s not your imagination. These eagle-eyed reviewers are increasingly under pressure to verify facts and matters of attribution before going live. They know content shapers are increasingly relying on AI to assist them. They know AI tools often rely on outdated sources or misidentify sources or sometimes simply make them up. (More on than in a minute) So, they’re scrutinizing sources like never before. Don’t make them doubt you.

Example

Here’s a paragraph from a book manuscript a prospect sent to us for review:

 

“If you write something down, there’s a 42% chance you’re going to accomplish what you said you’re going to do. You must always know what you’re going to do today, tomorrow, next week and at the end of the month. It’s not just about committing to what you’re going to do today. For instance: ‘I must deliver three tax returns by the end of the week. Period.’

Only 16% of people write down their goals. Those who write down the goals are 42% more likely to achieve them.”

The stats he cited sounded very reasonable. But when we asked where he got them, he hesitated before saying: “I forget. I read it somewhere.” That’s not good enough. Then he admitted he used AI to help him draft the manuscript “and it always gives me sources,” he assured us. So when we asked to see the sources AI came up with he gave us a link to this blog post on LinkedIn. Yes, the post mentioned the 42% statistic, but it didn’t cite where it came from.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

A week later, the author somewhat sheepishly came back to us and said the missing source was CNBC because he heard it on a news report they did. To their credit the CNBC correctly cited Dr. Gail Matthews, a psychology professor at Dominican University of California, as the source of the 42% statistic. But alas the CNBC link was broken and it pointed to a general bio page for Dr. Matthews, not the source of her research containing the 42% statistic. We run into second-hand bias like this often from clients who say they read something in The Wall Street Journal or Financial Times or Bloomberg. But a news report in well-respected mainstream media is typically not the source – it’s just a conduit.

If you’re curious about Dr. Matthews’ research, the 42% statistic came from a paper she presented at the 9th Annual International Conference of the Psychology Research Unit of Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER), Athens, Greece. That’s your source.

Be wary of citing sources from AI

No one likes to have their hard work and research being ripped off without attribution. Academic research conducted by Middle Tennessee State University, Arizona State University and Duke University among others have found that ChatGPT and other AI tools will cite articles by an author who usually writes about your topic. AI might even identify a journal that published on your topic, but the title, pages numbers, and dates are completely fictional, according to the aforementioned academic studies. This is because ChatGPT and other AI tools are not connected to web search, so they have no way of identifying actual sources.

Since ChatGPT is based on a Large Language Model researchers found it does not have the ability to match relevant sources to any given topic. “It may do OK with some topics or sources, but it may also fabricate sources that don’t exist,” noted the Duke study. “Depending on the topic and availability of data it has on that topic, it may summarize the wrong source or provide inaccurate summaries of specific articles—sometimes making up details and conclusions,” Duke added.

 

Conclusion

We’re all super-busy these days. That doesn't give us the right to be lazy when it comes to citing sources for your stats, facts and attribution. So do the work or hire someone to do it the right way for you. You’re an Elite Professional; Don’t Act Like a Jamoke.

What are you and your colleagues doing to improve your fact checking and research capabilities? I’d love to hear from you and why.

 

#businesscommunication, #practicemanagement, #factcheck

 

In the Financial Advisory Space? Stop Using These 7 Words

Space may be the final frontier, but it has no place in your business vocabulary. I can’t tell you how many times we’ve come across references to the “private equity space” or “ultra-high net worth space” in our client’s presentations, guest columns or podcast interviews. PLEASE STOP!

The word “space” is a prime example of business jargon run amok. Nowadays, it seems like every company is claiming to be in some kind of “space,” whether it's the fintech space, the AI space, or the blockchain space. “Space” is a vague, catch-all term that often lacks substance. Stay away from it. Instead, be more specific about the industry, market, or sector to which you're referring.

Greg Bauman of the Silicon Valley Business Journal explained that “space” is often used in business jargon to “puff up the speaker.” Beware of people who deploy it to imply mastery of a topic when their knowledge may be thin, he advised.

If you’re using AI, Grammarly, etc., to assist you that’s fine. Just don’t let those tools cause you to become lazy. Here are six more of our corporate-speak pet peeves. Chances are they’re bugging your clients, staff and stakeholders, too.

1. "Synergy" - This word is often used to describe the potential combined effect of two or more things working together, but it has become a cliché and is frequently used without much substance.

