Join New Discussion Group

I have just set up a communication discussion group. If you are interested in joining, click here:

Communication Challenges and Opportunities

A Small Step

When I was about ten years old, I was given an amazing piece of technology - a transistor radio. As a member of the "baby boomer" generation, I still have a lot of catching up to do. Today I took another small step into the world of electronic networking - I created a Linked In account by posting my professional profile at http://www.linkedin.com/in/paulamarieusrey

I am not sure what my next step will be or should be. I am excited about all the possibilities but a bit cautious as well.

Flight Grounded, Tempers Flying

One of the best books I've ever read on negotiation and conflict was co-written by a Harvard Law Professor. The book, Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher (from Harvard) and William Ury, was first printed in 1981. A second edition followed ten years later in 1991. I first read this book when I was a graduate student. Since then, I have successfully applied one or more of the basic principles of this book to a number of different situations involving negotiation and / or conflict.

The four principles outlined in Getting to Yes are: (1) Separate people from the problem (2)Focus on interests, not positions (3) Generate options that satisfy both parties (4) Find objective criteria or standards for possible solutions.

Though it occur ed nearly a decade ago, one particular situation still stands out in my mind as a surprising example of how effective some of the principles I had learned from Fisher and Urys' book could be.

As it happened, I was planning to fly out of the Portland, Oregon airport with the intention of arriving in Minnesota late in the afternoon; early the next morning, I was supposed to start training a conference room full of 50-60 teachers on a topic related to communication instruction and assessment. A lot of preparation had gone into making arrangements.

When I got to the airport and made my way toward my airline counter I was suddenly struck with the heartsick realization that something was wrong. A very long line of people stood at a standstill and they were steaming mad. As it turned out, our flight had been grounded.

Eventually, the line started moving. I started feeling more encouraged; perhaps whatever the problem was, it had been addressed. When I finally did get close to the ticket counter, I could hear would-be travelers screaming at impersonal airline representatives who flatly said that our flight wasn't going anywhere.

Just about the time I was next in line, I remembered how important it was to "separate people from the problem." When I did approach the counter, I took a deep breath and looked the airline representative in the eyes and said, "This must be very hard for you with everyone so upset." I paused. Then I saw that the young woman standing in front of me was struggling to hold back tears. She said with some hesitation, "I'm doing my best, but it has been hard."

Once the airline representative realized I wasn't blaming her for the grounded plane, she became more receptive to problem solving. I believe she wanted to provide good service but felt helpless in the situation. I simply wanted to figure out a way to meet the needs of all the teachers waiting for me half way across the country. As I explained my situation and asked for her help, we were able to brainstorm some possibilities. Finally, we were able to hobble together an itinerary that involved four different flights and some lengthy layovers. Though I didn't get arrive at my final destination until early the next morning, I did keep my commitment to a group of teachers who had been expecting me. The airline representative who worked with me was able to solve a problem for a customer in spite of all the stress around her.

If you are not familiar with Getting to Yes, I believe you will find the book is practical and straight forward. I highly recommend this book to anyone wanting to learn more about negotiation and conflict.

Ranger's Rules for Communicating: Rule #2

Know the Signals

Recent research has suggested that our canine companions are a lot more adept at reading our nonverbal communication than once commonly recognized. Of course, ask any true dog lover, and they’ll probably tell you that this new research only confirms what they already had known—dogs are often able to read us like a book.

Though initially I may not realize I am stressed, Ranger will pick up my tone of voice, a tense muscle in my face, or some other signal that prompts him to move in close and lean into me. Normally, when Claude gets dressed in the morning, Ranger doesn’t pay particular attention. However, if Claude is getting dressed with the intention to go play golf or go somewhere, Ranger starts making high-pitched sounds and then usually brings Claude a bargaining chip—his favorite toy (as though he could keep Claude from leaving). If one of us is sad or discouraged, Ranger might get up on our lap or sit next to us and put his head on our shoulder. I suspect our dog has made it his mission to study our every move. Often Ranger reacts to us before we even register our own emotions.

