I’ll be talking at the ODN Europe conference on Friday September 23 about Creating a Listening Organisation.  We’ll be exploring:

  • Why organisations that listen well to their people are critical for success in emerging hybrid organisations
  • How difficult it is to achieve effective listening at an organisational level
  • Key factors and strategies that can improve listening

Here are links to all the recent Listening Reports that I have written with Howard Krais and Dr Kevin Ruck:

  1. Who’s Listening? – Small scale EMENA Research Project, December 2019
  2. Who’s Listening? – Good Listening Practice, June 2020
  3. Who’s Listening? – From Measurement to Meaning, Global Survey, Spring 2021
  4. Who’s Listening? – The Critical Role of Senior Leaders, Spring 2022

People need clarity and certainty about their organisation’s strategy to share goals and build common purpose.  But an understanding of strategic themes (e.g., digitisation, customer experience) will not bring strategy to life and provide “line of sight” – that key connection that explains “what it means for me”.


Real understanding, and indeed the effective implementation of strategy, requires the internalisation of strategy.  In other words, understanding how to apply what the strategy means to the work that people do, the decisions they make, and what they communicate to colleagues, customers, and suppliers.  For example, if the strategy involves investment in new technology people need to know how this helps their work, how customers benefit, and what they need to do to exploit the investment to support the business.


The answers to these questions are detailed and different depending upon different roles.  So, getting people involved in understanding business strategies and creating line of sight between local activities and the bigger picture requires an approach to communication that is conversation based.  Conversations are radically different from a traditional cascade approach in which leaders and managers tell people about a new strategy or vision.


A cascade process tells people about the direction the business aims to go.  A conversation challenges people to think about the role they play in delivering the strategy.  While the two approaches are not mutually exclusive, they have very different characteristics across a number of dimensions.



Dimension Cascade communication  Conversation
1.     Desired outcome Awareness and high-level understanding Ownership of strategy and relevance at local level
2.     Primary objective Build awareness of vision and strategy Build understanding of what vision and strategy means for the business and individuals; establish “line of sight”
3.     Approach to content and delivery Rational explanation and logic; presentations, video, slides Logic and emotion; pictures, stories, scenarios to prompt debate
4.     Direction Mainly top-down with questions Mainly lateral within and across teams
5.     Typical format Large meetings and Town Halls Breakouts and smaller group discussions
6.     Manager’s role Articulate and defend message Tell story and ask questions
7.     Evaluation criteria Quality of delivery, levels of awareness Quality of conversation, levels of ownership, commitment and appropriate actions



The irony is that most business leaders want the outcome and the objectives identified at the top of the table in the right-hand column, but adopt approaches highlighted in the middle column.   Moving to conversation-based approaches involves using techniques other than the Town Hall to help people internalise the messages.  Companies need platforms to use with small groups that both convey the big picture in relevant and engaging ways and that prompt teams to ask relevant questions about the way they work.


There are many different ways to create these kinds of conversations, but they all require balancing the strategic vision with the local application.  Using a picture and listening to what people think about the strategy, rather than talking at them, is more memorable, tailored, relevant, tangible, and avoids jargon.  It is also more involving and as a platform to support a conversation a picture provides an opportunity for people to relate the big picture to the work that they do.  This shifts the communication dynamic from “telling” to “exploring” and enables people to relate their work to the strategy and to talk to each other about how their work currently does, or does not, deliver on the intentions raised in the picture.


This capacity to help build “line of sight” means that a conversation approach provides a more long-lasting, effective and impactful approach than the cascade in which groups come together to be talked at about the strategy.


Image acknowledgement: Another great David Gifford illustration


Photo by Jason Goodman on Unsplash

It is much harder to listen effectively than most of us realise, and we tend to think we listen well when perhaps we don’t.  Effective listening is so important not only for personal relationships (who wants a friend who never listens) but also for building trust in healthy organisations.


For example, leaders encourage people to “speak up” yet often express frustration about the silence that follows requests for ideas or challenges.  But maybe the challenge lies in how leaders listen rather than in some deficit on the part of employees.


