Communication is any exchange between groups of people. Usually, it is either a one-to-one communication (e.g. 1:1s), or it is a one-to-many communication (e.g. announcements). There is also many-to-many communication (e.g. war) or many-to-one communication (e.g. scapegoating) but we focus on one-to-one and one-to-many communication for the scope of this article. Furthermore, we focus on speech communication either in person or over video call, and text communication (usually over slack).
Axioms of Human Nature
Generally speaking, humans prefer giving over receiving in communication. That is, a person would much rather speak than listen usually. We do not speculate too much on why this is but a few obvious explanations is lower cognitive load associated with speaking (its an active exercise) whereas listening can be more passive (but there are ways to make listening more active). Humans are usually not great at either speaking, or listening as well, and therefore both sides of a communication require training.
Furthermore, humans usually prefer themselves over others. This may be hypothesized as the need for self-preservation, but we do not reflect too much on it but accept it as generally a given. Therefore, a corrective that will be critical for most people in building effective communication skills will be to unlearn the framing of a communication scene from solely their perspective, and begin incorporating other’s into their scenes as well.
Failure Modes
Therefore, a common failure mode is saying without thinking. Usually we respond to our own desires almost instinctively in a reflex manner, but that is inefficient because it will not incorporate the receiver. And since communication requires at least one other person to be involved, saying without ever thinking is a surefire way to fail at communication. The best way to correct for saying without thinking and not incorporating the other point of view is to actively resist every time one initiates a communication, and think about how the communication will be received by the other parties involved. The classic advice here is to “put yourself in their shoes” to vicariously analyze how what you are saying might be perceived.
The other end of this is also common failure mode, which is responding without thinking. This is the most natural form of communication due to innate reciprocity in humans (difficult to not respond to things when prompted), and therefore requires some active resistance (in varying degrees depending on the person) as well. It is worth pausing (if not used to it) before responding to anything someone says to take a second and appropriately analyze the scene, and then frame your response in a way that would be best for the receiver(s).
Intent of Communication
Before initiating a communication, it is worth analyzing the “intent” of communication. There is always a purpose to any given communication situation and it is worth crystallizing what that purpose is before initiating a conversation. Failure to do so can lead to “rabbit hole” conversations which are discussions to nowhere, or in conversations that do lead somewhere, but not necessarily the place you wanted to go. Sometimes being adventurous is the point of a conversation but almost always at work, it is about getting something done that will add value to the business.
To analyze the intent of a conversation, take a step back before initiating a communication, and figure out what you wish to achieve after you have concluded the conversation. Good communicators will sometimes even state it up front before a meeting, but this could be thought of as too formal but worth doing if parties involved are comfortable. And intent clarification is doubly important as the number of parties increase (which means the potential for “lost” conversations is also manifold increased).
Weight of a Conversation
In analyzing the intent of a communication, it is worth considering what the “weight” of it might be. For instance, a conversation about work performance might be a much heavier “weight” in the sense of cost involved for both parties, than a conversation about, for instance, where to find a certain tool. The latter conversation could be said to be “lightweight” in the sense that it would probably end quickly and painlessly for both parties involved. On the other hand, the former conversation could take a really long time potentially, and even be quite literally painful.
It is worth thinking through the weight of a conversation because that would help one analyze when to initiate the conversation. If it’s a heavy conversation, probably best done under controller circumstances such as a scheduled performance review or 1:1, but light conversations could be easily initiated over Slack and resolved in seconds.
Generally speaking, it is ideal to tend towards a majority of conversations being extremely lightweight, painless, and amiable. Rapport building between colleagues could be condensed to essentially how lightweight are the conversations. A relationship with only heavy conversations is a troubled relationship, whereas a relationship with only lightweight conversations is a healthy one.
That is not to say that one should avoid heavy conversations entirely, if necessary they must be had. If one avoids all heavy conversations even if they are necessary, then one is simply tending towards catastrophic failure at some point. Therefore, it is more that the goal must be towards building relationships that do not require too many heavy conversations. Relationships should tend towards majority lightweight conversations at work.
Facilitating Conversation
To effectively tend towards light conversations, one should look to build “positive reciprocity”. Conversations are most productive when all parties involved are active (because if in a two person conversation one of the two people are asleep, then its not a conversation). Positive reciprocity can be initiated by encouraging the other person to speak (because we usually prefer to speak) first, and usually people on noticing this positive reciprocity or “generosity in giving” will return the favor quickly.
Accordingly, beginning a conversation with “was hoping for your thoughts” or “wondering if you could tell me about” and so on is a productive way to initiate positive reciprocity. For the majority conversations, one should also seek to reduce the “cost” to responding to others. Think about “how much work this will incur” to the other person, and try to minimize that work. For instance, for busy people in a company, it is ideal to remove as much “work” as possible from the other person to be respectful of their time. Ideally, one should do this to everyone, since whenever someone is responding, they are effectively donating one of their most precious commodities to another person: their time.