Interpreting Communication

One important thing about which to be self-aware is how you interpret communication.

Communication is a two-phase commit. The first part lies with the person communicating. She has an idea she wishes to communicate, and she communicates it – in writing or verbally. The second part is with the person (or people) to whom the communication is directed. He has just read her email or is listening to her speak and must now interpret what he’s read or heard.

If all goes well, both parties agree on the message content and move forward. But if all does not go well?

Misunderstanding

Misunderstanding is one of the things that can go poorly in communication. Misunderstanding includes not hearing someone well enough, or misinterpreting what was said or written. This is one of the reasons businesses execute contracts: to make certain all parties understand their roles, responsibilities, and rewards. Agreeing in writing mitigates the opportunity for misunderstanding.

Under-Communication

When people in the know withhold information from others or partially deliver information, misinterpretation can ensue. Leaders should first consider the amount of information they desire to convey and then think about how to convey that information before delivering the message.

Not communicating falls into the category of under-communication. One trait of effective leadership is communicating, period.

Over-Communication

It’s also possible to share “too much information.” In business, especially, everyone does not need to know everything. In fact, sharing too much in a volatile or otherwise developing circumstance con lead to confusion as information ages and becomes stale. Leaders should strive to communicate developing information to those who need to know and an after-the-fact summary to those who may be interested.

Misinterpretation Ownership

Who owns a misinterpretation? Returning to the example of she-said-he-heard, both parties own any misinterpretation. There are practices available to facilitate communication. Active listening is one technique whereby a listener speaks a paraphrase of what they heard back to the speaker. The speaker gets to hear what the listener thought they heard and can correct any misinterpretation or mis-speaking. Body language and vocal queues can be observed to make certain the message has been properly interpreted. This works well for voice conversations, but what about written communications?

A challenging communication issue arises when one communicates in writing – via email, for example – and receives no response or a delayed response. How does a listener interpret no reply? One can assume the worst, that the listener is being dismissed or worse, completely ignored. This is often not the case, though. Thomas LaRock (blog | @SqlRockstar) offers trenchant advice on this scenario (and many similar scenarios) in his post titled What is Your McGuffin? What is Tom’s advice? “Assume good intentions.” Is, “I am being ignored” a good intention? Nope. How about, “I am being dismissed?” Not a chance.

Is it possible leadership is failing to communicate because they are busy with stuff they consider a higher priority? Yep. Is it possible leadership is disorganized or has forgotten? Absolutely – especially if they’re leading a startup or opportunities for growth are regularly appearing.  But does that mean your idea is not important? Personally, I think that’s a stretch.

The Key

Regardless of how you interpret the actions – or inactions – of those with whom you communicate, the key is tolerance. If you are a leader, you should strive to communicate better and at the proper frequency – not too much or too little – and you must tolerate the interpretations of those with whom you communicate. If you are not a leader, you should also try to communicate more effectively. Leaders and non-leaders would do well to exercise Mr. LaRock’s excellent advice: Assume good intentions.

:{>