The Barriers

The most obvious barriers to effective communication are age, gender and culture. One speaks often of “age-appropriate” behaviour—most often when the behaviour exhibited is age-inappropriate. It is often used socially and makes reference to modes of dress, language, public demeanor and the affecting of a style of speech or interaction that run counter to general expectations of the person’s age-group, whether that is sixteen or sixty. How does that play into managing the HR function? Firstly, it suggests that HR managers need to develop an ear for trends in conversation, public discourse and pop culture. This is not so that they can necessarily adopt these trends for themselves but so that they are equipped to listen better and hear what younger people especially might be trying to say to those in positions of authority—but not saying very well. The failure to communicate effectively in those instances arises both because one party resorts to the use of contemporary slang or net phrases that encapsulate both an intent and an attitude—and the other hears and reacts, often mistakenly—to that perceived intent and attitude.

This kind of miscommunication increases as organizations get flatter and there is less of a perceived hierarchical structure with established formalities that are observed by all. Information technology, entrepreneurial environments, advertising and marketing organizations and the focus on “star” and “celebrity” performance and empowerment within companies result in some of the old rules of communication being thrown out the window, deliberately violated or simply falling into disuse because they do not serve the needs of the organization.

HR Managers have a choice. They can get draconian and crack down on deviations from the norm—assuming their managements want them to do that. Or they can step back and ask themselves: “What is really going on here and how can we respond to these apparently renegade forms of communication effectively?”

This discussion becomes clearer if we view it in the context of some actual examples. As someone who manages a marketing communications agency in an environment of very mixed cultures—Hawaii—I am faced daily with the challenge of accommodating the different styles of communication of staff whose backgrounds, talents, education and expectations are extremely diverse. Yet the team effort of this very mixed group must serve a cluster of clients who are equally diverse in their backgrounds, expectations and needs.

A Case Study

One of the most talented at directors I have ever worked with—let’s call him Paul – happened to have serious problems understanding job instructions, delivering in time to meet deadlines and communicating effectively with other members of the team. In light of his considerable talents, I took the decision that we would bend our rules as far as we could to accommodate his personality and his needs as long as he was helping the agency to meet and surpass client expectations. He appeared to have some form of reading disability and serious personality mood swings. He consistently produced high quality design but without adequate attention to the finer points of client expectations relative to specifications and deadlines. He repeatedly demonstrated a sensitivity to words as much as to design and was able to bring the two together in ways that were attention-getting –a critical capability in our industry. He also was a willing contributor to tasks that went well beyond the scope of his normal duties, moving furniture single-handedly during an office-move for example, and addressing technical computing needs over and beyond what was expected of him.

Despite this, when Paul tendered his resignation after almost two years, we accepted it and made no effort to entice him to stay by raising his salary or offering him any other kind of incentive. Why? Two reasons: First, we had made every effort to change our expectations to accommodate his needs and personality. We had had several one-on-one counseling sessions when he was told that his moods and frequent churlishness were affecting the morale of other members of the team. While he had acknowledged his responsibility for bad behaviour, his efforts to curb that behavior were not having the results we hoped for. And therefore, the second reason for letting him go was that the negative effect of his behaviour on his colleagues had begun to seriously out-weigh the value of his contribution. It demanded more of the rest of the team in terms of their having to work around his bad behavior than seemed reasonable.

The Reasonableness Test

One of the keys to effective communications is to ask if the demands you make as a HR Manager passes the “reasonableness” test. That goes back to the two other barriers to effective communication mentioned earlier: gender and culture.

It’s always been there and historically women have been generally the ones victimized by it. Over time, however, both men and women have been casualties of the mis-communication that arises because of different gender expectations, assumptions and behavior. We would all like to flatter ourselves that we are open-minded, that we believe in the equality of the sexes and that women have as much right to be heard as men do. And yet, even in the least traditional of environments, there is a continuing expectation that women will be the kinder, gentler sex, that they will fight less fiercely, yield more easily and remain willing to serve a decorative, supporting role in organizations whatever their rank. Business deals are still struck for the most part by the good, old boys dealing with the good, old boys.

Networks of “old-boy” power exist within organizations as well, forcing women employees into silence or unwilling acquiescence. HR Managers can play a crucial role in asking if avenues exist for better communication despite the barriers raised by gender. Should there be a network within the organization, for example, that allows female employees to communicate with impunity, seek help and get counseling in ways that are not constricted by the power dynamics of gender?

Similarly, one should ask, especially in this period of accelerated globalization, if the expectations that multinational companies have relative to communications in the workplace run counter to local cultural practice. What might look to an American manager like obstinacy or recalcitrance on the part of a Japanese employee or partner, may, in fact, be simply a case of communications running on parallel tracks rather than in a two-way exchange that results in agreement. Saying “yes” or nodding while listening to what an English-speaking American manager is saying, does not necessarily signify agreement. It can simply mean, “I have heard you.” The American fondness for putting everything on the table or articulating every detail of a particular point of view is not a universal trait. HR Managers need to understand and find ways to foster communications through the thoughtful use of local cultural practices. Awareness of the miscommunication that can arise though different cultural norms should drive HR Managers to find alternative modes of communication instead of simply importing systems used by a parent company. Sometimes all it takes is simple modification of an existing system: spoken rather than written communications; one-on-one instead of group communications, or vice versa.

Authority, Empowerment, Expression

Human Resource Managers committed to re-vitalizing internal communications must re-examine inherited notions of authority and ask themselves whether tradition is standing, perhaps silently, in the way of empowerment and how employees express themselves. In the hyper-competitive, increasingly borderless world in which businesses, public sector organizations and nations function today, technology is breaking down some of the traditional barriers to communication whether the organizations want it to or not. The use of email is a very simple and powerful example of how so many of the conventions of what used to be considered “business communications” have fallen by the wayside. Email clearly encourages the kind of informality and shorthand in internal -- and sometimes even external -- communications that would have been considered unthinkable and unacceptable a few years ago. Rather than simply play catch-up, letting technology drive change, HR Managers can take the lead in understanding the changes that have taken place in how we communicate, the tools we use and the challenges we face in the workplace. That understanding should be the basis for creatively fashioning new channels for communication, new ways for managers to motivate the people they lead, new avenues for people to express new ideas and to articulate whatever is troubling them. Only then can people work together to arrive at outcomes that result in happier, more empowered individuals who contribute willingly to building stronger, healthier organizations. Organizations that listen as carefully to their employees as they do to the customers or constituents they serve will find themselves better positioned to hire and retain the kind of employees who fuel growth.