2. "Disruptive" - This term is overused to describe any new idea, product, or service that challenges the status quo, even when the "disruption" is relatively minor.

3. "Pivot" - Originally used in the context of startups changing direction, this word is now applied to any shift in strategy or focus, often unnecessarily. Maybe it’s time to pivot from your usual choice of words in your presentations, articles and podcast appearances.

4. "Low-hanging fruit" - This phrase, which refers to easily achievable goals or opportunities, has become a tired cliché in business communication. Buzzwords like these are the low-hanging fruit of business communication.

5. "Value-add" - This term, which refers to additional features or benefits that add value to a product or service, is often used without much substance or specificity. Hence, it’s not adding much value to your communication.

6. "Game-changer" – Ugghhh. This phrase is frequently used to describe any new development or innovation, even when its impact is not truly transformative. Think about how cringeworthy it is when the teenagers in your life use the word “awesome.” It’s the same thing when corporate folks use “game-changer” or any of the other jargony shortcuts above. 

Conclusion

We’re all super-busy these days, but that doesn't give us the right to be lazy when it comes to our written and spoken communication. You’re an Elite Professional; Don’t Act Like a Jamoke.

What are you and your colleagues doing to improve your communication and efforts? I’d love to hear from you and why.

 

What Constantly Canceling, Rescheduling Says About You

As a trusted advisor, most of you would never think of canceling or rescheduling meetings with clients at the last minute unless it was an absolute emergency. But when you constantly reschedule with your team, your prospects, your strategic partners, your vendors, your consultants and even your family, you could be doing irreparable harm to your personal brand.  Word gets around fast in this digital age and what you’re telling people is this: “My time is more valuable than yours.”

Beyond hubris, some of the folks you keep canceling on have a higher hourly billing rate than you do – so that’s what, hubris-squared!? No one likes to feel marginalized – ask your spouse or kids how that feels. You’re also not being trustworthy and reliable.

As Stephen Covey details in his book The Speed of Trust, you’re not being trustworthy when you fail to honor commitments that you freely made. It also implies that can’t manage your time or your business very well. None of these outcomes are very good for someone deemed a professional. Again, word gets around fast these days.

“Keeping commitments is a sign of maturity” wrote Whitney Johnson, CEO of Disruption Advisors, in a Harvard Business Review essay. “It’s difficult to hold your subordinates accountable when you don’t hold yourself accountable,” added Johnson. “How do we inspire commitment in those we lead when it’s obvious to them that commitment is a negotiable principle for us?”

Lessons from Sinatra and Michael Jordan

Rory Henry, Director, Arrowroot Family Office and host of the AFO Wealth Management Forward podcast told me the other day that when you’re constantly cancelling or rescheduling meetings, it’s often a symptom of being “overworked or unmotivated.” When you optimize your business and relationships, said Henry, “your business meetings become like standing reservations for both parties involved. It’s the type of mutually beneficial relationship Frank Sinatra had with Patsy's Italian Restaurant in New York and that Michael Jordan had with Gibson's Bar & Steakhouse in Chicago.”

Both Sinatra and Jordan not only received exceptional service, said Henry, but their consistent presence also greatly benefited these establishments through their ongoing support. “In business, when you consistently look forward to meeting so much so that you don’t feel the need to cancel or reschedule, it's a strong indicator of fulfilling and productive work relationship,” noted Henry, author of the forthcoming book Holistic Guide to Wealth Management.

“Regular, anticipated, and punctual meetings reflect a mutual respect and value for each other's time and contributions, similar to the mutual benefits enjoyed by Sinatra and Jordan and their favorite restaurants,” added Henry.

Josh Patrick, Senior Advisor, Stage2 Planning Partners, and a New York Times guest blogger told me that there is a “national feeling” that being civil is a thing of the past. “That includes those who feel that ghosting is an OK thing to do,” said Patrick. “Too often, we say yes, and then we decide we don't want to do whatever it is we said yes to,” said Patrick. “We then are rude or worse when we don't show up.”

Patrick believes that social media and the fact that we can hide behind our screens and keyboards when being rude to others plays a role. “I also think that if you watch conservative news, you are in a constant state of rage and that rage overflows into other parts of one's life like disrespecting people and the value of their time,” added Patrick.

