If YOU suddenly became the CEO of GottaWidget, Inc., would you behave as though you had crossed some rung on an invisible ladder above which you forgot everything that ever frustrated you when it was done TO you instead of BY you? Would you quit caring about talking about real things--using nouns and verbs--instead of acronyms and vague metaphors? I don't think so. I hope not, just as I hope I wouldn't, either. But it seems to happen. A friend and I call it the Dipwad Effect. All power corrupts, I guess.

And I disagree that it's usually done out of the CEO's passion for the company. I think it's usually done out of the CEO's passion for himself.

I don't think I would liken your passion for boxing to a CEO's love of jargon.

Yes, we all have passions that other people don't share and we think they are silly for not having the same passions.

However, and I think this has been touched on before with your "manipulating pictures" post, CEOs feel or believe they must act, talk, etc., a certain way or they are not being CEO-like. It does not matter if they worked their way up the corporate ladder or were handed the reins by their daddy.

As communicators, I think our passion is what drives us. Without it, we'd go insane more than we already do. It is part of our job to continually educate leadership to try new ways of communicating to their employees. It's our job to give them insight as to what employees are thinking and/or saying so that they (leadership) can work on better relating to employees (quit laughing). What we cannot control is the CEO's decision to take or not take our advice.

But to give up is not in a communicator's nature. It's like golf. That one great drive or putt keeps us out there on the course, even though it's a frustrating game (unless you are Tiger).

But Jane, to what do we attribute CEOs' self-love? They're not another species, are they? Aren't they just exactly what we would become if nobody ever blew us off, if everybody feigned deep interest in ever asinine hobby we ever took up, every goofy idea we ever had.

Susan, maybe my analogy is strained. I appreciate your insights. But you say, "It does not matter if they worked their way up the corporate ladder or were handed the reins by their daddy."

As we try to help them get touch, don't we at least have a head start wtih someone who worked his/her way up, rather than a person who was born on third and thinks he hit a triple?

David,

I'd like to think we have a head start, and perhaps there are rare instances where this may be the case. Yet, most people don't work their way up the corporate ladder at one company, and thus we may not always have the benefit of "knowing them when". Or, we as communicators don't stay with the same company, and only meet the CEO in a new position and do not have that history with him or her. Then we pray that someone else either trained the CEO well or there is someone who knows how to give swift kicks in the >>>. :)

Here's the real question that no one is asking: Is it possible for Justin to video tape you boxing in your living room as you wax philosophically on the above topic? Now there's a video worth watching.

Eileen!! I like it!!!

I would love it if Justin would do that. Justin, why won't you do that?

That's my very question, David. At what point does a CEO forget that he used to HATE being spoken to--no, make that "at"--in jargon? At what point does he stop asking himself whether people are as "into" him and his jargon as he is? At what point does he stop noticing or caring that workplace interactions are no longer messy and human but have become suck-up contests?

I've done work for the CEO of a world-famous organization. He's a brainac and is as full of acronyms and jargon as they come--but he ALSO genuinely likes and respects his employees and fervently believes in communication, so he tells stories to get his points across. Because employees know he's really TRYING to communicate, they forgive his acronyms and listen closely to what he says.

David, if you want to watch people beating the shit out of each other, just tune in a hockey game.

Will

Well, put, Jane. As a creepy borderline socialist, I attribute much of CEOs' workplace detachment to their ungodly riches, which seal them off not just from employees but from everybody who doesn't own a yact and a Leer Jet. I think some of these goofs would be better with people if they just went to the friggin' grocery store or the corner bar every once in a while.

"At what point does he stop noticing or caring that workplace interactions are no longer messy and human but have become suck-up contests?"

That said, I look forward to this day in my own life .....

"rather than a person who was born on third and thinks he hit a triple?"

Then there are those who were born in the village like everyone else but believe their real place is in the manor and treat it like their manifest destiny -- no matter what their level. I bet they don't make really great CEOs, either.

As usual, I agree with Jane which is about the lamest comment ever on this blog filled with intellectual giants (Jane: could you please stop beating me to my own opinion, or at the very least stop giving the version of my opinion I WOULD give if I were as eloquent as you??)

Also, I'm still waiting on Justin's response to the proposed filming of "The David Murray Shadowbox Invitational" I think Steve C. should be invited as well. That way after the "boxing" is over Justin could film you guys doing shadow animals on the wall. You could make that one of the DVD "extras."

