Keeping Anticipation In-Check

There are few things that get our hearts pumping than anticipation. These days, for many, it may be upcoming debates between presidential candidates. For others, it may be the thought of a home-cooked meal. Whatever is the "thing" that dominates our thoughts in looking ahead, there is little doubt it is a time of  high internal activity. In fact, the anticipation can be so intense that it may even overshadow the actual event or activity to which we were looking forward. It can also enhance whatever enjoyment we derive from the event or activity depending upon what it is and how satisfying it is to us.

When it comes to communication, however, anticipation is not always a good thing, particularly if we are unable to keep it in-check. What do I mean by that? Let's say we have an upcoming meeting with our boss. Let us also say we do not know exactly what it is the boss wants to discuss. I have been in situations like that and can attest to the reality that there is little else that I think about. Does the boss want to see me because I have done something wrong? Or have they called me in to sing my praises? To say the least, such a discussion is one I am highly anticipating. As a result, I have gone into those situations with multiple things to begin talking about so as to give the appearance of being prepared.

The same has held true with similar, upcoming encounters I have had with friends or relatives. Giving into my anticipation, I have often begun talking about things that have no relation to what my spouse or cousin or daughter wants to discuss. The result is I have come across as being more interested in my own agenda then what is my "partner" in the conversation wanted to talk over. This paints me as being self-absorbed and insensitive. The best tool against such moments is to keep one's feeling of anticipation in-check all successful encounters are ones in which all participants are committed to two-way interactions

"Out Front"

Not long ago my wife and a friend of hers were talking on the phone and made plans to get together for lunch. My wife told the friend that she would meet her "out front." The friend, in response, said she that would be fine as she would be "out front" waiting. No problem, right? The time came for my wife to go meet her friend. She went to leave our house to pick up her friend at the friend's house only to open the door to find her friend waiting outside our house. My wife had the understanding that she would be picking up her friend at the friend's house. The friend had the understanding she was to come to our house.

This miscue was no big deal as everything worked out fine. The two had a nice laugh at the misunderstanding and then proceeded to have a nice time together. Both persons, I should note, are as nice as they are smart. Their conversation was very much on friendly terms, yet despite that they got their signals crossed. In making their plans, my wife knew what she meant and her friend knew what she meant. But the two did not know what the other meant. Each assumed what they were communicating was quite clear. Each was wrong. Fortunately, this scenario was quite innocent but imagine if something of great consequence had been at stake.

This incident illustrates just how complex communication can often be and how easily actions can be misdirected simply because people do not make the effort of ensuring mutual understanding. This kind of every day mishap happens to all of us. While one could argue it adds to the charm of being human, others - like me - could respond while being human certainly does have its advantages, it also means each of us needs to do a better job of ensuring what we are saying is clear and that what we are hearing corresponds what the sender of their message is trying to say. Even in everyday situations, without question communication is a challenge.

Moats

Remember moats? They are architectural designs you rarely see added to new houses or structures any more today. Of course, in their time, which began approximately one-thousand years ago, they used to be quite popular, particularly as applied to castles. Moats would be built around the castles as a way of helping make it more difficult for any invaders from invading or storming the place where the ruler and his or her people lived. They were also designed to make it harder for folks to leave the castle. On both accounts, the moats worked pretty well as they remain "in-style" throughout Asia, Europe and even Africa for hundreds of years.

While moats as we know them are not being built these days, they very much exist. When it comes to communication, moats are used by many. They are devices geared to protect all who communicate from criticism, debate or disagreement. One form of moats today is known as "small talk." Such interaction usually revolves around the weather or kids or traffic or an array of so-called safe topics on which everyone feels free to comment without fear of heated exchange. The result is interaction with little commitment. We interact with another without investing ourselves any more then is necessary.

I confess to being a small-talker on a regular basis. But this is a fact in which I take little pride. Moats as they apply to communication are little more than a charade, a shadow conversation in which the participants go through the motion of conversation without actually having one that comes close to having any meaning. To be fair, small-talk does have its place. At the same time, I am not a fan. Much like the moats of a thousand years ago, I do not think it would be a bad thing if we stopped relying upon them to protect ourselves from either making or attempting to make a genuine connection with another.

Shout-Out to "Mad"

To all my readers and, perhaps more accurately, non-readers, I have been on a bit of a hiatus from this blog. Yes, I missed it and, yes, it was nice taking a bit of a breather. Now, I am back. Over eleven-hundred blog entries and still counting. Not bad. Sadly, my return is a bit of a sad one as I wish to give a shout-out and appreciation to "Mad" magazine. This classic publication has been part of the American landscape for nearly seventy years. Recently, its publisher announced that the magazine will be ending its reign of wit, sarcasm, silliness, and lampooning shortly. I, for one, am not happy with this decision.

Could one say that I am now mad at "Mad" magazine? Perhaps. But more than that, I am grateful to the many smiles it has given me my entire life. (I "started" just a little before "Mad's" first edition hit the newsstands.) While I cannot say I read every issue of the magazine, I certainly read enough over the years to recognize it for the treasure it has been for almost seven decades. Being funny is not easy, especially on a consistent basis. But what the folks at "Mad" did, was take "funny" to a higher level by being clever, insightful and, at times, profound. Its jokes on such aspects of our culture as politics, entertainment and advertising, to name a few, has been spot-on.

