July, 2014

By Jonathan Babcock

George Bernard Shaw (1856 – 1950), prominent Irish writer and co-founder of the London School of Economics once said, “The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished.”

Communicating parties may come to verbal or written agreement only later to learn that, while they agreed to the words, their interpretations of those words are different – sometimes very different. Communication using spoken or written language carries a certain inherent ambiguity even when words and phrases are carefully chosen.

News headlines can serve as humorous examples of this ambiguity. For instance, when I read the headline, “Complaints About World Cup Referees Growing Ugly”, I could interpret it as meaning the nature of complaints about World Cup referees is becoming increasingly less civil – or more ugly. An equally valid interpretation is that the complaints pertain to the World Cup referees becoming less and less physically attractive, or ugly looking.

While it is fairly easy to guess which is more likely the intended meaning, the headline serves as an example of how people can hear or read the same words, and come away with valid, yet distinctly different understandings.

A couple simple ways to calibrate understanding and lessen the risk of “the illusion of communication,” include:

  1. Confirming understanding by restating using different words – perhaps applying what was said to a relevant business scenario, or
  2. Using simple visualization techniques such as drawing a rough sketch or model with pen and paper or on a whiteboard to confirm meaning.

 

As an experienced solution delivery professional, I’ve come to learn that missed expectations, defects, and interpersonal stress are often direct results of miscommunication. By being sensitive to the idea that everyone interprets things slightly differently, and using techniques to calibrate and confirm understanding, we can avoid most instances of the “biggest problem with communication,” and improve our effectiveness as communicators.