by Diane M. Hoffmann, ph.d./th.
How does one communicate with another who has never been trained in effective communication? It is hard for the one to lead the conversation into the right direction if both people are on a different Focus of Argument. One is arguing from the point of view of his own focus and the other from a totally different focus. What is the right focus of argument?
I was working on a temporary assignment for a company where my job was to prepare financial presentation charts. Financial managers would insert their data into a common drive on the network system and construct their charts.
At the corporate operations end, which is where I was, the goal was to standardize the different styles and formats in which these charts came in from their different original sources. One of the managers who had been asked to change certain aspects of his monthly charts went ahead and added a whole new set instead, and made changes to already approved standards. Not only did his department now have two sets of charts on the common drive, but merging the two required major work because of the inconsistencies of his changes.
When I brought up the problem, it came to the attention of one of the computer operators who was involved with the manager's charts. This operator took the side of the manager and argued that it didn't matter if the charts were changed and that managers had the right to develop their own charts as they wished. But the problem was "bringing the two sets of non-compatible charts back into one set". That was the Focus of Argument, not whether or not managers had the right to develop their own charts.
No matter how I tried to make the point clear that we were not arguing the changes in the new charts, but that we now had to amalgamate two sets of charts into one in the best possible way, while keeping the necessary data from the point of view of both the department manager and corporate operations. But the operator created his own focus of argument and got "stuck" on it for the rest of the discussion. He became more and more entrenched in his own focus, to the point where he walked away, back to his desk unnecessarily shaking his head.
Had both people focused on the same purpose for the discussion -- the same Focus of Argument -- a workable corporate solution would have been reached.
Those who are lucky enough to have been taught effective communication by their parents or their teachers in school will have a rewarding head start later in life. Those who have not had this privilege will have to acquire it as they move into jobs; it will then be their own responsibility and the responsibility of management to make it a subject of training and nurturing.
In our case here, the computer operator has never been trained in effective communication. It would be hard for the corporate staff to lead the conversation into the right direction, because both are on a different Focus of Argument. That's why the responsibility for setting the right environment for good communication falls on top management.
As I always say, communication is a two-way street. Yet half of us communicate on a one-way stretch most of the time. To have success in argument and communication in the Workplace is to train people to recognize and look for the common Focus of Argument./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
***Sign up for my weekly "TipSheet" on Communication Verbal-Nonverbal, Organization and Training...***
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Communication Verbal Nonverbal - Smart Questioning
by Diane M. Hoffmann, ph.d./th.
The word 'Smart' is the key word here. Many factors come between the brain and the tongue: feelings, emotions, personalities, moods, ability to express, background, childhood development, etc., all these are predispositions of life's experiences and frames of references in both the Sender and the Receiver.
These are codes that open, or fail to open, the connecting gates which create the power of effective communication -- or inhibit it, depending on how our life's experiences have affected us. We either accept or reject our partner(s)' communication(s) on this basis.
The Receiver must be prepared to receive communication in its coarseness as well as in its "fineness", according to the various situations. That's the contextual part of communication. The contextual part is the current situation/location surrounding the communication at the time of being exchanged.
(Please keep in mind that in communication, the roles of the Sender and the Receiver change alternatively. As the dialogue takes place, the Sender becomes the Receiver when the response from the Receiver comes back. The Receiver becomes the Sender when he/she sends the response to the Sender. But the one who begins or initiates a conversation or communication is the original Sender.)
Sometimes there is a context that is not known to the other. If, for example, I show a group of people the picture of a rat and we talk about it for a while, then I show another group of people the picture of an old man’s face and talk about that for a while. I can display a picture that could be read as either a rat or an old man’s face to both groups, and the group that was predisposed to the rat will see the rat in the picture; the group that was predisposed to the old man’s face will see the old man's face in the picture. This is ambiguous perception.
