Effective Communication, Feedback, and Listening

Table of Contents · Introduction · The Communication Process · Sources of Noise in Communication · Constructive Communications: Listening and Feedback Skills · Why managers are often reluctant to provide feedback · Theories in Action: The Chris Argyris model of Communication

Effective communication occurs when the intended meaning of the source and perceived meaning of the receiver are the same. This should be your goal but it is hard to achieve. Organizations use a wide variety of channels for communication. Effective communication depends on a good understanding of all these channels

In this chapter we will cover the basic process of communication focusing mostly on interpersonal communication and then we will cover some of the most difficult communication issues managers face-providing constructive and effective feedback and performance appraisal. More specifically, we need to develop the ability to understand:
· what is really happening in an interaction?
· why do other people behave as they do?
· what can I do about it?

Terry: I won't make it to work again tomorrow; this pregnancy makes me nauseous and my doctor says I should be given such a heavy workload and should probably be reduced to part time

Boss: Terry this is the third day you've missed and your appointments keep backing up; we have to cover for you and this is messing all of us up.

Looking at the example, Terry has what appears to be a simple message to convey-she won't make it to work today because of nausea. But she had to translate the thoughts into words. The message is not really as simple as it appears because it appear Terry is aggrieved that her employer has not been as caring as she thinks it should be. The boss's reaction reinforces this feeling.

And this is the first potential source of error. Was she just trying to convey that she would be late; was she trying to convey anything else. It turns out she was. She was upset because she perceived that her co-workers weren't as sympathetic to her situation as they should be. Her co-workers, however, were really being pressured by Terry's continued absences, and her late calls. They wished she would just take a leave of absence, but Terry refuses because she would have to take it without pay.

Thus what appears to be a simple communication is, in reality, quite complex. Terry is communicating far more than that she would miss work; she is conveying a number of complex emotions, complicated by her own complex feelings about pregnancy, work, and her future.

The Intended Communication: The message Terry is sending is very complex even to the degree that she herself probably doesn't totally understand all that she is conveying. Her message is a mix of content, attitude, expectation, feeling, and emotion.

She had to "encode" all of this and she probably did it imperfectly since it involves a mix of words, tone, facial
expression, body language, and timing.

The Received Communication: Even if she did this "encoding" very well, this in itself wouldn't ensure that her boss would "decode" it accurately. He would have to interpret the complex mix of words and non-verbal messages she is sending. There are many ways to decode the simple message that Terry gave and the way the message is heard will influence the response to Terry.

In this case the boss heard far more than a simple message that Terry won't be at work today. The boss "heard" hostility from Terry, indifference, lack of consideration, among other emotions. Terry may not have meant this, but this is what the boss heard.

Communications is so difficult because at each step in the process there major potential for error. By the time a message gets from a sender to a receiver there are four basic places where transmission errors can take place and at each place, there are a multitude of potential sources of error. Thus it is no surprise that social psychologists estimate that there is usually a 40-60% loss of meaning in the transmission of messages from sender to receiver.

"Noise" in Communication
In the two examples we have seen that we have to be aware of a large number of factors that affect communication accuracy and effectiveness. There are a wide number of sources of noise or interference that can enter into the communication process. This can even occur when people know each other. The following lists some of the common sources of "noise" in communication.

Perceptual Biases: People respond to stimuli in the environment in very different ways. We each have shortcuts that we use to organize data. Invariably, these shortcuts introduce some biases into communication. Some of these shortcuts include stereotyping, projection, and self-fulfilling prophecies. Stereotyping is one of the most common. This is when we assume that the other person has certain characteristics based on the group to which they belong, without validating that they in fact have these characteristics. In our first case Susan has strong perceptional biases towards anything Brian might say to her; Brian is probably doing the same thing.

Past Experiences: How we perceive communication is affected by the past experience with the individual. Susan's behavior towards Brian was strongly affected by her past experience with him and with other bosses in the past. Similarly, Brian's behavior is heavily a function of his perception of his past experiences with Susan.

