So, here are some examples and lessons I\u2019ve learnt that might be useful for your own communication with your colleagues:<\/p>\n
Example 1: What response are you getting?<\/strong><\/p>\n One day, back in the mid-nineties, I was offloading my frustration to my first coach. I spent all my time writing beautifully crafted memos (pre-email days) communicating important things to \u2018my\u2019 people and, in spite of my efforts, it wasn\u2019t working. My coach asked me about the response I got from my memos. I replied, \u201cNothing, zilch, silence.\u201d<\/p>\n She said, \u201cDave, your communication is the response you get\u201d and left me with that.<\/p>\n Confused, I asked a few of my people about a recent memo I sent out. Frank, the general foreman, said, \u201cDave, I just chuck them straight in the bin, like most other people do.\u201d<\/p>\n I got it. My communication is the response I get. No response, no communication. I was not communicating. Time to try something different.<\/p>\n Example 2: What do your people think of your communications?<\/strong><\/p>\n About 20 years ago, I was coaching Brian, a company owner. He had set it up from scratch and employed over 100 people.\u00a0He was annoyed about constant complaints from staff about the \u2018lack of communication round here\u2019.<\/p>\n He said, \u201cDave, I\u2019ve got to crack this communication thing, but I don\u2019t know what else to do.\u201d Visibly frustrated, he continued, \u201cI tell them everything I know, I don\u2019t hold back, it\u2019s all up there on the noticeboard and in our Board meetings. I explain everything and ask all the directors to tell their people and they tell me they do and I believe them. What else can I do?\u201d And then, \u201cActually, I\u2019m sick of this, I\u2019m going to sack the next person who complains about lack of communication!\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhat do your people think?\u201d I asked.<\/p>\n He shot back, \u201cAbout what?\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t know \u2026 about the stuff you and your directors are telling them.\u201d<\/p>\n Silence.<\/p>\n \u201cDave, I\u2019m not listening to them am I? I\u2019m telling them. Communication is two-way, talking and listening, isn\u2019t it?\u201d<\/p>\n He set up Friday lunchtime open comms sessions in the canteen where he mostly listened.<\/p>\n No one got sacked.<\/p>\n Example 3: Staff communications are not black and white<\/strong><\/p>\n Steve, a company manager, said to me, \u201cToday, I want to work out with my team why it\u2019s so difficult to bring about change in our organisation.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cHow are you going to do that?\u201d I asked.<\/p>\n He told me he had been thinking about it in the lead-up to this workshop and his plan was to explain the change and then show them the organogram which set out the corporate hierarchy and lines of communication.<\/p>\n \u201cIt should be simple, but never is, we always get bogged down. Exploring this will hopefully shed some light and open up new avenues.\u201d<\/p>\n When they were in the thick of it, I asked, \u201cDoes your organogram explain the lines of communication in reality?\u201d<\/p>\n Steve confirmed in front of the group, \u201cYes, that\u2019s how it works here\u201d and most seemed hesitant while a few nodded in agreement.<\/p>\n I invited an experiment: write the names of the people featured in the organogram randomly on the whiteboard (about 30 people) and connect those who frequently talk with each other using a green marker pen, and those who \u2018should\u2019 be talking with each other but don\u2019t with a red marker pen.<\/p>\n After twenty minutes I invited comments on their whiteboarding, asking \u201cWhat does this mean to you?\u201d<\/p>\n One person said it was a mess of green and red lines and that nothing discernible could be drawn from it.<\/p>\n Another said it was great how mostly everyone was freely talking with everyone else.<\/p>\n Another agreed but wondered what they were talking about and if it was on mission and if so, who\u2019s mission?<\/p>\n Steve said, \u201cIt\u2019s clear that our actual communication is way more complex than the lines dictated in the organogram. I\u2019ve been naive to think it ever worked as shown.\u201d He continued, \u201cActually, I don\u2019t think top-down change has ever worked here. Right, we need to learn from this and come at it differently. Let\u2019s put our minds to that for the rest of the day.\u201d<\/p>\n The difference between dialogue and debate<\/strong><\/p>\n Debate<\/strong> is where you argue your point; your intention is to prove you are right and the other person wrong. In the UK House of Commons, for example, the Government and the Opposition hammer it out; there is no listening, they don\u2019t attempt to answer questions, they have their own agendas and it appears the intent is to score points against the other. The one with the most votes wins the argument, seemingly irrespective of its merit. In organisations, the boss usually wins the argument.<\/p>\n Dialogue<\/strong> is different. Let\u2019s say you and I are having a dialogue \u2013 I stay open to what you are saying even though I may not agree with it. And you stay open to what I am saying even though you might not agree. We each suspend our thinking, like clothes on a washing line, so we can stand back and look at it. Our intent is to understand each other\u2019s perspective. We avoid a rush to judgement and fixed positions. If we can do that, we might learn something and move forward together.<\/p>\n To distinguish dialogue from debate, I have oversimplified, unwittingly portraying one as good, the other bad. In reality, both are needed, depending on the situation. You choose. Debate tends to be competitive; dialogue collaborative.<\/p>\n Often, we talk about working collaboratively while using the competitive form of exchange \u2013 it\u2019s jarring and feels wrong.<\/p>\n Coaching is underpinned by dialogue. A coaching style of management is a good match for our desire to work collaboratively \u2013 it feels right, it\u2019s congruent. (See useful resources below for how to adopt a coaching style of management.)<\/p>\n Going deeper than communication<\/strong><\/p>\n There is a deeper way of relating to people at work than merely communicating and that is to engage them. To engage is to intensely involve. How do you intensely involve someone? Well, not by hitting them with 45 PowerPoint slides; that\u2019s broadcasting to them, one-way traffic.<\/p>\n Asking questions of one another and deeply listening, giving them space to think, draws on coaching skills \u2013 that\u2019s a good way to intensely involve someone. Make sure to consider their response and build on it, though avoid stacking questions, machine gun style \u2013 that\u2019s interrogation and not at all engaging. Also delegating a deliverable in a deep and deliberate way is very engaging that wins back your time and frees you up to permanently operate at a higher level.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Links to useful resources:<\/strong><\/p>\n Delegate for Results \u2013 course<\/a> and book<\/a><\/p>\n Coach for Results \u2013 course<\/a> and book<\/a><\/p>\n Leadership Team Coach\u00a0Dave Stitt<\/a>\u00a0works with construction industry executives and project teams enabling them to deliver remarkable results in a remarkable way.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Dave is the creator of \u00a0Coach for Results,<\/a> an accessible online course teaching the basics of a coaching management style so managers can grow confidence, capability and enthusiasm in the people around them.\u00a0Read more blogs from Dave:<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Leadership \u2013 a useful definition<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n