In the same way, communication is affected by our predispositions. If the predisposition to a subject matter is good it will enhance connections and mental references; if it is bad, it will impede it. Being aware of such possible interferences prepares the communicators on both sides to act productively. All communications take place within a specific context. Awareness is imperative to successful contextual communication.
An example of predispositions is a new and excited sales individual discussing the company with an older, disillusioned member who knows the company is in trouble.
The older staff member tries to give warning about the particular company’s financial situation by pointing out that after three years in business the company is still at the same level of sales. The new member’s excited response is that this presents “a great opportunity to grow with the company” (ambiguous concept of hope and excitement about the new job -- lacking the facts). The contextual part (only known to the older staff member at this point) is that the company is in financial trouble and on its way into receivership, however, he couldn't come out and say that. The new member has no idea and sees no obstruction to optimism; the older member knows there is no opportunity.
Rather than being blinded by false hope and excitement, the new employee should pick up between the lines and bring the actual context into focus by using the “Smart Questioning” tool to find out what the sender is really trying to warn him of, and glean some important knowledge about reality and valuable ammunition for future sales developments and expectations.
Another example: if a group of people in the company cafeteria discusses the activities of a distant war, one individual in the group, who might have come from a war-torn country where death and pain touched close family members, may not take it so casually and react with a strong argumentative comment, “What do you know about war?”.
The listeners could not have known the context surrounding this person. However, before the group jumps on the individual’s case for saying what he said, a few strategic (Smart Questioning) will bring that context into focus and explain the unexpected outburst, giving understanding to the group -- "seeking first to understand, then to be understood".
The Sender must always be aware of a possible surrounding context or environment on the Receiver's side, and the Receiver must always be aware of a possible surrounding context or environment on the Sender's side. If a reaction is outside of the known actual context, either side can find out through Feedback and Understanding whether there is a legitimate situation or a misunderstanding on someone's part.
Some people are afraid of questioning because of fear to appear as intrusive. However “Smart Questioning” is good for better communication. You just need to question within the context and not throw any unrelated questions. Stay within the context of the immediate conversation and situation in a direct and caring manner./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
The word 'Smart' is the key word here. Many factors come between the brain and the tongue: feelings, emotions, personalities, moods, ability to express, background, childhood development, etc., all these are predispositions of life's experiences and frames of references in both the Sender and the Receiver.
These are codes that open, or fail to open, the connecting gates which create the power of effective communication -- or inhibit it, depending on how our life's experiences have affected us. We either accept or reject our partner(s)' communication(s) on this basis.
The Receiver must be prepared to receive communication in its coarseness as well as in its "fineness", according to the various situations. That's the contextual part of communication. The contextual part is the current situation/location surrounding the communication at the time of being exchanged.
(Please keep in mind that in communication, the roles of the Sender and the Receiver change alternatively. As the dialogue takes place, the Sender becomes the Receiver when the response from the Receiver comes back. The Receiver becomes the Sender when he/she sends the response to the Sender. But the one who begins or initiates a conversation or communication is the original Sender.)
Sometimes there is a context that is not known to the other. If, for example, I show a group of people the picture of a rat and we talk about it for a while, then I show another group of people the picture of an old man’s face and talk about that for a while. I can display a picture that could be read as either a rat or an old man’s face to both groups, and the group that was predisposed to the rat will see the rat in the picture; the group that was predisposed to the old man’s face will see the old man's face in the picture. This is ambiguous perception.
In the same way, communication is affected by our predispositions. If the predisposition to a subject matter is good it will enhance connections and mental references; if it is bad, it will impede it. Being aware of such possible interferences prepares the communicators on both sides to act productively. All communications take place within a specific context. Awareness is imperative to successful contextual communication.
An example of predispositions is a new and excited sales individual discussing the company with an older, disillusioned member who knows the company is in trouble.