Cultural Differences: Effective communication requires deciphering the basic values, motives, aspirations, and assumptions of the other person. Given some dramatic differences across cultures in approaches to such areas as time, space, and privacy, the opportunities for mis-communication while we are in cross-cultural situations are plentiful.

Language: The choice of words or language in which a sender encodes a message will influence the quality of communication. Because language is a symbolic representation of a phenomenon, room for interpretation and distortion of the meaning exists. In the above example, the Boss uses language (this is the third day you've missed) that is likely to convey far more than objective information. To Terry it conveys indifference to her medical problems.
Note that the same words will be interpreted different by each different person. Meaning has to be given to words and many factors affect how an individual will attribute meaning to particular words. It is important to note that no two people will attribute the exact same meaning to the same words.

Nonverbal Communication: The use of gestures, movements, facial expressions, and space can clarify or confuse the meaning of verbal communication. In the first example, both Brian's and Susan's used body language (facial expression, tone, etc.) that were at odds with the words being used. The receiver has to deal with these contradictions and the result can often be something different than the intended message.
A word of warning. Nonverbal cues can differ dramatically from culture to culture. An American hand gesture
meaning `A-OK" would be viewed as obscene in some South American countries. Be careful.


Defensiveness and related processes such as distorted perceptions, guilt, project, transference, distortions from the past, self-fulfilling assumptions and selective hearing

Other Factors include distrusted source, erroneous translation, value judgment, state of mind of two people

Constructive Communications: Listening Skills
Effective listening can occur at a rate of 500 words per minute but normal speech occurs at 125-250 words per minute allowing the listener to dewll on many other things like attitudes, biases, personal needs, or last night's ball game. The way we use this "free time" is a major barrier to communication.

Effective communication is very dependent on effective listening, something many of us are quite poor at. The purpose of effective listening is to convey interest and respect for the other person; this is crucial if we are to have any ability to help solve problems and satisfy the other person's needs and goals as well as our own. Constructive feedback depends on a wide range of skills including listening skills and feedback skills.

Why are many of us so poor at listening. The following list identifies some of the major barriers to effective listening

Barriers to Listening forming a judgment or evaluation before we understand what is being said making unjustified inferences about the meaning of what is being said attributing our own thoughts and ideas to the speaker causing distortion being inattentive having a closed mind hearing what we wish to hear fear of being changed ourselves excessive and incessant talking

So what are the keys to effective listening. The following list highlights some of the keys:

Active Listening Skills Stop talking- listen openly and with empathy to the other person Try not to be defensive Look at the person; be patient Ask the other person for as much detail as he/she can provide; paraphrase what the other is saying to make sure you understand it and check for understanding Respond in an interested way that shows you understand the problem and the employee's concern attend to non-verbal cues, body language, not just words; pay attention to both emotional and cognitive messages (eg. anger) stay in an active body state to aid listening; fight distractions; use eye contact, encouraging gestures Ask the other for his views or suggestions maintain the self confidence and self-esteem of the other person lead by example (at work) take notes; decide on a specific follow-up action and date

Balancing Inquiry and Advocacy (based on the work of Argyris and Senge)

Most of us are trained to be advocates; we are rewarded for being problem solvers, for figuring out what should be done, and influencing others to adopt our ideas. Inquiry skills, the ability to ask questions, is a fairly undeveloped skill for many of us. But as managerial problems get more complex, we find that we must do a better job of balancing inquiry and advocacy. This is not easy for many of us who find it uncomfortable to encourage others to critique our arguments.

Example of Advocacy: We are being too conservative. Can't we grow market share faster than that..."
Typical Response: "I disagree,... let me state my argument again..."
Possible Inquiry: "Can you give me an example of what you mean" or "Can you share with me the data you are using to support that conclusion?"

Being a good advocate: make your reasoning explicit; encourage others to explore your views; acknowledge weaknesses in your points; actively inquire into others' views that differ from yours

When Inquiring into others' views: if you are making assumptions about their views, state your assumptions; state the basis on which your assumptions are made; don't bother asking questions if you don't mean it.

