Misunderstandings
“ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant”
A summary of my first post is the premise that there is never a good reason to attack the person with whom we are communicating, regardless of how different our points of view are. While most people agree with that statement on the surface, why is that we fall into the trap of personal attacks? There are actually a lot of different “reasons”, but before we go there (in another post), I have noticed that misunderstandings can be a big roadblock to communication. Though misunderstandings are not unavoidable, we can take some steps to reduce them and to deal with them appropriately.
I was surprised in writing this blog and having someone else look at it, how often the phrase came up–“they will think you are saying…” or “it sounds like you mean…”
That's their problem
So who is responsible for the misunderstanding? As communication starts with “co”, the responsibility is often shared. Even in my first blog post, I was misunderstood–that sure feels more comfortable than saying–I failed to communicate with sufficient clarity, which is the truth. So the misunderstanding can be the sender, the receiver and often both–because we never hear or read anything with a clear slate but we have built-in filters (past experience, beliefs, bias, etc.) which affect what we receive.
Now let’s complicate it even more. Written messages like in social media do not include the tone, facial expressions and other non-verbal feedback which is a major part of communication. We have all seen or experienced times when someone’s post was viewed as serious when it was sarcastic, or viewed as patronizing when it was an attempt at caring.
Let’s take a detour here and talk about the difference between being kind and being nice–Steve’s perspective.
Being nice is like walking on eggshells, focusing on not saying anything that a person may not want to hear. This is based on fear and I think you get the point that I’m not a big fan.
Being kind, instead, is saying what needs to be said in a respectful manner even though it may be hard for the hearer to receive. It is based on caring about the person who is receiving my message.
Unfortunately, many people, like a previous employer I had, think that you can only be nice–not confronting wrongs, or you can attack the person for what they have done or not done. He once told me, people think I’m an “a-hole”–but I don’t care–I just call it like I see it. The truth is, if you don’t act like one, most people won’t think you are one. The other choice besides those two extremes is to be kind.
You can quote me–“Steve said not to be nice”–as long as you add, “but always to be kind.”
Hey, do you want to fight?
Okay, we get to the point where we realize there is a misunderstanding–what do we do? A common practice is to make fun of the other person–blaming them for not understanding–as, obviously, what we said was so clear anyone could understand what we meant:). Maybe we put a laughing face by their post or maybe we ridicule the person by acting like they are from another planet–how did you come up with that?
From a pragmatic standpoint, we have all seen that such a response is always counter productive. However, if our true intent is to communicate, when we observe the misunderstanding, if we seek to clarify, by rewording (repeating is usually not helpful), the doorway stays open for dialogue, and the relationship is not harmed.
Next week let’s dialogue about “reasons” we switch from addressing a topic to attacking a person. Your input is welcome.