3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time

3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time You probably already know a few of the tips and tricks to getting team buy in to new ideas, processes, or change. When it comes to influencing your peers, though, it can be a delicate dance. Because you lack positional authority, you cant pull the, Well, thats the way were going to do it, card. (Not that you ever would 😉) But these three off-beat tactics Im sharing will work for you. Today. Well lay some groundwork first. But if you wanna jump ahead, be my guest. Each strategy will work for peer or team buy in. Table of Contents: The Problem: Why We Resist Change? The Solution: What Does Leading Change Look Like? Step 1: Take the Marketing Cholesterol Test Step 2: Start With the Problem Step 3: Script the Critical Actions Required3 Uncommon Ways To Get Team Buy In Every Time via @ Did Isaac Newton Already Figure Out Why We Resist Change? Neurologically, were hard wired to maintain things as they are via our ingrained habits. Were comfortable in the rut of status quo. And any threat to it is perceived as discomfort - which humans avoid tooth and nail. Said psychologist Ralph Ryback: Inertia, or a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged, is at the headwinds of any change that we make in our lives. Wildly enough, Isaac Newtons principle of inertia applies to our psychology as well as the world around us. One of the best places to validate this is in the world of software - in both simple and complex ways. Remember when Spotify changed its hue of green a few years ago? Millions of us were used to their funky green. It wasn’t beautiful, but it was normal. Then, they warmed up the color in favor of the vibrant lime green. Thousands of users whined at the ugly new color scheme. I’ll admit, I didn’t like it at first either. Oh yeah†¦ then there’s the Snapchat UI updates that just about broke the internet. People hated the updates so much, there were riots in the streets! Okay, not quite that bad. But, the backlash was so intense, 1,257,640 users signed a petition on Change.org to get the old UI back. On a societal scale, people are change averse. We often have negative initial reactions to both functional and visual changes. This means â€Å"different† is often perceived as â€Å"bad.† The perception that different = bad often blocks positive organizational change. Learn how toThis isn’t simply a mob-mentality issue, either. It’s a human phenomenon at scales both large and small. As Mark Twain famously quipped: Im in favor of progress; its change I dont like. What Does Leading Change Look Like For Marketers? In user experience design, this is known as change aversion: Change aversion is the negative short-term reaction to changes in a product or service. This happens in the non-digital world, as well. And is a force we marketers have to battle when leading change (especially within our own companies). Now, lets learn how to go out with the old and in with the new. One of the most important changes marketers should make is killing makeshift marketing. Makeshift marketing has become the normal way marketers do things today. Its the pain of using one tool for social media scheduling Another tool for analytics A spreadsheet for tracking Endless email threads for collaboration and communication A task management tool (or multiple ones if everyone on your team uses something different) We get caught in a mess of using tons of different productivity tools that end up strangling our output rather than boosting it. Another force at work is that complicated tool stacks are actually celebrated with awards. To bring it a little closer to home, lets ask a question. You’re executing marketing today How’s that going? Staying organized is really hard. You’re missing deadlines, your team is disgruntled, your boss is wondering what’s happening, and stakeholders like your sales reps are constantly asking where their projects they requested three months ago are at. You can’t blame them. If you worked with another team, you’d expect things to roll forward smoothly, too, right? The thing is†¦ if you don’t change anything, you’ll keep experiencing these same side effects of â€Å"good enough-ism.