The older staff member tries to give warning about the particular company’s financial situation by pointing out that after three years in business the company is still at the same level of sales. The new member’s excited response is that this presents “a great opportunity to grow with the company” (ambiguous concept of hope and excitement about the new job -- lacking the facts). The contextual part (only known to the older staff member at this point) is that the company is in financial trouble and on its way into receivership, however, he couldn't come out and say that. The new member has no idea and sees no obstruction to optimism; the older member knows there is no opportunity.
Rather than being blinded by false hope and excitement, the new employee should pick up between the lines and bring the actual context into focus by using the “Smart Questioning” tool to find out what the sender is really trying to warn him of, and glean some important knowledge about reality and valuable ammunition for future sales developments and expectations.
Another example: if a group of people in the company cafeteria discusses the activities of a distant war, one individual in the group, who might have come from a war-torn country where death and pain touched close family members, may not take it so casually and react with a strong argumentative comment, “What do you know about war?”.
The listeners could not have known the context surrounding this person. However, before the group jumps on the individual’s case for saying what he said, a few strategic (Smart Questioning) will bring that context into focus and explain the unexpected outburst, giving understanding to the group -- "seeking first to understand, then to be understood".
The Sender must always be aware of a possible surrounding context or environment on the Receiver's side, and the Receiver must always be aware of a possible surrounding context or environment on the Sender's side. If a reaction is outside of the known actual context, either side can find out through Feedback and Understanding whether there is a legitimate situation or a misunderstanding on someone's part.
Some people are afraid of questioning because of fear to appear as intrusive. However “Smart Questioning” is good for better communication. You just need to question within the context and not throw any unrelated questions. Stay within the context of the immediate conversation and situation in a direct and caring manner./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Three Ways to Enhance Effective Business Communication
by Diane M. Hoffmann, ph.d./th.
Effective business communication, for the business professional, is already above average. However you and I know that business communication needs to be constantly added, improved and enhanced in order to keep us growing and to stay in the race of effective leadership.
Three important areas of communication in business are found in meetings, writings and presentations. Two of these require verbal activities and one written. Effective business communication means that meetings need to be lead (not let to happen). Writing needs to be clear, and presenting needs to be credible.
Here are three ways to enhance your effective business communication:
#1 – Effective business communication – Meetings need to be lead (not let to happen):
Let’s face it, most business colleagues hate meetings. Why? Because they are usually too long, unfocused, un-lead, boring, and too frequent.
So how does one undo this image of meetings?
For one thing, don’t call meetings on a moment’s notice, as too many do, and drag your people on for hours, taking away from their already overloaded work schedules. That’s one sure way to discourage them from coming to your meetings -- let alone liking them.
It is good to realize that meetings cost a company a lot of money. If you have 5 people in your meeting who make twenty dollars an hour and you keep them for three hours, that’s three hundred dollars direct financial loss right there.
Then you have the actual time and productivity loss that each of the people is responsible for within each their department. While they are in the meeting, they are not working at their job function. If these are sales people the value lost is even multiplied.
So, one way to enhance your effective business communication within your meeting activities is to think of the cost of the meeting, then decide if it can wait for another day, then plan ahead, organize and edit it for maximum impact, giving it a definite shortest possible time-frame to get to the result that is expected of the meeting.
#2 – Effective business communication – Writing needs to be clear:
From what I hear people tell me, not many business folks like putting letters and memos together. It is a very happy person who enjoys this task. How efficient is your writing? Do you have a process that you go through before you begin writing?
If not, here’s some help: First, know the purpose you are writing about. Write directly to your reader. Write a draft first and don’t worry about mistakes.
Then re-arrange your draft into 1) a summary of your idea or purpose. 2) a summary of the actions you require of your reader as to who will do what (I, we, you, or personal name).
If the content is long, it is better to use two easy-to-read pages than one page stuffed with too much information and data that’s hard to follow. Break it down with the summary of your idea or purpose then refer to the actions to be taken which you outline clearly on the second page.