When we think of human-to-human communication, knowing individual signs
(communication signals) is also important. Many of our intentions are communicated nonverbally rather than verbally. In fact, up to 90% of our ability to accurately interpret communication depends on nonverbal aspects.

One of the challenges we face when trying to understand each other is that many nonverbal messages or culture specific or specific to the individual. Therefore, we must become a student of communication in all of our relationships. Like Ranger, we must constantly observe and respond appropriately.

Here is an interesting link on canine communication behaviors:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,504508,00.html

A Failure to Communicate

When I first graduated from college, I was offered a position as a claims adjuster trainee. Although it was an interesting learning experience, I chose to leave after I received my first promotion. I created this fictional case study as a result of some observations I made during the time when I worked for "Acme" Insurance Company.

What are your thoughts about how the company might have communicated to potential recruits during the interview process and then communicated to trainees once they were hired to avoid "wash outs" and a very high turnover rate?

Becoming An Insurance Claims Trainee

Acme* Insurance Company representatives typically recruit on college campuses during the winter and spring of each year. The initial contact with potential recruits occurs at job fairs held on different campuses. At this initial encounter, seniors who are interested in becoming a claims professional at Acme are exposed to a ten minute video on the company and get an opportunity to talk with the recruiter. Students may fill out an application on the spot and leave it with the recruiter.

The selection process at Acme is highly competitive. The company is interested in candidates who have the right academic preparation, demonstrated leadership ability, strong communication skills, a high GPA, and at least two years of work experience (part-time is considered). In addition, Acme looks for candidates who have been involved in some type of community service or other volunteer work. Promising candidates who will be graduating at the end of the term are invited for initial one-on-one interviews held on campus usually one month after the job fair. Those candidates who pass the initial screening interview are invited for a structured interview conducted by a three-team committee at local branch of the company. The most promising candidates are invited to a third interview at the company. At this interview, the candidates are given a series of tests that measure analytical and problem-solving abilities. Those candidates who do well on these tests are scheduled for a final interview with the branch manager. This entire process may take up to two months to complete.

Once the new graduate is hired, they are immediately sent out of state to a three-week training program along with other new recruits. During this training period, the trainees learn about Acme values, company policies and procedures. Primarily though, the new trainee learns about the rules and regulations that govern the industry and the claims adjuster role. Trainees also participate in a number of “high stress” simulations dealing with auto accident or loss claimants. About 10% of the trainees “wash out” during the first three weeks of training.

When the trainees return to their branch offices, they are paired with a mentor (a senior claims associate) as they start assuming a caseload of files to assess and close. If the trainee does well, he/she may become a full claims adjuster associate within one year. Approximately 35% of all new trainees make it to full adjuster status within the first year. The process is highly competitive.

To become a full-status adjuster, the trainee must not only demonstrate competence by closing a high volume of claims while making reasonable claims (dollar) decisions to accomplish this, they must also do so with a minimum amount of complaints. Further, they must show that they can work well with others, demonstrate a consistent positive attitude, and always communicate as an Acme professional.

All trainees (along with all other adjusters) in the branch attend quarterly meetings to discuss expectations and progress. Claims stats are shared at this time. Trainees are aware of how their “stats” compare to other trainees.

Trainees receive their first formal performance review at nine months. Claims supervisors seek feedback from the trainee’s mentor and other adjusters. The trainee is also asked to complete a self-appraisal. The supervisor uses a category rating system and his/her own observations in addition to stats that the trainee produced during the first nine months. In addition, the supervisor reviews the trainee’s self evaluation and the narrative and checklist submitted by the mentor and others.

As many “want-to-be” claims adjusters soon come to realize, stats are important in the review / promotion process. If the adjuster’s stats are not good, he/she will not be promoted to full status. However, even with good stats, trainees quickly discover during the review process that others’ perception of their “soft skills” such as teamwork, communication ability, etc. can heavily influence whether or not they are promoted.

