3 Ways to Level ↑ Your E-mails

February 6, 2018February 7, 2018Leave a comment

E-mails.

We all write them…but do we really know how?

I know, I know…sounds silly to ask, especially in the Information Age business world we live in.

Still, when it comes to etiquette, how we frame professional communication within pragmatic boundaries is worth discussion.

As a governmental employee, I’ve been on both sides of the decorum fence as a sender and recipient. So trust me when I say the importance of lining up what you say and what you mean is very important.

That said, here are three practical points in delivering quality e-mail content…

1. Keep it ‘short and sweet’

As a writer, I admit: I can be wordy at times. I remember early in my career, I would often exhaust my word count fearing I’d say too little, conceal my tact, and/or give my recipient room to read between the lines.

Yet, after years of composition, I ultimately discovered my best e-mails were the ones with simple language and basic syntax (think 4^th grade level as opposed to 8^{th 1}). Granted, variance in e-mail construction hinge on the need; however, in most professional scenarios, e-mails will either answer a question or call to action.

Thus, if you want to communicate more effectively, consider a ‘short and sweet’ approach. Not only will you capture the problem more cogently, but also increase the odds of it being solved more quickly. Not to mention you limit the risk of asking unnecessary questions.

Bottom line: Coherency and conciseness go hand in hand.

After all, if you’re going to troubleshoot, why not shoot straight?

Bonus: If you’re concerned your ‘short and sweet’ e-mail is more on the short than sweet side, consider inserting a smiley emoji after the greeting or concluding sentence (informal cases only).

2. Make humility apparent

In a day-to-day grind, it’s hard to be perfect. Clearly, as long as there’s work, there’s going to be errors…and with errors, an assortment of cleanup, manipulative maneuvers², and mountains made from molehills.

Okay, okay…maybe those last two are a tad extreme; however, as real world correction has taught me, it’s worth noting how to handle being on the wrong side of them.

‘Cause truth is: when people throw you shade, there’s always a fade³…and that, in one word, is humility.

Now I know for many humility is nothing more than a ‘kill with kindness’ or ‘fall on the sword’ strategy; however, given true humility has no agenda, it’s safe to say these approaches are flawed since they cater to what you want to say or what you think others want you to say.

From my experience, if you want to live true humility in the marketplace, the best approach is through forthright evaluation. In other words, if there’s something to own, be sincere in owning it; if there’s something to resolve, be direct in resolving it.

Remember when rectifying conflict electronically, the emphasis should always be reconciling the issue as opposed to justifying why it exists. In doing so, not only will you validate concerns, but establish value to whom and what is necessary to move the ball down the field.

Bottom line: Wrong turns happen. Why not write⁴ the ship by humbling yourself and letting God’s grace exalt you?

3. Proofread your tone, not just your grammar

It’s fair to say the e-mail equivalent of ‘think before you speak‘ is ‘proof before you send’.

Need proof? Just check out your app store…

Grammarly, PerfectIt, Ginger, AutoCrit, No Red Ink, Hemingway Editor, Phrase Express, After The Deadline, EssayDot…and we’re just scratching the surface.

Yet, while most of us associate proofreading to syntax and grammar, arguably one of the most underrated elements in e-mail content construction is checking for tone.

Yes, you may be able to master subject lines, use the right words, and succinctly capture information; however, if you don’t put yourself in your recipient’s shoes before pressing ‘send’, you risk losing the message through ambiguity and misunderstanding.

Bottom line: When proofing your e-mails, dare to read them as sender and receiver.

Footnotes

Just because you decrease the reading level, doesn’t mean you decrease the tact
i.e. ‘throw under the bus’ tactics
Specifically, a fade from offense
Intentional misspelling

Cover photo creds: Shutterstock

3 Things I’m [Really] Sorry For

January 11, 2018February 15, 20181 Comment

For many, it’s the same thing every January…

…we forget all acquaintance, inflate our morale…

…only to tease ourselves with premature quests founded on prayer-less resolution.

But perhaps you’re like me in the sense you prefer cleanse before change…in getting real before getting right.

If so, trust me when I say these days in early January can seem just as blue as they are buoyant.

Still, while taking internal inventory may seem less ‘fun’ compared to making resolutions, when we fearlessly explore what we need to be free from, we ultimately position ourselves to embrace the ‘next’ God has for us.

Thus, in the spirit of going under the knife, here are three things I’m owning as we turn the clock to 2018…

1) Making culture the enemy

I’ve learned many lessons as a state employee from persevering when treated like a number to managing challenging subordinates, but arguably none has gripped me so intensely as knowing your enemy in the face of conflict.

