[From Dag Forssell (931006 1610)] Bob Clark (931006 10:50 am)
You still seem to be "selling PCT" rather than your services.
The reason many people have complimented me on the article is that
it is a dispassionate account of PCT, not a self-serving
advertisement for my services. PCT is the only thing that sets me
apart from the crowd of feel-good gurus with PhD's in cause-effect
thinking. PCT is my qualification. I am indeed selling PCT first,
and giving all the references. I am confident that those few who
buy PCT will find that Purposeful Leadership offers the best way to
teach PCT to a group of people and bring applications to life.
Asking the employees of a company to read Bill's book is not going
to do it. Asking them to read my book will not do it either, but
will make it easier to buy me as an authority. So I am writing one
now, based on the materials I have already collected. The articles
are a way of organizing the work, and publishing it piecemeal.
Regarding your sample sales letter: generally, great! You'll be
interested in Mary Ann's comment that her university course in
Business Letter Writing strongly emphasized the "you" orientation.
Thank you. Show Mary Ann Bruce Nevin's rewrite below about "you" in
second paragraph.
Note also -- the word "theory" (and its various forms) is a major
"turn-off" for some (unpredictable) people. I suggest saving it
for a time when it becomes essential.
See Bruce's rewording in first line: "usual ideas". Theory is gone.
Your sales letter is intended to make a "friend" of your prospect
-- ask him for his advice. He then tends to become part of your
project. A "participant" rather than a "customer." What do you
think of this approach?
I do not understand what you mean. I am asking the prospect if he
has an error signal; if he is concerned enough to want to learn.
Bruce Nevin sent me some suggested revisions directly. I think they
are very good, except for a typo. Again, I find this net
wonderful. Good suggestions come out of the woodwork.
ยทยทยท
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Nevin October 6, 1993
Researcher at large
Control Systems Group
49 Sumner Street
Gloucester, MA 01930-1546
Dear Mr. Nevin:
Our usual ideas about human behavior do not fit the way human
beings actually work. For this reason, running a company,
department or team is more difficult than it needs to be. Top
executives set policy and financial goals for the company, but to
achieve those goals, many people must carry out their functions in
a coordinated way at all levels and in all areas of the company.
As an executive, you may be frustrated with associates who don't
commit themselves to do the job that is required and don't stay
motivated on a lengthy project, with associates who don't pull
their weight in a team, or with the process of implementing TQM.
Your managers may be uncomfortable with conflicts, with performance
reviews, or with sales.
Most executives have not deeply questioned the generalizations that
they have made from life experience about what makes people tick.
They have not noticed the absence of explanatory principles
(meaning laws of nature, as in the physical sciences) in leadership
training programs, in the ways in which cultural differences are
explained, and in their own conclusions about people. The best
contemporary leadership programs, such as Dr. Stephen R. Covey's _7
Habits of Highly Effective People_ or Dr. W. Edwards Deming's _The
Deming Management Philosophy_ do not offer explanatory principles.
They can only offer "principles" (meaning rules of thumb, rules of
conduct) based on generalizations from experience. Each individual
in an organization who learns the rules of conduct will interpret
them differently. This makes it hard to attain consistent
management in an organization.
Suppose there is a way to give your executives the capability to
deal with all the issues mentioned above by using explanatory
principles to determine how to proceed in each situation. Would
you be interested?
We would like an opportunity to show you how.
Sincerely,
Dag Forssell
To learn more, please call or fax this letter back to us.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bruce, besides the improvements mentioned above, you have brought
in "generalizations" from experience. Smooth. This has been
recently discussed here, and fits in this context very well.
You have softened the letter, made it a little more personal, but
not lost any of the meaning. As so often shown on the net, you are
a very good writer.
Back to Bob:
Dag, your proposed title is much better than mine.
The editor at Engineering Management Journal did not agree. To him,
A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PEOPLE AND LEADERSHIP has the flavor of "New
and improved," and a such is of little interest. So it is still
*
CONTROL : A KEY MANAGEMENT INSIGHT, which is different.
This can only be resolved by IV-DV research. Print the same article
in two equivalent journals with similar readership and circulation
and see which gives the greater response.
Personally, when I think about it, I am inclined to agree with the
editor. I am taking the bull by the horns anyway. Now the segment:
* CONTROL DEFINED is definitely necessary. I can only hope that by
having a challenging title, complete with a fat asterisk and the
explanation below, the bull will quickly be wrestled to the ground.
Readers will see that this is different, relevant and attractive.
Another thing that should attract readers is the segment on the
first page:
--------------------------------------------------
COMING TOPICS IN THIS SERIES
PROBLEM SOLVING:
Recognize control. Understand conflict & cooperation.
Respect. Teaching effectiveness. Align wants &
perceptions. Resolve conflict.
LEADERSHIP:
Performance coaching reviews. Non-manipulative selling.
Vision and mission statements. Total Quality Management.
Develop team spirit and caring relationships.
--------------------------------------------------
I had suggested four additional articles, but the editor was not
comfortable. He asked me to define two.
I think the first article is now finished. Will send hard copy to
anyone who asks for it with snail mail address.
Best, Dag
Dag & Christine Forssell
Purposeful Leadership (R)
23903 Via Flamenco
Valencia, CA 91355-2808
Phone (805) 254-1195 Fax (805) 254-7956
Internet: purpose@mcimail.com
MCI mail: purpose or 474-2580