No one ever became a great leader without first becoming a great communicator. Great leaders connect with people on an emotional level every time they speak. Their words inspire others to achieve more than they ever thought possible. Great communicators are intentional about it, and there are 10 secrets they rely on to deliver a powerful message. Put these secrets to work in your communication and watch your influence soar.

The  greatest leader of the 21st Century.

1. They Know Their Audience

Great communicators do not worry about sounding important, showing off their expertise, or boosting their own egos. Instead, they think about what people need to hear, and how they can deliver this message so that people will be able to hear it. This does not mean that leaders tell people what they want to hear. Quite the opposite—they tell people what is important for them to know, even if it is bad news.

2. They Are Experts in Body Language

Great communicators are constantly tracking people’s reactions to their message. They are quick to notice cues like facial expressions and body language because they know this is the only feedback many people will give them. Great communicators use this expertise to tailor their message on the fly and adjust their communication style as needed.

3. They Are Honest

The best leaders know that for communication to be effective it has to be real. They cannot have people parsing every word trying to separate fact from spin. When great communicators cannot share certain information, they come right out and say it because makeshift, half-truth answers breed distrust and anxiety. In good times and bad, honesty builds trust.

 4. They Are Authentic

Great communicators do not try to be someone they are not just, because they have stepped behind a podium. There is a reason Mark Zuckerberg presented Facebook to investors in a hoodie and jeans. Great leaders know that when they stay true to whom they are, people gravitate to their message. They also know the opposite happens when leaders put on an act.

5. They Speak With Authority

Great communicators do not try to cover their backs by being ambiguous, ineffective, or unassertive. Instead, they stick their necks out and speak very directly about how things are and how they need to be.

6. They Speak To Groups as Individuals

Leaders rarely have the luxury of speaking to one person at a time. Whether it is a huddle around a conference table or an overflowing auditorium, great leaders know how to work the room and make every single person feel as if he or she is being spoken to directly.

7. They Have Ears (And They Use Them)

Great leaders know that communication is a two-way street and what they hear is often more important than what they say. When someone else is speaking, great communicators are not thinking ahead and planning what they will say next. Instead, they are actively listening, fully focused on understanding the other person’s perspective.

8. They Use Phrases Like 'It’s My Fault,' 'I was wrong,' and 'I’m Sorry'

When great leaders make a mistake, they admit it right away. They do not wait for someone else to find and point out their blunder. They model accountability for their words and actions, even when they could have easily “gotten away” with the mistake. In addition, they do it matter-of-factly, without drama or false humility.

9. They Solicit Feedback

The best communicators never assume that the message people heard is the exact same one they intended to deliver. They check in to verify that their message was understood correctly, and, if it was not, they do not blame the audience. Instead, they change things up and try again.

10. They’re Proactive

Leaders with the best communication skills do not waste time playing catch-up. They are quick to head off the rumour mill by sharing bad news in a timely manner. They also give clear, concise goals and directions so people do not waste their time heading in the wrong direction.

Great communicators stand out from the crowd. They are honest. They are authentic. They listen. They excel in communication because they value it, and that is the critical first step to becoming a great leader.

A version of this article appeared on Entreprenuer.com

A chain is only as strong, as its weakest link. I have found this wisdom quite helpful in enforcing teamwork and the need to have everything laid out well, prior to taking massive amounts of action.

The same holds true when developing an airtight communications strategy. It is imperative that we know and understand what each element entails, before plunging into a mission that most certainly projects the future of the organization. So far, we have looked at strategic analysis and strategic intent. In this post, let us move a step further and look at strategic action.

Taking Strategic Action

‘Strategic action is concerned with the translation of the strategic intent’ says Cornelissen, ‘or chosen strategic option into action.’ Yes, we have done the analysis-fact finding mission; we have generated suitable options tailored to deliver certain key objectives. It is time we put the ideas into action.

Specify the Communication Objectives and the Role Communication Will Play

Before the suggested communication programs are implemented, it needs to be clear from the outset; the role communication is going to play in this instance. Is it a support or lead role? Having this in mind makes it clear on the direction to go and programmes to implement.

