Monitor Your Organization’s “Non-Verbal” Communication
February 23, 2010
It is widely cited that verbal communication makes up only 7% of a total message during a conversation. That is, 93% percent of the meaning within the conversation comes from outside the words that we use. These non-verbal aspects of communication include gestures, posture, intonation, and facial expressions. It turns out the concrete language is by far the least important factor in our interpretation and understanding of what the other person saying.
A similar phenomenon happens in organizations. Consider that the equivalent to verbal communication in organizations are the formal words that come to employees in the form of official documents: values and mission statements, strategy, policies, newsletters, websites, announcements, press releases, and other communication devices. The rest of internal communication comes from everything else employees experience. Similar to a conversation, the vast majority of meaning and understanding is generated by “non-verbal” communication.
The following are examples of “non-verbal” communication in organizations that speak louder than words:
Accountability
Employees assess which policies count and which ones are merely guidelines based on how consistently they are enforced. Processes and procedures are generally followed to the extent that they are required.
“Everyone must contact the IT helpdesk to resolve computer issues”
(unless you know who to call to avoid waiting).
Rewards
Rewards in all their forms tell employees how to be successful. Traditional incentive programs signal expectations but may conflict with stated values or even inadvertently motivate a different behavior than what is desired. Furthermore, who gets promoted and what behaviors elicit praise send powerful messages about what is expected.
“Safety first!”
(Here’s your efficiency bonus.)
Decisions
How managers spend resources speaks volumes about what they truly value and prioritize. The decisions they make about how to allocate funds and how they spend their own time demonstrates what they believe will lead to success.
“Strategic initiatives are important”
(until we need to cut something out of the budget).
Management behavior
More than anything, employees look at the behavior modeled by management to see if it matches what is officially communicated. The most influential person in this regard is an employee’s own boss. The attitudes and behaviors displayed by people in authority tell the real story of what is expected.
“We value employees’ ideas”
(but not the terrible one you just shared).
Employees will rely on “non-verbal” communication to understand what is expected and to decide appropriate action in the midst of uncertainty. When introduced to news of change, many employees will take the stance, “I’ll believe it when I see it.” It is not enough for them to hear it or read it. It is imperative to monitor your organization’s “non-verbal” communication to ensure that actions and behaviors are consistent with your official change message.
Interview: Creating Alignment with Four Questions
January 19, 2010
This morning I hosted an interview with Jeff Lebow, Co-founder and Principal Consultant of Alignment at Work, LLC, on my biweekly radio show, The Change Agent’s Dilemma. The topic was “Create Alignment with Four Questions.”
During the show, Jeff shared what alignment is, how it relates to accountability, and how you achieve it. The key is to gain agreement on the answers to The Four Pull QuestionsSM.
Among my favorite quotes from our discussion is “What goes without saying doesn’t always go.”
Listen here (30 minutes):
If you are a podcast listener, you may also subscribe to The Change Agent’s Dilemma on iTunes.
The Dance of Change
August 24, 2009
I’ve been thinking about how despite our better intentions, changing organizations is never predictable, and doesn’t perfectly fit into a nice theoretical model the way we wish it would.
As change agents, we frequently Dance in the Moment (a term I learned a few years ago in the CTI coaching program). While we work toward an envisioned future, we can only handle what is right in front of us, which is constantly shifting based on the reactions to the strategies we’re using to try to influence change.
If you think of the process of change as a dance, you realize it’s a partnership between two entities. Even if you haven’t taken ballroom dancing classes (or watched Dancing With the Stars), you probably know that each person in the duo has a specific role: leader and follower.
A few of the moves that the leader does to show the follower where to go are overt gestures that can be observed from the audience. However, most of the time the follower just seems like she knows what to do next, even if the dance is not choreographed. For the most part, the dance is a series of subtle nudges by the leader: a tug of the hand, a slight pressure at the waist that indicate the steps and the direction to go next.
The follower, for her part, responds to the nudges with what she interprets as appropriate movements, and adds her own flair to the dance. Sometimes the corresponding movements are what the leader intended, and sometimes they aren’t. Depending on the leader’s ability to react quickly, the result can be a seamless transition, or it could be a disastrous fall. Either way, it is the role of the leader to make the follower look good.
It’s important to note that the dance doesn’t work at all without a third element: the music. The nudges by the leader mean nothing to the follower if there is no context, no framework that they share. The music tells the dancers if they are doing the Waltz or the Mambo. They won’t get very far without stepping on toes if they are performing one of each. The music also keeps them in step, moving together at the same time.
The analogies of the dance’s leader and follower to the subject of organizational change are obvious. But the music might be a lot of things. What do you think?
What role does music play in the dance of change?
If you enjoyed this post, you may also like:
A common picture of the ideal organization
May 18, 2009
Even though organizations have different purposes and strategies, I think we tend to have a common picture of the ideal characteristics of an effective organization. I wonder if these are the things you are trying to bring about in your organization:
- Multi-directional trust (leadership, employees, peers)
- Transparency and feedback
- Ample, clear, compelling, consistent communication
- High-performing teams
- Data-based decisions
- Accountability to results
- Clarity of vision
- Congruence of personal work with organizational goals
- Alignment between business units and departments
- Breakdown of silos, turf wars, and self-protection
- Atmosphere of mutual respect
- Employee engagement
- The idea of a “well-oiled machine”, efficient standardized processes
- Effective, value-added meetings
I would love to hear what else you might add to this list, and if any of these would actually decrease your success. Please share using the comments.
Spring forward: simple change is not easy
March 8, 2009
As we participate in the annual ritual of moving our clocks ahead one hour for daylight savings time, I’m reminded that even simple change is not so easy. A few observations:
Change itself is less complicated than the tasks required to align people to it. Time itself (or at least as we measure it) changed once. But in my house, that required adjusting four analog clocks, four digital clocks, three watches and two car radios.
Change results in a temporary efficiency loss. The parking lot at church was a little thin today, and I bet morning traffic will be lighter than usual at times when it was previously light. People are sluggish as they acclimate to waking earlier. No matter how well planned, anticipated or small, change requires an adjustment period.
People change on their own schedule. Although the time change is instantaneous, people will make the change when it is most convenient for them. I don’t know anyone who would set an alarm for 2:00 a.m. so they can wake up and move their clocks forward. Some people set their clocks before they go to bed, and others complete the task in the morning. My husband changed his watch on Saturday morning because he had to wake up early on Sunday morning, and wanted to have more time to adjust.
Not everyone receives the message, remembers it or understands it. Some people will show up late to work on Monday morning, having spent all day Sunday thinking it was the wrong time. Either they didn’t hear about it, heard it but forgot about it, or rearranged the slogan “Spring forward, fall back.”
Even after hearing the benefits and seeing that everyone else is on board, some people will still choose not to participate. Most of the State of Indiana stays on Eastern Standard Time year-round, preferring to change their time zone instead of their clocks. During Daylight Savings Time, they are on Central time.
Inquiry: How is your organizational change more complicated than it seems?
Feel free to chime in by adding a comment below.
Don’t miss a thing!
Subscribe
in a ReaderSubscribe
via E-mail
-
