Not sure how many times over the years I’ve heard people say “I spoke to my boss about this”, then to come back later, disappointed that there was a “misunderstanding”. These occur just about anywhere you look. In a corporation though, these forms of misunderstandings can have disastrous effect both on the company, and the person! But why does this breakdown in communications happen?
Well it is widely accepted that the 3 most common forms of communications are Linear, Interactional and Transactional. All have their uses in the social processes of communication. But it’s fair to say that the most common model used in manager/subordinate employee relationships is Interactional. So let’s delve into this area a bit, shall we? (NB: For those interested in further reading, try West & Turner (2007)).
To understand where communications breakdown, it’s first important to clarify what interactional means and the typical modes of speech.
Understanding Interactional communication
Interactional means there is a distinct communication/feedback loop occurring. The sender “sends” a message to the listener. The “listener” responds back with some form of feedback to the sender. If all goes well, there is a clear agreement of what the message was. But it is important to understand now, underpinning this, the modes of speech used. For simplicity, we will call these: –
- Interrogative (question) mode;
- Normal mode (sometime referred to as Linear mode);
Interrogative mode, is “having the force of a question”. So it’s either asking a direct question (clear), or making a somewhat obscure statement that may imply you want an answer (unclear). Examples of both would be: –
- Question: “Can I take Friday off”?
- Question: “When do you need the presentation”?
- Interrogative: “The choices seem to be blue or white…”
- Interrogative: “I’m not really sure whom is right…Joe or Sally”
So whereas questions are typically direct and to the point, needing an answer, interrogatives may/may not be clear. What you are basically doing is “fishing” for an opinion or answer. Interrogatives in conversation are easily resolved in most interactional communications by simply turning them around: –
- Question: “Do we go with blue or white?”
- Question: “So is Joe or Sally right?”
Sadly, these types of “misunderstandings” are only the tip of the iceberg. The majority of misunderstandings occur during normal (linear) mode. Normal (linear) mode simply refers to conversational speech where the communicator sends a message to the listener. But does not require a reply from the listener. But what goes wrong?
The reason communications break down
Normally, it can be one reason or a combination of things. The sender is distracted, not being clear in the message (muddled thinking). Sender is presumptive in assuming the listener understands the terms and concepts. The sender erroneously presume the listener will query anything unclear. Sender is using Normal (linear) mode instead of Interrogative/Question mode. Take this example where Joe & Sally (the boss), whom have worked together now for 2 years, are discussing a piece work: –
- Joe: So do we have funding and if so, how much? (Question mode, Sender)
- Sally: Yep, we are good to go, budgets are in place. (Question mode, Responder)
- Joe: Great! What are the timelines? (Question mode, Sender)
- Sally: We have exactly 8 weeks from Monday. (Question mode, Responder)
- #break# Joe enters normal linear mode of speech.
- Joe: OK, well it will take us 3-4 days to put together the delivery plan. I know the servers will take 4 weeks to order, 2 week to deliver. Also, I know the development teams will need at least 6 weeks to build the new environment. So it’s going to be tight.
- #break# Sally: (“disconnected interest after hearing “OK” and there were no more direct questions”)
- Sally: “OK Joe, let me know if there are any problems. I have to jump now to another call”.
Dialogue Analysis
Joe was obviously trying to point out to Sally that 4 weeks + 2 weeks + 6 weeks = 12 weeks in total. So 8 weeks was not achievable. But instead of asking direct questions like “It’s going to take 12 weeks, what do we do?”. Or “12 weeks is not possible, can we deliver in week 12”, he didn’t, and a breakdown occurred. Joe presumed Sally was really listening and would have “jumped” onto the issue if she was really concerned. But since she said OK Joe, he presumed 12 weeks was now OK. And of course, we know what happens. At the end of week 8, Sally is expecting the project to complete whereas Joe says it will take 4 more weeks! Disaster!
Communications at work
Any business is complex, using words and terms relevant to the organisation. This requires a far greater degree of communications discipline than normal. So whom is to blame? In truth, both of them. Joe’s blame is for phrasing hard questions into statements without qualifying if this was OK. He was too timid to ask hard questions. Sally, for failing to recognise after 2 years Joe’s weakness here and in also “tuning out” prematurely.
There are no “magic wands” that will always ensure good interactional communications, especially in business. Corporations spend millions annually trying to improve communication models to safeguard their goals. But distilling this down, the answer will ALWAYS finally rely on the quality of the communication skills of the people involved. Some simple concepts that may help though in future dialogues.
Useful tips
- If you have a question or don’t understand something, ask, ask, ask! Don’t presume the listener (or sender) is always keenly listening and will contest any discrepancies in the conversation.
- Don’t shy from the truth. If something isn’t going to work, state this clearly and ask for guidance.
- Pay attention. “Zoning out” during a conversation is not only rude and unprofessional, it could have disastrous consequences.
- Organise the way you work so that you ALWAYS end a conversation with a summary of the key agreements, of the conversation. And then confirm each salient point with the sender and listener.
- Learn about your audience. If you know someone is weak in communications, you should be especially diligent. Query ANY potential discrepancies, in the conversation.
- Agree terminology up front. And if someone uses a term you don’t understand, ask for a definition! Don’t just presume you will “Google” the answer later.
- Finally, it’s quite often very useful to summarise the discussion into a written set of notes. With clear bullet statements on key agreements, facts, timelines, principles. Send these out for re-affirmation of the work at hand.
Good communication skills are not something we are inherently born with. But with practice, I am glad to say it is a skill that can be improved with over time, if you really work at it!
