Communicating is the most basic and important relationship
The most basic and fundamental of all relationships is formed when two parties communicate. No powerful and productive relationships can form without communication.
Communicating always has the shared objective of accurately transferring information and emotion between two people.
Understanding the strategies that improve accurately transferring information and emotion is essential to the effectiveness of people working together.
Some behaviors look like communication but aren't.
We often confuse communication with broadcasting. Broadcasting is when you send a message but you do not follow up to see if it has been received accurately. Broadcasting is not caring if a shared objective has been created or the payoff has been achieved. Writing an email and sending it to a large distribution list and then assuming that it has been read is not communicating. Neither is posting on social media; it is broadcasting.
Communication means both parties participate—but it is not a symmetrical relationship, because the sender and receiver play different roles. The sender has the information and emotion that she wants to share with the receiver, whether the receiver wants it or not. This is why communication can be cooperative, competing, or retreating based on whether the information and emotion being sent is something the other person wants to receive.
Asking for feedback is important
Anyone who wants to make sure information or emotion has been accurately transferred to someone else needs to ask for feedback. Most people who want to know whether their message has been received accurately look for visual clues to get the feedback they need. Some people are more adept at reading visual clues; this ability is a trait that is measured as part of EQ. Of course, many communications are not done face-to-face or are done between people who are not good at reading visual clues about whether the transmitted information and emotion have been accurately understood. It's easy for anyone, including a founder, to make sure a communication he sends is accurately received; he just has to ask, “Did that make sense?” “What did you hear?” or even better, “What else would you like to know about this?”
The role of the receiver
People receiving information and emotion should want to make sure they have accurately received the message. People we think of as “good listeners” naturally give us feedback on whether they understand the information or emotion we sent. Good listeners are people with whom we know we have done a good job of communicating; they make it easy. Indeed, good listeners can play the lead role in improving an otherwise poorly constructed communication. These techniques are hallmarks of good listeners:
Nodding or saying “Uh-huh,” is an indication that the listener is not confused by the consistency of the information and emotion being sent. This is not a true positive confirmation, but it indicates that the message makes sense.
Paraphrasing what the listener has heard is a positive confirmation of the accuracy of the communication and precludes the sender from having to ask the follow-up question. The most basic form of paraphrasing is, “I understood what you just said to mean . . .”
Communicating back an implication of the information or emotion that was transferred—for example, “What you said means that you must be very unhappy”—is the most powerful form of good listening because it leads to the most accurate and timely exchange of information and emotion.
Being a good listener always makes a communication cooperative, even if the receiver does not agree with the information or emotion being communicated. Cooperative communications are always best, because both parties know the information and emotion has been accurately received, so there are no misunderstandings, and each party can independently decide what to do about it.
Naïve communications cause problems
Unskilled communicators often assume their communication is cooperative, but sometimes engage in behavior that makes their communication retreating or competing. Communication becomes retreating when the receiver of the information ignores the transmission. Not responding to an email asking you a question is a retreat. So is changing the subject. Founders should never leave an email from a teammate, customer, or other stakeholder unread for any extended period.
Even when she goes on vacation, the founder needs to delegate someone to read and respond to all of her relevant emails unless she plans to do that herself while lying on the beach in Hawaii. And founders should never change the subject. You can always say, “I understand that you do not like the new coffee we've chosen, so let Bill know your opinion, and he may decide to change it,” or the founder could say, “I promise to return to hear whatever it is you want to tell me, but I must run now to meet an important commitment.”
Competitive communications
Communication can easily turn competitive. For example, the sender may try to get the receiver to tacitly agree to something as part of receiving the message. Aggressive senders can try to establish their dominant status by intimidating their receiver with strong negative emotions, judgmental phrases, or name calling.
An opposite tactic can also be employed, wherein the sender tries to lure the receiver into reciprocating their agreeableness or effusive praise with an acceptance of their position. The sender may try to manipulate the receiver's feedback as to the information and emotion that was sent. Asking a closed-ended question is often competitive. “Do you prefer X or Y?” seeks to constrain the receiver to make a choice the receiver may not wish to make.
The receiver may compete by refusing to acknowledge receipt of the information and emotion. The receiver can attempt “to take over the communication by immediately forcing the sender to respond to an onslaught of accusations.
For example, “What you are saying makes no sense at all!” or “What you are saying is a waste of my time to even listen to.” They can use aggressive emotions, such as “It infuriates me that you waste my time with nonsense!” with the implication that their emotions are more important than whatever was in your message.
Finally, the receiver of the information may try to change the message he has received to gain advantage over the sender. The receiver may purposely say he understood a different message: “So . . . you are not going to prevent me from taking your car to Las Vegas tonight.”
Competitive communication is often not openly declared, and one party may not realize what is at stake. These covertly competitive forms of communication are often referred to as manipulations.
There is an important distinction between a communication being competitive and the information and emotion being transmitted relating to a competition. It is not competitive to communicate, “I do not agree with what you said” or even “I will fight your proposal.” It is not competitive, communication-wise, for the receiver to demonstrate that she accurately received the information by saying, “I look forward to your fighting my proposal.”
These examples accurately convey information important to both parties and are good examples of cooperative communication.
Unfortunately, we sometimes do not even realize we are being manipulative with our communication. Who doesn't sometimes ask a very direct yes-or-no question to cut off further discussion? When effective communication is important, a founder wants to make sure that his communication is clearly cooperative.
The importance of the open-ended questions
A founder can ensure the cooperative intent of any communication by asking an open-ended question and then demonstrating good listening skills when the receiver responds to the question. An open-ended question is one that does not presuppose a particular answer; for example, “How would you suggest that I solve this problem?”
Open-ended questions invite the receiver to be in the position of controlling the information and emotion being transferred and puts the sender in the position of being a listener. “The cost of asking open-ended questions is that the communication often takes longer and some or all of the information and emotion received may not be relevant. In spite of your good intentions in asking an open-ended question, the receiver still could give a competitive or retreating response.
Even though open-ended questions require more time and patience, they are a good strategy for defusing competitive communication and competitive emotions as well as for striking up conversations with strangers.
Identifying competitive and retreating communication helps a founder do a better job of conveying critical information and emotions while also helping others do it. Because communication is the starting point for all relationships, being able to identify cooperative, competing, and retreating communication helps create more effective relationships everywhere within an enterprise.