The importance of Psychological Safety


When researching how organisations listen to their employees “psychological safety” often emerges as a core theme. 1   Psychological safety is the belief that you won’t be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. 2


Encouraging a culture in which people feel free to speak up is important for at least three reasons:


  1. Motivation: listening creates a sense of belonging by confirming that everyone’s view is welcome
  2. Risk Management: listening increases the ability to identify and spot problems that people will feel free to raise; and reduces the risks of future mistakes being made, harm being done and reputations damaged
  3. Change management: listening increases the likelihood that teams and organisations can change and innovate by welcoming ideas that challenge how things get done.

There is a circularity between speaking up and listening up – see the diagram below.  Team leaders need to take the initiative to encourage people to speak up by creating safe team spaces at a micro level.  At the macro or organisational level, the leader needs to create a listening strategy and culture that encourages and celebrates employee voice.


I’ve spent years listening to leaders, managers, employees and special interest groups (e.g., high potential managers, union representatives) talking about communication at work.  Recently I’ve run international surveys and focus groups with Dr Kevin Ruck (PR Academy founder) and Howard Krais (Communication Director, Johnson Matthey) in which we have focused on how organisations listen.   I’ve also spent time recently talking to some respected colleagues who work in management and leadership to explore what they see as the barriers to listening up (see acknowledgements below).


I’ve captured below the things that stand out, and some of the things that organisations can do to make it easier for people to listen effectively.


What makes listening up hard?


  1. Closed minds


The biggest barrier to listening, and by implication to insight and new ideas, is the simple fact that people often enter a conversation with their minds made up.  If people have fixed views, the narrative in their heads constantly filters whatever they hear.  In our second and fourth “Who’s Listening” reports we looked at best listening practice at an organisational and individual level, and “Open Mindsets” emerged as a critical enabler in both.


During times of change at work listening is particularly critical.  However, leaders and managers are the champions of whatever change is needed.  This makes it even more likely that they will be preparing a response or a “solution” to any pushback or objections, making it harder for them to listen and making others feel that speaking up will make no difference to the course of action under discussion.


  1. Bias  


People are biased – their brains are designed to create shortcuts to aid decision making and for protection.  For example, people form “in-groups” with those who share common goals and are more disposed to listen to those they think are like them.  The familiar problem of organisation silos – in which information flows poorly across organisational boundaries – often has an in-group mentality as a contributory cause. The ability to listen is affected by, often unconscious, bias.   Tell-tale phrases that bias is limiting listening include “They would say that” or “I know what they will say”.  As a result, people from other departments, levels or countries find it more difficult to be heard and are likely to speak up less.  Or, voices may become more strident and the conversation becomes adversarial rather than constructive.


On the flip side, bringing in external agents with perceived expertise can improve their impact, even if their recommendations are no different from internal agents.


  1. Power


One particular form of bias that is highly relevant to the challenge of listening up is concerned with power.  Power affects relationships and interferes with the capacity to listen.  People who have power over others find it easier to be heard.  This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.  Our brains have evolved to take heed of more powerful members of the tribe.   But for a leader it works in reverse increasing the difficulty of really listening to those over whom the leader has power. 4


There may be various explanations for this.  For example, do leaders believe they need to be hard-nosed because they have to take difficult and unpopular decisions and empathetic listening may make it harder to make these decisions?  They also face competition for their time amongst those over whom they have power, and rationing listening is a necessary coping strategy.



  1. Risk


Listening up is taking some risk as an individual (in the same way that speaking up involves risk).  These risks essentially involve perceived challenges to one’s credibility, status or position and involve fears about exposing oneself to ridicule.  For example, what if:

  • I do not know the answer to a question?
  • I say something in response that is contradicted by others or more senior colleagues?
  • I’m presented with a need that cannot be met?
  • I unearth mixed and irreconcilable perspectives, and open a Pandora’s Box of insoluble dilemmas?
  • I make myself look weak and out of control to others in more senior positions?


These concerns may identify some narrow and false perspectives about what it means to be a good leader.  But what matters is that they drive how people behave.  Not speaking up is normally based on an assumption that an individual risks exposing him or herself to ridicule or censure if they do speak up.  Likewise, not listening up can also be based on assumptions about how I will appear to others.


