It is useful to describe communication as a process of sending and receiving messages with attached meanings. The key elements in the communication process are illustrated in Figure 11.1. They include a source, which encodes an intended meaning into a message, and a receiver, which decodes the message into a perceived meaning. The receiver may or may not give feedback to the source. Although this process may appear to be elementary, it is not quite as simple as it looks. Noise is the term used to describe any disturbance that disrupts communication effectiveness and interferes with the transference of messages within the communication process. For example, if your stomach is growling because your class is right before lunch, or if you are worried about an exam later in the day, these can interfere with your ability to pay attention to what your professor and classmates are saying. In effect they are noise in the communication process.

Figure 11.1. The communication process and possible sources of "noise."

The information source, or sender, is a person or group trying to communicate with someone else. The source seeks to communicate, in part, to change the attitudes, knowledge, or behavior of the receiver. A team leader, for example, may want to communicate with a division manager in order to explain why the team needs more time or resources to finish an assigned project. This involves encoding—the process of translating an idea or thought into a message consisting of verbal, written, or nonverbal symbols (such as gestures), or some combination of them. Messages are transmitted through various communication channels, such as face-to-face meetings, e-mail and online discussions, written letters or memoranda, and telephone communications or voice mail, among others. The choice of channel can have an important impact on the communication process. Some people are better at using certain channels over others, and specific channels are better able to handle some types of messages. In the case of the team leader communicating with the division manager, for example, it can make quite a difference whether the message is sent face to face, in a written memo, by voice mail, or by e-mail.

The communication process is not completed even though a message is sent. The receiver is the individual or group of individuals to whom a message is directed. In order for meaning to be assigned to any received message, its contents must be interpreted through decoding. This process of translation is complicated by many factors, including the knowledge and experience of the receiver and his or her relationship with the sender. A message may also be interpreted with the added influence of other points of view, such as those offered by friends, co-workers, or organizational superiors. Ultimately, the decoding may result in the receiver interpreting a message in a way that is different from that originally intended by the source.

Most receivers are well aware of the potential gap between the intended message of the source and the perceived meaning assigned to it by the recipient. As discussed in Chapter 4 on perception, learning, and attribution, this often occurs because individuals misinterpret the message by attributing motives or meanings the sender did not intend. When there are gaps in messages (and even when there aren't) receivers will often "fill in the blanks," resulting in large potential for miscommunication in the workplace.

One way these gaps are identified and corrected is feedback, the process through which the receiver communicates with the sender by returning another message. Feedback represents two-way communication, going from sender to receiver and back again. Compared to one-way communication, which flows from sender to receiver only, two-way communication is more accurate and effective, although it may also be more costly and time consuming. Because of their efficiency, one-way forms of communication—memos, letters, e-mail, reports, and the like—are frequently used in work settings. One-way messages are easy for the sender but often frustrating for the receiver, who may be left unsure of just what the sender means or wants done.

In most workplaces, there is too little feedback rather than too much. This is particularly true when the feedback is negative in nature because people are afraid of how the feedback will be received or of raising emotions they are not prepared to handle. Words that are intended to be polite and helpful can easily end up being perceived as unpleasant and even hostile. This risk is particularly evident in the performance appraisal process. A manager or team leader must be able to do more than just complete a written appraisal to document another person's performance for the record. To serve the person's developmental needs, feedback regarding the results of the appraisal—both the praise and the criticism—must be well communicated. As pointed out in OB Savvy 11.1, there is an art to giving feedback so that the receiver accepts it and uses it constructively.

We all know that people communicate in ways other than the spoken or written word. Indeed, the nonverbal communication that takes place through facial expressions, body position, eye contact, and other physical gestures is important both to understand and to master. It is the act of speaking without using words. Kinesics, the study of gestures and body postures, has achieved a rightful place in communication theory and research.^[501]

The nonverbal side to communication can often hold the key to what someone is really thinking or meaning. When verbal and nonverbal do not match, research has shown that receivers will pay more attention to the nonverbal. Nonverbal can also affect the impressions we make on others. Interviewers, for example, tend to respond more favorably to job candidates whose nonverbal cues, such as eye contact and erect posture, are positive than to those displaying negative nonverbal cues, such as looking down or slouching. The art of impression management during interviews and in other situations requires careful attention to both verbal and nonverbal aspects of communication, including one's dress, timeliness, and demeanor.

