|
Abundant Communication!
By Mike
Flaherty, The University of Montana
Rural Institute
In this era of budget shortfalls, when we
are faced with increasing demands for our services and diminishing
dollars, we can get mired in “scarcity-thinking.” We
think we must do more with less, guard what we have left, and choose
among critical needs. This scarcity mindset is not limited to funding
issues; it drives our decision-making processes and often is behind
conflicts within our own agencies. But in a time of scarce resources
(funding!), information is in great abundance! Although funding
is indeed often in short supply, there remains one resource that
is not only abundantly available but also renewable: communication!
We are in an information age; information and communication
applications power our lives, jobs, and workplaces. Cable television,
internet/email, cell phones, fax machines, etc., deliver an ever-increasing
volume of information, communicating messages twenty-four hours
a day. These communication devices, tools, and resources are
available to help us manage our work and personal lives. Communication,
the art of information sharing, is a potentially abundant resource
that allows us to reach out to our teams within our agencies
and to our customers and collaborators. The challenge is using
communication effectively. The absence of a healthy exchange
of information costs agencies effectiveness and can destroy a
well-meaning program. This article explores the “fallout” that
results when communication is fuzzy or filtered and offers some
solutions to the conflicts that may result from poor communication.
“Conflict, the engine of social evolution,” John
Locke
In some cases, the lack of information critical to managing
and providing quality service manifests itself in conflict. Conflict
happens. In its pure definition, it is friction that occurs
as two forces are in opposition. In human relationships, conflict
is not always so neatly defined, and it is not always a bad thing.
Differences of opinion drive social and cultural evolution. In
the world at large friction is the force that motivates us to
respond to situations or adjust our behavior to changing circumstances.
Conflict is a normal outcome of people dealing with other people,
issues, and environments.
Internal and external disagreements can happen over a
variety of differences and in many environments. These
differences may be simple opinions and interpretations
of events, or be a more widespread discussion over policy
or budget priorities. Our initial reaction to most conflict
is often stress and anxiety. While the stress can positively
stimulate growth, it usually creates negative work conditions.
Fight or flight is often the initial reaction to unpleasant
friction in the workplace. Fight generally prolongs and
expands conflict; flight ignores the problem, hoping
that the unpleasantness and underlying issues will just
go away. Although an initial fight response can potentially
explode the conflict, flight or ignoring friction may
create more damage over the long-term.
The personal stress arising from conflict costs our agencies
efficiency and functionality. It often becomes an expensive proposition,
an unplanned line item in our already stretched budgets. It impacts
critical aspects of staff creativity, work production, and customer
service. The most severe impact of unmanaged conflict is lost
time and energy, both major efficiency leaks! Effective management
demands that friction be recognized as a potential major cost.
Not all conflict and its effects can be managed. A good deal
of it occurs suddenly; instantaneous events create unpleasant
situations that even the best management plan could not properly
anticipate. However, some arguments can be anticipated, even
eliminated, with proper management preparation. Accept that conflict
is part of the world and plays a large role as a change agent
for good and bad. Acknowledge that we have a choice in how we
respond as staff and management. Methods and approaches are available
to us to manage, reduce, or in some cases
Example:
Fuzzy Communication
and a Customer Service Disaster
Terri, the new director of Good ’Nuf ILC, tells
the assistive technology coordinator Joan that the ILC
has a new, free servicing program for power wheel chairs.
Based on the conversation, Joan phones all the power chair
users she knows in the area and tells them there is a new,
free program. The next day, 15 people who use power chairs
come to Good ‘Nuf for the “new, free” service.
A surprised Terri then explains to Joan that the service
is actually only for Gulf War veterans. Joan has to explain
the mix-up to the people expecting service.
Incomplete, or “fuzzy” communication has created
a customer service nightmare for the ILC, made Joan angry
because she looks foolish, and made Terri question Joan’s
abilities. eliminate potential problems. |
What tools are available to help us
to effectively deal with disagreements, to manage them at
their onset, and to deal with
their effects once they become a force in our agencies?
Good communication—clear, open, honest, and personally directed—is
a potent tool for managing conflict. Additionally, effective
mediation or negotiation can augment existing methods of
information sharing. Skillfully used, communication tools
can have a marked,
positive effect on long-term agency conflict management
success.