*not real name

Ranger's Rule's for Communicating: Rule #1

Expect Others to Like You

When Ranger meets someone new, he usually waves with his tail and then makes his approach. Most often he gets a positive response. Even when he doesn't make a new friend, our amicable neighborhood ambassador still continues to act consistently toward almost everyone.

I think most people who approach others expecting positive responses generally are not disappointed. The old adage, "Smile and the world smiles back at you" usually holds true.

Keeping Your Cool During Heated Situations

Some years ago, I had a communication studies student named Tom who happened to be working as a ticketing agent for a major airline. Tom had plenty of stories about communicating with demanding travelers. One of his stories still reminds me of how important it is to keep our communication goals in mind when emotions start heating up. Though he confessed to feeling very bad about it later, Tom admitted to doing the unthinkable in response to one customer’s angry outburst.

As it reportedly happened, a domestic flight had to be cancelled because of a mechanical problem. Anxious travelers converged on ticketing agents as they scrambled to secure seats on other flights. Though many of the travelers were understandably upset, Tom was trained to deal with such challenging communication situations in a professional manner. Nevertheless, Tom’s training took a back seat to his own adrenalin-fueled response when dealing with one particular customer’s angry behavior. All Tom could focus on (while trying to maintain an outward appearance of civility) was how he could retaliate in response to an attack that had started to feel very personal. Tom did keep his composure when informing the rude customer that he’d found an alternate flight for him via San Francisco. However, Tom later revealed he was so upset by the situation that he had secretly slapped a Dublin, Ireland routing tag on the angry customer’s luggage.

Admittedly, if any of us think a situation is unfair, if we feel disrespected, or if we are treated rudely, it may feel great (at least for a few minutes) to rip into somebody or to get even in some way. Yet this kind of careless communication typically generates more problems rather than resolving them.

If we think about it, achieving our communication goals – which usually means getting others to work with us rather than against us –involves a certain degree of common sense. When we are upset and in “attack mode,” other people tend to respond by being defensive or even finding some way to attack back. How then do we prevent our emotions from sabotaging our communication goals?

First, it is helpful to consider what we want to accomplish as a result of our communication. Do we simply want to vent? If so, we need to make it clear to the other person that we are not attacking them – we are just unhappy about the particular situation. Or, do we want to solve a problem? If so, what expectations do we have, and how reasonable are they?

Second, it is important to manage our emotions before they manage us. When we are offended or perceive we are under attack, our “fight or flight” response tends to kick in; this is when adrenalin surges through our body and prepares us to stand and fight or run for the hills. While this rush of adrenalin may be pretty important in life-threatening situations, it can prevent us from thinking clearly and may create some significant problems in many communication situations. As our internal systems start gearing up for battle, we tend to talk more quickly, our muscles tense, our posture may change, and our vocal tone becomes sharper. If we learn to recognize these changes (or enlist others to help us recognize them) as they start to develop, we have a better chance of actually managing our communication rather than letting it take on a life of its own.

Though human communication is a complex process, a little common sense will go a long way in helping us smooth out the rough spots when interacting on a day-to-day basis.

Winchester Schools: An interesting case study

In 1990, I spent one of the longest years of my life teaching English to junior high students in a private school. Three weeks earlier, I had left a lucrative career as a senior marketing consultant in the insurance industry because, more than anything, I wanted to teach. I don't know what made me think I could walk into a classroom and teach teens without any preparation whatsoever. Of course, I don't know why in the world I was hired with absolutely no experience. Nonetheless, the lessons I learned during that long year were invaluable.

One of those lessons was not so much about classroom teaching but about communication and power. I wrote this fictional case study (inspired by my own experience) some years later when I began teaching organizational communication at a university. (Note: Because I was not paid to produce this case study for the university, I have the right to publish it on this blog.)

After you read the following situation, please share your comments about the ways in which power had been exercised or ways in which it could have been exercised.

Winchester Schools

Winchester Schools is a private, nonprofit religious educational organization serving K-12 students. In the past forty years, Winchester has grown into a three-campus organization.

