Antipatterns for Time-Constrained Communication: III

In Part I of this exploration, I described three communication antipatterns that can arise independent of what we intend to communicate. In Part II I described antipatterns that arise, in part, because of the attributes of what we're communicating. In this last Part III, I focus on three kinds of confusions that arise from contextual factors.

As in the previous posts in this series, I use the name Eugene (E for Expressing) when I'm referring to the person expressing an idea, asking a question, or in some other way contributing new material to an exchange. And I use the name Rachel (R for Receiving) when I'm referring to the person Receiving Eugene's communication.

With that prolog, here are three antipatterns that increase the risk of miscommunication.

Poor framing

The frame of a message includes the specific context required to understand it. The specific context is the top layer of the knowledge stack. It includes specific vocabulary, acronyms, historic references, and the settings in which components must operate. Because framing terminology that also serves other purposes can create ambiguity, the frame includes information needed to resolve those ambiguities.

Rachel (a recipient) If time constraints are tight,
the urge to find communications
shortcuts can be overwhelmingcan understand only well-framed messages. A poorly framed message almost certainly leads to miscommunication.

Examples are among the most powerful tools for mitigating the risk of poor framing. If Eugene (the person Expressing the message content) doesn't include examples, Rachel would do well to ask for them, or perhaps to formulate one herself and ask Eugene to confirm that it's a relevant example.

Similarity to previous problems

If time constraints are tight, the urge to find communications shortcuts can be overwhelming. One very appealing shortcut involves viewing the current problem as another instance of a previously solved problem. That approach can work well at times, because it saves some of the effort associated with defining the problem and then finding a solution.

But in our haste we sometimes overlook important distinctions between the current problem and the problem previously solved. For example, when Eugene has taken this shortcut, and Rachel or others haven't, the opportunities for miscommunication are numerous. Worse, recognizing the miscommunications can be difficult when the parties are talking about different problems using similar vocabularies.

At some point when this has occurred, someone might say, "Wait, are we talking about the same thing?" If you feel the urge to ask such a question, you could be caught in this kind of trap.

Closely held information

If one of the parties to the exchange, let's say Eugene, has access to closely held information, special kinds of miscommunications can occur. Suppose that Eugene knows about Secret 1, but Rachel doesn't. And suppose that Secret 1 is relevant to their exchange. We can easily imagine scenarios in which Eugene — knowingly or unknowingly — allows Rachel to exit the conversation with a significant misconception. But there's nothing special about these roles — we can swap roles and the problem could still arise.

Eugene's failure (or choice) to inform Rachel that she is misinterpreting some part of their exchange might not reflect badly on Eugene. For example, he might be constrained by law or by role not to reveal anything about Secret 1, including its very existence.

Both Eugene and Rachel might simultaneously possess closely held information that they cannot reveal to the other. Navigating in environments in which these scenarios are common can be challenging.

Last words

These three posts have explored miscommunications that arise in three categories: causes independent of content, causes that depend on content, and causes that depend on contextual factors. Other frameworks are possible, of course. To search for causes of miscommunication in your context, begin by collecting examples. If you can devise a framework that covers a significant share of your examples, you can use that framework to anticipate other communication antipatterns. Anticipation is among the first steps toward prevention.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Effective Communication at Work:

Virtual Presentations

Modern team efforts almost certainly involve teleconferences, and many teleconferences include presentations, often augmented with video or graphics. Delivering these virtual presentations effectively requires an approach tailored to the medium.

The Limits of Status Reports: I

Some people erroneously believe that they can request status reports as often as they like, and including any level of detail they deem necessary. Not so.

Virtual Blowhards

Controlling meeting blowhards is difficult enough in face-to-face meetings, but virtual meetings present next-level problems, because techniques that work face-to-face are unavailable. Here are eight tactics for dealing with virtual blowhards.

Red Flags: II

When we find clear evidence of serious problems in a project or other collaboration, we sometimes realize that we had overlooked several "red flags" that had foretold trouble. In this Part II of our review of red flags, we consider communication patterns that are useful indicators of future problems.

Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: III

When we first perform actions or play roles unfamiliar to us, we make mistakes. We learn new ways not only by reading or being told, but also by practicing. Unless we feel that making mistakes at first is acceptable, learning might never occur.

See also Effective Communication at Work and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info