Growing up, like many, I learned Ephesians 6:12: “…we don’t wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, authorities…and spiritual forces of evil”; however, while I understood this truth conceptually, I lacked awareness contextually. For instance, at work whenever I felt belittled or neglected, I used to justify resentment by redirecting my disappointment from colleague to culture. I’d think to myself, ‘As long as what I hate isn’t breathing, I’m good.’

The problem was: my offense wasn’t going anywhere. If anything, I had taken cynicism with respect to ‘person’ and extrapolated it over ‘many persons’ all the while exchanging discouragement for a false comfort I could easily hide behind.

Yet, as I’ve now learned, when it comes to not making culture the enemy, we must be willing to assign our offenses and align our defenses in the heat of battle. Far too often, we want to make sense of our surroundings; we want to feel secure about who is for us, who isn’t for us, who is pouring into us, who isn’t, etc.

However, if our filing system defaults culture to enemy while compartmentalizing those we assume aren’t for us as products of that culture…are we not recasting the same judgment we fear?

And yeah, I know it’s easy to appoint anger and bitterness onto what we think can’t be seen; however, I encourage you…

…if your idea of enemy is the deceived, not the deceiver, then not only are you misappropriating identity, but you’re removing yourself from an opportunity to love and judge righteously.

Think of it this way: if you’re struggling to see the finger-pointing, never wrong colleagues as anything but enemies, try focusing on encouraging them (Matthew 5:44, Luke 6:27-36, Ephesians 4:32) and watch as God transforms how you see them. That way you’re at least in position to shift the enemy from instigated to instigator.

2) Hiding behind proximity

As an introvert, I love my solitude…that still calm in the middle of productivity and a dwindling ‘to do’ list.

But lately I’ve been thinking: Why is privacy perceived as such a luxury when we were created for proximity (i.e. engaged connection with those around us…not just closeness in space)?

I mean…if you’re reading this, odds are you’re close¹ to someone, right? From neighbors to co-workers to immediate family and friends, it’s no question proximity is both prominent and prevalent. Why is it then if we were to describe our ideal escape, it’d often involve seclusion or separation?

Is it because we think harmony and proximity are mutually exclusive…that rest can only happen in a vacuum?

If so, I submit we get back to valuing those in our midst regardless if they treat us like strangers or outcasts.

‘Cause truth is: if how we engage people is conditioned on what we can’t control, it’s going to compromise our conviction in acting on what we can.

That said, it’s worth noting the false security in minimizing proximity.

Case and point: for years at my job I used to think to myself, ‘Just because so-and-so lives two cubicles down doesn’t mean I’m entitled to be close…’ or ‘I’ve tried talking with so-and-so, but after all these years, they’ve never tried to talking to me. Might as well as be strangers.’

However, once I realized these thoughts were only de-salting my witness, I knew my approach had to change. Like my heart towards culture, I had to stop compartmentalizing people to make sense of my surroundings. Somehow, someway…I had to open myself back up so anyone and everyone could be a potential target for love, kindness, compassion, and encouragement.²

‘Cause like many, I can love on certain people well…plugging into their life…even giving gifts (which for me, is far down the love language list), but when I consider how Jesus broached proximity, no one was outside his periphery to love or his reach to heal.

Thus, I think it’s important we all examine ourselves and explore where good intentions may be linked to our own terms. Perhaps then we can find those secret places we may be hiding behind.

3) Marginalizing³my bandwidth

Left unguarded, my mind can easily drift into personal narrative. How will what’s left untold…unfold based on the good, bad, and ugly of yesterday?

Yet, as mentioned in prior posts, it’s hard to invest external margin (i.e. loving one another) in the present when you’re overly vesting it in the past. Therefore, if we’re wanting to be more selfless in venturing our margin John 3:30 style, then clearly we must be willing to examine our perception of relationship before transferring it.

Granted, easier said than done; however, as long as we’re intentional in asking God to breathe width into our bandwidth (i.e. capacity/strength to love on purpose), who’s to say we can’t change?

And hear me: I get how tempting it can be to assume other people’s perception of you is less than what it should; however, I also know if you cement your mind in thinking people won’t believe the best, you will do the same as well. Why not then trust God to move, convict, and transform others the same way He’s moving, convicting, and transforming you?

If it helps, if you want to de-marginalize your bandwidth, go back to your narrative…but this time, consider what you learn at 35 or 45 may be what someone else learns at 25 or 55. After all, who are we to judge when truth clicks for someone else? I mean…if we truly want to be heaven on earth, then we should want to root each other on regardless if our maturity curves line up (see Matthew 7:5).

Selah.

Footnotes

Literally and figuratively
A key distinction between world and ‘like Jesus’
To treat as insignificant

Cover photo creds: Newhdwallpaper

Faith at Work: Rethinking Influence

June 8, 2017May 30, 2020Leave a comment

If you’ve been a frequent flyer with us over the years, chances are you know we’re passionate about helping bivocationals bridge the gap between sacred and secular…in living the same way on Monday as they do on Sunday.

