When we discover misunderstandings, and work them out, we tend to focus on the misunderstanding at hand. Afterwards — not often enough — we ask ourselves, "Is it possible that there are some similar misunderstandings elsewhere?" If we look upon misunderstandings as potential indicators of broader difficulties, we often find opportunities to search around for other examples of that same difficulty.
For example, suppose you discover that one of the Advance Marketing (AM) teams began meeting weekly to make plans for a new product introduction. And suppose you find that they've been meeting without a representative from Customer Support (CS). This isn't good, because AM does need input from CS, and CS needs to be fully aware of what AM is planning. After investigating, you manage to correct this communication defect.
But you don't stop there. It occurs to you that other AM product introduction planning teams might be doing the same thing — that is, excluding CS. Not by intention, perhaps, but it doesn't matter why. Upon investigation you discover two AM teams that are including CS and one that isn't. So you fix the one that isn't, too. Finally, you address the problem generally between AM and CS, and that kind of omission won't be happening again. Success.
But what about the relationship between CS and the Product Development teams? Are they keeping each other as informed as they need to? Since you don't know, you investigate that, too, and you fix what you find there. More success. You keep doing this until all the connections with CS are working right.
Then you take it further. You look at all the silos, top to bottom, to determine whether all the people that need to connect with each other are actually connecting. It becomes an enterprise-wide initiative.
I call Communication refactoring is a
disciplined process of improving
communication between the
parts of an organizationthis process communication refactoring. It's a method for generalizing one situational repair of organizational communications to all possible instances where it might be beneficial, throughout the organization. In this way, by improving organizational communication gradually, we help to transform the organization from a series of weakly interacting silos into a coherent whole. I say "help" because there's a lot more to do to achieve coherence, but communication refactoring is a good start.
The term refactoring is borrowed from Software Engineering, where it refers to a disciplined practice of gradually transforming a program's code, usually by a series of seemingly tiny changes, that, over time, make the code more readable, maintainable, and extensible without directly affecting its intended functionality. By analogy, communication refactoring is a disciplined process of improving communication between the parts of an organization.
You might ask, "Where else can we apply the refactoring approach to improve the effectiveness of the day-to-day interactions of organizational life?" My guess: everywhere. You can start today. Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- Don't Worry, Anticipate!
- Dramatic changes in policy or procedure are often challenging, especially when they have some boneheaded
components. But by accepting them, by anticipating what you can, and by applying Pareto's principle,
you can usually find a safe path that suits you.
- The True Costs of Indirectness
- Indirect communications are veiled, ambiguous, excessively diplomatic, or conveyed to people other than
the actual target. We often use indirectness to avoid confrontation or to avoid dealing with conflict.
It can be an expensive practice.
- Problem-Solving Preferences
- When people solve problems together, differences in preferred approaches can surface. Some prefer to
emphasize the goal or objective, while others focus on the obstacles. This difference is at once an
asset and annoyance.
- False Summits: I
- Mountaineers often experience "false summits," when just as they thought they were nearing
the summit, it turns out that there is much more climbing to do. So it is in project work.
- Red Flags: II
- When we find clear evidence of serious problems in a project or other collaboration, we sometimes realize
that we had overlooked several "red flags" that had foretold trouble. In this Part II of our
review of red flags, we consider communication patterns that are useful indicators of future problems.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming April 3: Recapping Factioned Meetings
- A factioned meeting is one in which participants identify more closely with their factions, rather than with the meeting as a whole. Agreements reached in such meetings are at risk of instability as participants maneuver for advantage after the meeting. Available here and by RSS on April 3.
- And on April 10: Managing Dunning-Kruger Risk
- A cognitive bias called the Dunning-Kruger Effect can create risk for organizational missions that require expertise beyond the range of knowledge and experience of decision-makers. They might misjudge the organization's capacity to execute the mission successfully. They might even be unaware of the risk of so misjudging. Available here and by RSS on April 10.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed