Menu
by Kelly Riggs
Seattle Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll yells on the sideline. (Tom Gannam/AP Photo)
Communication makes the world go ’round.
Nowhere is that more true than in the corporate world, where everything works better when people are communicating effectively and consistently.
In fact, it stands to reason that no communication is the death knell for any organization, but what about bad communication? What does that to a company?
Is one worse than the other?
The results of no communication are pretty clear: general confusion, a lack of direction, and even disengagement. A lack of communication will eventually create resentment among employees, leaving them to speculate as to what is really happening within the company. This is why successful business leaders always keep their employees informed. Of course, not everyone is capable of giving the perfect speech, most of them would probably hire professional speechwriting services to assist them. However, the core content or value of the speech is about informing the employees and shareholders, which they do through written or oral communication. John Hamm commented on this all-too-common issue in a Harvard Business Review article:
In the absence of clear communication that satisfies the urgent desire to know what the boss is really thinking, people imagine all kinds of motives. The result is often sloppy behavior and misalignment that can cost a company dearly.
OK. Clear enough. A lack of communication is damaging to a company, perhaps fatally so. Left in the dark, employees can only speculate as to what is happening, and, in my experience, people never assume the best. Quite the contrary.
But what about bad communication? Is bad communication better than no communication at all?
It certainly does not seems likely. In fact, I think it is reasonable to conclude that bad communication may create just as many problems as no communication – if not more – and may actually be worse than no communication at all, which is incredibly difficult to imagine.
A MarketingProfs article entitled “CEO Communications: Five Phrases That Signal ‘BS'” describes several commonly used phrases that can actually damage a CEO’s credibility (and, by extension, the trust in that CEO) because they are cliched, lack sincerity, or are intentionally vague:
1. “This deal is a win-win.”
2. “Thinking/working/planning outside the box.”
3. “We’re not here to talk about the past.”
4. “__________ is stepping down to spend more time with his family.”
None of these may seem all that damaging at first blush, but in the right context each sounds trite or even condescending. For example, “We’re not here to talk about the past” is typically code for “We’re not here to discuss the real issue because we would have to dwell on a mistake I made.”
However, the article did get me to thinking about some of the communication mistakes managers make that consistently damage their credibility with employees and poison the company’s culture.
Credibility-Killer No. 1:
The condescending attempt to pull the wool over people’s eyes. Think Wizard of Oz: “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. The great Oz has spoken.”
Does anything really irritate you more than to know there is a problem and have the leader suggest there really isn’t a problem? Or, to have a leader figuratively pat you on the head and send you on your way as if you are simply not capable of understanding? Why not just call me stupid and get it over with?
Remedy: Admit the issue. Be transparent. Treat your employees like adults.
Credibility-Killer No. 2:
Generic motivation without detailed plans gets very old, very fast.
So, if you are big on meaningless declarations you (mistakenly) believe will motivate your employees to greater performance, you might want to rethink your approach. Hamm explains the problem:
“Leaders frequently espouse dozens of cliche-infused declarations such as “Let’s focus on the key priorities this quarter,” “Customers come first,” or “We need a full-court press in engineering this month.” Over and over again, they present grand, overarching-yet fuzzy-notions of where they think the company is going.”
“Fuzzy” proclamations, by definition, lack clarity. As such, they sound meaningless and fail to create a clear set of steps to achieve an objective.
Remedy: Provide real analysis. Define clear expectations. Outline next steps.
Credibility-Killer No. 3:
Creating excuses for your own mistakes.
I once had the opportunity to work at a company where the owners were always quick to publicly criticize others, but never once admitted their own miscalculations.
Never. Instead, there was always a good reason why their failures were acceptable.
I suspect there are few areas of ‘bad communication’ that outrank this one. If you’re looking to destroy a company quickly, this should be somewhere near the top of your list of tactics.
Remedy: Own your decisions. Admit your mistakes. Model the behavior you want in your people.
No communication is destructive, but so is bad communication. Sadly, both are common.
Which leads to an even bigger discussion: Why do companies fail to invest in training that will improve leadership communication?
Perhaps they are just too busy with that full-court press in engineering.
Kelly Riggs is a business performance coach and founder of the Business LockerRoom. A former national Salesperson of the Year and serial entrepreneur, Kelly is a recognized thought leader in the areas of sales, management leadership, and strategic planning. He serves clients ranging from small, privately held companies to Fortune 500 firms. Kelly has written two books: “1-on-1 Management™: What Every Great Manager Knows That You Don’t” and “Quit Whining and Start SELLING! A Step-by-Step Guide to a Hall of Fame Career in Sales.”
