I have no hard numbers behind my upcoming statement, only a basis in my experience. Poor, late, or intentionally dishonest/demeaning communication leads to 90% of arguments. I made that number up, but try to disprove me! Communication is a root of evil, just like money.
While I don’t consider the people I lead subordinate to me, I will use that term as a general one for those being led by someone else. Subordinates here could be students to teachers, teachers and coaches to direct supervisors, principals to superintendents, superintendents to the board, or the board to voters.
Poor Communication
When a complaint reaches me about some perceived injustice (real or not), I want them to feel heard and validated. The first question I ask is about the communication they received regarding expectations and outcomes. If the expectations and outcomes were made clear, and the consequences are not illegal or immoral, then the person complaining to me does not have a leg to stand on. They have the right to feel upset, but the anger should be self-directed. The issues come when expectations are unclear, so the person did what they thought was right, but received some type of punishment anyway. If the grievance is directed toward me, I have to own it, apologize, and seek amends. If it is toward someone I oversee, I have to work with the person who delivered the consequence to remove it and give the person another chance. These are always tricky conversations, but ultimately, we must clarify the intended outcome to hold someone accountable.
Late Communication
A common sign people have in their office space reads, "A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." In theory that sounds great, but in reality if what was communicated late is urgent and important it does constitute an emergency. Other people have a plan for how their day is going, so when we drop a bomb on them it can disrupt an entire day. When someone sends an email that is a "reminder" that was never first mentioned, it is not a reminder. It is a last minute memo of something they were supposed to ask you to do and forgot until it was almost due. Now what was someone's priority becomes less of one as your new 11th hour thought becomes their new priority. So either the quantity or quality of work is lessoned, or the other person has to put in more time to complete their job. The downstream impacts of more time on the job can be personal burnout, or a complete disruption of their family obligations.
Dishonest/Demeaning Communication
We all make mistakes, saying something we believe to be true that isn't or saying something we don't mean to be hurtful but it is. Like with poor communicating, taking accountability for the mistake, apologizing, and seeking forgiveness with a remedy to improve eventually will fix those communication gaffes. When these are intentional the impact can be brutal. Usually people will deceive as a form of protection from a former traumatic experience, or to save face and stall until a better solution can be found. Demeaning conversation is usually a power grab or a defense mechanism. One person is trying to make themselves appear more powerful or important than another, thereby creating a superiority dynamic. This is particularly challenging when a power dynamic, such as a student to a teacher, player to a coach, or employee to supervisor already exists.
Between peers, the abuser needs to be called out for their behavior. They can be flat out told they are wrong, but this will likely lead to more pushback and derision. Straw man arguments, partial truths, passive aggressive retaliatory actions, or more offensive comments are common. They can be asked what they are hoping to accomplish or trying to hide through their words. Asking them, “are you ok?” puts them on the defensive and slows down the conversation enough to even the playing field.
When it is an authority figure acting like this, the entire situation changes. The subordinate can still seek clarification of their bosses motive, and state they feel uncomfortable. A conversation can always be ended, and continued with representation if available. Resigning is always an option, and sometimes the only option, but that is easier said than done. I’ve heard that “people quit on people before they quit on jobs.” This is true since people need the financial security, but they will do the minimum for as long as it takes to find something better.
Conclusion
People communicate differently, and some cultures are more direct while others passive. Whatever style you choose in the moment needs to be clear, timely, and thoughtful. Don’t leave a conversation hoping the other person understands the expectations, ensure they do. Don’t spring big tasks on people at the last minute, or be ready for frustration and sub-optimal work. Finally, keep communication focused on issues, not people, and avoid making disparaging remarks. Belittling someone may create some temporary feeling of power, but eventually this will come back to bite the belittler in the behind.
Comments
Post a Comment