When we must communicate to others something very important, getting it right matters more than usual. Paradoxically, in those situations, we're at elevated risk of not getting it right. We dance around the points we most need to make. We find it difficult or scary to say what we really think. Instead, we lead our listeners close to the points we most need to make, and leave it to them to make the rest of the journey on their own. We give our listeners the information from which they might possibly deduce a significant message, but we don't articulate that message ourselves.
The significance of a set of facts is the way those facts relate to their consequences. The more complex and technical is the subject matter, the more important it is to be explicit about the significance of the information we're providing. I use the term significance messages to denote communications for which clearly stating the significance of their factual content is as important as clearly stating that factual content. Too often, we communicate facts, but we don't actually communicate the significance of what we're saying.
For significance messages, that is a recipe for communication disaster.
An example of a significance message
Project Marigold has encountered yet another setback. Its target date has been delayed twice already, and the project manager is preparing a report to the Executive Committee announcing a new, delayed, target date. The project manager has written a statement that makes the main point:
Version 1: Marigold's completion date needs to be delayed until Q2, due to changes in project objectives. Last month, for example, we reduced Marigold's budget by 15%. That change required that we reconfigure the PineTree Module, and the consultants we need for that work aren't available until next month.
This is a simple message, but it doesn't emphasize the fundamental point that project objectives have changed repeatedly. Here's a version that illustrates the importance of focusing on significance.
Version 2: Because we keep changing Project Marigold's objectives, we must expect impact on its completion date. The latest change, a 15% budget reduction, requires a delay until Q2, because we must reconfigure the PineTree Module. The consultants we need for that work aren't available until next month.
Both versions Too often, we communicate facts,
but we don't explicitly communicate
the significance of what we're sayingprovide facts justifying the delays in Project Marigold. But Version 1 emphasizes the reasons for this particular delay. Version 2 emphasizes that there is a pattern of unstable project objectives that accounts for the series of delays. Version 2 also implies that unless Marigold's objectives stabilize, there will likely be more delays.
There's a simple test you can use to determine whether your communication has given sufficient emphasis to the significance of the facts you've provided. Read the text and ask the question, "So what?" If the answer to that question includes material not contained in your communication, then the significance of the data probably isn't well enough represented. Top Next Issue
Do you spend your days scurrying from meeting to meeting? Do you ever wonder if all these meetings are really necessary? (They aren't) Or whether there isn't some better way to get this work done? (There is) Read 101 Tips for Effective Meetings to learn how to make meetings much more productive and less stressful — and a lot more rare. Order Now!
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.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.
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 Effective Communication at Work:
- When we steer the discussion away from issues to attack the credibility, motives, or character of our
debate partners, we often resort to a technique known as the ad hominem attack. It's unfair, it's unethical,
and it leads to bad, expensive decisions that we'll probably regret.
- Mastering Q and A
- The question-and-answer exchanges that occur during or after presentations rarely add much to the overall
effort. But how you deal with questions can be a decisive factor in how your audience evaluates you
and your message.
- That Was a Yes-or-No Question: I
- In tense situations, one person might question another. As the respondent replies, the questioner interjects,
"That was a yes-or-no question." The intent is to trap the respondent. How does this work,
and how can the respondent escape the trap?
- Naming Ideas
- Participants in group discussions sometimes reference each other's contributions using the contributor's
name. This risks offending the contributor or others who believe the idea is theirs. Naming ideas is
- Please Reassure Them
- When things go wildly wrong, someone is usually designated to investigate and assess the probability
of further trouble. That role can be risky. Here are three guidelines for protecting yourself if that
role falls to you.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming October 4: Self-Importance and Conversational Narcissism at Work: I
- Conversational narcissism is a set of behaviors that participants use to focus the exchange on their own self-interest rather than the shared objective. This post emphasizes the role of these behaviors in advancing a narcissist's sense of self-importance. Available here and by RSS on October 4.
- And on October 11: Self-Importance and Conversational Narcissism at Work: II
- Self-importance is one of four major themes of conversational narcissism. Knowing how to recognize the patterns of conversational narcissism is a fundamental skill needed for controlling it. Here are eight examples that emphasize self-importance. Available here and by RSS on October 11.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.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