I prefer to identify words of significance or anchor and then proceed to the detail.

Using the above approach in my sharing today, I would like to speak to the persona of corporates and the human beings that operate them and where the two converge.

For a corporate , my anchor words are “juristic” and “business”. These words remind me that a corporate, though discussed as a “person” is not possessed with breath or feelings. A corporate is established to carry on certain business whether for profit or otherwise. The corporate’s life is premised on business continuity and sustainability.

For human beings, what is significant for me are the words “Management” and “communication”.
Human beings have breath and feelings among other traits and they need to communicate to one another in their activities, notwithstanding their diversity.

It is the conversations that human beings have with each other, as the operatives of the corporate, that enable them to ensure the corporate’s continued life.

These two persons converge at the point of the realization that business must be there for the human beings to be able to operate it and receive compensation.

The conversations that the operatives of the corporate have with each other define whether or not the trajectory being pursued towards the corporate goals is harmonious.

So, is it freestyle or by accepted norms and practices?

For example, should you switch to corporate mode from the home or other mode when you are performing your management/operations function, and if so why?

In most corporates, the decorum and mode of inquiry and submission are expected to be characterized by calm, confidence, articulation, listening, understanding, respect, accommodation and so on.

In a supermarket, customers act in a generally uniform manner as they access products and services and communicate with each other and personnel of the supermarket, otherwise matters may escalate to undesirable levels!

In a similar fashion, in an if operatives in an organization have a freestyle approach to conversations, the likelihood of a disjointed and dysfunctional performance is quite high. This means that the prospects of success of the corporate may also be slim, inviting the need for interventions to ensure the going concern of the corporate.

It is necessary that at all levels, from the very bottom of the corporate pyramid to the apex, that there is a culture of communication that promotes growth and sustainability of the corporate.

My intention here is to stimulate introspection that will motivate a progressive and mutually beneficial convergence between the corporate and the human beings who manage/ operate it.