Last week we explored the skill of active listening and how we can use it when we need to really hear what another person is saying, thinking and feeling. We focused on communication with team members because a leader at work is responsible for keeping everyone in the performance zone – by spotting and dealing with issues that get in the way.
This week we explore blocks to communication – from those niggling little interruptions to major issues like the difference between thinking and speaking speeds. We’ll start with thinking and speaking speeds because it’s a tough topic that affects all other aspects of verbal communication. Ready? Here we go…
“What’s up with thinking and speaking speeds?”
Have you noticed how often people (that’s us) cut each other off? Talk over each other? Take over by telling a story of our own that hijacks the discussion? If you always thought these bad habits simply reflected bad manners, or impatience – or a greedy desire to dominate the conversation – you have only been partly right.
The real reason is a strange twist in human evolution that created a mismatch between the speed of speech and the speed of thought. Cognitive psychologists tell us that we think at roughly three times the speed that we speak. This means that while we speak at roughly 140 words per minute, we listen at roughly 400 words per minute. This means that without a special effort to slow down when we’re listening, we can find ourselves reaching faulty conclusions to what the other person is saying – before they say it. This puts us in clear and present danger of talking over, and taking over, the discussion.
Our simple solution: Knowing and Doing.
My listening game plan over the years has simply been to do a little consciousness-raising exercise before starting any meeting, discussion or interview – particularly with a client or team member who has a problem. I do this by mentally reviewing the following short list of my listening do’s and don’ts:
- If I feel my self running on ahead, I use deep nasal breathing (it slows us down and helps us think)
- I slow down by listening for meaningful words, phrases and sentences
- Remind my self to keep the focus on the other person.
- Use frequent feedback to convey that I’m paying attention and hearing key information correctly.
- Use reflective listening (a.k.a. mirroring) when I want to show that I hear their precise words
- Remember: my purpose in active listening is to get to the heart of a problem – and ask questions that lead to the team member coming up with their own solution and plan of action.
Your call to action
This week I encourage you to conduct a little consciousness-raising exercise of your own. Review the following list of common blocks to communication. Mark your Top Five – the five blocking habits that you recognize in your own behavior and would most like to change. Then – when you’re in discussions, meetings or team member interviews, try to ‘catch yourself in the act’ of using – or sensing that you are about to use – blocks that you want to eliminate. (‘Catching Your Self In The Act’ or ‘CYSITA’ is a little mantra we use to alert ourselves that impulse-control is needed). I also encourage you to act as a communication-block hunter. Be a ‘participant observer’ in your own communication venues. And eavesdrop on other people’s discussions – at work, at home, and in the world. Listen and look for blocks and their effects. The more you see blocks in action, the easier it gets to catch yourself in the act and avoid them.
Common blocks to communication:
- Wrong time and place (Discuss, re-schedule; consider meeting off-site for maximum privacy)
- Distractions (Cover paperwork, etc., focus on the speaker)
- Not turning cell phones off completely
- Letting attention drift (Slow down. Listen to words and phrases)
- Interruptions when meeting (Request ‘Do not disturb’ in advance; big yellow DND sticky on door)
- Interrogating (Avoid grilling, intrusive questioning)
- Inadequate or erroneous fact-checking
- Language barriers (Translator if necessary)
- Ignoring non-verbal language
- Saying something you regret (Self-monitor; ‘listen to what you’re about to say before you say it’)
- Inauthenticity e.g. advancing a hidden agenda? (Clarify your purpose prior to meeting; enter discussion or interview ‘clean and clear’)
- Invalidating by discounting, minimizing (“That’s not so bad…”)
- Admonishing (“if you can’t take the heat, Pat or, “Sometimes we just have to suck it up, Chris”
- Talking instead of listening
- Interrupting, asking unnecessary questions
- Talking over the other person
- Taking over by telling our own story (‘Stealing their thunder’)
- Inappropriate probing, prying, interrogating
- Judging, criticizing, disagreeing
- Praising, agreeing inappropriately, evaluating positively, buttering up, if contrived
- Interpreting, analyzing, diagnosing
- Reassuring, sympathizing, consoling, supporting (Even encouraging can be a block if it interferes with the other person coming up with their own solution)
- Patronizing, protecting, defending, assuring
- Joking inappropriately, making light of the situation
- Name calling, ridiculing, shaming, belittling
- Interpreting, analyzing, diagnosing,
- Reassuring, sympathizing, consoling, supporting (all ‘can’ be blocks if we’re taking over)
- Scolding, lecturing, criticizing, moralizing
- Advising, Counselling (Offering opinions and advice when not asked to do so)
- Passive listening (Provide ample feedback, nod, paraphrase, say ‘uh huh’ etc.)
- Misunderstanding what is said (Paraphrase without interpretation and verify as needed e.g. ‘Have I got that right, Chris?’)
- Trying to persuade, influence or convince
- Speaker feels they are stuck, with no options for solution (Help to broaden their thinking; paraphrase: “You’re feeling like your options are limited Pat…but is there just one thing you think you could try?”) – be prepared to change the wording and repeat this question as often as needed. I call this the broken record tactic in solution-making.)
- *Failure to empathize – but beware…
- * Re empathy: If you’re interviewing a team member and they complain about another person or department, listen, empathize and feed back as usual, but beware of buying into one side of a story. I always explained that I’m not neutral in these cases – that I’m biased, equally, in favor of both parties. (In other words, I’d like to see a win-win solution.) That response always brought a smile, and in many cases nudged the accuser to be less presumptuous and negative about the other person’s intentions. I always did a bit of the talking in these situations. (My rule of thumb in a serious discussion or interview is to speak only when I feel that I have something of value to say.) I explained that I believe we all have the best of intentions; we just differ in our opinions and approaches. I emphasized that when in danger of heading into conflict, we need to talk personally – to speak ‘with’ the other person, not ‘about’ them – and strongly resist the temptation to assume that they are ill-intentioned.
Designing your own reputation
If repeated over time, these simple habit-forming exercises will launch or enhance your reputation as a ‘really’ good listener – really!
See you next week.
Nei
Great chat on the river Neil. So nice to see you again. How did you think the convo went? We covered alot.