Communication is Often Slippery

In many ways, we live in a slippery world. Rarely are things as definitive as we might like. For instance, on a dinner date is it appropriate for the man to pay the bill or should the couple pay for their own order?  As we know, there is disagreement on this sort of thing. Regarding a more significant issue, should a person convicted of first-degree murder be executed or is a life-time sentence in prison the proper amount of justice? This is an issue where people of good faith honestly disagree. As a result, "justice" is not necessarily either-or. It is a topic that has different layers of meaning.

Another slippery aspect of life is communication. It is not always as clear-cut as one might think. How does one define the concept of effective communication, for instance? One may purchase a full-page ad in The New York Times and then claim they communicated their message effectively because the ad was seen by hundreds of thousands of people. On the surface such a claim is hard to dispute. But suppose that same ad does not generate any additional sales for the advertiser? Or suppose the ad triggers a great deal of criticism because readers its content to be offensive? If either one or both of those scenarios occur, then that initial act of communication still be considered to be effective?

None of these examples is far-fetched. In fact, if anything, they are quite plausible and even likely to happen. This reality makes communication a slippery critter. How we communication, words we use to express our thoughts and feelings, and how we interpret what is shared with us are all subject to interpretation and varying degrees of assessment in terms of quality and effectiveness. This is why there will never be universal agreement when it comes to communication. Thus, communication as an act and field of study will rarely be smooth-sailing.

       

What is the Ultimate Success?

What is the ultimate in communication? What has to happen for one to declare that when it comes to communicating, they have reached the top of the mountain? I raise those related questions because I am not sure there is a clear or set answer to them. In sports, for example, I suppose a player could say the ultimate is when their team wins a game or perhaps when they do something spectacular to help the team win that game or maybe if they as an individual are honored by being inducted into that sport's hall of fame. What is the "ultimate" when it comes to communication and business? How about when it comes to parenting? What about the entertainment industry?

I do not see the questions I raised initially as being all that easy to address simply because the answer to them - a best - is situational. Do people feel the most satisfaction when they are heard and understood or is their bell rung when they have understood others? In the field of public relations, what is the ultimate success of a practitioner? Is their measure of success based on how well their client does or in what they did on behalf of their client? To me, communication is a tough field to judge when it comes to success simply because how well one does is often dependent upon the perspectives of others.

President Trump could claim a recent appearance on television was a major success because a record-number of people watched his show. But many of those same viewers could claim they only watched the President in the hope he would say something inflammatory or off-the-wall. Success, regarding communication, then, could very well be in the eye of the beholder. One final analogy: A painting is not unlike communication. How does the painter of a piece judge the success of her or his work? Do they assess the quality of the piece or is their judgment based on whether the art work is eventually sold? And so this dilemma is with communication.

Trust is the Key

If one were to ask multiple married couples what is the one ingredient they believe is necessary to sustain a happy marriage, my guess is the answer that would be given most is "love." What would be the answer if a very similar question - What is the one ingredient above all others that is necessary to sustain a positive relationship? - were posed to business persons and customers. I asked this question of the more than 30 students in the undergraduate-level business class that I am teaching. The responses, though interesting, turned out not to be all that varied. "Trust" and "credibility" were, buy far, the leading responses. Other responses, included "credibility," "reasonable prices" and "positive ethics."

All these were and are good answers. What they have in common is the fact they revolve around the major focus of this blog: communication." Successful communicators are honest. They do not set out to mislead or misinform or even bluff their way through a ticklish situation or encounter. People shop where they shop because, in part, they believe the shops where they wish to spend money are reliable and appreciate the coming of those they seek to serve. Feeding into this is the notion is the perception of customers that they desire sincerity coupled with truth. In essence, businesses should ideally be truth-zones.

As one of my students wrote, "The most important factor between a business and a customer would be trust because without it the business would not be able to exist." That says it all. The same applies to all relationships. Trust is the essential key. One generates and maintains it via their behavior and what they communicate. If their credibility is lost, it is no doubt because of how they have behaved and what they have put forth via actions and words. My unscientific poll reaffirms the importance people place on communicating honestly.