  1. Lack of self-awareness


The fifth barrier is poor self-awareness involving the perception that people listen well when they do not.  Research in the NHS and elsewhere identifies the self-enhancement bias in which we rate our own competence at listening higher than others. 5 In other words, we think we listen well but we do not.  This “blind spot” means that those who most need help to improve the way they listen are least aware of the need.   Some of the issues here can include:


  • The lack of appreciation that power has a major impact on those without it. Leaders need to work to make others feel safe to speak their mind (“My door is always open” just reminds people that there is a door)
  • As mentioned above, those with power discount the perceptions of those over whom they have power
  • Failure to appreciate the reasons why it makes more sense for people not to speak up. 6  Given this, leaders and managers need to guard their responses and reactions carefully when they are listening and work hard to help people to speak up.



What can make listening up easier?


In order for people to speak up, managers and leaders need to listen up well.  To do so they need to:


  1. Frame the need for listening
  2. Set the right role models
  3. Use listening tactics
  4. Adopt a listening mindset and behaviours
  5. Act upon what they have heard and communicate what has been done.


Leadership needs to take responsibility for creating the environment in which the following can take place.


Frame the need for listening


  • One of the key roles of the leadership team is to frame the overall need for listening, and the conversations that establish this require some careful thinking through of when and why listening is important. The goal is to position listening as critical to the organisation’s success, explaining why speaking up is important and how it links to the organisations’ purpose.  This will vary by industry.  For example: in healthcare effective listening and speaking up may increase patient safety; in manufacturing it may support innovation; in service businesses it may increase customer insight.7
  • Helping the leadership team to recognise the need for this framing may involve using internal or external data to highlight the issue, and reflection within the team around individual biases and assumptions. Scenarios and case studies can be helpful tools, while getting the team to explore listening with each other can highlight some valuable lessons for the team and individuals
  • Be clear about what and when listening is important. For example: listen for ideas and input to change management but not to strategy (once decisions have been made).  Listen when the input is needed and avoid ‘false democracy.’  Along with this, ensure that leaders and managers take ownership of decisions that have been made which means that they need to understand them and their rationale.


Set the right role models


  • The example set by managers and leaders signals what behaviour is valued. The most important requirements for listening well include:
    • Responding appropriately to ideas, which may include rejecting them.   The need is always to respect the contribution and the person providing the input; be it challenge, idea or disclosure.  If the idea is just dismissed or the person is criticised or ridiculed others will not provide input.
    • Speaking up by challenging and debating to encourage others, and asking others for input
    • Showing vulnerability by relating events and stories in which the manager or leader themselves made mistakes, and emphasising lessons learned.
  • To develop the ability to respond well, work with the leadership on challenges and objections that they fear meeting with their teams and employees. Working on these key implementation of strategy questions can help develop much more sensitive and empathetic responses that helps sustain the strategy while involving employees in discussions around the issues that concern them.


Use listening tactics


  • Ask open questions that cannot be answered with yes/no responses
  • Develop familiarity with structured sessions that encourage people to speak up. This could include using methodology and techniques from Appreciative Inquiry 8 and the Technology of Participation 9
  • Other approaches to engage people in better conversations about the business and strategy include Open Space, Future Search, World Café and Big Conversation, Engagement Café and Knowledge Café
  • Break people into small groups or pairs to discuss reflections on what they have heard and questions they might like to ask before inviting them to post or raise questions in open forums
  • Prepare for questions in advance of meetings to help think through responses and as a leader or manager reduce the potential threat posed by questions that people will ask
  • Listen in pairs to support each other and check that all the subtleties behind questions are picked up. Listening in pairs is especially helpful when listening to large groups
  • Build internal networks so that managers and leaders can share stories and examples of the sorts of issues and questions people in the business want to discuss


Adopt a listening mindset and behaviours


  • The art of listening involves not just hearing what others are saying but empathising with others’ feelings and seeking to understand others intentions. It’s not possible to listen well without building relationships – the two go hand in hand
  • Create listening spaces and listen all the time. Listening is an “always on” function of leadership and management.  While listening during meetings and the everyday act of running the business, set up spaces dedicated to giving people the opportunity to talk about what is on their minds
  • Recognise that people do not always want answers to all the questions. They want to feel that they are being listened to and that their questions or suggestions are valued.  Sometimes the question is more of a test to evaluate the ability of the manager or leader to handle the difficult question.
  • Ask for feedback on how people experience listening to increase self-awareness and to encourage discussion about the art of listening.