Conflict avoidance is a major problem in the workplace. To foster healthy dialogue, people need to recognize the importance of being willing to give and receive feedback.

Nonverbal communication can also take place through the physical arrangement of space or workspace designs, such as that found in various office layouts. Proxemics, the study of the way space is used, is important to communication.^[502] Figure 11.2 shows three different office arrangements and the messages they may communicate to visitors. Check the diagrams against the furniture arrangement in your office or that of your instructor or a person with whom you are familiar. What are you or they saying to visitors by the choice of furniture placement?^[503]

Figure 11.2. Furniture placement and nonverbal communication in the office.

In interpersonal communication, it is important to understand the barriers that can easily create communication problems. The most common barriers in the workplace include interpersonal issues, physical distractions, and meaning, or semantic, barriers.

Interpersonal barriers are reflected in a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson: "I can't hear what you say because who you are speaks so loudly."^[504] Interpersonal barriers occur when individuals are not able to objectively listen to the sender due to things such as lack of trust, personality clashes, a bad reputation, stereotypes/prejudices, etc. In such cases, receivers and senders may distort communication by evaluating and judging a message or failing to communicate it effectively. Think of someone you don't like or a co-worker or a classmate who rubs you the wrong way. Now think about how you communicate with that person. Do you listen effectively, or do you turn him or her off? Do you share information with him or her, or do you keep your interactions short and curt, or potentially even evasive?

Such problems are indicative of selective listening and filtering. In selective listening, individuals block out information or only hear things that match preconceived notions. Someone who does not trust another will assume the other is not telling the truth, or may "hear" things in the communication that are not accurate. An employee who believes a co-worker is incompetent may disregard important information if it comes from that person. In filtering, senders convey only certain parts of relevant information. If we don't like a co-worker we may decide to leave out critical details or pointers that would help him or her be more successful in getting things done.

Interpersonal barriers may also occur due to ego problems or poor communication skills. Individuals with ego problems may twist what someone says to serve their own purpose, or overly emphasize their own contributions while failing to acknowledge others. Poor communication skills involve failing to effectively listen, rambling on in conversations or meetings rather than presenting a concise and coherent message, or inability to frame messages appropriate to the audience.

Physical distractions are another barrier that can interfere with the effectiveness of a communication attempt. Some of these distractions are evident in the following conversation between an employee, George, and his manager.^[505]

Besides what may have been poor intentions in the first place, George's manager allowed physical distractions to create information overload. As a result, the communication with George suffered. Setting priorities and planning can eliminate this mistake. If George has something to say, his manager should set aside adequate time for the meeting. In addition, interruptions such as telephone calls, drop-in visitors, and the like should be prevented. At a minimum, George's manager could start by closing the door to the office and instructing his secretary to not disturb them.

Semantic barriers involve a poor choice or use of words and mixed messages. When in doubt regarding the clarity of your written or spoken messages, the popular KISS principle of communication is always worth remembering: "Keep it short and simple." Of course, that is often easier said than done. The following illustrations of the "bafflegab" that once tried to pass as actual "executive communication" are a case in point.^[506]

One has to wonder why these messages weren't stated more understandably: (A) "Send us your recommendations; they will be carefully considered." (B) "Consumers want lower prices."

"We have two ears and one mouth so we should listen twice as much as we speak."^[507] This quote, a variation on that of the Greek philosopher Epictetus, indicates another common interpersonal communication pitfall: the failure to effectively listen. The ability to listen well is a distinct asset to anyone whose job success depends on communicating with other people. After all, there are always two sides to the communication process: (1) sending a message, or "telling," and (2) receiving a message, or "listening." And as the quote indicates, the emphasis should be more on the listening and less on the telling.^[508]

Leaders on Leadership

BEST BUY'S CEO BRAD ANDERSON ENABLES BOTTOM-UP COMMUNICATION

Brad Anderson believes that successful management requires a commitment to developing and facilitating the expression of employee capabilities. And at Best Buy, he has done just that.

Anderson has broken down barriers to enable a culture that allows ideas to move bottom up instead of just top down. As Anderson says, "I believe that some of our best ideas have come from the people who are furthest removed from the CEO's office—those line-level employees who interact with our customers each and every day." One example is a revolutionary program known as ROWE—results-only work environment. Seeking to eliminate the belief that physical presence means productivity, the goal of ROWE is to judge performance on output instead of hours. It takes the concept of paid work out of a 1930s assembly line culture and into the 21st century by allowing workers to choose when and where they will work. With ROWE, there are no schedules, no mandatory meetings, and no face time games—work is no longer a place you go but something you do. "This is like TiVo for your work," says the program's co-founder, Jody Thompson.

