Understanding and Being Understood
13 August 2009
Read by 1433 persons
Have you ever felt that your colleagues don't understand what you're saying? Then know that you are definitely not alone. We conducted a quick survey and came to a surprising conclusion. When observing a discussion between a manager and their colleagues and then asking them what conclusions were drawn, in over 80% of cases you will get contradictory opinions about the conversation.
This is a source of frustration for both the manager and their colleagues. But why is it that no one understands each other? What are the causes?
We discovered 3 important things:
1. The manager spends all their attention and energy on making what they want to explain as clear as possible. But no attention is paid to how others understand the message.
2. The manager often uses ambiguous terms belonging to management jargon, which must be understood by their colleagues.
3. Each party uses a different interpretive framework, a different logic.
Let's try to explain this
We spend, with the best intentions, an incredible amount of energy on the "packaging." The way we explain something. And this is to our credit. But it does indeed cause a problem for others. Really? Or does it only show a concern about how others see us, feel about us, and judge us? Ultimately, we need to pay more attention to others. How do we see others? How do we "package" our message in a way that they will understand it in the same way we intended to express it?
It's not about giving an explanation for ourselves, for whom the subject is clear, but about giving an explanation so that others can understand it as best as possible. What is understandable for us (our work jargon, acronyms, abbreviations, etc.) is not necessarily so for others.
Ambiguous terms
Each company speaks its own language. Furthermore, each department, each division, to a certain extent, uses its own language. Within the group, people (often) have the same interpretive framework and the same way of understanding the terms of their work jargon.
Once outside this circle, we often tend to use the same terms. And this can lead to two major obstacles during a conversation:
1. People interpret the terms differently; they give them different meanings.
For example, a "sales budget" means "achieving sales targets" to some and "a budget that can be spent to achieve sales targets" to others. To understand the particular notions of specific jargon, you need the context. So you must always state the context and explain the nuances. Also, use enough control questions to check if you are talking about the same thing.
2. We often assume that others know the same vocabulary as us and use it as we do. Nothing could be further from the truth... Concepts such as TQM, Six Sigma, balanced scorecards, etc., are common terms for managers, but they will only mean something (a business echo) to operational managers. But very few will admit their lack of knowledge. The consequence is that you are talking about relatively rare concepts that are unknown to others. For example, a particular process is designated by one word in one printing company and by another word in another printing company. What happens then if an employee suddenly changes employers and is confronted with this concept?
Different logic
Logic is logic! It's logical. Yes and no! Even in rational logic, the premises play an important role. In emotional logic, it becomes even more complex. Everyone has their own background and experience. We are all unique. And this means that we all have our own unique way of interpreting.
What is impeccably logical for some may be completely illogical for others. Only if you adapt your message to the interpretive framework of others can you benefit from a greater understanding. (You can find more information about emotional logic in the book of the same name or on the website www.emotionelelogica.be, a Dutch-language site)
Posted on Monday, November 3
references.be
This is a source of frustration for both the manager and their colleagues. But why is it that no one understands each other? What are the causes?
We discovered 3 important things:
1. The manager spends all their attention and energy on making what they want to explain as clear as possible. But no attention is paid to how others understand the message.
2. The manager often uses ambiguous terms belonging to management jargon, which must be understood by their colleagues.
3. Each party uses a different interpretive framework, a different logic.
Let's try to explain this
We spend, with the best intentions, an incredible amount of energy on the "packaging." The way we explain something. And this is to our credit. But it does indeed cause a problem for others. Really? Or does it only show a concern about how others see us, feel about us, and judge us? Ultimately, we need to pay more attention to others. How do we see others? How do we "package" our message in a way that they will understand it in the same way we intended to express it?
It's not about giving an explanation for ourselves, for whom the subject is clear, but about giving an explanation so that others can understand it as best as possible. What is understandable for us (our work jargon, acronyms, abbreviations, etc.) is not necessarily so for others.
Ambiguous terms
Each company speaks its own language. Furthermore, each department, each division, to a certain extent, uses its own language. Within the group, people (often) have the same interpretive framework and the same way of understanding the terms of their work jargon.
Once outside this circle, we often tend to use the same terms. And this can lead to two major obstacles during a conversation:
1. People interpret the terms differently; they give them different meanings.
For example, a "sales budget" means "achieving sales targets" to some and "a budget that can be spent to achieve sales targets" to others. To understand the particular notions of specific jargon, you need the context. So you must always state the context and explain the nuances. Also, use enough control questions to check if you are talking about the same thing.
2. We often assume that others know the same vocabulary as us and use it as we do. Nothing could be further from the truth... Concepts such as TQM, Six Sigma, balanced scorecards, etc., are common terms for managers, but they will only mean something (a business echo) to operational managers. But very few will admit their lack of knowledge. The consequence is that you are talking about relatively rare concepts that are unknown to others. For example, a particular process is designated by one word in one printing company and by another word in another printing company. What happens then if an employee suddenly changes employers and is confronted with this concept?
Different logic
Logic is logic! It's logical. Yes and no! Even in rational logic, the premises play an important role. In emotional logic, it becomes even more complex. Everyone has their own background and experience. We are all unique. And this means that we all have our own unique way of interpreting.
What is impeccably logical for some may be completely illogical for others. Only if you adapt your message to the interpretive framework of others can you benefit from a greater understanding. (You can find more information about emotional logic in the book of the same name or on the website www.emotionelelogica.be, a Dutch-language site)
Posted on Monday, November 3
references.be