† And that means†¦ You’ll continue to be frustrated†¦ You’ll continue making your peer managers frustrated†¦ You’ll burn yourself out with the trivial minutia of consistently missing deadlines Overcoming Change Aversion In Your Team However, everyone is used to the way things are. So, if youre going to overcome the forces allied against you as a leader, youve gotta be armed with the right strategies. So lets tackle three off-beat ways to overcome change aversion. Obliterate the status quo. And become a more influential leader while youre at it. #1. Take The Marketing Cholesterol Test To Get Team Buy In To start, you might need to prove that change is actually required right now. When you create urgency, at least people can agree that, We need to do something. One ingenious assessment for your organizations need to change appeared in the Harvard Business Review, and is called the Corporate Cholesterol Test. You can check out the original test in the article Change For Changes Sake. But heres an adaptation for us marketers to use. The tests purpose is to assess how well your teams (or team members) are working together. Thus Measuring how high your collaborative cholesterol is 😠· How high is your marketing cholesterol? Find out what that means and learn the answer viaTo do this, you can use Google Forms  to create a survey. Each of your peer managers should get the questionnaire to fill out. The test starts the buy-in process by helping your peer managers see for themselves if change is needed. Youll create three sections. Each with three yes or no answers. How well do we communicate? How well do we work together? How are our collective results? Pro Tip: To get honest answers, you can nix requiring first and last name. And simply make answers anonymous! Section One: How well do we communicate? In section one, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Do our teams interact only with people in their own group? This questions identifies the presence of silos.A silo mentality occurs when several departments or groups within an organization do not want to share information or knowledge with other individuals in the same organization.Basically its a problem of key info staying stuck in one group rather than shared with others it could help. Are there breakdowns in communication caused by silos? If there are silos, this will be a big fat yes 😕This is a great opportunity to understand it as a source of frustration. And you can position your change as a cure. Has fluid collaboration between our teams decreased over the past 6 months? This is an easy way to gauge how well your teams have worked together. If this is a Yes, its another sign that the winds of change should be blowing! How can marketers know theyre influencing positive organizational change? Find out via @Section Two: How well do we work together? In section two, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Are any people on your team uncomfortable with change? Now, admittedly, this question is a double-edged sword âš”ï ¸ After all, change is uncomfortable for pretty much everyone. But, as Sujan Patel writes, this is crucial to success.The crux of this question is to bring to mind the proverbial roadblocks to changeThe people on their team whose automatic answer is, No. Do we have processes, workflows, and tools that align with one another? I know this is buried in the middle of the survey But its my favorite question.This digs into the heart of a central problem for marketers today. We call it makeshift marketingand think of it as the temporary, sub-optimal solution for getting your marketing sh*t together. This is not #fakenews.I cant tell you how many marketers Ive met whose solution for â€Å"keeping their sanity† involves spreadsheets organizing spreadsheets.Who’ve decided endless meetings to â€Å"get on the same page† is par for the course.Who’ve succumbed to â€Å"on the fly† project management because that’s just the nature of the job?!And who’ve settled for a cobbled mess of one-trick tools becausewell†¦?Thats just how marketing works 😠¢In fact, this is one of the biggest problems solves (you can snag a free 1-on-1 demo to learn how it can help you do this!).Teams pay a HUGE productivity tax for misaligned processes, workflows, and tools.If this is a yes, its a red flag 🚠© Do your teams resist collaborative projects with other teams? Heres a newsflashIf people on your peer managers team resist collaboration, its prolly not because theyre bad people. Or employees.Did you know that 85% of most workers time is spent in email, meetings, and being on the phone?So maybe they resist working with other teams because they have so freaking much to do and not enough time!^^^ Sound familiar to you?If this is the case, its time to get efficient and make better use of peoples time.After all, who would resist: Here, would you like less stress while getting your time back and feeling more valued?If youre leading the right change, this can be exactly what youre giving them.What if collaboration could be a source of excitement and growth rather than a drain? Section Three: How are our collective results? In section three, youll ask these three yes or no questions: Has your team hit 80% or more of its KPI goals in the past 3 months? Simply put, if teams arent hitting their goals for more than 3 months in a row - somethings gotta change.This is a chance to highlight how your suggested change can help everyones tide rise. Have your teams collaborative projects proven positive ROI? This is an interesting one. Because some of your peer managers might say, What collaborative