Johnson agreed. “Never has canceling been easier and less painful for us than it is in the age of text message,” she wrote. “We can cancel without ever having to speak with, much less meet, someone. We can cancel five minutes ahead and without explanation. Just tack on an emoticon to our message, and we can convince ourselves that it’s almost the same as if we’d met our obligation.”

Like Johnson, Henry and Patrick, I believe rudeness is a factor, but when it comes to professionals and other high achievers, a bigger contributor is the misguided belief that “busier is better.” Too many folks with lots of credentials after their name are unrealistic about how much they can get done in a day, week or month. Thanks to technology and being connected 24/7 we think we can get more done in less time than is realistically possible, so we over-schedule, over-commit and under-deliver. All of these outcomes will come back to bite you in the long run.

As Johnson related, once she stopped constantly rescheduling her commitments and actually committed to them on the original date and time, her stress level went down significantly. “As I kept more and more commitments, I got more and more confident. And I learned how long things really take, so I got better and better at giving estimates on when I could deliver,” Johnson added.

Steps you can take

1. Stop making excuses. Excuses are like garbage cans. Everybody has ‘em and they all stink.

2. Prioritize. Start your day by identifying the three most important things you must get done in the next 8-10 hours and focus intently on those.

3. Find ways to show up no matter what. I don’t know if 90% of life is just showing up

4. Empathize. Think how it feels to be canceled or kept waiting constantly when you’ve come to an appointment prepared.  

 
Conclusion

You’re an Elite Professional; Don’t Act Like a Jamoke. As Golda Meir famously said: “I must govern the clock, not be governed by it.” How are you managing your time and relationships with vendors, prospects, strategic partners and your team? I’d love to hear from you and why.

 

#timemanagement, #respect, #practicemanagement

What March Madness Teaches About Our Biases

With the first week of the NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament (aka #MarchMadness) in the books, many of you are lamenting your “busted brackets.” Don’t feel bad. An estimated 30 million people painstakingly fill out their tournament picks every year, and there has never been a verified perfect bracket. The closest to perfection came in 2019, when a Columbus, Ohio, resident correctly chose the winners of the first 50 games of the tournament only to see his picks unravel in the Sweet 16 round. For years, billionaire Warren Buffett has offered a $1 billion prize to anyone picking a perfect bracket and he’s never come close to paying out.

Why we can’t predict winners consistently

It turns out our bracket-picking prowess gets clouded by many of the behavioral biases that derail investors. According to my friend Rory Henry @Roryshenry, business development director at Arrowroot Family Office and host of the AFO Wealth Management Forward podcast, here are the five most common biases that trip up bracket pickers and investors:  

1. Recency Bias occurs when people give more weight to recent events than historical data. For example, in the Big Ten Conference tournament held just before March Madness, Wisconsin's surprising victory might lead many to overrate them in the NCAA tournament despite a so-so regular season record. Conversely, Purdue, who many saw as a top overall pick throughout the season stumbled in the Big Ten Conference tournament and caused many bracketologists to remove them from their Final Four selections. If you’re keeping score at home, Purdue cruised through the first two rounds and Wisconsin was bounced in the first round.

 

2. Affinity Bias refers to our natural inclination to support teams or schools with which we have a personal connection or fondness. As a proud UCLA alum, Henry says he often picks the Bruins to win it all whenever they are in the tournament even if they’re not having a great year.

 

3. Overconfidence Bias occurs when individuals overestimate their knowledge or predictive abilities, which can lead to flawed decision-making. Watching a lot of college basketball might make someone overly confident in their bracket selections, possibly ignoring the unpredictable nature of the tournament and the potential for upsets.

 

4. Confirmation Bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs. In March Madness, if you believe a perennial favorite like Kentucky is a strong contender, and all the pundits say so as well, you might ignore signs of weakness (youth, inexperience, turnovers) that could be exposed against veteran teams in the high-pressure NCAA tournament. No.3 Kentucky was sent home in the first round by No.14 Oakland, a small commuter school outside of Detroit.

 

5. Intergroup Bias happens when we favor our own group (in-group bias) and the negative evaluation of rival groups (out-group bias). For example, Henry said if you have a strong dislike for a team like Arizona due to its rivalry with UCLA, you might underrate Arizona's chances in the tournament, not because of their skills or record, but because of the rivalry. Same goes for Duke vs. Carolina, Michigan vs. Ohio State and Oregon vs. Washington. Henry said: “You can bet your bottom dollar Arizona won't be making past the Round of 32 in my bracket,” but the Wildcats have posted two convincing victories so far and are favored again in the Swett 16.