Crisis at Uber

Everything seemed to be working fine. In fact, for a while, they actually were. Then, tragedy struck and now Uber Technologies, Inc., finds itself facing a major crisis. For a good while now, Uber has been working on producing a series of driverless cars as a way to further enhance its successes and serve its growing customer base. Unfortunately, while testing one of its new driverless cars, a few days ago in Arizona, a pedestrian was struck and killed. This is the first time such a tragedy has occurred. Out of this, several questions emerge: What impact will this have on the move toward driverless cars? and, more directly, How will this effect Uber? 

From the standpoint of the overall industry, one auto safety advocate predicted the accident will put a severe dent in consumer confidence in the concept of driverless cars. Time, as always, will tell. But more immediately, what will this do to the Uber "brand?" Further, how will executives at Uber respond? From a communication standpoint, it is going to be interesting to see the steps that they take to address the questions and concerns that are emerging in the aftermath of what happened. How and even what they do could very likely have a major impact on the company's profit-margin. Bottom line: this incident is a perfect case study in the area of crisis communication.

There are several key areas on which folks at Uber need to focus: identifying the real and potential problems; formulating the specific messages they wish to put forth; and determining the audiences that the company needs to address and/or with which they need to be concerned. In addition, fairly or not, time is not Uber's friend. Their responses, verbal and otherwise, should already be underway. A person has died and people want answers and, perhaps more importantly, public accountability. Without that, it will not be surprising to see confidence in Uber drop sharply. It is up to Uber to ensure that possible decline is only temporary.

Tension

There are those who claim they are at their best when the atmosphere around them is tense. When pressure is in the air, they say this is when they shine. Maybe. Maybe there are those who really are at their best as communicators when others with whom they are interacting are uneasy or on-edge. Does this mean they shine because it is at these moments when they are able to keep their wits about them, thus being the one in the room who continues to think clearly while others are confused and unable to articulate effectively? Again, maybe. Personally, I believe no one is immune from being overwhelmed by pressure from time to time and therefore unable to be clear of trout or effective in what they communicate.

Everyone, at times, is victim to tension. But what about those times when we do, in fact, rise above pressure or high levels of uneasiness? What enables us to do that? What it is that allows us to be communicate effectively when others around us are unable to? Such circumstances speak to times of crisis. It is those times when the routine is either under siege or, in fact, has been toppled. Disruption can and often does knock one off balance. The emotions one feels at these moments can be powerful enough to cause verbal and intellectual disorientation. Tension, when powerful enough, can be enough to compromise one's ability to communicate effectively.

A key way to reduce the chances of falling victim to such times is preparation. Take, for instance, an unwanted occurrence as a fire. How do we know what to do when a fire breaks out? Practice. This is why children in school have fire drills. They practice enough times so the proper steps to take are deeply instilled within me. Thinking clearly during tense times is also a matter of proper training. Proper training comes from devising negative scenarios and then practicing enough to where the ability to communicate well is not lost. None of us are immune to tension. At the same time, this does not mean we have to be a victim of it.

Greater Work Load

The arrival of social media was a game changer for the public relations profession. No more did these professional communicators have to rely so much on the traditional media for exposure for clients. Instead of having to pitch stories to reporters, for instance, in the hope they would agree to pursue a story, public relations workers could simply post that story on the web or email it out to as many persons as they wanted. The press' power over public relations efforts was, if not totally compromised, certainly reduced. For those in public relations, social media marked the end media dependence.

But social media also greatly increased the work load of those in public relations. A key characteristic of social media is that it literally gives anyone with a computer or access to the Internet the ability to post pretty much anything they want, thus making it possible for hundreds of thousands of viewers to see or read their message. This blog of mine is an example. There is nothing to prevent me from posting commments that are highly critical of a product or public figure. If I do that often enough and develop a following, then potentially I could do harm to who or whatever it is I am attacking. This, of course, is not something that any public figure or entity wants.

Suddenly, not only does the public relations worker representing the subject of my criticism have to deal with the media, now they have to contend with me and/or people like me who are saying not-so-nice things about their client as well. And as I am able to communicate my public perspectives any time I wish, this means the public relations reps need to be at-the-ready to refute my messages. Is this unfair to those in public relations? Yes. But in today's virtual world, it is also the new reality. For many in public relations, the work day is no longer just eight hours long. Their need to be vigilant on behalf of a client is now greatly expanded.

