text 01c – communication

8/16/2019 Text 01c – Communication

1/10

Communication

lc

CONTENTS

The age of communication

In simple terms, what does itmean?

The discussion is an encounter

Does the end justify the means?


2/10

© Copyright by GEKA-Management Verlags AG, Glarus

These training instructions are printed as manuscript. They, or partsthereof, may not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hiredout or otherwise circulated. All rights reserved, including the right of translation into foreign languages. 010107


3/10

When talking about communication today, in the “age of communica-tion”, do we not think in most cases of technique?

Expressions like fax, laptop,e-mail and internet are so common that we

no longer consider where they come from.

But do we also take into account that there is a human being at the be-ginning and at the end of the information chain?

People process information, interpret the results, lead discussions andhave conversations.

When things are not the way they should be – when projects are stuckor products not available in time – the cause is probably insufficient,missing or misinterpreted information. Why is it so important to beaware of this fact?

One of the most important preconditions for successful communica-tion is the ability to understand oneself and others at all times.

The ability to “process information about people” gives us the possi-bility to understand the other people fully and to communicate clearly.

But how do I understand my partner and how do I make myself un-derstood?

Which “information channels” exist and to what extent do I use them

consciously or subconsciously?

How important is verbal and nonverbal information and how do delib-erate reactions look?

Why does my discussion partner now react so aggressively when hedidn’t do so before in similar situations?

If you understand communication not as a one-way street, like, for ex-ample

– I’m talking – you are listening

– I suggest – you answer– My speech is the cause – your answer the effect

but as two-way traffic, like, for example

– Both suggest – and defer to suggestions– Both are talking – and listen mutually– Mutual understanding is as important as the agreement

then we have the chance, in the future,to improve our results where hu-man relations are concerned through more effective communication –inside and outside the company.

The age of communication

Communication isagreement by means of

understanding!

“I would pay more for the abilityto handle people properly

than for any other ability underthe sun.”

J. D. Rockefeller Snr.

3


4/10

A novice, who had just entered the monastery, asked the abbot: “Is itpermitted to smoke during prayers?”The abbot was rather surprised atthis question and naturally answered: “Of course not, it’s strictly for-bidden.” That evening, the novice went to the chapel for prayers with

the other monks. What do you think he saw? There was an old monkdeep in prayer, smoking his pipe. The novice was beside himself. Hecould hardly wait for the end of prayers to accost the old monk:“Broth-er, how is it that you smoke during prayers? The abbot has definitelyprohibited it.” – “Did you ask him?” – “Well, yes, of course.” – “Howstrange,”retorted the old monk,“I also asked him, and he gave me per-mission.” Quite indignant about this injustice, the novice was about torun to the abbot, but the old monk held him back. “Tell me, what ex-actly was the question you asked the abbot?” – “I asked him whether Imight smoke during prayers.” – “Oh, I see. I asked him whether I mightpray while smoking.”What can we learn from this story?

I can say a thing in two ways; to make a good impression or to make abad impression.

And indeed there are not just two ways,but many different ways of say-ing something. Have you ever considered in how many ways we cangive somebody else new ideas, new impressions? We can speak in aloud or a soft voice, we can speak slowly or quickly. We can converse,contend,ask questions.We can flatter, intimidate, menace,request,beg.We can give examples, mention rumours, awaken hopes etc.

We can paint the devil on the wall, build castles in the air …

There are countless paths to a particular goal; there are innumerableways of broaching a subject. The important thing is to choose the rightapproach, so that we talk like the old monk and not like the novice.

One can converse in such a way that, however long the interview con-tinues, the other is negative and antagonistic. Or, on the other hand, areally friendly and warm relationship can develop from the conversa-tion.

Somewhere between these two extremes lies the happy medium, the

proper way to discuss and to deal with customers, managers and col-leagues.

This gives rise to the first question we have to ask ourselves:What dowe want to achieve in the discussion, what is our objective? For in-stance,would we wish to draw ourselves and a customer closer togeth-er or to increase the distance between us? Put visually, the questionlooks like this:

In simple terms, what does it mean?

4

There are two sides toeverything (at least)

There are limitless ways of “expressing something insimple terms”.

What is our goal?


5/10

Should the two associates come closer to one another or move fartherapart? Do we want to move to the left or to the right? Are we ready torisk an argument with our partners? But…

– if they don’t think we are doing our best, or if things don’t turn outthe way they expected;

– if they don’t understand that everything takes time;

– if they think they can work off their bad temper on us;

– if they imagine we are dependent on them;

then we have to make them understand that they are on the wrongtrack – fully aware of the risk that they will not be pleased to hear this.In fact, we can be certain that they will not thank us for the informationand that they are even less likely to pat us on the back or embrace uson account of it.

This is indeed the problem! There is absolutely no sense in blatantlyagreeing with our partners in all circumstances, whether justified ornot.There is no sense in sacrificing the interests of our own firm to cur-ry favour with the customers.Taking the customers’ side in order to win

their sympathy is neither sensible nor will it, in the long run, gain re-spect. How can customers really trust business associates who are soready to give up their own point of view? But if the situation is re-versed, there is just as little sense in stubbornly thrusting the fact thatwe are right under the customers’ nose, so that they resent our “well-meaning” correction. Skilful negotiation technique, of course, lies be-tween these two extremes.

