Tuesday Edition

The model for future success from Tom Peters Company


Get the Blog Feed
What is RSS?

dispatches from the new world of work

We

Tom shared his "Power of We" presentation with us a few days ago. Here's something I've been thinking about for a while—ponder this:

How many of your customers would regularly talk about themselves and you as "We," as opposed to "Us" and "Them?"

Steve Yastrow posted this on 06/19/05.

Comments

I have for the last 10 years asked groups (often clients on leadership retreats) to tell me about their favorite team experience. I have noticed a deep emotional response to this question and a longing to somehow repeat the experience of team. The longing usually is not around accomplishment of team but nearly always around the WE of team.

Posted by Michael at June 19, 2005 2:12 PM


Yes, as Consultant i have always thought that´s a critical moment when you and your clients can share a common experience and say we. Another experience of this kind happens when your clients talk to you as if you were part of their staff. Especially if it happens in an spontaneous way, unconsciously.

Posted by felix gerena at June 19, 2005 3:33 PM


Michael ... yes, the feeling of WE is rewarding in itself ... doesn't it seem to motivate people to a whole new level.

Felix ... thanks for helping make this personal for me. As I think of "We" as a general concept, you've highlighted how my most successful consulting enagements are those in which I cease being a vendor and seamlessly become part of the "We." I can sense the same thing must happen for you.

Isn't the most powerful brand harmony one in which the customer participates in creating?

Posted by Steve Yastrow at June 19, 2005 3:50 PM


The US Hockey Team that beat Finland in Lake Placid in 1980 to win the Olympic Gold was seeded seventh in a field of twelve teams. The power of "we"--of coaching team and playing team was apparent in their perseverant and spirited play. It was, shall we say, a "miracle on ice"...
In my own experiences in work and personal arenas, the experience of co-laboring with others in a "we" relationship makes it easy to overcome underdog status and lousy odds and disbelief to achieve the unthinkable.
Now if "we" can put our heads together, we may be able to achieve a 'global we' that could take our planet to miraculous levels that we never dreamed of.

Posted by Pam Brill at June 19, 2005 8:31 PM


This is a very good topic.
In my experience, if we CONNECT ourselves to the customer, "we" relationship starts.

Posted by Sridhar at June 20, 2005 1:24 AM


That´s an excellent way of achieving brand harmony, Steve. Indeed, if we could say that about all our customers we would probably have few branding problems.

Trevor, I agree with you. If freedom was the great word for the liberation of the oppressed, autonomy is the great word for the development of the individual.

Pam I like your idea about a global we. I know sometimes I can be a bit utopic but powerful ideas have always had a global extension.

There´s an slight contradiction about this we and any sense of me. The french psychiatrist Eric Laurent has talked about the business of narcissism. I think these are opposing trends. What can we do? Is the business sense of we as Steve is telling a way of facing problems? A way of understanding the other´s position and working together?

Posted by felix gerena at June 20, 2005 5:42 AM


Ugh, why do you keep asking these painful questions? I don't have "customers" but I have "students"... and I doubt that many would include me with "we" when describing our classes.

That's the painful truth, dammit. So my question (to myself, I suppose) is, how do I change that?

Great Post! Keep asking.

Posted by AJ Hoge at June 20, 2005 6:00 AM


Aj, I think you could find some point your students find it interesting or even exciting, something you and they could find as a challenge. And then you could tell them something like "How will we find a solution to this? That is a good way to make your subjects interesting. And you could also involve in their current interests as to make them think you are part of their lives. Just an idea...

Posted by felix gerena at June 20, 2005 8:12 AM


This idea of "we" is quite timely for a project that I've been working on. I came into the company about a little over a year ago and it felt like there was a big wall between the company and our customers.

After about a year of begging, we've finally put together a small blog. And we've invited customers to have full authorship of the blog right along side us. We're hoping that by making this a collaborative "we" type experience, we will start to break down that wall and make the relationship feel less like company-customer.

There are most certainly risks associated with it, but hopefully the openness, dialogues, and relationships started will help keep us headed in the right direction for our customers.

Posted by Ryan Toohil at June 20, 2005 9:23 AM


There are various levels of "we" that are being discussed here. "We" internally, shared between co-workers and "we" as in company/client realtionship. It seems that the point in "we" is that it includes the other party in your thoughts, expressions, and hopefully actions. No longer are you viewing situations from your individual vantage point, but from that of the pary you are having an experience with, be it a co-worker or client.

How important is language? By changing the words from me/you to we, are you also changing your thoughts and actions? Is learning to speak differently also leading you to think and act in new ways?

Posted by Caroline at June 20, 2005 11:01 AM



ARCHIVES

- May 2013

- April 2013

- March 2013

- February 2013

- January 2013

- December 2012

- November 2012

- October 2012

- September 2012

- August 2012

- July 2012

- June 2012

- May 2012

- April 2012

- March 2012

- February 2012

- January 2012

- December 2011

- November 2011

- October 2011

- September 2011

- August 2011

- July 2011

- June 2011

- May 2011

- April 2011

- March 2011

- February 2011

- January 2011

- December 2010

- November 2010

- October 2010

- September 2010

- August 2010

- July 2010

- June 2010

- May 2010

- April 2010

- March 2010

- February 2010

- January 2010

- December 2009

- November 2009

- October 2009

- September 2009

- August 2009

- July 2009

- June 2009

- May 2009

- April 2009

- March 2009

- February 2009

- January 2009

- December 2008

- November 2008

- October 2008

- September 2008

- August 2008

- July 2008

- June 2008

- May 2008

- April 2008

- March 2008

- February 2008

- January 2008

- December 2007

- November 2007

- October 2007

- September 2007

- August 2007

- July 2007

- June 2007

- May 2007

- April 2007

- March 2007

- February 2007

- January 2007

- December 2006

- November 2006

- October 2006

- September 2006

- August 2006

- July 2006

- June 2006

- May 2006

- April 2006

- March 2006

- February 2006

- January 2006

- December 2005

- November 2005

- October 2005

- September 2005

- August 2005

- July 2005

- June 2005

- May 2005

- April 2005

- March 2005

- February 2005

- January 2005

- December 2004

- November 2004

- October 2004

- September 2004

- August 2004

- July 2004

- June 2004

- May 2004

- April 2004

Before blogging became all the rage, Tom was posting book reviews and Observations (essentially early blog posts) to this site. You can find the archives below.

What Tom's Reading Archives

- February 2004

- August 2003

- March 2003

- September 2002

- March 2002

- September 2001

- April 2001

- March 2001

- June 2000

- September 1999

OBSERVATIONS ARCHIVES

- July 2004

- April 2004

- February 2004

- May 2003

- March 2003

- June 2002

- April 2002

- March 2002

- February 2002

- January 2002

- December 2001

- November 2001

- October 2001

- September 2001

- August 2001

- February 2001

- January 2001

- December 2000

- November 2000

- October 2000

- September 2000

- August 2000

- July 2000

- June 2000

- May 2000

- April 2000

- March 2000

- February 2000

- January 2000

- December 1999

- November 1999

- October 1999

- September 1999

right now

What we're talking about
on the front page.