Act upon what they have heard and communicate what has been done


  • During the research we conducted into listening a consistent concern was the perception that when people put forward their views, they hear no follow-up nor learn of any actions or decisions that have been made based upon their input. The perceived lack of response is a major barrier to speaking up because people feel it is pointless.  Yet at the same time I know many leadership teams that express astonishment at the idea that the findings from listening activities are ignored.  Leaders often point to initiatives and decisions that stem directly from employee input.  The trouble is that the connection between feedback and action gets missed.  It is critical for leaders to ensure that they make the connection between what has been heard and what has been done, even if – as is usually the case – that action is based upon further discussion and deliberation prompted by the feedback, rather than a simple “you said, we did” type response.



Listening up is not about feeling comfortable


When talking about creating safety for those listening one of my colleagues made the astute point that the leadership role when listening is not about feeling comfortable.  Getting pushback and objections from a group illustrates successful listening because the leader has encouraged speaking up.  The leader benefits too because the input of different perspectives and alternative ideas enriches the quality of decision-making and the feeling of trust within groups.


So, when leaders get pushback and objections, the leader needs to congratulate the group for its courage and remember that the response that the leader gives to the next question or challenge is the test of his or her listening.  Effective listening up involves recognising that what matters is always the response to the next question.




  1. Who’s Listening Research Report 1 2020; Couravel; PR Academy. Speak Up; Megan Reitz and John Higgins; FT Publishing 2019
  2. Source: What Is Psychological Safety at Work; Centre for Creative Leadership
  3. Who’s Listening Update 2 (2021) and Update 3 (2022); Couravel; PR Academy.
  4. Power and Perspectives not Taken; Galinsky, Psychological Science, 2006
  5. Speaking Truth to Power: Why Leaders Cannot Hear What They Need to Hear; Megan Reitz and John Higgins, British Medical Journal, Oct 2020
  6. The Fearless Organisation; Amy Edmondson, Wiley 2019
  7. A thorough exploration of the importance of framing is provided by Amy Edmondson: The Fearless Organisation; Wiley 2019
  8. See for example Appreciative Inquiry for Change Management; Lewis, Passmore and Cantore; Kogan page 2008
  9. The Institute of Cultural Affairs provides a starting point for Technology of Participation stories, tools and training: https://ica-uk.org.uk/about-ica/




A number of people helped by agreeing to talk to me about their experiences of listening up and I am extremely grateful for their input and support.  I take full responsibility for the content but I would like to acknowledge those who helped and the particular insights they provided:


  • Sheila Hirst, Authentic Leadership and Storytelling Coach who provided particular insights around the importance of self-awareness and openness as a key requirement for effective listening
  • John Holmes, Chief Examiner, ABRSM whose listening credentials extend to the professional leadership of a disparate and specialist group of musicians and teachers
  • Martin Horton, Leadership and Team Coach who differentiated feeling comfortable from feeling safe, and made the point that the leaders listening role involves generating challenge and support
  • Jane Mitchell, IABC Fellow and LDA Design Trust Chair who highlighted the importance of the leader displaying vulnerability and framing the importance of listening, and who helped bring out the importance of a visible response as a key enabler of speaking up
  • Simon Monger, President IABC UK&I, and Internal Communications, Change + Engagement Consultant at Simon Monger Ltd. Simon signalled the risks involved in listening up, and during online conversations identified the challenge that people often overate their listening abilities
  • Andrew Morrison, Director of Corporate Affairs and Communications who told me some helpful stories about the importance of anticipating questions and listening in pairs, and the need for courage to lead from the front
  • Ben Selby, Director, Epigeum (part of Oxford University Press).  Ben highlighted the importance of owning decisions and being clear about the importance of integrity when listening, and not practising false democracy
  • David Smith, PSC Tech Lead – Consumer Healthcare Separation, GSK who highlighted how important support networks are when listening and emphasised the need to establish good relationships in order to help people feel that they can speak up.