We are certainly notinterested in havingarguments with our

partners!

There is no sense in givingway all the time!

Constantly pushing our ownviewpoint is equally

unproductive!

5

their visions

my visions


6/10

The word “discussion” may sound a bit antiquated. Perhaps “Negotia-tion technique” or “Successful negotiation” would seem more appro-priate as a title for a management training text.

The basic technique of proper negotiation is only one aspect of a well-conducted discussion. Likewise,the discussion itself is only a small partof what happens if two or more people are sitting facing each other andtalking. There is very much more going on than a mere exchange of words!

Even well-intentioned words are out of place if I just cannot stand theother person!

Of what use are words, if empathy with the other person is obstructedby emotions?

How inadequate words are to express what lovers really feel!

How can words help, when someone is overwhelmed by anxiety?

A discussion is not only an exchange of opinions, but is always an en-counter as well.

We let ourselves be influenced and impressed by words only insofar asthey genuinely reflect the non-verbal situation, i.e. the facts, which donot need an explicit verbal explanation. Examples of such facts are:

– The hierarchical positions held by the parties to a discussion.

– Their authority.

– What past experiences they have had with one another.

– Their prejudices, the image each has of the other before having theopportunity to get properly acquainted.

– “I knew what to expect as soon as I saw them.”

So it makes a difference to the stance one adopts as a discussion part-

ner whether:

– The parent talks to the child or the child to the parent;

– the boss to the team member or the team member to the boss;

– the salesperson to the customer or the customer to the salesperson.

If managers think that they “sold” an idea to a team member, they areoften not aware of their position towards the team member. The rela-tive positions of two parties to a discussion decide who “sells” some-thing to whom and who “leads” whom.Very often what and how some-thing is said – intelligently – is pre-ordained within very narrow limitsby the relative positions of the discussion partners.

The discussion is an encounter

6

“What you are speaksso loudly that I donot hear what you say.”Emerson


7/10

The most high-powered discussion technique will not lead to the de-sired result (even,perhaps, may make it impossible) unless the non-ver-bal position of the discussion partners in relation to each other is tak-en into account properly and included in what is going on.

This applies, of course, not only to the discussion itself, but also to thepreparation for it. Hence the universal truth:

90% of success is preparation. 90% of successis preparation.

7


8/10

Before we go on to deal with preparing for the discussion, we shoulddecide what is the appropriate style to use.

Wherever one looks, there are always different points of view – in pol-

itics, in sport, in games, at home and in business.

The choice of the means and methods at our disposal,when we take upour stand, is correspondingly large.

When heads of state decide,“in theinterestsof their country”, they wantto annex a neighbouring country, they often try to eliminate the “dif-ferent points of view” in a war.

The price to be paid is known: death and destruction.

When a boxing champion wants to resolve differing views as to who is

really the greatest, he challenges the boxer he sees as No. 2 to a contestand tries to prove his view is right.

The result is: victors and vanquished.

When Jack and Jill are bored, they voluntarily choose different view-points – white or black – and they play a game of chess.

The result is: winner and loser.

And last, but not least, when X and Y are of different opinions as to if

or how business should be conducted, they sit down together for a dis-cussion. If it is a good discussion, it will leave behind neither dead norinjured, neither victor nor vanquished, neither winner nor loser, but –ultimately – partners, who reach a decision together.

The word “ultimately”is not used here merely by chance.Business peo-ple often get satisfaction from using the conversation to exercise theirsporting instincts. They are happy if they feel they had to use all theirskill to obtain the desired result.

Therefore the question is not how far one must go; but how far I wantto go in an actual case, considering –

a) the position at the start of the discussion,b) the goal to be reached.

To a): For instance, am I really, or only apparently, in a stronger orweaker position than my partners?

Here one should remember that someone who has little to gain or –above all – nothing to lose, or the gambler who is ready to stake every-thing on the turn of a card, is always in the stronger position at the start.This is, once more, a question of personal ideas.

Does the end justify the means?

8

War:death and destruction

Fight:victors and vanquished

Game:winner and loser

Business discussion:partners with a decisionreached together


9/10

To b):Also, does the goal I want to reach include maintaining the trustthat the other places in me? Or do I, as a professional con artist, haveto do justice to my image?

The answer determines my choice of style:

Slander Trying to demean my partner (and myself atthe same time).

Blackmail and Putting my partner under psychological andthreats physical pressure.

Objective discussion Allowing my partner a free choice.and evaluation

Begging and Lowering myself and thereby putting my

pleading partner under moral pressure.

Bribery Corrupting myself and my partner – accordingto the western moral concept (if both are notcorrupt already).

An incidental remark for sensitive readers: Naturally, we should neverresort to blackmail. But before we start feeling too virtuous, we mightremember that knowing blackmail for what it is hinders very few par-ents from dealing with their children by this “method”. Who is not fa-miliar from their own experience (either as aggressor or as victim) with

the demand: “If you don’t do such-and-such immediately, then …”!

To prevent any misunderstanding, let it be clearly understood that weare not giving any advice, just setting out the different style possibili-ties. They exist, and therefore we should know them in order to recog-nise them in a conversation!

I must remember thereputation I

want to maintain…

We should know and recognisethe different possibilities

to communicate!

9


10/10

10

Which points in this text do I consider to be the most important ones…

… and what do they mean for me, in practice?

text 01c – communication

Documents