projects?Again, this could stem from silo issues Or signal a breakdown in teams working together.For instance, nearly every modern marketing teams should be working with developers (who are often outside their team) regularly.Next, if they have worked with other teamsWell, has it worked?Are there more dollars, email signups, or whatever else they were looking for because of the joint venture? Does anyone on your team (including you!) experience significant stress or anxiety when executing a new project? I absolutely love this question.While there is always *some* amount of stress kicking off a new project - it shouldnt be consistently significant.Scientifically, we know significant stress reduces productivity. It also promotes negative behaviors like procrastination. So if new projects give your team a panic attack, something major is broken.Now is the time to fix it. How To Score Your Marketing Cholesterol Test (In GIFs) Alright, heres the final reveal Score your test responses as follows: 0–2 yes answers Youre good and probably rock at getting your peers to buy in. 3–7 yes answers Right now is the perfect time for change! Saddle up and get it done. 8–9 yes answers Panic. It was time to change yesterday but today is good too. You got this  Ã°Å¸ ¤Ëœ #2. Start With The Problem To Get Team Buy In Next,  to overcome change aversion with your peer managers, start with the problem you’re trying to solve and the benefits your solution offers to them. Yes I’m encouraging you to market change to marketers. #inception Software has more to teach us, here. Intercom recently revamped the design of their products inbox - a place their customers spend a lot of time in. The new interface looks like Evernote and Intercom had a baby And its one cute baby. They got ahead of change aversion by focusing on problem their change was geared at solving. Often, change is resisted with statements like this: We dont need to change for changes sake! If you begin with the problem, though, you sidestep this as an issue altogether. When theres a genuine problem to be solved, you arent changing for changes sake. Your changing for growths sake. Huge difference. Trying to influence positive change within your marketing department? Start with the problem first. Start With The Problem First, specifically outline the problem you want to solve and the harm its causing. Outline the problem as specifically as you can: Right now, were using six different tools to manage our marketing. Because of the constant shuffle, details are getting lost, were dropping balls, and not hitting deadlines. Outline Your Solution Propose your solution, address the cost of switching, and focus on the benefits: If we consolidate our tools, these problems will evaporate. We each lead talented, competent teams. So its a simple thing to give them a better way to do their jobs. Yes, this will mean adapting our workflows to a fresh way of doing things. And it will mean a new way of collaboration among our teams. But the gain in productivity and organization will pay dividends in results, reduce stress, and improve communication. When you focus on the problem, your proposed change isnt the focal point. Admittedly, Im assuming the change you want to lead is truly an issue. If it is, you can position any resistance to be against the benefits your solution offers. This keeps the conversation focused on, How do we solve this  real problem. #3. Script The New Actions The Change Requires To Get Team Buy In A third way to  get your peer managers to buy in comes from Chip and Dan Heaths fantastic book,  Switch: How To Change Things When Change Is Hard. Its a way to get ultra-specific about what needs to happen next. The catchphrase analysis paralysis turns out to be a real thing. It even happens to LeBron James. When people are presented with too many options, we get stuck. When people are presented with too many options, we get stuck.Analysis Paralysis Is A Real Thing In the book  Switch, the authors share how this same phenomenon happens to doctors. A medical doctor and a psychologist devised a test to see how well the average doc make choices. The test involved two similar groups asked to make a decision on the same case. The only difference was that Group A made a choice between two options. While Group B had three. Check out the scenario The patient in the test was an older gentleman with hip trouble. Group A had to decide between a hip-replacement surgery and a simple medication that hadnt yet been tried. Almost 50% of the doctors from Group A chose the non-surgical path. Group B had a similar choice. Only instead of one non-surgical option, there were two. Thats it. That was the only variable. These doctors had to decide on surgery, medication 1, or medication 2 Logically, two non-surgical options seem even better than one, right? Well, only 28% of Group B docs opted for the non-surgical option. ^^^ This is analysis paralysis at work.