Fuzzy or Filtered Communication
Prior to attempting any effort at managing arguments, it is
important to address the roots of the friction. Conflict
is often intertwined with poor communication models. Fuzzy, or
non-existent
communication, can create mixed messages. Remember the “telephone
game?” Even the most clear and concise message can be distorted
when it is re-communicated. Personal interpretation of
information often results in misinterpretation. Probably
the most damaging
aspect of poor or incomplete information is when that information
creates personal disagreements. Personalized arguments
undermine agency effectiveness, creating mistrust, defensive
thinking,
reactive behavior, and ultimately a highly dysfunctional workplace.
Example:
Filtered Communication
and Unfinished Work
Sammy, CEO of Assist ILC, announced to his staff that
Luci, a newly hired staff member who is in charge of the
annual fundraiser that provides almost 25% of the ILC’s
annual income, was involved in an automobile accident.
In the days following, Luci’s family gives Sammy
little and confusing information on Luci’s condition
and the prospect of her returning to work. The family is
filtering details about her medical condition.
The Board raises a concern with Sammy about who will take
the reigns for the fundraiser. Staff are concerned with
both Luci’s health as well as the unfinished work
on the fundraiser. Sammy feels trapped in a “holding
pattern,” not wanting to assume the worst about Luci’s
medical condition and reassign Luci’s work. Everyone
waits for the family to release more information about
Luci, while the ILC and its important fundraiser flounder. |
Filtered communication, when only pieces
or part of the information is communicated, is also an issue.
Filtered messages can
have some of the same negative impacts as fuzzy communication.
Persons
on the receiving end of filtered messages will soon feel
disrespected, that they are not trusted or “qualified’ to
get the whole message.
Information that is doctored, filtered, or spun creates the
potential for further mistrust in the long-term. Flawed communication,
be it filtered, fuzzy, incomplete, or missing creates an environment
of confusion and conflict. Any approach to managing conflict
begins with improving communication.
Example:
Lack of Abundant Communication
Ernie, the new Board chair for Always Helpful CIL, has
called for a series of closed-door budget meetings with
the CIL director, Suzie. Suzie has always encouraged staff
to attend all Board meetings, but agrees to Ernie’s
request. Over the next three weeks, six closed-door meetings
are held and more are scheduled. After each meeting Suzie
gives the staff a list of cost-cutting orders from the
Board. The staff members discuss what some consider draconian
cuts around the water cooler and over coffee.
Thelma, the CIL’s highly effective publicity director,
begins to worry about the agency’s fiscal health.
She asks Suzie what is going on, but Suzie explains that
Ernie and the Board have told her not to discuss the Board’s
financial plans with the staff. A panicky Thelma begins
looking for a new job and gives notice the following week.
The CIL has lost a valued employee. In the absence of
valid information, people will create their own scenarios.
Because the Board has stopped sharing, whether because
it doesn’t trust the staff or wants to protect the
staff, the staff has filled the information vacuum with
conjecture and fear. Once anxiety grips the staff, future
Board communication could be viewed suspeciously. |
A Best Practice for managing conflict begins with establishing,
promoting, and honoring clear channels of communication. Building
a culture of trust means communication and information are abundant
resources. Information, and the communication tools that carry
it (i.e., memos, phones, email, etc.) are indeed powerful management
tools in the workplace. Smart managers recognize that personnel
who are both well informed and participating in day-to-day information
sharing are less likely to feed into rumors and workplace paranoia.
Sincere communication, relaying information in a trustful manner,
says R-E-S-P-E-C-T loud and clear.
Obviously, agencies cannot survive without a strong chain of
command. Board members, directors, managers, and staff all need
to have a strong sense of place, defined job tasks, and expected
work outcomes. In short, Boards make policy, the executive directors
put policy into action, and the staff carries out the goals/objectives
dedicated to maintaining customer service. Clear, respectful
information sharing connects each link in this chain of command.
Much conflict in human service agencies can be traced to breakdowns
in this chain of communication. Executive directors are the intermediaries
in this chain. Communication is undermined, conflicts abound,
and agencies suffer when either Board members or staff initiate
discussions around the director, or do an “end run” around
the director. This eventually isolates the director and renders
the chain of command/communication impotent.
How do we formalize this “chain of communication?” Wise
Boards, with the assistance of their directors, develop and nurture
policies that demand openness, which includes participation (feedback!)
from managers/staff. Feedback—suggestions and collaborative
problem solving—is a two-way street. For example, in these
periods of budget duress/service curtailment, it behooves us
to communicate abundantly throughout the agency.
