I smiled when I read this, because my boss LITERALLY had this exact conversation with me yesterday. A hack I’ve found to help connect and get instant engagement is starting the conversation with: “Imagine if… “
I really like how the advice boils down to being specific, unless I'm mistaken.
Cross functional collaboration and other corporate jargon mean nothing but when you're spexific about not seeing the hard work recognized because of poor communication, that hits harder.
And it's more specific than the jargon.
Being specific also gives people a stake on the ground. It's saying "this is where we stand"
this is one of those pieces where the practical advice is dead on but I keep coming back to what sits underneath it.
the leaders I've seen who struggle with "being inspiring" usually don't have a communication problem. they have a clarity problem. the reason their language defaults to abstract buzzwords is because the actual strategy is abstract. when you genuinely know what you're solving for and why it matters, the concrete language shows up almost automatically.. you're just describing what's real.
curious whether you've seen that pattern too, where coaching someone on communication technique reveals the deeper issue is they haven't locked in what they actually believe yet.
Making someone ‘feel emotion’ is more than a thought exercise to prioritize your feature. It’s about understanding their goals and ambitions and how you do or don’t align. If they don’t align all hope is not lost but you need to undertake some discovery on where the misalignment is and shine a light on it before trying to find alignment. That’s the work.
The study about people rating whatever they agree with as “logical” explains so much of my old job!!
I spent years building method decks for companies, and the slide that moved a room was never the one that said “alignment” — it was the one showing what Monday morning would look like if nothing changed. Your rewrite does exactly that: the abstract version bills the team, the visceral version bills the listener. People move when the cost lands in their own calendar.
As a knowledge worker in disability advocacy whose more existence is referred to as "inspiring," I wasn't sure where this post was headed. I'm glad I stuck around. People want to see concrete examples of cause + effect.
You had me at "rallying men to fight Sauron," which made me old-school LOL. And, the study about logical/emotional appeals is really interesting. It makes me think about how a) people make emotional decisions and backfill them with logic (I've heard this so. many. times and it makes intuitive sense, though I'm realizing I don't know if its evidence-based) and b) how we judge logic as "good" (I agree with this argument, therefore it's logical) and emotion as "bad" (I don't agree with this argument, therefore it's emotional).
I like your reframe—getting a visceral reaction. That's vivid and effective and avoids the false logic/emotion binary.
I smiled when I read this, because my boss LITERALLY had this exact conversation with me yesterday. A hack I’ve found to help connect and get instant engagement is starting the conversation with: “Imagine if… “
Love this reframe. Inspiring in a workplace context is about clarity and follow-through, not big speeches. This is practical and useful.
I really like how the advice boils down to being specific, unless I'm mistaken.
Cross functional collaboration and other corporate jargon mean nothing but when you're spexific about not seeing the hard work recognized because of poor communication, that hits harder.
And it's more specific than the jargon.
Being specific also gives people a stake on the ground. It's saying "this is where we stand"
this is one of those pieces where the practical advice is dead on but I keep coming back to what sits underneath it.
the leaders I've seen who struggle with "being inspiring" usually don't have a communication problem. they have a clarity problem. the reason their language defaults to abstract buzzwords is because the actual strategy is abstract. when you genuinely know what you're solving for and why it matters, the concrete language shows up almost automatically.. you're just describing what's real.
curious whether you've seen that pattern too, where coaching someone on communication technique reveals the deeper issue is they haven't locked in what they actually believe yet.
Making someone ‘feel emotion’ is more than a thought exercise to prioritize your feature. It’s about understanding their goals and ambitions and how you do or don’t align. If they don’t align all hope is not lost but you need to undertake some discovery on where the misalignment is and shine a light on it before trying to find alignment. That’s the work.
The study about people rating whatever they agree with as “logical” explains so much of my old job!!
I spent years building method decks for companies, and the slide that moved a room was never the one that said “alignment” — it was the one showing what Monday morning would look like if nothing changed. Your rewrite does exactly that: the abstract version bills the team, the visceral version bills the listener. People move when the cost lands in their own calendar.
The second feedback lands because it is making the person receiving it feel seen. There is more support, connection and trust.
As a knowledge worker in disability advocacy whose more existence is referred to as "inspiring," I wasn't sure where this post was headed. I'm glad I stuck around. People want to see concrete examples of cause + effect.
You had me at "rallying men to fight Sauron," which made me old-school LOL. And, the study about logical/emotional appeals is really interesting. It makes me think about how a) people make emotional decisions and backfill them with logic (I've heard this so. many. times and it makes intuitive sense, though I'm realizing I don't know if its evidence-based) and b) how we judge logic as "good" (I agree with this argument, therefore it's logical) and emotion as "bad" (I don't agree with this argument, therefore it's emotional).
I like your reframe—getting a visceral reaction. That's vivid and effective and avoids the false logic/emotion binary.