Not on-purpose, with the U.S. and so many its leaders in an array of areas being the kind of people they are, "Mad's" writers were never without targets in which to poke holes. Though this may have ruffled a few egos over the year, it has long been my perspective those at the top need to be satirized from time-to-time. Not only does this give them an opportunity to assess their behavior, it also provides us affected by their decisions and personalities with a reminder that they are just as human as us and, as a result, no better as people. So thank you, "Mad" magazine. If you ever think of coming out of retirement, then that will be fine by me.     

PR is All Around

Public relations is tough. For one thing, it is not easy coming up with a sustained campaign. But even more than that, the amount of competition is almost overwhelming. Every entity that puts forth a service or product is doing all it can all day, every day to promote itself. It is all that those of us on the receiving end of these non-stop messages can do to keep track of all that exists in a particular field; never mind trying to figure out which cereal, for instance, is the best or which toothpaste actually makes our teeth whiter. This represents the challenge of public relations as it relates to promoting "things."

This does not touch on the public relations work each of does on behalf of ourselves. The challenge of that far exceeds what any manufacturer faces when devising campaigns to boost sales. As journalist Will Storr observes in his most-interesting book, "Selfie," all of us are, "to some degree, anxious and hyperactive PR agents for our selves." Such effort revolves around the concept of trying to determine what others think of us. Regardless of our individual morality, I do not believe there is a single person who does not contemplate strategies on a daily basis that they believe will influence others to think of them in a positive way.

With the world population now in excess of 7 billion, that means there are billions of self-directed PR agents that go to work every day promoting the single product that means the most to them: themselves. Even if that person works as a public relations agent and has clients they have been assigned to promote, you can bet they are in all likelihood putting more energy into promoting themselves. After all, each of us is the hero or leading man or woman in our lives. We all want our hero to succeed, do well and have others like them as much as we do. Whether we like it or not, public relations is all around us.

The Difficulty of Success

Who determines whether we have communicated effectively? On the surface, such a question seems easy enough. The answer is "us." Surely, we know whether or not we have communicated well. Did I speak and/or write in a coherent style? Did we frame our message in a way that best relates to the needs and concerns of our audience? Did we actively listen to the audience's response? If the answer to each of these fundamental questions is "yes," then all is good. Any miscommunication is on the shoulders of the audience. Not us. If the desired results of our outreach fall short of their intended goal, then that, too, is more about the audience than us. Right?

Not necessarily. Perhaps a good analogy is a batter in baseball. The batter can be holding the bat properly, have a sturdy stance and a smooth swing, but all that does not mean they are going get a hit or even make contact with the pitch. Doing things as they should does not guarantee success. That is one of the frustrating and challenging aspects of communication. The audience has a definitive say in the matter. Thus, the answer to the question asked at the beginning of this entry is both the sender and receiver. And even then, a thumbs-up from both entities does not automatically equate with success. For that to occur, "success" must be defined with both parties agreeing upon the definition. 

For myself, I define "success" as two-fold: mutual understanding and ongoing dialog. I understand such a definition might not ring the bell of a client who wants to boost sales and has hired you to orchestrate a communication campaign to make that happen. The execution of your campaign can be flawless but that does not mean sales will increase. There are far too many variables driving the audience's response that one cannot always control. The playing field on which the act of communicating occurs is ever-shifting. As part of this, success often remain elusive, hard to grasp and hold onto - a goal not easily achieved.    

Finishing Each Other's Sentences

I admit that I make this entry with the full realization that upon reading it, folks will be tempted to label me as a cynic, an unromantic, or a real fuddy-duddy. To all that and more, I acknowledge your reaction and even see the logic of it. Still, I stick to my guns. I find the act of finishing another person's sentences to be annoying and wish people would not do it. (Full disclosure: I do it from time to time with my spouse and always admonish myself (to myself) when I do.) There are several reasons for my attitude. One is that I see it as an act of rudeness. A person is talking and suddenly, without invitation, the person with whom they are speaking interjects what they believe to be the thoughts or words of the speaker. How do they know what the speaker is going to say? Why not wait and find out?

The second and, to me, most important reason for having such a distaste for this act is that it is a blatant act of non-listening. Here's the scene: two people are talking. One begins talking about, say, what they did over the weekend. After awhile, he says, "Then I had to go to the store and......." He is suddenly interrupted when the other person interjects,".........some more cold slaw, baking soda and coffee beans." At this point, the conversation goes either one of two ways: The initial speaker concurs or has to correct what was just suggested. Either way, when that occurs, it makes for an awkward moment. It also knocks off balance the rhythm of the conversation.

I understand not everyone is as engaging when they talk as we might like them to be. They can be repetitive, dull and even confusing. Nevertheless, being an effective communicator requires active listening. This is because none of us are mind readers. Also, regardless of how close we might to that person, as Professor Nicholas Epley, a behavioral scientist, reported in his 2014 book, "Mindwise," often times we do not know what the person with whom we are conversing is going to say or what words they are going to use. Trying to finish their sentences is a crap shoot. In other words, exercise some patience and let that other person complete their thoughts or stories. It is better for you, them, and the overall exchange.