Sometimes our communication has dramatic affect, even though it might be ineffective. The bleeding finger is an excellent example.
Steve, my cousin, and I started first grade together. At the end of each school day, we walked home together. One day as school dismissed, I noticed a scratch on my pointer finger – it had a little blood on it. As Steve came out of his class, I raised my pointer finger and said, “look, Steve, blood!” I was not prepared for Steve’s reaction.
Steve begin to cry. He then ran down the hall and out the door. I followed. When I got outside I could see Steve at the crossing. The crossing guard was examining Steve’s head. By the time I got to the crossing, Steve had already started for home. I hurried after.
When I arrived at Steve’s home, I went in and found his mother examining Steve’s head. Steve was still crying. What had happened? As you have probably already surmised, Steve thought I was pointing to his head when I said blood. He thought his head was bleeding.
How good was my communication to Steve? Was it effective communication?
Steve’s reaction probably would not have been any greater had he actually had a bleeding head. But, he did not have a bleeding head. Although the communication was impacting, it was not the message I was trying to convey. It was pretty ineffective communication.
What can we learn?
First, remember that effective communication is measured by how well the message sent is the one received. Regardless of the method used – visuals, pictures, diagrams, examples, looks, expressions, written content, etc. – the only valid evaluation of communication is the fidelity of the message sent to the message received.
Second, be aware of how easy it is to be misunderstood, and do everything possible to ensure the message you send is clear. For example, if I would have just said to Steve, “Look Steve, I have a cut,” the misunderstanding would not have happened.
[This story and many similar discussion are found in The Wrong Bottom Line and How to Change It
Steve, my cousin, and I started first grade together. At the end of each school day, we walked home together. One day as school dismissed, I noticed a scratch on my pointer finger – it had a little blood on it. As Steve came out of his class, I raised my pointer finger and said, “look, Steve, blood!” I was not prepared for Steve’s reaction.
Steve begin to cry. He then ran down the hall and out the door. I followed. When I got outside I could see Steve at the crossing. The crossing guard was examining Steve’s head. By the time I got to the crossing, Steve had already started for home. I hurried after.
When I arrived at Steve’s home, I went in and found his mother examining Steve’s head. Steve was still crying. What had happened? As you have probably already surmised, Steve thought I was pointing to his head when I said blood. He thought his head was bleeding.
How good was my communication to Steve? Was it effective communication?
Steve’s reaction probably would not have been any greater had he actually had a bleeding head. But, he did not have a bleeding head. Although the communication was impacting, it was not the message I was trying to convey. It was pretty ineffective communication.
What can we learn?
First, remember that effective communication is measured by how well the message sent is the one received. Regardless of the method used – visuals, pictures, diagrams, examples, looks, expressions, written content, etc. – the only valid evaluation of communication is the fidelity of the message sent to the message received.
Second, be aware of how easy it is to be misunderstood, and do everything possible to ensure the message you send is clear. For example, if I would have just said to Steve, “Look Steve, I have a cut,” the misunderstanding would not have happened.
[This story and many similar discussion are found in The Wrong Bottom Line and How to Change It
Excellent example of the need for more specific communication! :) You had me giggling in front of the computer screen. :)
ReplyDelete