Establishing this abundance of communication is a good beginning.
Effective leadership means directors, Board members, and staff
members are all open to discussion. Everyone has input and everyone
benefits; everyone has to “buy-in” to the process
for it to work. Staff input goes a long way toward creating a
work culture of “healthy” debate. A management policy
on information sharing does two important things: one, it communicates
trust and partnership to all staff and two, it puts in place
a system that ensures that information will be abundant and shared,
thereby averting conflicts that occur when communication is fuzzy
or incomplete.
Negotiation
Okay, we have put into place an agency policy that sets the
stage for abundant communication and information. But we still
have issues to resolve. Where do we go now?
I’ve managed human service agencies for half of my 25
years in the rehabilitation field, and I’ve found abundant
communication an effective tool for averting conflict. But abundant
information is only one tool at our disposal. In even the best
agency, there will be disagreement that will need further response.
Apart from taking flight or fighting for our positions, we have
another tool at our disposal: negotiation.
Negotiation is the method, approach, tool, or intervention that
allows differing parties to share views on what they perceive
to be the best outcome for their interests. Each party enters
the negotiation with the intent to capture as many of their ideas
and plans through a system of “verbal barter.” Obviously
this verbal barter—the debate of ideas, plans, and desired
outcomes—focuses on each party getting what they think
is best. In reality, rarely, if ever, does either party get all
that it desired in a negotiated settlement.
I’ve learned that negotiation requires a “buy-in” similar
to abundant communication. For negotiation to be effective, everyone
in the agency has to abide by the guidelines of trust, honesty,
and maturity throughout the process. There must be an understanding
that leaders and managers as well as staff members will use negotiation
rules of engagement for the best interest of all.
Purposeful negotiation is getting the issues creating conflict
out into the open, encouraging dialogue and healthy debate. Guided
dialogue, within a proper framework, is an excellent management
tool that seeks the best possible course of action or decision
after all perspectives are weighed. It is as important to have
a policy or guidelines for individual and agency “rules
of engagement” in effective negotiation, as it is to have
policy on abundant communication. An overriding consideration
for entering any negotiation demands that for meaningful impact
to take place, a general “no shortcuts” rule must
be honored. I offer the following suggestions as a checklist
for successful negotiating.
The Rules of Engagement
1. Just the Facts, Ma’am
Nothing is as important for setting the stage for purposeful
negotiation than getting the facts. Getting
the facts requires getting all the information that relates
to the issue being considered.
Common questions to be answered may include:
- “ Is the information
current;”
- “Is the information source reliable;”
- “What are the issues of conflict;” and
- “What parties are involved?”
The key to starting negotiations is having correct information.
Incorrect, filtered, or fuzzy information will have a damaging
effect on meaningful
success. In fact, any negotiation based on flawed information is doomed
at the onset.
The energy expended initially to gather the facts is well spent,
as it provides the framework for lasting and valid negotiation. 2. Give and Take
Negotiation is a give and take process. Understand at the onset:
- “What is indeed negotiable;”
- “What options can I bring to the discussion;” and
- “What are potential fall-back positions?”
All
three questions need our input or a plan to address
the answers. Our responses to these three questions
will provide a great deal of potential
flexibility,
the give and take to the negotiation. Black and white responses
won’t
work. The art of negotiation, the whole process, is elastic.
The more abundant the responses to the above
questions, the more flexibility you
bring to the
process, and the better the outcomes. 3. Stick to the Issue
Throughout the negotiation process, always keep focused on the
issue or issues on the table. Use an agenda designed to keep
the pertinent issues on the table and stick to it. At the same
time we want to stay on topic, we want to make sure we discuss
it completely. It is helpful to maintain a working list of all
the topics, or talking points. Even the best attempts at negotiation
can be derailed or rendered invalid if we fail to keep all related
issues open for discussion. Leave no loose ends!
4. Know What you Want
Have a clear idea of what you want to achieve, how you wish
to proceed, and what the best outcome would look like. Determine
in advance a “game plan” that lays out your opening
moves, your data, feelings, and desires. In turn, the respectful
negotiator acknowledges the data, feelings, and desires of the
other participating parties in the negotiation process.