When you arrive at an impasse: ask what data or logic might change their views; ask if there is any way you might jointly design an experiment that might provide new information

When you or others are hesitant to express your views or experiment with alternative ideas: encourage them or yourself to think out loud about what might be making it difficult; if there is a mutual desire to do so, jointly brainstorm ideas about overcoming barriers

from Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday, New York, 1990.

Feedback Skills
It is easy to give positive feedback to people doing well, or in general to give information that people want to hear. Most of us do this pretty well. It is giving negative feedback or information people don't want to hear that is far more problematic, of course. Feedback taps basic human needs-to improve, to compete, to be accurate; people want to be competent. Feedback can be reinforcing; if given properly, feedback is almost always appreciated and motivates people to improve. But for many people, daily work is like bowling with a curtain placed between them and the pins; they receive little information.


The following identifies some characteristics of effective feedback: effective feedback is...

• the "giver" must be clear about motives : too often we think we are providing feedback when we are really letting off anger or trying to exert control; it should take into account the needs of both the receiver and giver of feedback. It should be given to help, not to hurt. We too often give feedback because it makes us feel better or gives us a psychological advantage.
• problem oriented, not people oriented: feedback should focus on issues, not the person since the individual usually has little control over personality. It is important that we refer to what a person does rather than to what we think he is. Thus we might say that a person "talked more than anyone else in this meeting" rather than that he is a "loud-mouth."
• specific rather than general; simple, not overwhelming; the receiver must be able to do something about the problem if they choose to; make sure examples of the behavior are recent
• descriptive, not evaluative: people more readily receive information if the sender describes shat happened and communicates the personal effect it had, as opposed to evaluating its goodness or badness, rightness or wrongness.
• validating, not invalidating; it is important to acknowledge the other person's uniqueness and importance
• supportive and open to hear new and possibly disconfirming information; tone of voice, facial expression, choice of words is crucial here since tone can go a long way to indicate that B cares about A
• owned, not disowned ; use "I have a problem with your work", not "others have been complaining"
• matches words with deeds: make sure your body language and tone don't contradict the words ; given directly and with real feeling
• checked with others to support its validity; the other person must understand what has been said and be willing and able to accept it
• helpful to the receiver and directed toward behavior which the receiver can do something about. A person gets frustrated when reminded of some shortcoming over which he has no control. Ideally feedback should be solicited, not imposed
• Feedback is useful when well-timed (soon after the behavior-depending, of course, on the person's readiness to hear it, support available from others, and so forth). Excellent feedback presented at an inappropriate time may do more harm than good.
• accurate: not surprisingly, people will not want to hear negative information especially if it is incorrect
• involves sharing of information, rather than giving advice allowing a person to decide for himself, in accordance with his own goals and needs. When we give advice we tell him what to do, and to some degree take away his freedom to do decide for himself.
• It involves the amount of information the receiver can use rather than the amount we would like to give. To overload a person with feedback is to reduce the possibility that he may be able to use what he receives effectively. When we give more than can be used, we are more often than not satisfying some need of our own rather than helping the other person.

Problem oriented-not person oriented "How can we solve this problem?"	not	"Because of you there is a problem."
Congruent, not incongruent "Your behavior really upset me."	not	"Do I seem upset? No, everything's fine."
Descriptive, not Evaluative "Here is what happened; here is my reaction; here is what I suggest that would be more acceptable to me."	not	"You are wrong for doing what you did."
Validating, Not Invalidating "I have some ideas, but do you have any suggestions."	not	"You wouldn't understand, so we'll do it my way."
Specific, not global "You interrupted me three times during the meeting."	not	"You're always trying to get attention."
Conjunctive, not disjuncctive "Relating to what you just said, I'd like to discuss this."	not	"I want to discuss this (regardless of what you want to discuss."
Owned, not disowned "I've decided to turn down your request because..."	not	"You have a pretty good idea, but they just wouldn't approve it."
Supportive Listening, not One-Way Listening "What do you think are the obstacles standing in the way of improvement	not	As I said before, you make too many mistakes. You're just not doing the job."