What began as a covert guerrilla action by two HR managers quickly gained social networking heat, spreading to become a revolution, and a successful one at that—productivity is up an average 35 percent in departments that have switched to ROWE. It wasn't created as the result of some edict, but instead was an idea born and nurtured by a handful of passionate employees. ROWE reflects a concept Anderson broadly encourages—"bottom-up stealth innovation."

In Best Buy, the greatest cultures aren't pronouncements, they are enablers of creative thinking at all levels, listening to the results, acting on them, and giving credit where it's due.

Everyone in the new workplace should develop good skills in active listening—the ability to help the source of a message say what he or she really means. The concept comes from the work of counselors and therapists, who are trained to help people express themselves and talk about things that are important to them.^[509] Take a moment to review the guidelines for active listening shown in OB Savvy 11.2. Then read the following conversations. How would you feel as the group leader in each case?^[510]

Conversation 1

Conversation 2

The second example shows active listening skills on the part of the branch manager. She responded to the group leader's communication in a way that increased the flow of information. The manager learned more about the situation, while the group leader most likely felt better after having been able to really say what she thought—after being heard. Compare, by contrast, these outcomes with those in the first example where the manager lacked active listening skills.

We all know that globalization is here to stay. What we might not realize is that the success of international business often rests with the quality of cross-cultural communication. And all is not well. A recent study of large firms by Accenture reports that 92 percent find that the biggest challenge in working with outsourcing providers is communication.^[511] People must always exercise caution when they are involved in cross-cultural communication—whether between persons of different geographic or ethnic groupings within one country, or between persons of different national cultures.

Not only does language differ across cultures, so does the nature of nonverbal communication. While Americans are used to wider personal space and less physical touch, persons from Asian and Hispanic cultures are much more comfortable with close contact.

A common problem in cross-cultural communication is ethnocentrism, the tendency to believe one's culture and its values are superior to those of others. It is often accompanied by an unwillingness to try to understand alternative points of view and to take the values they represent seriously. Another problem in cross-cultural communication arises from parochialism—assuming that the ways of your culture are the only ways of doing things. It is parochial for traveling American businesspeople to insist that all of their business contacts speak English, whereas it is ethnocentric for them to think that anyone who dines with a spoon rather than a knife and fork lacks proper table manners.

The difficulties with cross-cultural communication are perhaps most obvious in respect to language differences. Advertising messages, for example, may work well in one country but encounter difficulty when translated into the language of another. Problems accompanied the introduction of Ford's European model, the "Ka," into Japan. (In Japanese, ka means "mosquito.") Gestures may also be used quite differently in the various cultures of the world. For example, crossed legs are quite acceptable in the United Kingdom but are rude in Saudi Arabia if the sole of the foot is directed toward someone. Pointing at someone to get his or her attention may be acceptable in Canada, but in Asia it is considered inappropriate and even offensive.^[512]

The role of language in cross-cultural communication has additional and sometimes even more subtle sides. The anthropologist Edward T. Hall notes important differences in the ways different cultures use language, and he suggests that misunderstood communications are often caused by them.^[513] Members of low-context cultures are very explicit in using the spoken and written word. In these cultures, such as those of Australia, Canada, and the United States, the message is largely conveyed by the words someone uses, and not particularly by the "context" in which they are spoken. In contrast, members of high-context cultures use words to convey only a limited part of the message. The rest must be inferred or interpreted from the context, which includes body language, the physical setting, and past relationships—all of which add meaning to what is being said. Many Asian and Middle Eastern cultures are considered high context, according to Hall, whereas most Western cultures are low context.

International business experts advise that one of the best ways to gain understanding of cultural differences is to learn at least some of the language of the country that one is dealing with. Says one global manager: "Speaking and understanding the local language gives you more insight; you can avoid misunderstandings." A former American member of the board of a German multinational says: "Language proficiency gives a [nonGerman] board member a better grasp of what is going on ... not just the facts and figures but also texture and nuance."^[514] Although the prospect of learning another language may sound daunting, there is little doubt that it can be well worth the effort.^[515]

Organizations are designed based on bureaucratic organizing principles, meaning that jobs are arranged in hierarchical fashion with specified job descriptions and formal reporting relationships. However, much information in organizations is also passed along more fluidly, through informal communication networks. These illustrate two types of information flows in organizations: formal and informal communication channels.

