The Right and Left Brain Blog

There is no question that there is more communication than ever today. In our daily lives, many of us receive a myriad of communications from multiple sources - emails, TV, podcasts, phone conversations, work meetings, the Internet… and we somehow still have time for our families. The problem, though, is that our sources of communications have clearly increased significantly, while our ability to “hear” has decreased. As the old saying goes, a good conversationalist is a good listener.

In the last week, several incidents have convinced me that we have a hearing crisis. We tend to communicate on the basis of “need to know,” rather than on a foundation of openness and participation. The most blatant example is corporate communication of layoffs. These decisions always seem to be arbitrary and made in a vacuum by consultants and HR staff that have no actual understanding of the business. This is of course the perception of the employees and to an extent, this is due to the lack of active engagement and conversation by management with staff.

We need to try new methods. For example, rather than simply laying people off, why not retain some at lower wages and let them join teams to develop new methods to reduce costs, generate new income and create new positions for themselves? Organizations that have an ongoing two-way conversation with employees will find that cutbacks, although certainly not welcomed, to not be as arduous since it will not be the first time that they have discussions with employees. Smart managers read the landscape and begin preparing employees as part of their regular communications. Even in a bad economy there is hiring, although limited. Transferring an employee to an open position in the company is a win-win situation.

A more revolutionary step is allowing employees to discuss cutbacks and recommend solutions. In other words, engage employees early on in the process to work towards a solution.
• Are there cost-saving measures that could be implemented that management is not aware of?
• Do the employees have any ideas on how to cut out costs outside of layoffs?
• Do employees have ideas about other revenue sources?

There is no question that there is more communication than ever today. Many of us receive some combination of more than 100 emails, 2-3 hours of T.V., 2-3 hours of listening to an iPod, 3-5 hours of interaction with the computer, reading numerous books, magazines and other papers, 1-2 hours of phone conversations, 1-2 hours with the Blackberry, 1-2 hours of blogging, podcasts or networking sites like MySpace, 2-3 hours of meetings, and even a little social time with our family and friends. The problem is, what do we really hear? The answer is, despite all the great efforts of these communications, we hear very little:

• Just think of the loss in communication when we are multi-tasking on the web, talking on the phone and thinking about something else at the same time, and being with our family kids, which are often the case.

• The option of “reply all” on our internet programs has probably encouraged more useless communication that we don’t need or care about than any other simple vehicle.

• Similarly, voicemail, Tivo, and other recording devices allow us to catalog even more communication that we mostly didn’t need in the first place.

• Answering cell phones while in a meeting and can’t talk to the person anyway is so annoying. People are so paranoid that they answer the phone in a meeting, and say they can’t talk rather than not answering and letting the person simply leave a message.

One of the obvious characteristics of communication is the perceptions of the presenter and environment of the communication. What we all know and seldom acknowledge is that our perceptions of the presenter have a dramatic effect on our understanding and acceptance of the communication. However, we frequently ignore this fact, which has been well proven in what is called the “Theory of Cognitive Dissonance,” which articulates this view and has been affirmed through years of research. We all know better appearance, clearer communication, a pleasant environment, and respect for the presenter affect our acceptance of communication. This is one of the rationales for using celebrities, pretty girls or experts in much of our advertising.

In short, it is not just what we say but to whom we say it that affects our success. As a personal example, I am constantly bothered that readers of my communication will correct my spelling and grammar and ignore my message. Do you have a good example? Let’s hear it.