Revise and correct for sentence construction and grammar. Read as if you were receiving the letter. Then edit out unnecessary wordings. Add summary headings to paragraphs to make for easy scanning and reading.
#3 – Effective business communication – Presentations need to be credible:
You’ve all heard that the first impression counts. Well the last does too, and everything in between. The first impression captures the attention, the last leaves a feeling (bad or good) on your audience and the content in-between gives you credibility.
To make the introduction positive, point out the benefits to the audience of listening to what you have to say. Show the relevance to the concern or purpose. The idea is to answer the question: “Why should we listen to you?” before they even ask silently or outloud.
Organize your presentation as you do your writing, first on a draft. Then break it down into point-form items, which you each write up on 3x5 or 4x6 cards to keep you on track or use transparencies or power-point.
Effective business communication is a continuous effort that is not drudgery but that is fun and interesting and required for continuous business success and leadership./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Effective business communication, for the business professional, is already above average. However you and I know that business communication needs to be constantly added, improved and enhanced in order to keep us growing and to stay in the race of effective leadership.
Three important areas of communication in business are found in meetings, writings and presentations. Two of these require verbal activities and one written. Effective business communication means that meetings need to be lead (not let to happen). Writing needs to be clear, and presenting needs to be credible.
Here are three ways to enhance your effective business communication:
#1 – Effective business communication – Meetings need to be lead (not let to happen):
Let’s face it, most business colleagues hate meetings. Why? Because they are usually too long, unfocused, un-lead, boring, and too frequent.
So how does one undo this image of meetings?
For one thing, don’t call meetings on a moment’s notice, as too many do, and drag your people on for hours, taking away from their already overloaded work schedules. That’s one sure way to discourage them from coming to your meetings -- let alone liking them.
It is good to realize that meetings cost a company a lot of money. If you have 5 people in your meeting who make twenty dollars an hour and you keep them for three hours, that’s three hundred dollars direct financial loss right there.
Then you have the actual time and productivity loss that each of the people is responsible for within each their department. While they are in the meeting, they are not working at their job function. If these are sales people the value lost is even multiplied.
So, one way to enhance your effective business communication within your meeting activities is to think of the cost of the meeting, then decide if it can wait for another day, then plan ahead, organize and edit it for maximum impact, giving it a definite shortest possible time-frame to get to the result that is expected of the meeting.
#2 – Effective business communication – Writing needs to be clear:
From what I hear people tell me, not many business folks like putting letters and memos together. It is a very happy person who enjoys this task. How efficient is your writing? Do you have a process that you go through before you begin writing?
If not, here’s some help: First, know the purpose you are writing about. Write directly to your reader. Write a draft first and don’t worry about mistakes.
Then re-arrange your draft into 1) a summary of your idea or purpose. 2) a summary of the actions you require of your reader as to who will do what (I, we, you, or personal name).
If the content is long, it is better to use two easy-to-read pages than one page stuffed with too much information and data that’s hard to follow. Break it down with the summary of your idea or purpose then refer to the actions to be taken which you outline clearly on the second page.
Revise and correct for sentence construction and grammar. Read as if you were receiving the letter. Then edit out unnecessary wordings. Add summary headings to paragraphs to make for easy scanning and reading.
#3 – Effective business communication – Presentations need to be credible:
You’ve all heard that the first impression counts. Well the last does too, and everything in between. The first impression captures the attention, the last leaves a feeling (bad or good) on your audience and the content in-between gives you credibility.
To make the introduction positive, point out the benefits to the audience of listening to what you have to say. Show the relevance to the concern or purpose. The idea is to answer the question: “Why should we listen to you?” before they even ask silently or outloud.
Organize your presentation as you do your writing, first on a draft. Then break it down into point-form items, which you each write up on 3x5 or 4x6 cards to keep you on track or use transparencies or power-point.