Though faculty at Winchester are paid far less salary than public school teachers, many on staff have been with the school for several years. Most of the teachers are women.

Though the teachers may not have been paid the same as public school teachers, they do have excellent health benefits and some on staff have taken advantage of “free” tuition for their own children or other family members. (Of course, this has been a “bone of contention for faculty who do not have children attending the school but get paid the same as those who have two or three children getting free tuition.) Yet, as the chairperson of the board (referred to as the “chairman” within the organization) has frequently reminded the staff, “they are a family,” and were chosen to teach because of their dedication to making a difference in the lives of children. The real reward for working at Winchester is the joy they have in knowing they are making an investment that will reap rewards for a lifetime.

During the past couple of years, Winchester has struggled financially and has needed to increase tuition considerably. Further, when teachers have retired or quit, they have not been replaced. Class size increased considerably over time.

At an administrative retreat, a decision was made to hire a full-time development manager who would solicit gifts for the school and also run an annual auction. The development manager would be paid a base salary and a commission on additional revenue generated.

The board chair and administrators strongly encouraged teachers to support the new development manager’s efforts for the sake of the kids. Many of the parents and teachers volunteered to help support the new fund-raising efforts with the understanding that any new revenues will benefit everyone.

The first auction was a smashing success – far more revenue was generated as a result of collective efforts than anticipated. Yet after the net revenue was distributed across different programs and needs, individual faculty members saw little personal gain.

Some of the teachers were not at all happy with the way in which the fund-raising efforts were handled. Why should the development manager get a large commission on the backs of underpaid teachers? Why should all classrooms benefit when not all teachers helped out with the fund-raising efforts?

Soon after these few words of discontent were whispered, the board chair, administrators, and a few of the more “trenched in” teachers launched a staff development program called “The Heart of Servanthood – a Teacher’s Calling.” All teachers and staff were required to participate in the new program. Some teachers even confessed that they were ashamed of the bitterness they had felt toward those who had not volunteered in the fund-raising efforts. It soon became clear that those who dared to continue complaining would do so at the risk of offending other “family” members. Worse yet, those who did not get their “hearts right” would risk being excluded from the informal community life of the organization. Complaints disappeared. No one left the organization. Teachers continued their work without pause.

Over time, the continued fund-raising efforts, new marketing programs, and increased tuition were helping ease some of the financial concerns at Winchester. However, when teachers and staff were again asked to help with another large auction, a whole raft of compensation issues again surfaced. Board members and administrators knew it was going to be necessary to develop a new compensation strategy or risk losing good teachers who were willing to work for less than it would cost to replace them.

Listening Awareness

If you are interested in cultivating stronger relationships with others, start by listening to them with your full and undivided attention. Though this process will not be easy, the rewards will be great. According to Daniel Goleman, author of Social Intelligence (2006), “Intentionally paying more attention to someone may be the best way to encourage the emergence of rapport,” (p.88).

Focused attention requires effort: Giving another our full attention means we need to work at keeping focused. Some more recent models on listening suggest that our ability to attend to messages is much like a limited resource that we consciously and unconsciously distribute. For instance, we will not be able to give someone our full attention if we are also distracted by other messages such as conversations in the background or even other competing internal messages.

Because focused listening does take a lot of energy, most of us cannot sustain this effort for more than an average of 15-20 minutes at a time. When we are experiencing anxiety in a listening situation, it becomes even more difficult for us to keep focused.

Focused attention requires a willingness to listen: Not only must we make an effort to listen, we must also be willing to listen before we can be fully attentive. Are we willing to listen to others when we don’t agree with them? Are we willing to listen to others when they aren’t organized? Our attitude has a lot to do with the amount of energy it takes to really focus.

Consider strategies for improving attention: Though fully attending to others takes both effort and desire, there are a few things we can do to improve our ability to listen.