This is getting kinky.

Actually, I'm just waiting for Steve to get some wasting disease so that he and I could spar in the ring for charity as we've been doing in print for nothing.

I need him to lose about 100 pounds of muscle first (and keep the fat).

Jargon is jargon for a reason. It's a shorthand way of expressing ideas and concepts.

Everyone has a set of jargon that ranges from unintelligible to slightly obscure to the untrained.

I think CEOs etc use the words and phrases and acronyms and cliques they do - because it's easy and they're lazy.

Passion is different.

But I wouldn't just speak English to a Chinese workforce just because it's easy and I am lazy.

So how can these people be so out of touch, not only with how meaningless these terms are to the workforce--but even how meaningless they are to one another?

Stay tuned for my next theory: Executives don't care about the power of words, because they have the power of ... POWER.

I didn't say it makes sense...yet it happens every day of the week.

As for speaking English to Chinese - I think if you shouted it helps to increase comprehension...

Kristen: I'll be blushing for a week. And yes, isn't it fun hanging out on this site? That's why I got so much work done while David was tanning on the beach.

>>Why aren't more employees interested in the "game" of business?<<

Do any CEO's really try to get their employees interested in the game of business? Do they take time to let them really know where they are/what they contribute/how they are affected by the ups and downs of the "game?"

Or do they simply through out some financial jagon laden CEO-speak and then scratch their heads when no one on the factory floor is panting for more?

Back in the early '90s I was priviledged to have lunch with and hear Jack Stack, CEO of SRO Holding Corporation, give a speach on the management concept he called "The Great Game of Business." It was a management system he'd developed with his colleagues at the Springfield Remanufacturing Corp. (SRC) in Springfield, Mo. which involved teaching employees the basics of finance and then providing them with all the information they needed to monitor the company's--and their own--performance.

What I was struck with all those years ago - and still remember quite vividly to this day - was his intense passion for training his employees in understanding the fundamentals of business as a way to not only help the company, but provide an ongoing knowledge benefit for the employees outside and beyond the walls of the factory. It was also evident that he had a deep and abiding compassion for the people who made up the company.

Unfortunately, I have never encountered any company and/or company leader who even begins to approach the bar the Stack set that day.

So while CEOs may have passion, in all too many cases it's not directed in the right place.

Yes, we had Stack speak at a Ragan conference, almost a decade ago. "Open-book management" was his watchword. It went the way of "empowerment." Remember that?

Actually, I think the term "open book management" was coined in response to Stack's game analogy. Its a shame that it has faded from prominance in business (what hasn't?) since it was/is a great concept and practice, IMHO.

>>>if you want to watch people beating the shit out of each other, just tune in a hockey game.<<<

Boo! Low blow (pun intended). I love hockey--and I'm not even Canadian. The fighting thing is overblown, I promise. There is a sweet science (I did it again!) to the fighting in hockey that the untrained eye will not recognize. It's unfair to perpetuate the stereotype of goonery, which is sadly something that mainstream sports media do every day.

Well, my philsophy has always been, "The readers get what the readers want." So Diane, if you want to see video of Dave fluttering like a butterfly (let's face it, there's no way he floats) as he shadowboxes his way around a barcalounger, you got it. Blooper reel, here we come.

My mother, not a sports fan, watched hockey during the 1960s and 70s just for the fights. I'd be in my room reading and all of a sudden she'd cry out, "A fight! A fight! Oh, that was a good one!" I seem to recall the Philadelphia Flyers were reliable; our own Buffalo Sabres (save for one or two hotheads) were not.

The Flyers of those days were called the Broad Street Bullies...and other teams were afraid to step foot in their stadium to face them because of their well-deserved reputation for toughness. Hockey veterans tell stories of players from visiting teams suddenly contracting the "Philly Flu," the symptoms of which mysteriously disappeared when the team traveled to the next town. Teams nowadays carry one heavyweight on the roster, with the strict responsibility to defend the offensive superstars.

Honestly, I think a lot of executives use the jargon without even realizing they're doing it. I think they're so surrounded by it that they just absorb it. My head would probably explode if I had to spend a lot of time with them, I think, because I would be mentally editing out all the jargon and replacing it with real words.