Then there are the intangibles like team chemistry and culture. As my friend Dan McMahon, Managing Partner of Integrated Growth Advisors (and a diehard UConn Huskies fan) wrote recently:

“While athleticism and recruiting budgets are important, the most successful teams in the tourney year after year are those with strong cultures built on trust, communication, and shared values. On these teams, every member of the roster from the stars to the walk-on benchwarmers are valued and has a unique role on the team.”

As I’ve learned over the years, filling out your brackets is like constructing a diversified investment portfolio. You’re trying to find the right balance between the “safe picks” (the top seeded, blue-chip stocks) and the “upset picks” (the undervalue lower seeds, aka small cap growth stocks) that earn you bonus points and separate you from the other players in your pool. That’s where team culture, like a strong company management and culture can trump financial statements and team stats.

 

Now, let’s look at how these bracket-picking biases relate to investing:

 

Recency Bias. Investors believe that last year’s top performing stocks and funds will repeat their success in the current year. In reality, last year’s top performers are usually in the middle or bottom third of the pack the following year. Remember how well tech stocks did in 2022 or how poorly energy did? What a difference a year makes. Same goes for all the bracket pickers going for last year’s Final Four participants San Diego State, Connecticut, Miami and Florida Atlantic. Only UConn and San Diego State remain this year. Miam and Florida Atlantic didn’t even qualify.

 

Familiarity Bias. It’s amazing how many people pick their alma mater to do well regardless of the team’s record or who else is in its bracket. People also tend to overweight teams that are in their geographic area because they hear about them all the time on the news, or because many family members are alums. The same goes for investors who overweight their portfolios based on the industry in which they work, or Fortune 500 companies located nearby.

 

The reciprocal of Familiarity Bias is Unfamiliarity Bias. That’s the tendency to ignore promising investments because you’re not familiar with the company or industry – or ignoring promising overseas markets because you’re not familiar with the language or the culture. Same goes for March Madness. West Coast hoops fans are far more likely to overlook East Coast powerhouses like UConn, North Carolina and Marquette, even though both programs have been in the national top 10 and make it to the Big Dance almost every year.

 

Overconfidence Bias is another derailer for both investors and bracket players. Most pool participants have massive confidence in top-ranked teams. Yet, only once in the history of the tournament (2008) have all four No.1 seeds made it to the Final Four. Some years only one of the four No.1 seeds will make it that far—you never know which one. Same goes for investors who overweight the Magnificent Seven or Dow 30 stocks.

 

Following the Herd. Oddsmakers love it when the American public stampedes over itself crowding into the same bets. History shows all four No.1 seeds almost never make it to the Final Four in the same year, but once again, those top four rated teams have the most votes to make it to the Final Four this year. And two of those teams (Houston and Purdue) have never won a national title despite years of success. Reminds me of all the investors who continue piling into Nvidia, Amazon, Tesla (and Bitcoin) despite their frothy valuations.

 

The “Halo Effect” comes into play when investors blindly follow the recommendations or investing choices of gurus such as Bill Gross and Warren Buffet. It’s the same when bracket pickers blindly follow the wonky statistical models of KenPom, 538, and RPI, or blindly pencil in the “sleeper” picks of TV analysts Kenny Smith and Charles Barkley, or former President Obama. As with the stock jockeys on TV, the picks of the expert hoop heads on TV rarely pan out.

 

Then there’s the fallacy of “breakeven,” a mental accounting trap that has plagued gamblers and investors alike for centuries. How many times have you held on to a losing stock for years, just waiting for it to get back to the original purchase price before you dump it? Likewise, how many people keep selecting BYU (31 tournament appearances without a title); Tennessee (26 appearances without a title); Alabama and Creighton (25 appearances without a title) to go far in the tourney because they have great records again and this time, you tell yourself, it’s finally their year. Or maybe, you tell yourself, it’s the Zags’ year because they’re long overdue for a championship.

Gonzaga University, formerly a little-known “microcap” from eastern Washington is now a mighty mega-cap in the world of college basketball. The Bulldogs have qualified for the NCAA tournament an amazing 25 straight years and have never come close to having a losing season during that span. They have an impressive record again this year. The majority of bracket pickers have the Zags brand penciled in for another deep run in the tournament – because they always do -- despite the fact that Gonzaga has never won the championship. EVER.

