As I See It: Communication Fail
July 22, 2024 Victor Rozek
If there is one frequently overlooked source of workplace discontent it involves the quality of communication. Or the lack of it. On a corporate level, pronouncements seem predictably boilerplate lacking authenticity if not veracity, more suited to limiting liability than guiding behavior. Everyone, for example, touts their commitment to customer service. But customers must often navigate draconian phone trees and endure excessive wait times before being connected to a helpful human.
The disconnect between what is said and what is experienced is based on two sets of competing values: Professed Values, and Operational Values. Professed Values are the ones companies and individuals publicly acknowledge. A sampling might include: Honesty, Integrity, Equal Opportunity, Diversity, and Respect. Operational Values are the lesser values by which we actually live.
For example: Amazon’s Professed Values in regard to the treatment of its employees state that the company is “committed to ensuring the people, workers, and communities that support our entire value chain are treated with fundamental dignity and respect. We strive to ensure that the products and services we provide are produced in a way that respects human rights.”
Sounds great, especially if you believe that low warehouse wages and sophisticated 24/7 surveillance systems, which track employees from the time they come to work to the time they leave, are somehow evidence of “dignity and respect.”
A recent Oxfam report found that “Amazon warehouse workers are anxious, depressed, and burned out. Nearly three quarters report feeling pressure to work faster. More than half report that the pace of work makes it hard for them to use the bathroom. In Amazon warehouses, production standards – not people – reign supreme.” And the report concludes that “physical exhaustion, work-related injuries, and mental health concerns are just some of the risks posed by these high-pressure environments.”
So, Amazon’s Operational Values could be described as speed, efficiency, and profit, far different from the Professed Values described in press releases and employee handbooks. Note that there is nothing inherently wrong with speed, efficiency, and profit. These values only become problematic when they conflict with the expectations created by a company’s Professed Values.
The same holds true for individuals. Employees may express a Professed Value of commitment to job and company, which conflicts with the Operational Value of creating more balance in their lives. I, for example, place a high value on environmental stewardship, but if the simple act of recycling required me to drive two hours each way to a recycling center, I probably wouldn’t do it. So convenience is one of my Operational Values.
The solution to the values conflict is, whenever possible, to incorporate Operational Values into our Professed Values thus honoring both. How, for example, can Amazon – or any company – remain efficient and profitable while treating employees with dignity and respect? These two sets of values are not incompatible unless profit alone drives decision making.
When Professed Values become incidental to Operational Values it creates discord and unease as employees (and often the public) sense that a company lacks integrity and cannot be trusted. In the extreme, it can also invite retaliation from employees in the form of theft or deliberate work slowdown.
While corporate communication is typically handled by public/media relations that specialize in spin, interpersonal communication has also become problematic in the workplace. People have become exquisitely sensitive to a range of issues in part because they don’t experience being heard or seen. Some of this lack of visibility can be attributed to a growing cultural rudeness, but much of it results from the language we use to express ourselves. There are two phrases that are used pervasively in our culture which rob us of psychological visibility – of truly being heard and known. Those phrases are “I feel like…” and “I feel that…”
I feel like you’re not listening to me; I feel that we need more training; I feel like tech support is understaffed; I feel that the new software release is premature. I feel like women’s opinions aren’t respected.
When we use those phrases we believe we’re expressing feelings – often important ones – and may become frustrated when the listener doesn’t respond appropriately. But there isn’t a single feeling expressed in any of those statements. They are all thoughts. I think you’re not listening to me; I think we need more training; I think tech support is understaffed; I think the new software release is premature; I think women’s opinions aren’t respected. What’s missing are actual words that describe the feelings behind the thoughts. What do I actually feel when I have the thought that you’re not listening to me? Frustration? Anger? “I feel frustrated and angry when I think you’re not listening to me” is a far different communication and likely to get a much different response.
Likewise, saying “I feel hurt, annoyance and rage when I think women’s opinions are not respected” is a much more complete communication which allows the listener to fully understand the impact of being dismissive.
There are, in fact, a number of excellent communication models that could help improve mutual understanding and enhance individual visibility. Unfortunately, none of them work. The common assumption is that communication models fail because, after initial training, employees don’t bother to use them. But even assuming that the models were used, why might they still fail? The simple reason is that people don’t tell the truth, or at best they edit themselves to the point of inauthenticity. It’s the GIGO axiom applied to the intention for, and impact of, a communication.
Imagine a doctor making medical decisions based on faulty or incomplete patient data. The physician’s intention is to properly treat the patient, but the impact on the patient may be deleterious. That’s the position we’re placing others in when we don’t speak our truth. They are forced to make judgements based on incomplete or false information, and then we are left to wonder why we feel so misunderstood and invisible.
Can speaking the truth have consequences? Of course. So it is imperative that it be delivered respectfully, preferably without blame or judgement. Most of us learn our communication style through family, education, and social interaction. But quite often, based on life experience, or fear, or caution, we wrap our communications in a shroud of self-protection editing out what’s real in favor of what’s pragmatic.
That, regrettably, is a recipe for invisibility and ultimately, isolation.
RELATED STORIES
As I See It: Upgrade Exhaustion
As I See It: The Other Eight Hours
As I See It: Elusive Connections
As I See It: Entitlement Master Class
As I See It: Greetings, Comrade IT Professional