But lately I’ve been thinking: What if we’ve been looking at the Sunday –> Monday discussion all wrong?

I know, like many, I’ve heard my share of seasoned voices charging consistency within the body of Christ. Yet, the more I consider this in the context of commissioned marketplace leaders, the more I wonder if the core issue has more to do with connecting our influence than leading from spiritual authority/expertise.

For instance, I may not have the most expert depth relative to my occupation, but I do have the mind of Christ guided by his thoughts and purposes (1 Corinthians 2:16 AMP). Sure, I may be a low man on the totem pole from a corporate hierarchical perspective; however, this doesn’t mean I lack influence.

You see…far too often we get distracted trying to make our spiritual lives stratiform¹. We take the ol’ Sunday adage of not being a once-a-week Christian, convince ourselves we’re not going to be that, then go out and try to extend our church person into “secular” places.

The problem is: if our influence is based on convincing others what we’re about rather than showing them why they’re here, then we can never experience real connection.

Why? ‘Cause real connection can’t happen without interdependent (i.e. two-way) relationship…without people actively investing ‘next step’ direction into one another.

Granted, how we approach compartmentalization and contextual inferences are worth discussion; however, as long as we aspire to share what we were made to know with whom we were made to engage, those issues will ultimately take care of themselves as relationships grow in faithfulness.

No reliance on institutionalizing, exaltation of effort, or Kingdom-izing business.

Just warmly abiding in the effortless rhythms of grace knowing it’s not about our credentials, but God’s competence flowing through them².

Thus, I submit…

If we choose to see leadership as influence and influence as helping people build their own, we allow transformative culture to establish itself.
If we want to get real about reaching people (from purpose), we must first get intentional about connecting our influence (on purpose).
Rather than encourage people to be the same on Monday as they are on Sunday, let’s show them in love how to be better today than they were yesterday.

‘Cause I’ll be honest: I don’t want to be on Monday who I was on Sunday; I want to be better today than the day before. I want to know the best God has in store. And then go out and live that forevermore.

Whatever gap we’re trying to bridge, why not start there? …

Footnotes

Preaching the choir here
That, my friends, is what being an influential marketplace priesthood is all about.

Photo creds: Wallpaper Abyss

Framing the Role: A Guide to Better Workplace (Part 1)

May 15, 2017September 16, 2019Leave a comment

We all know there’s no such thing as the perfect working environment.

After all, work can’t exist without people and to err is human.

Still, whether you’re a bivocational minister, a supervisor, or an entry-level employee, chances are you care about how positions are developed and managed.

Thus, in the coming months, I want to unpack some basic concepts churches and businesses can use to frame their roles and equip their employees to thrive in them.

The goal? To help organizations make the best investments with their best hires to achieve the best outcomes.

Let’s dive in…

Assess the ‘Inner Man’

As a bivocational pastor with seven years of marketplace experience, I understand there are certain disadvantages when it comes to large and small scale human resourcing; however, I also believe bureaucracy and growth mismanagement doesn’t have to determine how classifications are managed.

For example, at my work¹, each classification is linked to a job plan involving a specific set of functions. Fair enough.

The problem is while roles are detailed well in their promotion, they’re overly dependent on ‘template’ in their evolution. As a result, employees feel boxed in with functions forged on title rather than gifting.

My thought is: if more organizations integrate character and gift assessment (i.e. DISC, Myers-Briggs, Strength Finders, enneagram testing, etc.) into hiring, training, and development processes, then more prospects/new hires could contribute the strength of who they are in addition to the strength of what they do.

Granted, big organizations are going to have different priorities. Yet, this doesn’t mean their personnel approach has to be shallow.

‘Cause truth is: while procedure and process are important, you can’t define a person by a job description nor can you separate the quality of a person from the quality of his work.

I know culturally we love streamlining/over-institutionalizing our way to bottom lines; however, if morale becomes the sacrifice in our quest to hierarchical efficiency, one must question the system.

Whatever our work situation, it’s important we remember our position is a journey, not a drop-off. And while the implications are many, bottom line…

Classifications should never compartmentalize what an employee can be (i.e. his innate nature in motion).
A piece of paper or paragraph on a screen should never determine or dictate the totality of function.
Given man gives life to function, not the other way around, the inner man must be considered in both the evaluation of fit and the evolution of role.

Stay tuned next time when we’ll tackle our next point on equal deeper learning opportunities. In the meantime, if you have a question, idea, or story to share, feel free to comment below.

Footnotes

Note: My appreciation for my workplace has grown considerably in recent months; however, this doesn’t mean I can’t advise from what should be improved.

Cover photo creds: Company Incorporation | Company Registration Singapore