A first fundamental issue that needs to be decided upon before working out the content of the communications strategy, the communications programme, is the role that communications is to play in the overall corporate and market strategies for the organization. {Sic.}

Knowing the role communication will play makes it possible to determine the communication objectives as well as the communication tactics that are feasible to use. These objectives need to satisfy the SMART criteria, as do all other objectives. They need to be Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Realistic, and Targeted.

 Planning Communication Tactics

You have your objectives in place. The role communication is going to play is in check. What next? After defining the communication objectives and its contribution to corporate and/or market strategies made specific, the next step is to determine the elements of the communications programme: the stakeholder audiences to address and the message and channel tactics to use.

The stakeholder analysis we engaged in in the first elements helped us identify the key audiences we needed to target first, for us to achieve the desired effect. These showed us who the target audience would be of our communications programmes.

For our programmes to deliver the desired effects, we need to define the target audience. This is about media usage, usage of the company’s products, geo-demographic characteristics, membership of interest groups etc. Once we have a clear understanding of our target audience, anything, and everything about them: guided by our communication objectives, then we can determine the message to use in the communication programmes.

This will involve determining the main themes of the communications message (from which the specific copy can be developed), and the tone and type of response (awareness, attitude/reputation, behaviours) that the message will seek to evoke. The important factor is thus to decide what the message should say in relation to the organization’s identity, as it needs to reflect and be in tune with the values of the organization, as well as the stakeholder audience in hand. {Sic.}

Once we have our message, it follows that we need to settle on effective media channels to use. Knowing the most efficient and effective channel that will get our message across to the target audiences is as important as determining the message to deliver.

‘Discussion around media selection has recently centred or the notion of ‘zero-based’ selection, where the most appropriate medium in the light of the criteria selected is chosen, rather than a pre-fixed and standard choice for a medium that may have worked in the past.’ {Sic.}

Organizational Arrangements

‘Once the communications programme has been filled in – that is, when the objectives, message, media and audience are all specified – the next step is to consider the organizational arrangements that need to be made to carry out the programme and as such effectuate the communications strategy.’ Says Cornelissen.

These questions need answers:

• What budget is required for the envisaged plan?
• Who is to be responsible for carrying it out?
• What changes in organizational structure and design are needed to support and carry out the plan?
• What will different departments be held responsible for?
• What are the key tasks to be carried out?
• Are the practitioners involved up to the task, or is retraining necessary?

Answering these question brings to light the capability of the organization to actualize the communication strategy developed.

In developing a communication strategy, often professionals from different departments will need to collaborate. Thus, the need for an organization to have in place mechanisms and structures that support such interactions and collaboration.

Lastly, Cornelissen advices, ‘to take into account whether the proposed communications strategy adapts or builds on existing strategies – an incremental approach – or whether, because of the inadequacy of existing strategies or because management sees the need to change fundamentally the direction of the organization, a completely new communications strategy is suggested.

Are we ready to determine the message, media channels, and ability of the organization to implement the communications strategy? Let us find out. Shall we.

We have covered strategic analysis, a fact-finding mission, if I may. Nevertheless, what happens once you have all the information you need in place? Armed with all the relevant information it's time to act. Don’t you agree? In writing a communications strategy, this is the strategic intent phase.

What actions do you have lined up?

‘Strategic intent proceeds from this analysis and involves the formulation of a strategic vision,’ says Cornelissen, ‘around which possible courses of action are formulated, evaluated, and eventually chosen.’ In other words, strategic intent sets the agenda. By considering the current position of the corporation, strategic intent sets the direction the corporation needs to take for the realization of the desired ‘new’ position.

This desired position is achieved in the following ways:

Identifying Bases of Strategic Choice

Before the options available for a corporation are tabled, certain key factors need understanding. Luckily, these strategic options are embedded in the mission and vision statements of the corporation. Mission and vision statements express the desire of stakeholders. If the vision statements stipulates the need to be the best in the region, then that is the objective management strives to meet.