Have you ever experienced this: the team has gone away for a couple of days for a deep dive into their vision and plans for the future?   They return full of enthusiasm and ready to brief their teams on the way forward.


Only to find they are met with a host of reasons why the plan won’t work, and resistance to change.   They push back with answers to the objections but the game is lost because the leadership never involved those who have to make the change happen in the planning process.


If yours is like many organisations, the leadership team then regroups with new information and insights from their teams that should have been factored in to the planning stage in the first case.  They decide that they have not been clear enough on the need to change and rear-guard action is mobilised as the new data is incorporated into a revised set of plans which the leadership team then aims to implement.  Momentum is lost, and the team acknowledges that they hadn’t taken into account some key factors.  What is sad is that confidence in leadership falls not because the plan was unworkable but because the leadership did not think to listen to their teams before shaping it.


If this is familiar don’t feel that you’re on your own; it is symptomatic of how planning takes place at multiple levels in many organisations in which not enough attention is paid to the perspectives and views of those who actually get the work done.


One of the benefits of the pandemic and the rapid adoption of agile thinking into the way we work is that we are learning the importance of listening to people in order to come up with feasible plans.


For example, a leading systems engineering business has used the experiences of people during the pandemic to create a new vision for ways of working post-pandemic.  It makes sense to talk to the people about their perspectives of the good things that came out of remote working.  Their insights on what made it more difficult and what made it easier has to shape the way forward.  100 people from all levels of the business contributed using an open process in which everyone’s voice carried equal weight. After crunching the data the emerging vision was illustrated in order to provide a narrative and emotional depth; helping others to see the vision in a tangible way and to think about what it meant for them.


We’ve got to get better at listening to people and incorporating multiple perspectives into future plans in order to survive in the rapidly changing workplace and highly competitive market places in which our organisations now need to compete.


Listening needs to be at the core of this.  It helped get us through the pandemic and it is going to help get us through the next phase for a number of reasons:

  • Listening to people increases their sense of belonging, confirms that their opinion is valued and builds subsequent commitment to future plans
  • The plans won’t be “full of holes” because those who understand customers, operations and their own needs have helped to create it
  • A listening process creates better ideas, insights and plans because it reflects a diverse range of views
  • Listening is the right thing to do in this day and age as companies need to show a real commitment to inclusivity at work – not just for reputation but because it makes business sense.


We’ve never had more tools to help us with the way we listen to our employees but despite the range of digital apps the thing that differentiates the high performers – those who listen really well – is open and curious minds. We need processes and tools to bring together bottom-up views and leadership to co-create new thinking.  These tools may include big conversations in which everyone gets involved in shaping the future of the company, open space, future search, engagement cafes or other meeting methods that bring together people. We can do it rapidly and we can do it remotely as a result of the lessons from the pandemic. It’s critical that all organisations adopt these kinds of approaches to bring people’s views together.


The role of leadership is to provide the long-term vision, to monitor the external environment and to ask questions that help people to speak up.


Acknowledgement: David Gifford for his excellent cartoon



The more people understand purpose, vision and strategy, and appreciate how they support these, the more likely it is that the organisation will deliver effectively.   This makes intuitive sense and is borne out by consistent correlations between employee engagement and performance.  Understanding of purpose and strategy, and my contribution, is a recurring theme in employee engagement metrics.


But how to make this high-level communication engaging, so that people feel inspired and motivated to participate, and to take ownership of higher-level goals?  The advantage of a visual approach is that it is more attractive and engaging.


Contrast the two images below.  The first is an outline that shows a vision built on three core themes supported by specific objectives (some of the detail has been omitted to protect confidentiality).  The one that follows is a picture telling a story featuring vision, strategy, objectives and tactics.

TUI Communicating strategic goals


Numerous businesses use imagery like the first above: a house, a temple with pillars, a pyramid, or a series of circles.     These images conceptualise at a high level and aim to convey the linkages between these different concepts; e.g., how the objectives support different strategies; how values underpin behaviours etc.

