How to Improve Communications and Reduce Workplace Friction

With a Simple Shift in Perspective

Have you ever made a comment to someone and gotten a totally unexpected negative reaction? Or maybe you’ve noticed an increase in the tension between you and a direct report after you suggested a re-write of their work?

It’s amazing how often what we see as a simple off-hand remark or a well-intentioned comment can lead to communication problems and inter-personal friction in the workplace. For instance, a client once complained to me that one of his staff had become remote and difficult to deal with after a feed-back session and he was questioning the value of feedback if that was the result he was going to get.

On reviewing his recollection of the feedback session with him, it became apparent that this was an instance of mis-communication brought on by an assumption he had made about how people received his comments. One comment in particular could be taken as either an off-hand remark or a highly sarcastic judgement statement. When asked about whether it was possible that his employee might have taken it as a highly critical judgement of his actions, my client brushed the possibility aside, saying that “if somebody said that to me it’d be like water rolling off a duck’s back – it really didn’t mean anything”.

He was not considering the fact that his employee was not like him, in fact was very much unlike him in many ways (and on top of that, my client was the boss, the one who signed the pay-checks, so everything he said was taken very seriously, whether intended that way or not).

This is an example of a common, all be it unintentional, communication error that often hinders good communication and smooth relationships in the workplace. The mistake occurs when we apply the “Golden Rule” too literally. This is the ‘rule’ that advises us to ‘treat others as we want to be treated’. However the problem arises when we attempt to apply this word for word. After all we are not all identical, so why should we expect everyone to want to be treated exactly the same way we want to be treated?

For instance, let’s say that you are a detail person, you like to have all the background data with all the ‘i’s’ dotted and ‘t’s crossed before making a decision. When asked to prepare a proposal you diligently make sure all the relevant information is in it, as seen from your perspective. Yet when you proudly present your carefully prepared proposal to your boss he quickly loses interest and becomes very abrupt and impatient. In fact he may hardly even look at your rigorously researched documentation before telling you to re-do it and ending the meeting. Now you’re upset and he appears dissatisfied with your work.

So where did you go wrong? After all, you gave him exactly what you would want to receive before making an important decision. And that is the problem in a nutshell. He is not you. He doesn’t want what you want.

What appeals to you does not appeal to him. He doesn’t want the information you want, he just wants the bottom line, and he wants it quickly. He doesn’t want to wade through reams of detail when all he’s interested in is your recommendations. If, and only if, he sees something that raises a red flag, will he ask for more details – and he’ll tell you exactly what details he wants. At this point you had better be able to supply them quickly – to do otherwise will irritate him, hinder clear communication and further weaken your relationship with him.

The solution, therefore, is to not follow the “Golden Rule” to the letter. Do to not treat others in exactly the same way that you want to be treated. You will find it is far more productive to take an approach that does not center on your preferences. After all, what you really want is to be treated in a way that you’re comfortable with, that matches your preferred communication and working style. And this is exactly what others want as well. That is why a simple shift in your perspective so that you see things from the other person’s viewpoint can work wonders.

And implementing the solution is actually quite straightforward. To find out how they want to be treated you simply have to observe how they interact with others and how they like to do things. When speaking with others do they tend to be very detail oriented or do they just hit the high points? Do they speak rapidly, with a tendency to appear abrupt, or do they take their time and do things in a more leisurely fashion? Do they concentrate on the task at hand, or take time to consider the broader impact on others who might be involved? Do they like to get written reports and see things presented graphically, or do they prefer to just be told the information?

People are continually providing these and many other clues to what they like and what makes them comfortable and puts them at ease when working with others. If we observe their actions carefully we can identify clusters of consistent behaviour. Then all we have to do is connect the dots to come up with their preferences for communicating and taking action. Treat this knowledge as a working hypothesis to guide your interactions with them. Observe the results, and if necessary, make adjustments as you go.

Your ability to communicate with others and develop friction-free working relationships will greatly improve if you simply take the time to discover how people differ from you and what methods of interaction they are most comfortable with so that you can provide it. If you make this simple shift in approach you’ll likely find that where previously there might have been some friction in the working relationship, now things function much more smoothly. You will also likely find it much less stressful working with others. You might even come to enjoy it!

© 2010 Karen Switzer-Howse

Print PDF