Formal channels follow the chain of command established by an organization's hierarchy of authority. For example, an organization chart indicates the proper routing for official messages passing from one level or part of the hierarchy to another. Because formal channels are recognized as authoritative, it is typical for communication of policies, procedures, and other official announcements to adhere to them. On the other hand, much "networking" takes place through the use of informal channels that do not adhere to the organization's hierarchy of authority.^[516] They coexist with the formal channels but frequently diverge from them by skipping levels in the hierarchy or cutting across divisional lines. Informal channels help to create open communications in organizations and ensure that the right people are in contact with one another.^[517]

A common informal communication channel is the grapevine, or network of friendships and acquaintances through which rumors and other unofficial information are passed from person to person. Grapevines have the advantage of being able to transmit information quickly and efficiently. Grapevines also help fulfill the needs of people involved in them. Being part of a grapevine can provide a sense of security that comes from "being in the know" when important things are going on. It also provides social satisfaction as information is exchanged interpersonally. The primary disadvantage of grapevines occurs when they transmit incorrect or untimely information. Rumors can be very dysfunctional, both to people and to organizations. One of the best ways to avoid rumors is to make sure that key persons in a grapevine get the right information to begin with.

Today, the traditional communication grapevine in organizations is often technology assisted. The most common form is probably the e-mail message, but as text messaging and social networking technologies continue to evolve, so, too, do informal communication channels. In more and more organizations people are communicating officially and unofficially by blogs and wikis. As evidence of the power of technology in this regard, the U.S. military set strict regulations on blogs after becoming concerned about the messages from a proliferation of bloggers stationed in Iraq. On the other hand, reports indicate that, by 2009, wikis were used by at least 50 percent of organizations world-wide as a communications improvement tool.^[518]

Channel richness indicates the capacity of a channel to convey information. And as indicated in Figure 11.3, the richest channels are face to face. Next are telephone, video conferences, and instant messaging, followed by e-mail, written memos, and letters. The leanest channels are posted notices and bulletins. When messages get more complex and open ended, richer channels are necessary to achieve effective communication. Leaner channels work well for more routine and straightforward messages, such as announcing the location of a previously scheduled meeting.

Figure 11.3. Richness of communication channels.

Within organizations, information flows through both the formal and informal channels just described as well as downward, upward, and laterally. Downward communication follows the chain of command from top to bottom. One of its major functions is to achieve influence through information. Lower-level personnel need to know what those in higher levels are doing and to be regularly reminded of key policies, strategies, objectives, and technical developments. Of special importance is feedback and information on performance results. Sharing such information helps minimize the spread of rumors and inaccuracies regarding higher-level intentions. It also helps create a sense of security and involvement among receivers who believe they know the whole story. Unfortunately, a lack of adequate downward communication is often cited as a management failure. On the issue of corporate downsizing, for example, one sample showed that 64 percent of employees did not believe what management said, 61 percent felt uninformed about company plans, and 54 percent complained that decisions were not well explained.

The flow of messages from lower to higher organizational levels is upward communication. As shown in Figure 11.4, it serves several purposes. Upward communication keeps higher levels informed about what lower-level workers are doing, what their problems are, what suggestions they have for improvements, and how they feel about the organization and their jobs. Upward communication has historically been a problem in organizations due to lower-level employees filtering information that goes up, leaving many higher-level organizational managers in the dark about what is really happening in the organization.

The importance of lateral communication for promotion of collaborative environments in the new workplace has been a recurrent theme in this book. Today's customer-sensitive organizations need timely and accurate feedback and product information. To serve customer needs they must get the right information—and get it fast enough—into the hands of workers. Furthermore, inside the organization, people must be willing and able to communicate across departmental or functional boundaries and to listen to one another's needs as "internal customers."

Figure 11.4. Directions for information flows in and around organizations.

RESEARCH INSIGHT

Leadership Behavior and Employee Voice: Is the Door Really Open?

In today's environment, the willingness of all members to provide thoughts and ideas about critical work processes characterizes successful learning in various types of teams. Yet, despite this "learning imperative," many individuals do not work in environments where they perceive it as safe to speak up. To address these issues, James Detert and Ethan Burris engaged in a study of employee voice, which they define as "the discretionary provision of information intended to improve organizational functioning to someone inside an organization with the perceived authority to act, even though such information may challenge and upset the status quo of the organization and its powerholders."