‘Some of these bases of strategic choice arise from an understanding of stakeholder expectations and influence, which may already be reflected in mission and vision statements that provide overall guidance about the nature or aspirations of the organization.’, says Cornelissen.

These bases are:

Competitive advantage:This involves knowing what differentiates the corporation from others. Could it be superior services at affordable costs or unique products that meet the needs of a segment of the customers? Competitive strategy makes it easy for a corporation to penetrate a given market.

Organization Identity:According to Cornelissen, ‘identity sets boundaries to the strategic options open to the organization in terms of how people within the organization see themselves and the company they work for, and predetermines how the company should be profiled and positioned with stakeholders and the markets in its environment.’

Generating Strategic Options

In planning, we are advised to think on paper. Once you have your goal written down, you should list all the necessary steps you need to take to meet that particular set goal. I borrowed this gem from Brain Tracy’s Ultimate Goal program. In other words, what Brian Tracy is merely advising is once you have established your goal; enumerate a list of options (actions) for which to engage in order to realize your goal.

The same holds true for strategic options. ‘These courses of action emanate from the bases of strategic choice as identified above, and include options concerning which stakeholders and markets to address and target, and what the organization wants to achieve with them.’ {Sic.}

Case in Point: in the 1970s and 1980s, Shell, for example, was a respected multinational in the petroleum industry steeped in a technological and engineering ethos. By the 1990s, changing market conditions and public scepticism posed the organization other choices of strategic direction. The company had to ask itself what the basis of its business and success was: profitability or public legitimacy, or both. {Sic.}

At this point, we need to understand the role communication plays: Firstly, gaining legitimacy with important stakeholder groups, and secondly, enhancing the organizations reputation and preserving its legitimacy.

According to Cornelissen, ‘Indeed, in developing strategies, a potential danger may be that managers do not consider any but the most obvious course of action – and the most obvious is not always the best.’ He explains, ‘A helpful step in strategic intent can therefore be to evaluate and limit strategic options.’ Avail limited and worthy options for consideration.

Evaluation and Selection of Strategic Options

In settling on an option-we need to have at the back of our minds: an option that will be a ‘fit’ between the organization, its resource capability, and its environment. All options needs to meet the suitability, feasibility, and acceptability test.

‘The process of selecting strategic options cannot always be viewed or understood as a purely objective, logical act. It is strongly influenced by the values of managers and other groups with interest in the organization, and ultimately may very much reflect the power structure within the organization.’ explains Cornelissen.

Having clear intentions is a step closer to executing an effective communications strategy. Once you know what exactly you want to do, positive results are in the pipeline. It is time to act. Happy option-storming.

The post preceding this, talked about the 4 elements we need to consider when working on a communications strategy. I am positive that it gave you a solid foundation on the topic. In this post, we will look at each of the elements in detail. Read along; let us hone this skill together.

The first element we looked at was strategic analysis. An element that must precede all others in order to gain a solid understanding of the corporation. Without this element, you are like a ship without a rudder. 

Flickr | Simon Cunningham

When looking at strategic analysis, what are we looking for? This is the question, is it not? Strategic analysis does not stop at understanding the strategic position of the corporation. It goes on to look at any changes taking place within and outside the environment surrounding the corporation.

‘The aim of strategic analysis is, then, to form a view of the key influences’ says Cornelissen, ‘on the present and future well-being of the organization, and what opportunities are afforded by the environment and the competencies of the organization.’

These are the three analysis that comprise of this element:

Organization-Environment Analysis

Cornelissen says the organization exists in the context of a complex commercial, economic, political, technological, social, and cultural world. Moreover, as we know, these environment changes in a heartbeat. These unprecedented change, or otherwise can affect the company greatly.

We know and appreciate that change is inevitable. Thus, depending on the positioning of a corporation, these environmental changes might result into a lucrative opportunity or present a threat that will shake the very fabric of the corporation. We would rather be casualties of the former. Right?

During these stage use these two tools: DESTEP analysis and   SWOT analysis.