• state the constructive purpose of the feedback ("Charlie, I'm upset about some things you say about production control in scheduling meetings; it is important to me that we talk about it.")
• Give the other person an opportunity to respond: try "what do you think"
• focus on what is said and done, not why. The "why" involves assumptions regarding motive or intent and this tends to alienate the person generate resentment, suspicion, and distrust. If we are uncertain of his motives or intent, this uncertainty itself is feedback, however, and should be revealed.
• Check to insure clear communication. One way of doing this is to have the receiver try to rephrase the feedback. No matter what the intent, feedback is often threatening and thus subject to considerable distortion or misinterpretation.
  · check to determine degree of agreement from others. Such "consensual validation" is of value to both the sender and receiver.
• Pay a lot of attention to the consequences of the feedback. The supervisor needs to become acutely aware of the effects of his feedback.
• Be ready to receive feedback yourself while avoiding defensiveness; the information may be valuable ask for clarification, summarize, check for accuracy, listen carefully; mentally note questions; paraphrase what you have heard
• It is an important step toward authenticity. Constructive feedback opens the way to a relationship which is built on trust, honest, and genuine concern and mutual growth.
• offers specific suggestions

Why managers are often reluctant to provide feedback

As important as feedback is, this critical managerial task remains one of the most problematic. Many managers would rather have root canal work than provide feedback to another-especially feedback that might be viewed as critical. Why are managers so reluctant to provide feedback? The reasons are many:

• fear of the other person's reaction; people can get very defensive and emotional when confronted with feedback and many managers are very fearful of the reaction
• the feedback may be based on subjective feeling and the manager may be unable to give concrete information if the other person questions the basis for the feedback;
• the information on which the feedback is based (eg. performance appraisal) may be a very flawed process

Coach vs. Judge: many managers would prefer to being a supportive coach than judge; feedback often forces a change in the relationship from friend to friend to parent-child. Some have called this "playing God."

• assume the problem is caused by the other person
• develop a private unilateral diagnosis and solution
• since the other person is the cause of the problem get him or her to change using either facts, logic, and rational persuasion
• involve indirect influence such as asking leading questions, manipulating the other person
• direct critique-tell the other person what he or she is doing wrong and how he or she should change
• if the other person resists or becomes defensive, that confirms the original diagnosis
• respond to resistance through some combination of intensifying pressure, protecting the other person, and rejecting the other person
• if your efforts are unsuccessful, or less successful than hoped, it is the other's fault
  

They suggest the following guidelines as an alternative way of achieving interpersonal effectiveness:

· emphasize common goals and mutual influence
· communicate openly and publicly
· test assumptions and beliefs
· combine advocacy (eg. communicate what the person thinks, knows, wants) with inquiry (learn what the other wants

Appendix 1: Reading Nonverbal Communication Cues

A large percentage (studies suggest over 90%) of the meaning we derive from communication, we derive from non-verbal cues that the other person gives. Often a person says one thing but communicates something totally different through vocal intonation and body language. These mixed signals force the receiver to choose between the verbal and non-verbal parts of the message. Most often, the receiver chooses the non-verbal aspects. Mixed messages create tension and distrust because the receiver senses that the communicator is hiding something or is being less than candid.

Nonverbal communication consists of:

· visual: body language including facial expression, eye movement, posture, gestures. The face is the biggest part. All of us "read" people's faces for ways to interpret what they say and feel. Think about dealing with someone with sunglasses. These visual cues can easily be misread especially when dealing with someone from another culture

· tactile: touching imparts a lot of information; examples include handshake, a pat on the back, or a hug

· vocal: the meaning of words can be altered significantly by changing the intonation of one's voice; think about how many ways you can say "no"

