Classic Communication Mistake

We have seen the movie a thousand times: the hero is captured and about to be killed by the baddie. But just before it happens, the hero asks the baddie how and why he(or she) performed the dastardly deeds that led to great havoc and chaos. The baddie chortles and then tells everything, confident the hero is going to die in a few moments. The baddie then departs, leaving the death of the hero to their underlings. Naturally, the hero breaks free, beats up the underlings, and goes on to save the day, not only capturing and/or killing the baddie but now knowing how to undo all the problems that have been created because of the baddie's loose lips. It is, among other things, a classic communication mistake. Why, we wonder on our drive home from the movie theater, did not the baddie simply shoot the hero instead of spilling the beans on everything? The answer falls under the heading of institutional arrogance. It is not uncommon

This can be found in many organizations as well. Look at the evaluation process that many profit and non-profit organizations have today. The boss evaluates their workers and tells them whether their work is satisfactory. This exchange is largely, if not totally, one way with little or no opportunity for the worker to assess the performance of their boss. Why not? Why are many organizational superiors insensitive or hesitant to provide their people with opportunities to not only evaluate them, but also provide meaningful feedback on how they and the organization itself can and should be doing a better or more effective job? It is another case of institutional arrogance.

I am in no way implyjng that bosses are bad people or that they do not care about the welfare of their organization or the people they employ. Reality dictates the opposiie is much more the norm. But when it comes to evaluations, one-way communication seems to dominate. For meaningful and lasting professional and even personal partnerships to florish, then they must ride on the wings of two-way communication, true collaboration, and mutual trust.

The late Studs Terkel once observed that the big guys who ties and sit behind big desks are not necessarily the smartest people in the room. If they were, they would know the value that talking-with has over talking-at and then begin practicing it.