Communication - or is it?

“Communication” is a much-used word, and a very important one at that, one which we all use frequently and, perhaps, have pride in ourselves for our ability to achieve.

Governments 'communicate' their message to us, people send each other 'communications', we use 'telecommunications' to talk to each other on the telephone, or send emails and texts, we 'communicate' with our inner selves to better understand and project ourselves to others – we do so many things that involve the word 'communicate' (and its derivatives) that we surely all have a pretty good idea of what the process entails.

But perhaps we are kidding ourselves.

Well, firstly, let us look at the word itself. “Communicate” comes from a derivative of the Latin word “communicare” and means to share out or divide, communicate or impart, all sharing the quality of “making common”.

So we already have a problem – you cannot communicate 'to', you can only communicate 'with', because only the latter enables you to share information or opinions with someone else.

So what, you might ask?

Well, almost every aspect of our daily lives involves talking – on the phone, in person, via computer, and so on – or sharing information, such as text, images or video footage, and there is little point in our having all these interactions with other people if what we are trying to convey is different from what these other people are seeing and hearing. We might as well be talking in different languages to each other (actually, we are, in effect) because it is only if A has correctly interpreted what B has said that A can respond in a way that is relevant and actually advances the course of the conversation.

Of course, in day to day life it doesn't really matter if confusions or ambiguities arise out of a chat about the weather, or the film you watched. But it really does matter in a business context, where clarity is essential to (for example) the making of a legal contract, or dealing with a disciplinary issue, or perhaps helping a co-worker in an emotional situation.

Here are some suggestions, in no particular, order, as to what we can all try to do. It's not an exhaustive list, and if you have some different, or better, ideas of your own, that's excellent – at least we'll all be thinking about the subject, and that can only benefit us all:

• Have a clear idea, in your own mind, of what you want to say, and how to say it, before the mouth opens! If the message starts out as garbled, it's not going to get any better on its way to the other person.

• You may feel impassioned about a particular matter but, even if it is your passion about something that you want to convey to someone else, keep it under control and retain the discipline to get across the key points of the message.

• In a formal setting, such as a staff appraisal, or a disciplinary meeting, there are a number of things to consider:

• make an agenda of all the important points you want to raise before the meeting, and stick to that agenda no matter what. Tell the other person what these points are, so that there is no surprise in store for them during the meeting and they have the chance to consider their response.

• during the meeting, these points should be presented in a succinct way, but always in a manner that is seen as open and unthreatening, and which invites thoughtful and positive response.

• don't get side-tracked. If issues are raised which need thought or comment, that's fine but if they are not directly relevant to the matter in hand, they should be deferred until a separate meeting.

• think about the language you are using. If you are senior to the person to whom you're talking, they may feel reluctant to ask for clarification or expansion of any points you are trying to make. Of course they won't tell you, so you'll be having a conversation but without full comprehension taking place. In other words, there will be no communication. A position of authority may not be the only stumbling block to communication. If you and the other person don't have the same language as your first language, or if the educational background of one person is inferior to that of the other person, there are many ways in which problems can arise, so (if necessary) ensure that your words and your concepts are expressed simply, and clearly, and if necessary have a translator with you.

• try not to talk in a monotone! If you can vary your speech patterns (louder and softer, for example, or slower and faster) there is more chance that your listener will stay interested and want to be a part of the conversation.

• listen, listen, listen! Remember, you have two ears and just one mouth, but you will only learn anything through the ears. Your point of view may not be the only one, or even the right one and, especially when dealing with a sensitive issue, you need to hear what the other person has to say – and to make sure that they know that you are hearing them.

• be aware of your body language. This will reveal more than you think, and you don't want to look as if you are bored, or in a hurry to do something else (even if you are)!

• If possible, try to be on the same (physical) level as the person with whom you're talking. Otherwise, the conversation can look or feel like bullying, and is always an obstacle to an open, candid, exchange of views.

• In a disciplinary situation, it can be very tempting to open with conversation with something like “ Mr X tells me that you've made an inappropriate comment to your team” or “Ms Y says that you always try to undermine her authority”.

Make sure you resist the temptation to put the conversation on an accusatory or aggressive footing, as the person you're talking to will just feel got at, and will retaliate in some way, or will just close up into their shell. Neither are helpful responses, and your behaviour could be regarded as hostile should matters proceed toward a formal claim of some sort.

Instead, you could try an approach along the lines of “Look, it's been suggested to me that there may have been a problem with your team meeting yesterday/ your interactions with Ms Y. I don't know anything about this, so why don't you tell me how you see the situation, and if there's anything I can do to help”. This may encourage the person to open up to you, and this will pave the way to a resolution of the problem. After all, just because you get a complaint about someone, it doesn't mean the complaint is valid, and disaffected persons can just as easily turn into aggressors as victims.

It is probably appropriate to say, at this stage, that whatever communications arise in the workplace, and particularly when these arise as the result of meetings of any sort (appraisal, disciplinary, board, planning, etc.) they should always be recorded in writing and, generally, copies should be circulated to each of the participants for them to sign and return as acknowledgement that what is claimed as taking place actually did take place, that all relevant points have been accurately documented, and that a diary is set up for any follow-ups that may be needed. And all this should be in plain English, translated if necessary into the recipient's native tongue.

Finally, perhaps we could all learn a lesson from the service industries, against which the single biggest source of complaint, year after year, is lack of communication. That doesn't just mean a lack of letters or emails (although that is infuriating enough), it also means that the organisation doesn't listen to what is being said to them, ignores or only deals with a part of the question or problem, or responds in a language that the recipient doesn't understand. And the funny thing is that it takes so much less time to deal with the matter correctly in the first place!