Why being a “good messenger” is not enough

In the business world you regularly hear how vital it is to be a “good messenger”, but what does it really mean? I completely query this idea. Communication is not about being good or bad, but as a substitute is effective or ineffective.

Being an effective messenger does not all the time mean being a good or charismatic. Effective communication results from the equalization between what was said, what was heard and what meant. If these three elements are synchronized, you’ll have effective communication that offers results.

Impact of ineffective communication

Companies suffer when communication is ineffective, because it causes non -social, unintentional conflict and anxiety, while causing self -preservation behavior that may result in high turnover and omitting possibilities.

The myth of “good” communication

A standard misconception is that some people are simply “naturally good” in communication. In fact, communication is a learned skill, much like financial skills or leadership. If you lack the right tools, you may’t expect you to speak effectively. If you are not aware and you are not wondering how others receive information, even the most sophisticated messages can fall flat.

This is particularly accurate when you have various teams filled with different communication styles. Because some people are analytical and details oriented, and others prefer a review or a short summary, leaders are inclined to communicate in the preferred style that may isolate some individuals who are trying to guide.

I call it a golden rule and a platinum principle of communication. The golden rule is to treat others You You need to be treated while the platinum rule says to treat others They You need to be treated. It is a changing game that makes a difference when it involves communication with the team.

Communication failures

When I work with corporations in several industries, ineffective communication is almost all the time at the root of operational or cultural dysfunctions. A recent example of this is when I noticed that the client was trying to collect a team member for a weekend volunteer initiative. The owner perceived the opportunity for volunteers as a significant involvement of the community, while her team member perceived it as more unpaid work. The owner assumed that her worker is lazy while his boss is ruthless. How did each of them have such different views? She tried to motivate him based on what motivated her – not on what resonated with him.

This is the heart of the conflict that is happening in the workplace: people talk side by side and watch the same situation with different lenses. Although it is actually possible that two people have different perspectives that are vital, without effective communication, these perspectives can be collided as a substitute of leveling.

Emotional luggage

Emotions are one more reason why communication is often ineffective. Often, people interpret emotional importance to what we hear – especially if feedback is critical. The emotional element can result in incorrect interpretation and escalation of the conflict. It is crucial for leaders to maintain emotions in check, accept feedback in the spirit in which he meant, and create a culture in which each positive and negative feedback is seen as a gift somewhat than a threat.

Technology

Technology is a double -edged sword that has modified the way of communication. On the other hand, it allows us to satisfy people where they are-they prefer text messages, other loose, and some appreciate personal conversations or a telephone conversation. Considering the preferred media is one other approach to apply the platinum rule.

The downside of technology is noise. With the increase in communication channels – E -Mila, text, teams, WhatsApp, DMS – it is much easier to lose tracking conversations, miss key messages or create confusion. This can result in team threads dispersed in applications without clear statement or responsibility. To avoid this potential negative impact, corporations should be purposeful in the field of communication platforms and determine expectations.

Building a cultural culture of effective communication

To support the team environment and the culture of effective communication, corporations should start by creating an environment in which no idea is a “bad” idea, and opinions are all the time welcome from each team member. Two practical strategies that I normally recommend are:

1. “Such…” – Instead of “yes, but …” that closes people, use “yes and …” so that the conversation is open and constructive. For example: “Yes, and I would like to understand more about your decision.”

2. Discities and training of disk – Investing in emotional intelligence and communication tools for your team can make a world. I exploit disk assessments to assist teams understand behavioral and motivational differences, which allows people to adapt their approach and connect more effectively.

When communication is effective, it builds a team filled with clarity, trust and adaptation, in addition to the foundation in which innovations and cooperation develop. Most importantly, it gives everyone, from leadership to the front line, a common language to go to success together. The next time you are frightened if your communication is “good” or “evil”, stop and reset: Is it effective? Was it received as I intended? If not, it could come time to adapt your approach.