Reduce distractions such as shutting off cell phones or other personal devices.
Choose a quiet environment when wanting to give undivided attention.
Try shadowing as appropriate—quietly repeating verbal messages as they are spoken.
Use nonverbal listening behaviors such as body positioning and eye contact to help keep focused.
Check out a self-assessment test developed by Richmond and Hickson (2001), the Willingness to Listen Measure: http://www.jamescmccroskey.com/measures/wtlisten.htm

In this era of information overload, multi-tasking, and fast-paced living, let us commit ourselves to stop, look, and then fully listen. By doing so we will not only influence others, but we ourselves will be changed in the process.

Listening for Understanding

Stephen Covey, author of Seven Habits of Highly Effective People recommends that we “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.” If we all endeavored to heed this simple advice, our relationships with others would profoundly change; when we truly seek to understand another person, we are communicating that we value them.

By first identifying some common listening barriers and then by practicing some counter strategies, most all of us could improve our ability to listen for understanding. Consider the following barriers and counter strategies:

1. Interrupting: Whatever the reason, when we interrupt others, we could be unintentionally sending the wrong message such as “What I have to say is more important than listening to you.”

Counter Strategy: Listen to the entire message—let the speaker finish their thoughts. Sometimes speakers may pause while trying to express themselves. Allow for pauses as appropriate without filling in for the other person.

2. Listening with an attitude. If we expect to hear something that confirms what we already believe about a speaker or situation, we will usually find it. If we expect to be bored, our expectations are more likely to come true.

Counter Strategy: By reframing the listening encounter as an opportunity to learn something new or to gain additional insight, we are more likely to meet these expectations and improve our own understanding.

3. Assuming we know exactly what the other intends: Though we may think we know exactly what the other means, we typically use our own experiences, background, and knowledge to interpret messages from others—our understanding is limited.

Counter Strategy: Check assumptions by using such techniques as paraphrasing what the other said or asking clarifying questions such as “Do you mean…?”

4. Listening only to the verbal message rather than the intended message: Too often we may hear only what the other person said rather than what they meant. Sometimes we will even experience semantic reactions – strong emotional responses to certain words that prevent us from really understanding the other person.

Counter Strategy: One way to improve our ability to understand others is to pay attention to not only the words but to the emotional tone and to other nonverbal messages that may either reinforce or contradict the verbal message. Another strategy involves self-awareness—recognizing when certain words trigger reactions and prevent us from fully listening to others.

Though it is far easier to talk about effective listening than to practice it, we could all improve by making consistent and conscientious efforts. I for one have a lot of work to do in this area. Communication really is a “discipline for life.”

Failing to Communicate
In 2005, the American Film Association voted on the most memorable movie lines ever produced. One of those lines from the 1967 movie, Cool Hand Luke, was "What we have here is a failure to communicate." This movie line resonated with people everywhere; the need to cultivate stronger communication skills is a common denominator for most all of us.Findings from the 1999 study, How Americans Communicate, revealed that the majority of people responding realized that ineffective communication could lead to serious problems. In a 2000 report about the importance of the communication discipline (as a field of study), it was noted that communication competence was related to school success, interpersonal satisfaction, social adjustment, self-concept, and workplace success, among other relationships.The inability to communicate is often blamed for all kinds of personal and relational problems. In a 1999 National Communication Association (NCA)study involving 1000 indivdiuals, 53% of the respondents identified poor communication as the most frequent cause for relational failures.Interestingly, the results of the NCA study (referred to above) also revealed that a strong majority of Americans believed they were fairly good communicators.Who is it then that might be creating all the communication problems that most of us can identify in just about every family or other organization we have experienced? Most people I know can almost immediately give me examples of dysfunctional communication they have observed in their families, relationships, and workplace.As a communication professional, a researcher, and a life-long student of the communication discipline, I am beginning to suspect that most of us have also contributed to dysfunctional communication dynamics. Without question, I know that I continue to say things I wish I hadn't said, fail to say what I should say, and wish I could have listened more effectively in order to really understand others and situations better. I trust I am not alone. While I am determined to continually grow as a communicator, I also consider myself a "recovering" dysfunctional communicator.