From small talk to real talk - face-to-face communication - includes related article

In a bid for closer teamwork, the president of an engineering consulting firm told his management committee, "I want open communication, so you can ask me anything you want." But as one executive put it, "Behind that statement, you could hear him saying, |if you dare.'"

A total-quality manager was asked for thoughts on manufacturing innovation. He fired off a two-page brief that day, then waited ... and waited. One week later, he caught up with his boss in the company cafeteria, and asked for feedback. "Oh, yes," remembered the boss. "It wasn't what I was looking for, but I've been able to find something else."

The executive secretary for a vice-president of a consumer products company reported that a controversial restructuring resulted in "tension that you can cut with a knife. But we pretend that everything's okay."

Sound familiar? After discussing performance issues with dozens of companies, I'm convinced that situations like these are awfully common. People say one thing and mean another. They don't check out expectations. They turn a blind eye to conflict. They end up playing games, trading rumours, huddling behind closed doors, and ultimately being frustrated and unproductive.

Dig below the surface, and you often find bungled face-to-face communication. And yet, I've still to meet a manager who doesn't swear by open, honest communication. As Harvard's Chris Argyris repeatedly demonstrated in his work with management teams, what we say we believe is light years away from what we actually do.

Today, face-to-face communication is more important than ever, especially with the teamwork theme of total quality management (TQM) and service excellence programs. For those of us responsible for managing our organizations' communication function, this is welcome news. Finally, the green light for all those dynamic face-to-face vehicles -- cross-department task forces, regular employee meetings, bear-pit sessions with senior executives, lunch with the president.

But hang on ... this could be precisely the time for some reality testing. In the February issue of Communication World, Les Landes railed against total quality "program-itis." Landes insisted that success in implementing total quality management "... is directly proportionate to an organization's ability to weave improvement efforts into the basic fabric of day-to-day business."

Just what is the "basic fabric of day-to-day business"? How about the simplest and most overlooked communication vehicle -- conversation. Not just the baseball scores and last night's barbecued shrimp, but the kaleidoscope of conversations all day long on information, ideas and opinions about daily operations.

Conversations directly influence so much of our daily work. Consider your thoughts as you turn off your computer and head for home at the end of the day. Chances are, they're not the company's strategic outlook, or where it plans to be in five years. More likely, you're mentally rerunning snatches of conversations with coworkers, your boss, customers. Plus, your satisfaction or discontent around those conversations will shape your motivation, energy and focus when you sit down at your desk the next day.

That's not to say that corporate vision, values and objectives don't have a place in regular conversations. Says Don Zieman, a purchasing executive for Magna International Inc., an automotive parts company, "Informal discussion allows me to test my assumptions about how the company is actually going to achieve its corporate objectives. Conversation that builds, that bounces back and forth, is tremendous help in showing me how I fit into the bigger picture."

At the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) in Toronto, organizational effectiveness consultant Sheila Legon helps business units integrate CIBC's vision and values into their daily practices.

For example, one of CIBC's values is "respect for the individual." Until a year ago, CIBC's highly conservative culture dictated that managers be formally addressed. It was always Mr. Jones, Mrs. Smith. Now, everyone works on a first name basis -- no matter what the rank or position. And Legon has coached senior managers to invite others to use first names with them.

"It might seem like a really small thing," admits Legon. "But for CIBC, it's been a significant shift. Calling people by their first names was visible, tangible proof that we were living our values."

The little things

As Legon accurately points out, it's the little things that count. When I ask employees and managers alike what makes the difference in daily conversations, these are the usual responses:

* listening attentively, without jumping to conclusions

* expressing thanks and recognition for a job well done

* not allowing interruptions from other people or the phone

* being accessible

* following through on commitments.

Common sense -- right? Then why are these behaviours so often missing? Sure, everyone's rushed for time and stressed by demanding work loads. But people still talk to one another. From what I've observed, face-to-face communication most frequently bogs down because of mixed expectations, one-sided listening, and poor conflict resolution skills.

Mixed expectations produce mixed results

Day-to-day expectations that aren't clearly defined and agreed upon are the most frequent cause of annoying minor crises. Gloria(*) is an administrative assistant working with Doug(*), the vice-president of logistics at a candy company. Because of a last minute change in delivery schedules for an important promotion, Doug asked Gloria to alert each one of the company's 30-odd trade customers personally. He assumed the job would only take a few hours and was horrified to discover Gloria still phoning customers two days later. She cited information inaccuracies and the difficulty in reaching customers. Neither Doug nor Gloria had discussed how long the project could take, or how frequently Doug wanted status updates.

Expectations -- even for small, non-routine projects -- need to be stated explicitly whenever someone asks for action from someone else, enters into a new working relationship with that person, or has information that affects a person's job. Says Graham Dixon, total quality manager of Albright & Wilson Americas, "If I'm working on a quality-related activity and my boss knows that someone else in the organization is doing something similar, I expect prompt communication on that subject. At the same time, I'll keep him informed of anything I learn that could affect his involvement with other departments in the company."

One-sided listening is a dead-end street

Although it's simple to understand, listening well is deceptively hard to do.