Effective business communication is a continuous effort that is not drudgery but that is fun and interesting and required for continuous business success and leadership./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Communication In The Workplace – A Manager’s Responsibility
by Diane M. Hoffmann, ph.d./th.
Some years ago, I worked for a company as a contract person, where the weirdest communication manager I ever came across performed. This senior manager who was responsible for marketing and communication never said good morning first or initiated any kind of communication. She didn't know anything about me when I first started and had no interest in finding out. Communication in the workplace is first a manager’s responsibility.
If I had not talked first, there would have been no communication outside of receiving orders from her. Within the first few days of my joining the team, there was a call for the staff to gather in the conference room for an important announcement. As we waited around the conference table for a long time and people were exchanging pleasantries, this marketing/communications manager never even introduced me. No one knew who I was. I certainly didn't know anyone and everybody was in little groups talking about their own familiar things.
You might say, it's up to the individual to introduce him/herself. Well, that’s what one has to do if management doesn’t know better. I have often made studies in companies, where I came in and purposefully did not say anything to see how long it would take for others to initiate communication or introduce me to a group. Sometimes, managers did eventually make a first contact -- but rarely; I would sooner or later have to do it myself.
You can always size up management training and communication capability by the staff. If they only knew what they say about themselves through their own people. Most don’t even bother to find that out.
Amazingly, many corporations don’t know either that the people to whom the new employees are "entrusted" don’t deliver properly. Often, wrong instructions are given which stay with the new staff for a long time until somebody catches it, but by then, it might have caused a lot of problems or damage to the new people or their performance.
I remember doing some work for a company where I had been briefed about fire drills on my first day. Some months later, a drill took place. I had forgotten the details that had been said to me. I had been through fire drills at other companies before and I knew that supervisors are there to give instructions at the time.
A sound rang through the office which I did not know as the sound of the fire alarm. It didn’t sound like those I had heard before. I asked an employee who had been there many years if that was the fire alarm. I could not see the other area of offices where people worked because mine was located at the far end corner of the building in an L-shaped area, away from the view of the others.
The only person I could see was that one individual in the office right adjacent from mine. As he picked up his jacket, he gazed ahead, ignoring my inquiry, without saying a word, stretching his head as if trying to figure out what was going on himself and proceeded toward the central area of the building.
I figured out by myself that people were making their way out as well, so I started toward the main area too. Everybody had already gone out. I met one supervisor dashing across to the back door entrance, whom I asked where I was supposed to go. He told me to go to the front entrance. I was the last one to join the shivering staff waiting and milling around on the front lawn.
After the whole drill had taken place and we came back to our posts, this individual whom I had questioned, told me that “he couldn’t say anything, because he was supposed to time how long it took everybody to go out". Hello! If a new employee had asked me if that was the fire alarm, you better believe I would have said "yes it is".
The most amazing thing is that, again, none of the management people knew about this behaviour from an employee who had been given a responsibility he wasn't trained for nor ready to take on. Why is communication so poor in companies? All communication in the workplace is a manager’s responsibility from the very top to the very bottom. I always say we need a General Communicator in every organization to take on what management is unable to do./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Some years ago, I worked for a company as a contract person, where the weirdest communication manager I ever came across performed. This senior manager who was responsible for marketing and communication never said good morning first or initiated any kind of communication. She didn't know anything about me when I first started and had no interest in finding out. Communication in the workplace is first a manager’s responsibility.
If I had not talked first, there would have been no communication outside of receiving orders from her. Within the first few days of my joining the team, there was a call for the staff to gather in the conference room for an important announcement. As we waited around the conference table for a long time and people were exchanging pleasantries, this marketing/communications manager never even introduced me. No one knew who I was. I certainly didn't know anyone and everybody was in little groups talking about their own familiar things.
You might say, it's up to the individual to introduce him/herself. Well, that’s what one has to do if management doesn’t know better. I have often made studies in companies, where I came in and purposefully did not say anything to see how long it would take for others to initiate communication or introduce me to a group. Sometimes, managers did eventually make a first contact -- but rarely; I would sooner or later have to do it myself.