‘A DESTEP analysis is a broad analysis of the various demographic, economic, social, technological, ecological and political developments and factors that are expected to have an impact upon the organization and its operations.’ Says Cornelissen. This guided framework enables management to deduce the most pressing changes and foresee any future changes in the environment. 

A SWOT analysis on the other hand, stands for an investigation of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. This involves taking a blank sheet of paper and subdividing into four quadrants and at the top of each quadrant, one through four indicate the titles strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Proceed to list what you factors you think fall under each category.

The first half of this analysis – strengths and weaknesses – examines the company’s position, its capabilities, operations, and products vis-à-vis stakeholders, competitor activities, environmental trends, and company resources. The second half of the SWOT takes this review further to examine the opportunities and threats identified within the environment, including, for instance, market opportunities, political regulation, and shareholder activism. {Sic} At the heart of this analysis, lies the need to know which groups will support the corporations and which ones would hinder any move the corporation might decide to make.

Remember that the whole purpose of organization-environment analysis is not to generate long lists of factors and points, but to provide a concise and to-the-point analysis of the organization and its current position within the environment, adds Cornelissen.

Market and Competitive Analysis

Corporations exist to meet the needs of certain markets. Conducting market research is a prerequisite when it comes to penetrating a new market. Once you are in the market, it follows that you would like to dominate the market. Thus the need for market and competitive analysis.

‘…identify what the competitive position of the organization and its products is within the markets in which it operates and whether the organization can target and serve those markets in a way that at least rivals, if not exceeds, its nearest competitors.’ advises Cornelissen.

Gone are the days of John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, where they monopolized entire industries.Today, competition is as alive as our beating hearts. And it would be a big mistake for anyone in business, to think that they are all alone. The business ground shifted in the favour of the majority.

‘An analysis of the structure of a market includes identifying the size of the market and trends within it, and whether the market can be further partitioned into different market segments. An analysis of the customers includes gathering data and drawing up a detailed profile of customers within the market or market segments in terms of their buying and consumer behaviour.’ states Cornelissen. This is what is referred to as market analysis.

In conducting competitor analysis, Michael Porter is the go-to person. His five forces model is often used to conduct a thorough competitive analysis. ‘The five forces – each with a different threat – are industry competitors (threat of intense segment rivalry), potential entrants (threat of new entrants), substitutes (threat of substitute products), buyers (threat of buyers’ growing bargaining power), and suppliers (threat of suppliers’ growing bargaining power).’ {Sic}

Stakeholder Analysis

The corporation exists to meet certain interests. It follows that cultivating and sustaining a great relationship between corporation and stakeholders is something we need to think of consistently and persistently. It is a fragile relationship.

‘Stakeholder analysis should at least provide some answers to the following questions: how will the organization’s actions affect stakeholders? What influence can stakeholders exert on the organization that may affect the realization of its goals? What type of consequences may result from either’s actions? What type of behaviours from stakeholders does the organization wish to encourage? What reputation does the organization have with its stakeholders?’ {Sic}

In conducting stakeholder analysis, these two tools come in handy. Stakeholder mapping and reputation research.

‘Stakeholder mapping is an analytical tool whereby managers start with identifying all stakeholder groups of an organization and display their relationship to the organization,’ says Cornelissen, ‘and one another visually in a map. This mapping exercise should enable the primary stakeholder relationships to be identified and the patterns of interdependence to emerge.’ Consider going on a journey to a new town-you will need a map to know which route to follow and so forth. That is the idea behind this stakeholder mapping tool.

Through qualitative methods of research, in-depth interviews, and focus group sessions, and quantitative methods of reputation research; the latter including a larger sample of respondents who are then asked to rate the organization on a number of pre-defined dimensions. The outcomes of such reputation research may be compared to a target or benchmark that the company has set for itself in terms of how it wants to be known and appreciated by key stakeholder groups.

Since strategic analysis is the gateway to writing an effective communications strategy, taking a considerable amount of time to have all your facts right is imperative. By conducting organization-environment, market & competitive and stakeholder analysis, you will be armed with information on which to make informed decisions. Consider this a shot in the arm. Lock and load.