In contrast the second image – the island picture – conveys a narrative telling a story for this travel business of the company’s history, why it needs to change, the key themes in its strategy, how different parts of the business contribute, the high-level objectives and the vision.

The visual looks different and is more colourful and appealing.  It draws people in to examine detail.  There is no jargon in the picture, no “corporate speak” and because it is visual it works across language barriers.  Because it is more accessible it works across multiple levels and provides an ideal platform for talking about the story that it illustrates.  Moreover, by asking simple questions managers can involve people in thinking about their own stories and how they fit in this bigger picture.

A picture also reduces cognitive load for people because it makes the concepts more tangible.  It illustrates, for example: what competitiveness looks like; how customers will interact with future systems; what HR policies will deliver to employees; what capital investments will deliver to the business, etc.

Because the visual and narrative engages multiple circuits in our brains, it increases the likelihood that people will empathise with whoever is leading the conversation.  A manager presenting bullet points and words is more likely to encourage critical responses and resistance; a picture and story triggers emotions and helps people see different perspectives.

We have found visualising purpose, vision and strategy helps to involve people in conversations about the heritage, purpose and future of the business, and that this approach works well in many different types of organisation.  For example:

  • A global engineering business visualised its vision for new ways of working post-pandemic to involve leaders and managers in discussions about how to shift to new operating models
  • A global charity visualised its culture to engage employees in discussions about behaviours and ethics
  • A global travel business involved 70,000 employees in head office, airline and destination locations to explore how they all contributed to supporting the achievement of global objectives
  • A global medical devices business conducted virtual and face to face conversations for 9,000 employees working from home and in manufacturing operations to share a new strategy and explore actions teams could take to support the goals

Lessons from this include that a central visual is important because it is more memorable and the conversations people have around it creates line of sight as teams discuss their role in delivering the objectives.   The questions managers pose help focus inquiry, and people find a visual approach attractive.  It makes it easier for people to discuss by making intangible concepts real and relevant, helping people to devote more energy to considering the implications of strategy for the work that they do, and how they support the strategy.

I’d like to acknowledge David Gifford from Inscript Designs for his great cartoon at the top of this post!




Leading organisations requires aligning people behind purpose and common goals.  This essential task also meets employees increasing desire to know the purpose of the organisations they work for1, and customers are increasingly likely to expect employers to demonstrate social responsibility including consideration of the knowledge and welfare of their people.  To meet these needs, leaders need to cut through and provide this information in ways that are relevant, appealing and easy to communicate.


Creating a picture that conveys purpose, vision, strategy and operational plans provides an effective tool for learning and a platform for conversations that can be far more effective and impactful than traditional approaches involving telling people about strategy.


One of the reasons is that our brains are better at remembering information that has been delivered using visuals as opposed to text or verbal communication.  The Picture Superiority Effect is well established in psychology and refers to the likelihood that people will remember pictures and images better than words.


If we hear a piece of information, we will tend to remember 10% of it three days later. But if the information is delivered using a picture as well, we will tend to remember 65% of it three days later.2  Explanations for this differ but include the argument that our brains find it easier to encode and recall pictures, and that abstract concepts presented as more concrete and tangible images are easier to remember.


Vision is by far our most dominant sense, taking up an estimated 50% of our brain’s resources.The brain we have and use today evolved hundreds of thousands of years before writing evolved and is wired to process visual information more rapidly than text or language.  Pictorial information takes less cognitive effort to process and is more attractive to our brains; it is a more efficient way to convey information.

The power of visuals is well illustrated by iconic images that stick in the mind.  Witness “Earthrise” taken by the Apollo 8 astronauts or US ironworkers lunching perilously on a beam at the RCA Building in Manhattan.


Educators, health communicators and advertisers use imagery all the time, and it is becoming increasingly popular in the communication of strategy.  A visual of the strategy typically captures:

  • Legacy and heritage such as founders’ stories and previous milestones
  • Why change is necessary which may include external forces, customer needs and issues about the way the business currently operates
  • The vision for the future and how the organisation will help key groups
  • The journey to the vision which often brings together and illustrates how different things fit, including for example strategic themes, brand and positioning, values and transformation programmes
  • What happens if we do not change?