Having Impact

The question is not about whether words matter. Is there any one who honestly believes they don't? The real issue revolves around two questions in-one: Under what circumstances do they matter the most? and What steps can be taken to ensure when we do use them that they have the most impact? (Quick aside: Obviously as we all use words, these questions apply to all of us.) The first question is more situational. There are times when we are speaking when being heard and understood is important. For some, these "times" may be all-the-time. For others, not so much. Either way, as individuals we know when we most want to make a meaningful connection with others.

This is why the second of those two questions is really the key to effective communication. Packaging is a vital element here. If one is an entertainer, for instance, then lighting is often used to, in a sense, set the mood for a performance. Bright lights highlight one type of presentation, while dim lights signify another. Sure, a singer can perform a sad song with bright lights, but it won't have the same impact if those same lights are turned down. This is a point that professional communicators pay a lot of attention to. They are constantly looking for ways to better showcase their clients or messages.

It should not be any different for so-called non-professional communicators. For those folks, and I include myself among them, we should pay attention to the "how" of our communication efforts as much as we do the "what." My wife and I talk all the time, but sometimes we do not properly hear what the other is saying. Why? One of us may distracted or not recognize right away that what is being shared needs to be remembered. This is why the sender of a message needs to take steps to ensure they need the attention of the one on the receiving end. "Can we talk?" or "Do you have a minute?" represent good first steps. Our words will not necessarily have impact unless we take steps to properly set the stage for them.

Stumbling

I, for one, am always glad and grateful when something I attempt goes smoothly. No bumps in the road, mistakes, wrong turns or stumbles. No doubt I feel as good as I do when none of those things occur is because usually they do occur. When going to the grocery store, for instance, I usually end up getting caught at a traffic light or stuck behind a school bus. Seeing a friendly face, though pleasant, would be better if I was better at remembering names. And conversations would be more satisfying if I was able to more quickly call upon specific words that I wish use. These and other similar every-day examples may seem trivial but the fact is, for most of us, they constitute our lives. They speak to actions in which we are involved are a regular basis.

Stumbling is a regular part of all these activities. This is particularly true in our efforts to communicate as effectively as possible. These days part of my time is spent teaching a business class on globalization. I go into each class prepared to speak to a number of points. While more often than not, I do cover everything I want, nearly 100 percent of the time I do not do it as smoothly as I would like. In part, this is due to the fact students do not always grasp things as well as I might like. But what is even more true, I do not always articulate things as well as I could or should. (Despite the fact I sure try to.)

All this speaks to a key element of communication that all of us share: our communication efforts rarely ever go as well as we would like. Given this truism, yes, we should continue to do as well as we can to communicate well. But perhaps more importantly, we should focus on doing a better job of appreciating the imperfection of virtually all communication efforts. We need to listen to what is being said to us with a higher level of charity and speak to others with an equally high level of patience in the knowledge that often what we are saying may not come out quite as well as we might wish.  

Stick to the Truth

Update. In the previous blog entry, I called for Hope Hicks, communication director of the Trump administration, to step down following her admission that she has publicly lied on behalf of the President. For a professional communicator to reveal that she does not tell the truth, then any chance of such a person carrying on with even a shred of credibility is lost. Gone. As in never coming back. I am happy to report that shortly after my entry, Hicks handed in her resignation. A specific date as to when she leaves her position has not been announced, but she and The White House did indicate it would be soon. Make no mistake, this is a very good thing.

For the leader of our nation to function with any degree of effectiveness, they must be credible. When they speak, they must be viewed as telling the truth. Any more, the Trump team, including Trump himself, has very little credibility left. Hicks' admission reaffirmed that. Her resignation is the best thing she could have done for herself, her boss, and the country. Maybe on a personal level, she is a good person. On a professional level, however, her lack of integrity is appalling. I have no doubt it is in large part due to the company she has kept while on the job. But that is in no way an excuse. A person of professional integrity would have quit the moment she was first directed to lie.

Serving as a spokesperson is never without challenge. One needs to be articulate, quick on their feet, able to contend with the glare of the media spotlight, keep their cool, and be well informed. Together, all that makes the position quite complex. At the same time, all that complexity is kept in-place if one sticks to telling the truth. So long as they do not lie or seek to mislead, then the job they do will be acceptable. Being a teller of the truth serves as a balance to the many layers of the spokesmanship position. The performance of Hicks will hopefully serve as a case study for all current and future spokespersons. It is not a job for liars.