5. It’s Not Personal
Personalizing disagreements are all too common. The very issue
of communication and information sharing is quite personal in
itself, so this is an expected correlation. Finger pointing and “you” statements
in any negotiating environment may derail any real chance of
reaching meaningful settlement for either side. Focus on the
issue not the personality; demonizing and condescending behavior
will immediately shut down any chance of meaningful communication.
In personalized conflict there is a high chance of escalating
the friction, reducing any real chance of settlement.
6. Choose Your Battles Well
Determine what is important, necessary, and critical. There
is potential for many little “battles” in the workplace.
Ask yourself:
- “How important is this issue;”
- “Should I spend the energy or time over this minor conflict;”
- “Is this an isolated conflict;” or
- “Is this issue part of something larger that could be addressed at another
time and place?”
Choosing battles takes a good dose of common sense and maturity
on everyone’s part. Many larger conflicts arise out of
smaller points of friction, either ignored or blown out of proportion
due to inaction (flight doesn’t work!). Many issues can
be managed on a one-at-a-time basis long before bigger conflicts
arise.
7. Now? Timing is Key
Knowing when to engage is also an important consideration. Timing
can be as critical as any other negotiation component. Sometimes
picking the right time may be the sole element that determines
success. Some of us are better than others at “reading
the person or the moment.”
The best environment for negotiation is as far away from disruption
and distraction as possible. An important social skill is knowing
when to ask or challenge. Engaging in debate or hoping to initiate
negotiation in a highly charged, stressful environment is risky.
We need to be prepared, armed with the information needed to
present our interests, if we are going to successfully negotiate.
Mediated Negotiation
I hope my “rules of engagement” help serve as guidelines
for individuals in conflict. They work when both parties agree
that it is in their best interest to work out differences in
an environment of mutual give and take. However, there may be
situations when it may be necessary to have an unbiased third
party guide or referee the negotiation. This may be the case
in more involved discussions when facts are disputed or when
a personality is indeed the focal point of friction.
Mediated negotiation, or more simply mediation, is the management
tool that binds differing parties in a formal communication environment.
There have been many books and articles written about mediation
and at the end of this article is a list of resources you can
access. Briefly, the mediator’s role is to actively enforce
the rules of engagement, seek consensus, and ultimately guide
the course of negotiation to its logical outcome.
Mediation is common practice used in negotiation and applied
to many aspects of our professional, business, and personal lives.
As a formal negotiation tool, it demands trust, honesty, and
maturity for success. When used effectively mediation is indeed
a powerful management approach to seeking consensus in conflict-charged
atmospheres within agencies and when we advocate in the community.
Conclusion
Conflict happens! All conflict is not negative; sometimes it
is the necessary friction that stimulates healthy discussion
as well as personal and agency growth. When it is disruptive
it costs agencies time and energy. The unresolved conflict disrupts
effective customer service, the very reason for our existence
as a human service agency. Much friction may indeed be managed
through effective, direct, and respectful communication among
all levels of agency staff. Conflict may be effectively managed
with pro-active methods before the friction becomes unmanageable
and damages agency operations. We can ignore it at our peril
or we can effectively engage, beginning by making communication
abundant.
Contact Information
Mike Flaherty, Project Director
The Rural Institute
52 Corbin Hall
The University of Montana
Missoula, MT 59812
(406) 243-4619
mcf@ruralinstitute.umt.edu
Resources
Condeluci, Al. (2002). Cultural Shifting, Community Leadership
and Change. St. Augustine, Florida: Training Resource Network,
Inc.
Fisher, Roger and Ury, William. (1983). Getting to Yes: Negotiating
Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.
Griffin, Cary. (1998). Working Better, Working Smarter: Six
Stages of Organizational Development. St. Augustine, Florida:
Training Resource Network, Inc.
Heyman, Richard. (1994) Why Didn’t You Say that in the
First Place? How to be Understood at Work. San Francisco: Josey-Bass
Publishers.
Kaye, Beverly and Jordan-Evans, Sharon. (2002). Love ‘Em
or Lose ‘Em, Getting Good People to Stay. Scranton: Pennsylvania:
Career Systems International.
Scholtes, Peter R. (1998). The Leader’s Handbook:
Making Things Happen, Getting Things Done. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Wycoff, Joyce and Richardson, Tim. (1995). Transformation
Thinking: Tools & Techniques that Open the Door to
Powerful New Thinking. East Rutherford, New Jersey: Berkely
Publishing Corporation.
Next Article |