 

Conclusion

 

Whether investing, gambling, or taking part in the friendly office pool, always check your emotions at the door. Working with an objective, independent advisor is one of the best ways we know to prevent your intuitions from causing you to stray from your plan and making costly turnovers that will shake your confidence and derail your plan.

Who’s your pick to win it all and why? I’d love to hear from you and why.

#marchmadness, #behavioralfinance, #bracketsbusted

Why It’s Hard to Edit Our Own Writing?

Simple steps for breaking through

Whether you have three books to your credit or agonize over a monthly blog post, there are at least a dozen reasons why it can be challenging to edit our own writing effectively. How many of these traps below sound like you? If you answered, yes to three or more, I have some suggestions for you at the end of this post:

1.      Familiarity bias: We are intimately familiar with our own thoughts and writing. This can make it difficult to spot errors or areas that need improvement. Our brains tend to fill in gaps and overlook mistakes because we know what we intended to say.

2.      Emotional attachment: We often develop an emotional attachment to our writing, making it hard to be objective and critical when editing. We may be reluctant to make significant changes or cuts because we've invested time and effort into the piece.

3.      Lack of distance: When we're deeply involved in a piece of writing, it's hard to step back and view it with fresh eyes. We may be too close to the material to see it from a reader's perspective.

4.      Confirmation bias: We tend to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs or interpretations. This makes it harder to identify flaws or weaknesses in our arguments or explanations.

5.      Blind spots: We may have blind spots or areas of our writing that we simply can't see objectively, whether it's due to our writing style, subject matter expertise, or personal biases. Sound familiar?

6.      Editing fatigue: Editing requires sustained concentration and attention to detail, which can be mentally draining. After a certain point, our ability to spot errors or willingness to make improvements will diminish.

7.      Difficulty with self-criticism: Some writers struggle with being overly critical or not critical enough when evaluating their own work. This makes it hard to strike the right balance.

8.      Perfectionism. I need every sentence to be perfect before I go on to the next. Instead, write quickly in a stream of consciousness style and then go back and revise, revise, revise. As Voltaire liked to say: “Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good.”

9.      Data dumping. I want to share everything I know about a subject. Spoiler alert: Nobody cares how extensive your knowledge is. True genius comes from distilling complex subjects into easily understandable bite-size nuggets. Doing so will prevent you from succumbing to Smartest Kid in the Class Syndrome.

10.   Hubris. I handle complex multi-state tax returns, multimillion-dollar estate plans and retirement plans for Fortune 1000 executives. How hard can writing be? Probably harder than you think.

11.   Impatience/tech reliance. I don’t make my living as a writer. I don’t have time for this. Why can’t I just let AI/Grammarly and software do it for me? How well did those Cliffs Notes work out for you in college?

12.   Procrastination.  Writing is something many people find unpleasant. It’s easy to put it off and avoid it until the inevitable deadline comes bearing down on you.

Tips for editing your own writing

1. Take breaks from your writing. Set your timer for one hour or a specific time of day. Then hit the save button on your work. Walk away for several hours or better yet, for at least a full day. You’ll come back with a fresh set of eyes and usually a surprising amount of clarity.

2. Seek feedback from others – people who you can count on to give you to tell you the truth.

3. Read your work aloud. Is it cringeworthy? Where does it start to drag?  Does it sound like you?

4. Start with the end in mind. What are the three most important takeaways you want your reader to gain from reading your work? Write them at the top of your piece and make sure you have answered them clearly. In your conclusion, remind the reader the expert insights you just shared with them. Tell ‘em what you’re going to tell them. Then you tell them. Then you tell ‘em what you just told ‘em.

5. Create an outline before writing. Start simply with the introduction, then the purpose of your piece, followed by the three to four main points and a conclusion. After that, it’s just a matter of filling in the blanks.

6. Just get started. If you’re a procrastinator or perfectionist, taking the first step is the key. As the old saying goes: “You can always edit a bad page, but you can’t edit a blank page. Your first draft is supposed to suck. Just get your thoughts on paper and revise, revise, revise.