You can always size up management training and communication capability by the staff. If they only knew what they say about themselves through their own people. Most don’t even bother to find that out.
Amazingly, many corporations don’t know either that the people to whom the new employees are "entrusted" don’t deliver properly. Often, wrong instructions are given which stay with the new staff for a long time until somebody catches it, but by then, it might have caused a lot of problems or damage to the new people or their performance.
I remember doing some work for a company where I had been briefed about fire drills on my first day. Some months later, a drill took place. I had forgotten the details that had been said to me. I had been through fire drills at other companies before and I knew that supervisors are there to give instructions at the time.
A sound rang through the office which I did not know as the sound of the fire alarm. It didn’t sound like those I had heard before. I asked an employee who had been there many years if that was the fire alarm. I could not see the other area of offices where people worked because mine was located at the far end corner of the building in an L-shaped area, away from the view of the others.
The only person I could see was that one individual in the office right adjacent from mine. As he picked up his jacket, he gazed ahead, ignoring my inquiry, without saying a word, stretching his head as if trying to figure out what was going on himself and proceeded toward the central area of the building.
I figured out by myself that people were making their way out as well, so I started toward the main area too. Everybody had already gone out. I met one supervisor dashing across to the back door entrance, whom I asked where I was supposed to go. He told me to go to the front entrance. I was the last one to join the shivering staff waiting and milling around on the front lawn.
After the whole drill had taken place and we came back to our posts, this individual whom I had questioned, told me that “he couldn’t say anything, because he was supposed to time how long it took everybody to go out". Hello! If a new employee had asked me if that was the fire alarm, you better believe I would have said "yes it is".
The most amazing thing is that, again, none of the management people knew about this behaviour from an employee who had been given a responsibility he wasn't trained for nor ready to take on. Why is communication so poor in companies? All communication in the workplace is a manager’s responsibility from the very top to the very bottom. I always say we need a General Communicator in every organization to take on what management is unable to do./dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Communication – Can One Listen and Not Hear?
by Diane M. Hoffmann
Watch and listen next time you are in a group -- any group -- family, business, community, church... Someone will express a feeling, an opinion, a statement. The listener will often respond differently from what was expected. This plainly indicates that the listener was not listening or was completely disinterested in what the speaker was saying.
In other situations, although a statement warrants further clarification (feedback responsibility) on the part of the listener (receiver), the listener was oblivious to it and replied on his/her own thought of the subject matter.
Even worse, have you ever experienced talking to people and suddenly a disturbance in the room interrupted your talk and after everything resumed back, no one returned to listening to you? Instead, they forgot all about you and started a whole new discussion. That really speaks volume about the lack of interest in what you had to say.
These examples indicate the complete lack of communication. All the time the person is speaking, the listener is thinking about what he/she is going to say from his/her own perspective or personal interest. The receiver is listening but is not hearing what the speaker says.
To hear = to perceive, sense through stimulation.To listen = to make a conscious effort to hear.
In the above definition of the words “hear” and “listen”, the first one is true – to hear is to perceive, to sense through stimulation.
However the second word “listen” is not completely true. Yes, to listen is to make a conscious effort to hear, but, in this day and age when we have lost touch of communication because of the fast pace, stress and pressures of time and activities of our lives, we often stand as if we are listening, looking straight at the speaker. But, inside the mind, there is a complete shut off to what is being said due to a bombardment of our own thoughts.
How often has it happened to you? And how often have you seen others do it from the result of their reply to what you said. Listening means that we need to learn to slow down the activities going on in our brains. This happens a lot in seminars or meetings. So much so, actually, that in one event I attended not long ago on team building and communication, the presenter made it a point to tell everyone that if they mentally “leave the room”, to immediately let her (and the group) know.