Sometimes the issue is people's lack of awareness around their listening habits. George is an account manager for a pharmaceutical firm. His boss Malcolm, the sales director, invited him out to lunch one day to practise the firm's newly stated corporate vision of valuing employees. Two hours went by. George said barely two words ... while Malcolm sermonized on openness, communication and teamwork. Returning from lunch, they ran into the VP of sales, who asked "How was lunch?" Malcolm replied, "Good. George is really on board." When a coworker asked George why he didn't say anything, he retorted cynically, "Why bother? The guy doesn't even know he's just blowing hot air. Besides, I got a free meal."

Peter Senge, in his brilliant book "The Fifth Discipline," makes the link between the vitality of a company's vision and intensive listening. "[Visions) that are genuinely shared require ongoing conversation. Listening is often more difficult than talking, especially for strong-willed managers with definite ideas of what is needed. It requires extraordinary openness and willingness to entertain a diversity of ideas."

Intensive listening calls for a genuine willingness to hear and understand someone else's point of view, even if it's different from our own. If that seems too obvious, try this exercise. The next time you're talking with someone whose opinions appear totally off base, just observe the surge in your thoughts. Quite likely, your first reaction will be |Yes, but..."

It's natural. We think we're right -- and we want to win. On the other hand, many of us have also experienced powerful breakthrough conversations, ones that leapt beyond the ping pong of opinion and into true sharing and learning. Conversations like that happen only through thoughtful, exploratory listening.

Conflict, good and bad

Mixed expectations, combined with one-sided listening, eventually lead to uncomfortable and bitter conflict. Few people other than veteran masochists enjoy the tension produced by conflict. We want to sweep it under the rug, pretend that nothing's wrong. Trouble is, the problem doesn't go away. Avoidance or resignation around conflict cripples our ability to have useful conversations and productive relationships.

Paula, a brilliant young computer consultant, is lead designer on a project team installing a complex network for a large telecommunications client. Her coworker, Bob, a system analyst from the client company, inches slowly through even the simplest procedure. Facing a rigorous schedule, Paula worries that Bob's pace will kill the project deadline. But since Bob is her client, not her employee, Paula is nervous to confront him or his boss about the problem. Her own manager is young and inexperienced too, and offers no real help. So Paula puts in 16-hour days to cover much of Bob's work herself. Within two months, she is exhausted and burned-out, and Bob continues to crawl along. Avoiding the conflict hasn't done any good.

What can we do to manage conflict more effectively in our daily conversations? Graham Dixon says the moment he sniffs tension, he brings it out into the open. By addressing a problem at the very early stages, there's a good chance of avoiding a big emotional storm.

Admitting our own defensiveness is another way to defuse emotionally charged conversations. When we disclose our feelings, we make it safe for others to open up. Risky, yes. But it works. In my consulting practice, I've often faced clients who didn't like what I was telling them. Rather than defend, I've found it much more fruitful to say, "I feel like I'm on the hot seat. How are you feeling?" That seems to unblock the tension, allowing the conversation to flow once more.

We also can discipline ourselves to separate the people from the problem. "I never start from a personal position," says Amy Hanen, director of employee involvement for CIBC. "If I run into a conflict, I step back and try to figure out what's influencing the other person to act the way they are. It's not the individual who's at fault, but usually something in the bigger picture -- different priorities, mandates and so on. I've had very few experiences when people were actually vindictive."

Finally, some conflict is healthy. As Senge says, "Contrary to popular myth, great teams are not characterized by an absence of conflict. On the contrary, in my experience, one of the most reliable indicators of a team that is continually learning is the visible conflict of ideas."

The role for communicators

What part can we communicators play to nurture healthy, constructive day-to-day conversations? First, in helping managers plan communication strategies, we can look at daily conversation and pinpoint where people are getting stuck. Have they spelled out expectations clearly? Are they listening with ears open and mouth (and judgment) shut? How are they handling conflict?

Second, we can team up with our colleagues in human resources and training to deliver effective coaching and learning programs on face-to-face skills for both managers and employees. Human resources and training often have the handle on design; communicators have the content nailed down. Collaborating across departments is also a step forward in mowing down thorny turf barriers.

And of course, our own daily conversations will serve as a litmus test. Our willingness to observe -- and improve -- how we talk and speak with others will provide us with concrete connections for theory-shy managers. Plus, we might even learn something valuable for ourselves.

|DO YOU HAVE A MOMENT?'

Strapped for time to talk with employees? Amy Hanen, CIBC's director of employee involvement programs, has discovered a way to balance effective time management and staying in touch with employees.

"When people first work with me, we discuss three distinctions in day-to-day communication," Hanen explains. "One, if a matter is important and urgent, people can barge in on me, they can even be rude. I let them know it's ok. The second distinction includes things that are important, but not urgent. Although we need to talk about them in person, we can wait for a regular meeting.

"Finally, there are the regular uncomplicated project updates. Here, I recommend that people use electronic mail, or printed information rather than face-to-face conversation. That way, it frees up more time for us to hold daily conversations around things that really matter."

Hanen doesn't arbitrarily set the rules for employees. "I leave it to their judgment. Generally, people are pretty good at making clear distinctions."

(*) Author's note: I've used first names only when clients have asked me not to divulge their real names. However, the situations are true to life.

COPYRIGHT 1992 International Association of Business Communicators
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group