Organizations depend on individuals sharing information quickly and accurately. All too often, these interactions are taken for granted. Moran, Abramson, and Moran (2014) label this simply as the communications process. While this may sound straight forward, it is riddled with complications. Office environments across the globe partake in this dynamic activity in which one must be adept at coding and decoding messages effectively in order to succeed. As children, we mocked this concept and enjoyed the inevitable breakdown in communication every time we played the game Telephone. As leaders, we now know we should be terrified by this concept and make every effort to mitigate its adverse effects on our teams. Despite these challenges, leaders can be effective communicators by understanding their own biases, leveraging their team’s diversity and assigning roles such as devil’s advocate (Pennsylvania State University, 2020).
Before leaders can begin to analyze their teams, they must analyze themselves. Bazerman and Moore (2013) warn against the dangers of unconscious, internal biases in our daily decision-making processes. All too often in the communication dance, it’s easier to blame the receiver for a missed step. However, Kruger, Epley, Parker, and Ng (2005) shed light on the fact that this is far from the truth. Communication starts with the sender, and all too often the sender has too much faith in their abilities to properly code messages. In their study Kruger, Epley, Parker, and Ng (2005) found that on average, 25% of email messages were misinterpreted by the receiver. While not as high, this trend remained constant even when the sender and receiver knew each other well. While this presents a challenge for small companies, larger organizations could have disastrous outcomes if 1 out of every 4 emails are misinterpreted. Armed with this knowledge, leaders must be willing to self-reflect and enlist help from others (Pennsylvania State University, 2020). For example, something as simple as having others proofread an email can fix a great deal more than grammatical errors. Additional perspectives can provide insight as to what will truly make a message resonate with others.
Soliciting help can go a long way, but it must be the right help. Understanding the differences within groups is key to effectively select the right individual to assist (Pennsylvania State University, 2020). In short, this is were diversity can be an incredible asset if leveraged properly. Knowing the individual strengths of each team member will undoubtedly be useful. A great example of this occurs when leaders put together teams comprised of unique individuals, with varying viewpoints, to tackle one issue. This can often include members from different departments who have different agendas and responsibilities. Although it may seem trivial at times, the benefits of this exercise are well worth it. Often, the diversity within the group can lead to more effective approaches to solve organizational issues. In addition, giving others a voice creates ownership. If the team feels like they own the solution, implementation effectiveness is much more probable.
Forming teams is a great tool that can be used to solve problems. However, sometimes teams can hit a creative wall and fall flat. This may require leader intervention. Assigning roles can help get the team back on track. Edward de Bono (1985) teaches us to embrace the discomfort of thinking differently through a metaphorical variety of colorful hats. This can be done by requiring individuals to find common ground on an idea or always look for an alternative. Often, always having a contrarian view can be better known as playing the role of devil’s advocate, or as de Bono labels it, the black hat. Whatever method is used, one can be certain that assigning someone to automatically negate an idea can stimulate robust discussions. It can also generate deeper understanding for each other’s positions and inadvertently trigger feelings of empathy for one another. Leaders can use this approach to not only solve issues, but bring their teams closer together.
In conclusion, breakdowns in communication are inevitable. However, leaders can mitigate these disconnects effectively and reduce the chances of encountering the adverse effects of poor coding and decoding. By self-reflecting, leveraging team diversity and assigning roles, leaders can help their teams achieve organizational success.
References:
Bazerman, M. H., Moore, D.A. (2013). Judgment in managerial decision making (8th ed.).
Hoboken, N.J. Wiley
De, B. E. (1985). Six thinking hats. Toronto, Ont: Key Porter Books
Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., & Moran, S. V. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences (9th
ed.). Oxford: Routledge.
Pennsylvania State University. (2020). Leadership in a global context – OLEAD 410. Lesson 1:
Introduction to leadership in a global context, Penn State World Campus. Retrieved from:
https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2041071/modules/items/27977817
Pennsylvania State University. (2020). Leadership in a global context – OLEAD 410. Lesson 3:
Diversity, Penn State World Campus. Retrieved from:
https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2041071/modules/items/27977828
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.