She went on to explain that this wandering off of the mind is common place and it was better for everyone to let it be known and have the lost information be repeated rather than missing out on some important aspect or details of the discussion.
It was every interesting to see the positive response to this from the group, how much it was appreciated and, particularly, how much the idea was used. People just opened up to the fact that it was happening and many at different times would just raise their hand and simply say, “Sorry, I left the room there for a moment, what was that?”
Certainly, when we talk about Listening/Receiving, we mean it to include "hearing". Listening doesn't just mean being quiet and looking at the speaker. It means really following and understanding what is being said. If at any time the receiver misses a point, or does not understand, it is his/her responsibility to ask or confirm the detail. That is providing feedback.
In communication, it is for certain that at times one will be listening and not hearing. But again as it is in any communication improvement process, it all begins with “being aware” of these factors. If we don’t know they exist, we cannot do something about it. /dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Watch and listen next time you are in a group -- any group -- family, business, community, church... Someone will express a feeling, an opinion, a statement. The listener will often respond differently from what was expected. This plainly indicates that the listener was not listening or was completely disinterested in what the speaker was saying.
In other situations, although a statement warrants further clarification (feedback responsibility) on the part of the listener (receiver), the listener was oblivious to it and replied on his/her own thought of the subject matter.
Even worse, have you ever experienced talking to people and suddenly a disturbance in the room interrupted your talk and after everything resumed back, no one returned to listening to you? Instead, they forgot all about you and started a whole new discussion. That really speaks volume about the lack of interest in what you had to say.
These examples indicate the complete lack of communication. All the time the person is speaking, the listener is thinking about what he/she is going to say from his/her own perspective or personal interest. The receiver is listening but is not hearing what the speaker says.
To hear = to perceive, sense through stimulation.To listen = to make a conscious effort to hear.
In the above definition of the words “hear” and “listen”, the first one is true – to hear is to perceive, to sense through stimulation.
However the second word “listen” is not completely true. Yes, to listen is to make a conscious effort to hear, but, in this day and age when we have lost touch of communication because of the fast pace, stress and pressures of time and activities of our lives, we often stand as if we are listening, looking straight at the speaker. But, inside the mind, there is a complete shut off to what is being said due to a bombardment of our own thoughts.
How often has it happened to you? And how often have you seen others do it from the result of their reply to what you said. Listening means that we need to learn to slow down the activities going on in our brains. This happens a lot in seminars or meetings. So much so, actually, that in one event I attended not long ago on team building and communication, the presenter made it a point to tell everyone that if they mentally “leave the room”, to immediately let her (and the group) know.
She went on to explain that this wandering off of the mind is common place and it was better for everyone to let it be known and have the lost information be repeated rather than missing out on some important aspect or details of the discussion.
It was every interesting to see the positive response to this from the group, how much it was appreciated and, particularly, how much the idea was used. People just opened up to the fact that it was happening and many at different times would just raise their hand and simply say, “Sorry, I left the room there for a moment, what was that?”
Certainly, when we talk about Listening/Receiving, we mean it to include "hearing". Listening doesn't just mean being quiet and looking at the speaker. It means really following and understanding what is being said. If at any time the receiver misses a point, or does not understand, it is his/her responsibility to ask or confirm the detail. That is providing feedback.
In communication, it is for certain that at times one will be listening and not hearing. But again as it is in any communication improvement process, it all begins with “being aware” of these factors. If we don’t know they exist, we cannot do something about it. /dmh
Article Copyright(c)Diane M. Hoffmann. You may print this article making sure to include the following bio without any changes.
Diane M. Hoffmann is the founder of Hoffmann-Rondeau Communications and author of the 296-page printed book "Contextual Communication, Organization and Training". Diane also provides a 2-part e-book version of her printed book, "Improve Communication, Verbal and Nonverbal" and "Improve Communication, Organization and Training" as well as many free articles which can be seen at her blog at http://contextual-communication-hrd.blogspot.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)