In their study of leadership behaviors and employee voice, Detert and Burris found that leader positivity or personalized behavior is not enough to generate employee voice. Instead, if leaders are going to overcome employee restraint in speaking up, they need to indicate openness to change and willingness to act on input from below. Although transformational leader behaviors are positively related to voice, openness behaviors clearly send the stronger signal that voice is welcome.

Openness behaviors are important because they provide a "safe" environment for employees to voice their opinions. The authors concluded that the signals leaders send are key inputs to employees in assessing the potential costs and benefits of speaking up.

Do the Research

Do you think the findings are applicable to your work situation? How would you conduct a study in your workplace to find out? What other variables would you include?

Source: J. Detert and E. Burris, "Leadership Behavior and Employee Voice: Is the Door Really Open?" Academy of Management Journal 50(4) 2007, pp. 869–884.

Collaborative organization designs emphasize lateral communication in the form of cross-departmental committees, teams, or task forces as well as matrix structures. There is also growing attention to organizational ecology—the study of how building design may influence communication and productivity by improving lateral communications—as illustrated in the opening case on IDEO. Information technology is allowing organizations to (1) distribute information more instantaneously, (2) make more information available than ever before, (3) allow broader and more immediate access to this information, (4) encourage participation in the sharing and use of information, and (5) integrate systems and functions as well as use information to link with other environments in unprecedented ways.

These new forms of communication also have potential downsides. When they are largely impersonal or mostly one-way, such as e-mail, they remove nonverbal communications from the situation and thereby lose aspects that may otherwise add important context to an interaction. Studies show that recipients of e-mail are accurate less than 50 percent of the time in identifying the tone or intent of the message.^[519] They may also create difficulties with understanding the emotional aspects of communication. In this respect, little smiley or frowning faces and other symbols often do not carry the message. Another problem is a failure in the electronic medium to control one's emotions, a skill considered essential in interpersonal communications.^[520] Some argue, for example, that it is far easier to be blunt, overly critical, and insensitive when conveying messages electronically rather than face-to-face. The term flaming is sometimes used to describe rudeness in electronic communication. In this sense, the use of computer mediation may make people less inhibited and more impatient in what they say.

Another very pressing reality of the new workplace is information overload and 24-7 work environments. Too much information may create stressful situations for individuals who have difficulty sorting the useful from the trivial. Even the IT giant Intel experiences e-mail problems. An employee once commented: "We're so wrapped up in sending e-mail to each other, we don't have time to be dealing with the outside."^[521] The growing trend toward presence-aware tools that allow for real-time collaboration create difficulties for employees trying to determine when they get to finish working. As described by Kevin Angley of SAS, there are "a lot of people who find it to be an intrusion and invasion of privacy, because they walk away from their desk for five minutes and their machine declares that they're idle, or they're reading a document on paper at their desk and all of a sudden their computer claims that they're idle." At Procter & Gamble, director of computers and communications services Laurie Heltsley says they are telling employees it's acceptable for people to turn their presence status to off or unavailable.^[522]

Another key element of organizational communication associated with hierarchical organizing principles is status differences. Status differences create potential communication barriers between persons of higher and lower ranks. On the one hand, given the authority of their positions, managers may be inclined to do a lot of "telling" but not much "listening." As mentioned earlier, we know that communication is frequently biased when flowing upward in organizational hierarchies.^[523] Subordinates may filter information and tell their superiors only what they think the bosses want to hear. Whether the reason is a fear of retribution for bringing bad news, an unwillingness to identify personal mistakes, or just a general desire to please, the result is the same: the higher-level decision maker may end up taking the wrong actions because of biased and inaccurate information supplied from below. This is sometimes called the mum effect, in reference to tendencies to sometimes keep "mum" from a desire to be polite and a reluctance to transmit bad news.^[524]

In hierarchical organizing, information can often become a source of power that employees hold and use for their own advantage. With the rise of social networking tools, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, and video technologies, such as camera phones and videography, the withholding of information is becoming more and more difficult. Customers now have more information power than ever due to the power of emerging collaboration technologies.