· use of time, space, and image

Appendix 2: Three Kinds of Interviews

Tell and Sell · fits when judgment of superior acceptable to subordinate, when sub. has ability to change and desired objectives are obtainable · most effective for new employees · objectives-communicate employee's evaluation as accurately as possible; gain employee acceptance of evaluation; · most important skill is persuasion · can expect some defensive reaction; since sup must be judge · can be difficult if inappropriate behavior is attractive to subordinate · often ineffective approach · this method encourages behavior focused toward pleasing supervisor rather than best thinking

Tell and Listen · fits same conditions as left · objective is to communicate accurately; give chance to respond · there will be defensiveness; listening skills critical; active listening needed; defensive behavior is reduced; if boss is effective motivator, can induce feelings of acceptance · can be joint problem solving; · supervisor may change · risk that subordinate may be satisfied but with no plan to improve job

Problem Solving · supervisor no longer judge, but helper; not diagnosing and supplying remedies · sup. must be willing to accept ideas for job improvement · must concentrate on situation, not individual · goal is to develop employee · skills needed- skillful questioning; skillful communicator · employee will think constructively if he perceives opportunity to influence process · subordinate will likely feel some increased job satisfaction; but superior may sacrifice some control · failure if subordinate doesn't respond to this method

---

Appendix 3: Five Modes of Conflict Resolution

Very Assertive   Unassertive	Competing		Collaborating
		Compromising
	Avoiding		Accommodating
	Uncooperative .......................................................Cooperative

Competing-forcing : In this mode you pursue your own goals, regardless of other person's ; you make first move to gain control and maximize chances of success; you prolong discussion of issues until other tires and gives in. This is designed for win lose situation
When you might use this strategy
· when quick, decisive action is vital-emergencies
· important issues where unpopular but vital actions necessary; when you know you are right
· against people who take advantage of noncompetitive behavior

Accommodating : In this mode you offer to handle problem any way other person wants; you go along with whatever the other person requests
When you might use this strategy
· when you find you are wrong-to allow a better position to be heard, to learn, to show your reasonableness
· when issues are more important to others than to you-to satisfy others and maintain cooperation
· to build social credits for later issues; when harmony important
· to minimize loss when you are outmatched and losing
· to allow subordinates to develop by learning from mistakes

Avoiding : in this mode you downplay seriousness of the problem; you tell the other person the problem doesn't bother you and explain there is no point is trying to resolve a conflict between two such basically different people and positions
When you might use this strategy:
· when an issue is trivial, tangential, or symptomatic
· when you perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns
· when potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution
· to let people cool down and regain perspective
· when gathering information supersedes immediate decisions
· when others can resolve the conflict more effectively

Compromising : In this mode you point out to the other person that if you both will make a few concessions, the conflict can be resolved; point out that if the disagreement is to be resolved, some sacrifices must be made by both of you
When you might use this strategy:
· when goals are important but not worth effort or potential disruption of more assertive modes
· when opponents with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals
· to achieve temporary settlements to complex issues; to arrive at expedient solutions under time pressures
· as a backup when collaboration or competition is unsuccessful

Collaborating : try to sort out where each of you stands and identify options available to meet both parties' needs; you suggest you take your ideas and other person's ideas and put them together to make an even more workable idea; express your concern for the differences between you and let the other person know you want a resolution which satisfies both
When you might use this strategy
· to find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised
· when your objective is to learn;
· to merge insights from people with different perspectives
· to gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus
· to work through feelings which have interfered with a relationship

Appendix 4: A checklist for evaluating your feedback effectiveness

• what is your purpose in giving the feedback
• what specific actions do you want to reinforce or correct? What are the consequences of the action?
• what suggestions might be helpful?
• What pitfalls might occur during this interview?
• How do you plan to overcome the pitfalls?
  

After the interview you might address these issues

• did the feedback accomplish your purposes
• what specifically did you do?
• what specifically were his/her reactions and your reactions
  did you follow the principles of supportive communication
• where did you fall short?
• how well did you focus on the situation, issue, behavior and not the person
• how well did you maintain the self-esteem of the other
• how well did you lead by example?

Reference: Hill, Linda, "Building Effective One-on-One Work Relationships," Harvard Business School Technical Notes, 9-497-028, 1996.