There will be exceptions where the precision provided by technical language or mathematical equations may be required.  But for the most part explaining the key elements of how an organisation exists to benefit customers or others, and the main thrusts of a strategic plan, can usually be captured visually.  Once done so, this picture becomes an effective way of involving people in conversations about the business that will be more memorable and involving.


Using a picture provides a platform that allows people to discuss its significance for them and how they can support the strategy.  The evidence that it is more memorable comes from before and after tests with employees.  In one study we found that only 1 in 5 employees could name just one of the major business goals of a major travel business.  Three months after using a picture to illustrate the strategy and involving employees in talking about it, over 50% could recall unprompted all of the major business goals involved in the strategy.


Cartoon: David Gifford, Inscript Designs



  1. McKinsey & Co; April 2021; Help your employees find purpose or watch them leave
  2. Stenberg, G (2006); Conceptual and perceptual factors in the picture superiority effect; European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 18(6): 813 – 847)
  3. John Medina; Brain Rules; Pear Press, 2014







Five things that differentiate great listening organisations

Recent global research I conducted with Howard Krais, Dr Kevin Ruck and the IABC Foundation established that in over 550 organisations effective listening delivers more innovation, better change management and the creation of a sense of fairness. As we emerge from the pandemic these outcomes are going to be critical for all employers.

We also found that the large scale annual survey represented the default approach to listening to employees. In our webinars we’ve been arguing that people are overlooking the value of qualitative approaches like focus groups and interviews.

To test that assertion I’ve looked at what differentiates the few organisations that do use focus groups – both face to face and online – on an ongoing basis and compared them to all others. The results suggest these companies are “stellar listeners”, illustrating that the use of tools like focus groups are symptomatic of a deeper cultural approach that values listening more highly and that generates more value from listening activities. Five key insights emerge about how they plan, measure, mitigate bias, adopt a listening mindset and create deep listening cultures.

  1. Planning

Planning to listen was identified as a relative weakness in the research we conducted. Many organisations talk about having an open mindset and valuing employee voice but less than half said that they actually plan carefully to ensure listening happens throughout their organisation. Our stellar listeners appear very different with 84% saying that they plan listening carefully and 88% (vs 54%) balancing messaging and listening within communication plans. As one of the respondents put it:

“A dedicated working group made up of volunteers across the business and led by our Head of Comms and Engagement is currently working on our new engagement eco-system taking feedback into account.”

  1. Measurement

Over 80% of our sub-group measure satisfaction with listening (86%) and claim that they use data from listening to improve performance ( 84%). The average figure is 54% and 57% respectively.

  1. Mitigate bias

One of the challenges about listening to employees is the problem of bias. How do you prevent negative views dominating feedback and reach through to ensure that the voice heard represents the – often silent – majority? The sub-group we identified stand out for employing a range of methods to ensure that they collect views across the spectrum of employees. They not only use focus groups but also are much greater users of

  • Large (hence the ability to measure) and ‘pulse’ surveys (e.g. 15% of companies use short pulse surveys on specific topics on an ongoing basis, but 47% of the stellar listeners do)
  • Monitoring discussions on internal digital platforms (59% of stellar listeners do this, only 32% of others)
  • 40% of those who use online focus groups regularly also run online leadership events to listen to employees. For most organisations the contrast is that only 9% use online leadership events on an ongoing basis.

Collecting data across a range of approaches mitigates the risk of hearing biased perspectives. Asked about the benefits of listening

  • One of our respondents commented that it: “Minimises resistance, mitigates risk and helps implement change more smoothly.” 
  • Another commented that their range of listening activities generate “Greater variety of ideas and opinions.” 
  • Many talked about the importance of listening ensuring more effective management of diversity and creating a more inclusive way of working: “You get a greater sense of the company working as a team (hard with 60,000 employees in over 30 countries) and feel closer to the decision making.”
  1. A listening mindset

The most striking difference is not the channels that great listening organisations use, but the mindset and culture that have developed and shaped the use of the channels. Compare these responses:

  • 90% of respondents from the good listening organisations agree that senior managers in their organisations respond to what employees say – the figure is 66% elsewhere
  • When asked about listening out for the emotional content of feedback there is a positive difference of 31% in favour of those organisations that are good listeners
  • 74% of respondents in good listening organisations say that they ensure senior leaders are effective listeners vs 44% amongst others
  • On average 26% of our respondents thought that their managers are more comfortable in listening to employees on digital platforms than in other settings. For regular users of on line focus groups the figure was 48%. This is important because our research established that employees are more comfortable speaking up on digital platforms than others. In other words, managers in these organisations appear more tuned in to the way listening needs to evolve to meet the changing needs of employees who are more comfortable using digital media at work.
  1. Stellar listeners are deep listeners

We characterised a listening spectrum covering different listening styles in our earlier report: passive, active, sensitive and deep listening styles. There is more on this here. Deep listening supports the facilitation of change and reflects a more co-creative style of leadership.

I found that the biggest differences between most of the respondents and the good listeners concerned questions about deep listening. For example, in good listeners 83% agree that they involve employees in important decisions about the future and 90% listen to improve how the business is run. The comparative figures are 39% and 55%.

One of the good listeners described their approach as follows:

“Regular crowdsourcing of ideas via Workplace. We’ve had a couple now. One to help shape our 5 and 10 year strategies and one to help our post-Covid ways of working (what we’ve learned,and how to implement it going forward). In each case the thousands of responses were available to all for support and comment and Senior Leaders were each given a topic areas to supervise and report on.”

Another described how a new Chief People Officer approached the leadership of change:

“Through working out loud and working sessions (open to volunteers) she was able to create a whole change programme, which has been entirely led by our people. The changes are massive, yet the business is happy to undergo them as they were involved on every step of the way and had more than once the chance to provide feedback or help shape the new solutions.”


As we emerge from the pandemic the pressure for growth is becoming intense again. Listening is a critical enabler of change and good listeners use a variety to approaches to engage their people in the process. We can learn from these approaches and use qualitative and digital listening to help deliver much greater insights into how well our organisations are working and how effective communication is. The depth and the frequency of the way we listen provides an important indicator of the leadership culture and mindset. Listening helps to generate new ideas, create good places to work and drive change. Listening is not just the preserve of leadership but needs to be planned in at all levels of the business to reap significant benefits.


Mike Pounsford



I help design and lead conversations for change. Some of the tools that develop more effective listening practices are:

  • Listening Audit to benchmark strengths and weaknesses
  • “Listen up” – a workshop to build listening capability amongst leaders and managers; and that can be adapted to develop listening champions
  • Insight Groups to train others to lead Deep Dives into organisational issues such as improving quality, compliance, communication, engagement or other key topics

Other approaches that help support change include:

  • Engagement Cafés and Ideas Exchange to involve people in developing solutions
  • Visioning Workshops to co-create future visions and strategy
  • Hot Spots which is a process for transforming performance from the bottom up
  • Big Conversation to build line of sight to strategy
  • Bushcraft – a set of tools to equip change agents with skills


Here is our latest Listening Report that features the results of our Global Research into how organisations listen to their employees.  Conducted with Howard Krais and Dr Kevin Ruck the report is based on the views of over 500 organisations.


Key themes are that:

  • Good listening is linked to the effective management of change and innovation
  • Organisations still rely on surveys and miss the value of insights from conversational approaches
  • The potential for digital listening is significant yet undeveloped
  • Leadership listening is more strongly associated with positive outcomes than line manager listening – leaders set the tone and make the difference
  • We tend to think we are better at listening than we are

Click here to download the report.






During the research we conducted into Listening across Europe, we became increasingly convinced that:


  1. Effective listening has a direct impact on both the performance of a business and the wellbeing of the people who work within it
  2. Listening has to be developed at a systemic level, rather than adopting ad hoc approaches
  3. Communicators have the opportunity to make a significant difference by shifting the balance from an emphasis on transmitting messages to an emphasis on receiving and understanding the voice of employees


We were invited by Lansons Communications to discuss our work for their podcast.  Here is a recording of the conversation between Megan Murray-Jones, Howard Krais, Mike Pounsford, and Dr. Kevin Ruck.


Click here to hear the recording