7. Get an accountability partner who will keep you on task. It could be a trusted colleague, good friend or even a writing coach who can make sure you have your outline, rough drafts and final drafts completed by the dates to which you committed. NOTE: I don’t recommend using your spouse as an accountability partner unless you can prevent criticism of your writing from spilling over into other areas of your relationship. That said, you can always do what our client Kyle Walters recommends and use the ‘Call Your Mom’ Strategy. She’ll always tell you the unvarnished truth.

8. Make a hard copy and use a pencil. Not to be anti-green here, but before you submit your final draft, make a hard copy of your work (print on both sides) and take out a pencil to do a final review of the piece. Personally, I’ve found it useful to read the hard copy to myself aloud. Using a pencil and reading aloud slows your brain down and forces you to listen – really listen -- to what you’re trying to say.

As Ernest Hemingway liked to say: “Write drunk, edit sober.”

Conclusion

It doesn’t matter how well you know the numbers, without having a solid command of the English language you won’t be taken seriously. After all, You're an Elite Professional; Don't Sound Like a Jamoke

 
#grammar, #businesscommunication, #selfediting, #thoughtleadership,

Irregardless, I Could Care Less

Most of you are armed with grammar apps, spell checkers and AI. But we’re still seeing plenty of grammatical fumbles in your submissions. Take the word “irregardless.” It’s frequently misused because it appears in most dictionaries and sounds more imposing than simply saying “regardless. ” By adding the prefix “ir” (which means “not”) to a word that already means “without regard,” you’re essentially saying: “not not without regard.” Huh!?

Using double negatives makes you sound unprofessional and unattuned to the details. That’s a liability if you’re in professional services even if your software doesn’t flag it. Most of the time “regardless” will suffice when you’re implying that something will happen (or is true) without being influenced by other conditions.

TIP: Try substituting “regardless” for “irregardless” in each example below.

·           Irregardless of opposition, he still wanted to expand the team.

·           They decided they would go ahead with the plan irregardless of the risks.

·           She elected to buy the growth stock irregardless of the high valuation.

·           I'm not sure about your tax advice, but I'm going to follow it irregardless.

Did the meaning or intent change? No. Are the sentences cleaner and more economical? Yes. Did you save your reader time? Yes. Stick with regardless.

I could (or couldn’t) care less?

On a recent NBA telecast, analyst and Hall of Famer Charles Barkley said: “I could care less what people think. People are stupid.”

Barkley is an imposing 300-pound individual who was known as The Round Mound of Rebound during his playing days. I might not correct Big Chuck in person, but if he “could care less” what people think, it implies that he does care at least a little bit what people think of him. Likewise, many of you have said you “could care less” about clients who ignore your advice or you “could care less” about Jim Cramer’s latest stock tip on cable TV. Please tell me you didn’t mean that!

When you get a chance, tell your software that “could care less” and “couldn’t care less” are often used interchangeably, even though only one of them technically conveys the intended meaning.

People will often use “I could care less” as a shorthand way of showing how little they care. But “I could care less” implies that you still have a little room left in your subconscious to care about something -- even though you don’t hold it in high “regard.” Would your interest be piqued if new information or your circumstances changed? That’s what you’re implying by using “could care less.”

For all intensive purposes, don’t peek

Speaking of “piqued,” it’s spelled with a “q” if you’re trying to show interest in something. I’ve seen some of you mistakenly write “peaked” (as though your interest level is no longer as high as it used to be) or “peeked” (as in you took a quick look at something but didn’t study it further). “Peaked” and “peeked” generally won’t get flagged by your tools, but they’re not the correct word choices in the aforementioned situation. So, for all “intents and purposes,” follow the rules above and you’ll be just fine. By the way, “intents and purposes” is correct if you mean “in effect” or “essentially.” Don’t say: “intensive purposes”!

It's great to have spellcheck, grammar apps and AI to assist you. However, you can’t go wrong by reading your work aloud before submitting it or consulting with a trained professional if you’re not sure. I hate grammar, too. When in doubt, I just keep it simple and try to be as economical as possible with word choices. As Barkley famously said when asked about his formidable rebounding technique: “Yeah, I've got a technique. It's called just go get the damn ball!”

 

Conclusion
It doesn’t matter how well you know the numbers, without having a solid command of the English language you won’t be taken seriously. After all, You're an Elite Professional; Don't Sound Like a Jamoke or #TheRoundMoundofRebound.

 
#grammar, #businesscommunication, #thoughtleadership, #TheRoundMoundofRebound.