Instead of fighting these trends, organizations are identifying ways to capitalize on emerging technologies. At Xerox, rather than leaving the design of high-level strategy documents to a handful of people at the top of the corporate hierarchy, they set up a wiki that allows researchers in the R&R group to collaboratively generate the company's technology strategy. Chief Technology Officer Sophie VanDebroek says that with the wiki, "we'll get more content and knowledge in all of our areas of expertise ... including everything from material science to the latest document services and solutions." At IBM, up to $100 million have been committed to sessions such as the Innovation Jam, where employees in more than 160 countries and their clients, business partners—and even family members—engage in online moderated discussions to glean insights that will transform industries, improve human health, and help protect the environment over the course of the coming decades.^[525]

The result is a reduction of status differentials and breaking down of corporate silos. At Mars Inc., the President's Challenge brings together thought leaders in the company with the most senior people in Mars to explore new enabling strategies for business. As part of this exploration, team members work together to challenge and engage in "fierce debate" of proposed strategies. As a result, Mars has broken down silos and developed leaders throughout the organization. The collaborative communication has resulted in a ferment of innovation with many new best practices being driven throughout the business.^[526]

In the financial world, "transparency" means opening the books. In the context of management, it is increasingly being used to symbolize more open and honest sharing of information. Interest in transparency concepts has been on the rise since the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which, to guard against corporate fraud, requires public organizations to disclose information concerning financial transactions.

Although many interactions are now occurring through technology, face-to-face interaction is still the richest means of communication. For difficult conversations, supportive communication principles can be instrumental in helping avoid problems that can lead to communication breakdowns.

Interactional transparency has been conceptualized in the OB literature as the ability for both leaders and followers to be open, accountable, and honest with each other.^[527] It comprises multiple components. First, transparent communication involves sharing relevant information. For example, contrary to information power games of the past, transparent communication means that individuals work together to share all pertinent information and not withhold important information from one another. Second, transparent communication involves being forthcoming regarding motives and the reasoning behind decisions. Such transparency about motives helps avoid the problem of faulty attributions that can often break down communication processes. Third, transparent communication involves proactively seeking and giving feedback. Transparent communication is two-way and collaborative, involving a free and open exchange of information.

To achieve transparency requires that individuals are comfortable communicating openly and honestly. However, we know that is not always the case. Avoidance continues to be a major issue in interpersonal communication. If a problem arises between employees or work groups, many individuals are much more likely to avoid than address it. Why is this?

A major reason is fear the conversation will be uncomfortable or worry that trying to talk about the problem will only make it worse. This fear often comes with a lack of understanding about how to approach difficult conversations. However, a set of tools known as supportive communication principles can help focus the conversation on joint problem solving to address communication breakdowns and change problematic behaviors before they lead to larger relational problems.^[528]

The primary emphasis of supportive communication is to avoid defensiveness and disconfirmation. Defensiveness occurs when individuals feel they are being attacked and they need to protect themselves. If you are communicating with someone who begins to get angry and becomes aggressive, that person is likely feeling defensive. Disconfirmation occurs when an individual feels his self-worth is being questioned. A person shows he is feeling disconfirmed when he withdraws from the conversation or starts engaging in show-off behaviors to try to make himself look good. In either case, the communicator needs to stop the conversation and work to reduce the defensiveness and disconfirmation by refocusing the conversation and building the other person up before continuing.

This can be accomplished using several techniques (see OB Savvy 11.3). First, focus on the problem and not the person. This helps keep the communication problem-oriented and not person-oriented. For example, instead of saying "you are bad," you would say "you are behaving badly." By focusing on behavior you are addressing something the individual can do something about—he can change his behavior but he can't change who he is as a person.

Second, be specific and descriptive, not global or evaluative. In the prior example, once you target the behavior, you then have to be specific about which behavior is the problem. Do not focus on too many behaviors at one time. Pick a couple examples that illustrate the problem behavior and identify them as specifically (and preferably as recently) as you can. Instead of saying "you never listen to me," you can say "the other day in the meeting you interrupted me three times and that made it impossible for me to get my point across to the group."

Third, own the communication. As a manager, instead of saying "Corporate tells us we need to better document our work hours," you would say "I believe that better documenting our work hours will help us be more effective in running our business."

Finally, be congruent—make sure your message is consistent with your body language. If your words say "No, I'm not mad," but your body language conveys anger, you are being dishonest in the communication and only provoking less open and collaborative communication.

By learning to use the supportive communication principles as shown in OB Savvy 11.3, you can enhance not only your ability to communicate effectively in your workplace but also in your life.