Used responsibly, communication is our method for constructively propagating ideas within and among groups, for testing those ideas, for selecting the most promising ones, and for making decisions about adopting them. Communication can also be abused to persuade organizations to adopt policies that benefit their advocates more than they benefit the organization.
Deceptive communication is one technique of communication abuse. It is any intentional action (or inaction) associated with communication that creates advantages for the deceiver by causing others to adopt or retain false models of reality.
Lies are one common example. But there are many much less obvious methods of deceptive communication. Here are three.
- Flawed metaphors
- Because metaphors are approximations to reality, some deceivers use metaphors to distort the target's thinking. One example: "Second quarter results suggest that we've hit a speed bump." Using this metaphor could be deceptive because it suggests that the slowdown is small and its duration short. But when you first encounter a speed bump, you can't really tell how long it will last or how big the bump is. Maybe it's actually a warning curb right in front of a brick wall thirty feet thick. The speed bump metaphor thus conceals the issues of severity and duration of the revenue decline. Similar tricks are possible with analogies. Unless we think very carefully about the metaphors and analogies deceivers use, we're likely to be deceived.
- Meta-deceptive communications
- Meta-deceptive communications are deceptive communications about others' communications. Thus, intentionally identifying as deceptive a communication that's known to be truthful is an example of deceptive communication, as is intentionally failing Lies are one common example
of deceptive communications,
but there are many much
less obvious methodsto identify as deceptive a communication that's known to be deceptive. Less egregious, perhaps, is identifying as deceptive a communication that one isn't certain is deceptive, without revealing the uncertainty, as is failing to identify as potentially deceptive a communication that one strongly suspects is deceptive.
- Pace of speech varies from person to person, and time to time. Occasionally, a speaker's pace is so slow that impatient audience members, unbidden, complete the speaker's thought. When this happens naturally, it can be a sign of a group working well together. But deceivers who wish to avoid explicitly stating something inflammatory or accusatory can slow-talk to exploit impatient audience members, who then "pick up the ball" and run with it. In this way, the slow-talking speaker avoids saying anything that could later be regarded as a violation of decorum or ethics. The technique is especially valuable when the unspoken thought is an accusation that the slow-talker knows to be false.
These are simple examples of deceptive communications. The full catalog is both enormous and dynamic, because as technologies evolve, some deceptions become transparent or useless, and new deceptions arise. In coming weeks, we'll explore the general properties of deceptive communications at work. Next in this series Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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.
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.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- How Did I Come to Be So Overworked?
- You're good at your job, but there's just too much of it, and it keeps on coming. Your boss doesn't
seem to realize how much work you do. How does this happen?
- On Snitching at Work: I
- Some people have difficulty determining the propriety of reporting violations to authorities at work.
Proper or not, reporting violations can be simultaneously both risky and necessary.
- Suppressing Dissent: II
- Disagreeing with the majority in a meeting, or in some cases, merely disagreeing with the Leader, can
lead to isolation and other personal difficulties. Here is Part II of a set of tactics used by Leaders
who choose not to tolerate differences of opinion, emphasizing the meeting context.
- Cultural Indicators of Political Risk
- Because of fire risk, hiking in dry forests during dry seasons can be dangerous. In the forest, we stay
safe from fire if we attend to the indicators of fire risk. In the workplace, do you know the indicators
of political risk?
- Stone-Throwers at Meetings: II
- A stone-thrower in a meeting is someone who is determined to halt forward progress. Motives vary, from
embarrassing the chair to holding the meeting hostage in exchange for advancing an agenda. What can
chairs do about stone-throwers?
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming July 8: Multi-Expert Consensus
- Some working groups consist of experts from many fields. When they must reach a decision by consensus, members have several options. Defining those options in advance can help the group reach a decision with all its relationships intact. Available here and by RSS on July 8.
- And on July 15: Disjoint Concept Vocabularies
- In disputes or in problem solving sessions, when we can't seem to come to agreement, we often attribute the difficulty to miscommunication, histories of disagreements, hidden agendas, or "personality clashes." Sometimes the cause is much simpler. Sometimes the concept vocabularies of the parties don't overlap. Available here and by RSS on July 15.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
- Bullet Points: Mastery or Madness?
Decision-makers in modern organizations commonly demand briefings in the form of bullet points or a series of series of bullet points. But this form of presentation has limited value for complex decisions. We need something more. We actually need to think. Briefers who combine the bullet-point format with a variety of persuasion techniques can mislead decision-makers, guiding them into making poor decisions. Read more about this program.
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.