CHAPTER 2
Exploring Communication Theories
You can’t build a great building on a weak foundation. You must have a solid foundation if you’re going to have a strong superstructure.1
—Gordon B. Hinckley, American religious leader and author
Just like a house needs to be built on a solid foundation, so do project communications. To help establish that foundation, let’s take a step back and look at some aspects of communication theory. Why approach project communications from a theoretical standpoint? Understanding why people communicate can help demonstrate why communication is so important in projects, and why problems arise when good communication is absent. It can also help you think differently about communication—not just as a process within project management, but as a fundamental driver of collaboration and progress on a project. Looking at project communications through the lens of communication theory can show new ways to improve the effectiveness of your communications, and help you develop new solutions that may prevent or remediate common problems caused by ineffective communication.
For the purpose of this book, we will explore building project communications on the foundation of two communication theories that share some commonality with project environments: uncertainty reduction theory and uncertainty management theory. These theories can help explain why the research we reviewed in Chapter 1 says what it does—that effective communication is a critical contributor to project success. With a better understanding of why people communicate, and what happens when they don’t, we can see why it is so important to plan, manage, and monitor project communications effectively.
The purpose of this chapter is to help you:
• Understand why people communicate by looking at two different communication theories that focus on communication as a way people handle uncertainty
• Evaluate the impact of the quality as well as the quantity of communication in a project
• See the connection between effective communication and stakeholder trust
Communication and Uncertainty
Most project managers and team members will already be familiar with the term uncertainty; typically, however, it is associated with risk management. According to the PMBOK® Guide, risks are uncertain events or conditions that can affect projects positively or negatively. The process of risk management is oriented toward identifying and managing these uncertainties so that they do not interfere with the accomplishment of project objectives.2 In the field of communication, however, uncertainty is a cognitive and emotional state that motivates people’s actions (or inactions) and behaviors.3
In both the communication world and the project world, uncertainty is about not knowing what will happen. In a project, uncertainty affects the project itself—it could positively or negatively impact processes or outcomes of the project. Project uncertainty is evaluated by how far the project could deviate from the plan. It is addressed or managed by considering the likelihood and potential impact of the uncertain condition, and by planning for different strategies and alternatives should the uncertain condition occur. This is addressed in your risk management plan.
When it comes to communication theory, uncertainty affects the person rather than the project. An individual evaluates uncertainty based on the perception of how it will affect him or her. Perceived consequences can span a wide spectrum. The impact could be concrete, such as, “I made a mistake, and I know that I will be reprimanded by my supervisor.” The impact could also be imagined/assumed, such as, “My supervisor does not value my abilities because she did not ask me to participate in this presentation.”
Just as project teams use risk management techniques to address the uncertainties in a project, individuals use communication to address the uncertainties in their lives. Think about the initiation of a project. The project team attempts to address many of the uncertainties about the project (for example, estimating cost, schedule, scope, and regulatory or environmental impacts) through project planning and risk identification activities.
Just as project teams use risk management techniques to address the uncertainties in a project, individuals use communication to address the uncertainties in their lives.
However, the people involved in the project harbor uncertainties as well. For example, a member of the project team may be excited about the opportunity to participate, or anxious because this is his first project. He may consider it a chance to show his skills, or he may be frustrated because he already has a lot of work to do and feels he will be overwhelmed by adding the project to his workload. A stakeholder who will be affected by a software implementation may be excited that the new software will make her job easier. Conversely, she may be worried that the software will be difficult to learn and take even more time than the current process.
These uncertainties can motivate actions and behaviors that affect the project. The first-time project team member may jump in enthusiastically and complete his project work early. Or, he may take longer than expected to complete his work because he wants it to be perfect, thereby delaying the project schedule. The stakeholder who will use the new software may serve as an unexpected champion of the project, spreading her positive attitude and getting others excited to use the software. If her reaction is negative, she could spread a resistant attitude toward the software, which could cause problems or delays in adoption when the software rolls out.
So how does a project manager or team member handle these “people-based” uncertainties that can affect the project? This is where an understanding of communication theory can be useful. Let’s look at two communication theories that specifically focus on uncertainty, and how people use communication to manage it: uncertainty reduction theory and uncertainty management theory.
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
Uncertainty reduction theory (URT), the older and more well-known of the two theories we will review, defines uncertainty as “having a number of possible alternative predictions or explanations.”4 This theory presumes that people always try to reduce or make sense of uncertainty from a cognitive, information-based perspective. “Making sense of something means increasing your ability to accurately predict or explain it, often by reducing the number of alternative explanations—hopefully to one.”5 Information acquisition, including communication, is the primary means by which people deal with uncertainty.
Two of the main principles of URT can help us understand how uncertainty motivates people to communicate in the context of a project. The first of these principles states that, “Efforts to reduce uncertainty are linked to the likelihood of future interactions and reward potential of the other person.”6 Generally, people are more motivated to reduce uncertainty about another person or situation based on how much influence (both positive and negative) they have over us. A team member who feels that impressing the project manager is beneficial to his status in the organization may ask questions to ensure he is completing his work to expectations. A project manager who does not feel that a particular stakeholder has much influence over the project may put little effort into communicating about the project with that stakeholder.
In your next interaction with a project stakeholder, consider this principle. How does the stakeholder’s influence affect the way you communicate with them? We will discuss stakeholder influence more in Chapter 3.
The second principle of URT we will review here explains that people reduce uncertainty through knowledge acquisition. There are three main strategies people use to do this:
1. Passive: Observing other people without actually interacting with them
2. Active: Using indirect methods to collect information about the other person (e.g., conducting an internet search, or asking others about them)
3. Interactive: Seeking information through direct contact with the person (a face-to-face conversation, phone call, e-mail, etc.)7
The interactive strategy is the one we most often use day-to-day while doing work on a project. Most planned communication in a project is meant to share information with various stakeholders, thereby increasing their knowledge (and decreasing their uncertainty) about the project. However, planned communications do not always address all stakeholder uncertainties. These unaddressed concerns are often the motivation for stakeholders to reach out to the project team for information (interactive strategy). However, they can also motivate stakeholders to use passive and active strategies to observe or talk to others about the project, potentially making inaccurate assumptions or spreading negative attitudes or misinformation.
Think about this the next time a stakeholder initiates communication with you. What is the purpose of the communication? Is it to acquire knowledge about some aspect of the project? Can you discern any uncertainty the stakeholder has that might have motivated them to reach out to you? Is it information that is needed but was overlooked when planning the project communications?
While this is a brief overview of only two key elements of URT, it sheds some light on what motivates people to communicate within a project. Next, let’s look at the second communication theory that focuses on uncertainty.
Uncertainty Management Theory
Uncertainty management theory (UMT) was developed a few decades later. It builds on the work of URT but broadens the impact of uncertainty beyond the cognitive realm to the emotional realm. This addition of the emotional aspect helps explain why, in practice, people do not always attempt to reduce uncertainty.
UMT states that “uncertainty exists when details of situations are ambiguous, complex, unpredictable, or probabilistic; when information is unavailable or inconsistent; and when people feel insecure in their own state of knowledge or the state of knowledge in general.”8 UMT proposes that people react to uncertainty based on how they evaluate the relevance of the uncertainty to their lives, and how they react emotionally to the uncertainty, i.e., do they view it as a threat or as an opportunity?
Under this theory, what determines how people react to, and communicate as a result of, uncertainty? According to Dale Brashers, one of the main developers of the theory, people can respond differently to uncertainty based on both objective evaluation and subjective reaction:
• The person will appraise the likelihood of different outcomes (how likely it is that something will happen or not happen), and how relevant those outcomes will be to them (if this does happen, how will it affect me?). This is similar to the first principle of URT that we shared—motivation to reduce uncertainty is based on the influence and reward potential of the other person. However, UMT broadens this to the relevance of the situation, not just the individual with whom you are communicating. It’s also similar in concept to the way that risk analysis is performed, evaluating the significance of the risk by analyzing its probability and impact.
• The person subjectively experiences an emotional reaction to the uncertainty that is either positive, negative, or neutral. This is the primary way that UMT differs from URT. A person reacts positively if the uncertainty could be beneficial, or if they tend toward optimism. A person reacts negatively if they perceive danger, and may even panic if the reaction is extreme. Neutral reactions generally occur if the person sees the uncertainty as irrelevant or inconsequential. Finally, it is possible for a person to react both positively and negatively if they perceive both threat and opportunity— think of skydiving or gambling.
In a project, a stakeholder’s appraisal of and emotional reaction to uncertainty can help explain the communication actions they take (or do not take):
• Stakeholders may seek information to gain knowledge, or to reinforce or disprove what they already know or believe. They may also seek social support from others as a means to cope with uncertainty. In a project, this can take a positive form when team members share expertise and collaborate to solve a problem or complete a deliverable on time. It could also manifest negatively, as when stakeholders vent frustrations about the project because they are not well-informed of the project status, or because the last project that affected them did not deliver the intended results.
• Team members may also avoid information as a means to shield themselves “from information that is overwhelming and distressing.”9 Avoidance can be conscious or unconscious; mechanisms include direct avoidance, withdrawal, or discounting/discrediting negative information. For example, a team member who is overburdened with project and functional responsibilities may not clarify a task, and instead submit their work with minimal effort. A stakeholder who is distressed about the burdensome impact of a software implementation may avoid reading e-mail communications about the project or not attend a training session.
Table 2.1 shows a high-level comparison of the two theories.
Table 2.1 Comparison of uncertainty reduction and uncertainty management theories
Theory |
Uncertainty reduction theory |
Uncertainty management theory |
|---|---|---|
Definition of uncertainty |
Uncertainty is a cognitive state based on an individual’s knowledge, and is separate from emotion. |
Uncertainty is both a cognitive (knowledge-based) and emotional state. |
Evaluation of uncertainty |
Uncertainty is always bad. |
Uncertainty could be good or bad. |
Behaviors that result from uncertainty |
People will communicate in order to reduce uncertainty. |
People may or may not communicate to reduce uncertainty based on how they evaluate the probability, impact, and emotional reaction to the uncertainty. |
Uncertainty and Effective Communication
As a project manager, how do you tackle these stakeholder uncertainties that can impact your project? Through communication! Specifically, by communicating enough (quantity) and by communicating well (quality). Let’s look at both of these aspects.
Quantity of Communication
People can’t act on, or react to, information they do not have. If information is a primary way to reduce or manage uncertainty, lack of communication limits stakeholders’ ability to make sense of the situation and make decisions about how to think, feel, and act. Often they fill in the gaps with assumptions, or they may speak negatively about the project out of frustration. The more they are invested in or affected by the project, the more they are likely to make assumptions and share those assumptions with peers, such as spreading gossip or rumors.
Quantity of information doesn’t necessarily mean sending more e-mails—most workers already feel like their inboxes are flooded. But you do need to ensure information is available to people when and how they need it. We will address ways to do this in the next two chapters, where we discuss audience communication preferences (see Chapter 3), and basic guidelines and considerations for project communications (see Chapter 4).
Another aspect to consider is that communication is not all verbal; in fact, much of it is not. A significant amount of meaning is communicated through physical cues (facial expressions and body language) and voice (tone, inflection, and other vocal cues outside of the words themselves). This means that communications you are delivering through methods that use only text or voice will have reduced effectiveness. We’ll look at this further in Chapter 4.
Virtual teams especially can be impacted by this. When there is limited face-to-face interaction, even via methods such as video calls, teams can struggle to develop an effective approach to working together because the opportunities to reduce uncertainty are decreased. If the vast majority of the team’s interactions are, in fact, virtual, the team will need to work harder to compensate for the lack of nonverbal communication.
Quality of Communication
High-quality communication gets your message across clearly and effectively. For example, consider the word “dog.” What image comes to mind? One person might envision a golden retriever, while another person pictures a chihuahua. A third might picture the mutt that was a beloved family pet from childhood. They’re all thinking of a dog, but the dogs they are picturing are very different. Ferdinand de Saussure, a linguist who was one of the founders of the field of semiotics, called these distinctions the signifier (the word itself—in this example, “dog”) and the signified (the mental concept—in this example, the image your mind conjures of a dog).
How does this apply to project communications? Suppose an assignment within the project is to research similar projects to learn what technologies might be useful. The project manager giving the assignment might mean “research” as a very thorough and exhaustive process of seeking out all available options and carefully weighing the pros and cons of each. For the team member assigned this task, however, it might mean a cursory search to find evidence that supports what he already thinks or wants to do.10 To a stakeholder, “soon” could mean 2 hours, but to you it could mean tomorrow.
Quality communication requires that the person sending the message must make sure that the message he or she wants to send is accurately received. One way to do this is to be clear and specific about what you are communicating. If you need a task completed by 3 p.m. tomorrow, don’t just say “tomorrow afternoon.” When communicating an assignment or request, provide as much SMART11 information as you can:
• Specific: What is the scope of what needs to be done? Make sure the assignment is clearly defined.
• Measurable: How will you determine completion/success? State any metrics or parameters for measuring and tracking progress.
• Attainable: Is what you are asking attainable in the parameters given? Ask for feedback on this from the team member(s) involved.
• Relevant: Have you tied the task to the overall project goals? Ensure team members involved understand why this task is important.
• Time-bound: What is the deadline for this task? Be as precise as you can.
Another way to communicate clearly is to limit your use of vocabulary that is not universally understood, a.k.a. jargon. Project management uses a lot of technical terminology; just a few examples are “critical path,” “free float,” and “lag,” not to mention acronyms like EVM, LOE, and RACI. Be conscious that many stakeholders and even team members who are new to project management may not understand these terms. We’ll talk more about the issues that can arise from using jargon in Chapter 4.
A third way to ensure quality of communication is to seek feedback from the receiver to verify that they understood what you intended to communicate. You can consider feedback a means of quality assurance in your communications. We’ll look more at this concept in Chapter 6.
Reducing Uncertainty Builds Trust
Why use communication to help eliminate uncertainty with project stakeholders? Uncertainty is closely tied to trust. When you think about whether you trust someone, what factors do you consider? Most people count honesty (presenting information accurately and truthfully) and reliability (doing what you say you will do) as major factors in trusting others. Both factors speak to the level of uncertainty you have about the other person’s words and resultant behaviors.
In a team environment like a project, trust is critical to success. Trust results in high-functioning teams that exhibit dedication to successful project outcomes and are often willing to take personal risks to advance common goals.12 It also results in stakeholders that develop and maintain support for the project and the project team. We’ll talk more about stakeholder support in Chapter 3.
On the other hand, there are consequences when a team lacks trust. It’s not just about reduced performance; it is a cycle that feeds itself. Just as good communication cultivates trust, lack of trust can lead to poor communication. “In lack of trust, members may delay communication, or reduce quality of communication by giving insufficient knowledge and misinforming. So team trust supports to healthier and more reliable formal communication in teams.”13 Similarly, stakeholders who do not trust the project team can withhold support and even delay or derail the project entirely.
As business leader and author Stephen R. Covey has stated, trust is “the most essential ingredient in effective communication. It’s the foundational principle that holds all relationships.”14 Build a solid foundation for your project by establishing trust with your stakeholders through effective communication.
Summary
Project communication starts by building on a solid foundation—an understanding through communication theory of why people communicate, and what happens when they communicate ineffectively. Two communication theories that apply well to project communications are URT and UMT. These theories view uncertainty as a primary motivation to communicate (or not to communicate). People use communication as a tool to gain information that will reduce their uncertainty.
Understanding uncertainty as a motivator can help project managers and stakeholders appreciate the value of communication as a means to manage uncertainty, and therefore manage the project. Two ways to manage uncertainty are to ensure sufficient quantity and high quality of communications. These strategies for good communication can help build trust among project team members and outside stakeholders, which is a key factor in project success.
Key Questions
1. In your opinion, what are the similarities and differences between the way uncertainty is defined in communication theory and in project management? Discuss your findings with other stakeholders, colleagues, or classmates.
2. How does a stakeholder’s influence affect the way you communicate with them? In your next stakeholder interaction, document your experience.
3. Select an opportunity where a stakeholder initiates communication with you. Can you discern any uncertainty that might have motivated the stakeholder to reach out to you? Is it an uncertainty you could have addressed in your project communications management plan?
Notes
1. Gordon Hinckley.com, https://gordonhinckley.com/about.
2. Project Management Institute (2017), PMBOK® Guide 6th ed., p. 397.
3. Greene and Burleson (2003), p. 942.
4. Redmond (2015), p. 4.
5. Redmond (2015), p. 7.
6. Redmond (2015), p. 11.
7. Redmond (2015), pp. 16–18.
8. Brashers (2001), p. 478.
9. Brashers (2001), p. 484.
10. Hiyashi (2011), p. 35.
11. Doran (1981), p. 35-36.
12. Sinek (2009), p. 118.
13. Polat et al. (2018), p. 101.
14. Kruse (2012).
References
Bradac, J. 2001. “Theory Comparison: Uncertainty Reduction, Problematic Integration, Uncertainty Management, and Other Curious Constructs.” Journal of Communication, 51, no. 3, pp. 456–475.
Brashers, D. E. 2001. “Communication and Uncertainty Management.” Journal of Communication, 51, no. 3, 477–497. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466 .2001.tb02892.x
Covey, S. M. R., and R. R. Merrill. 2006. The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything. New York: Free Press.
Doran, G. T. 1981. “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives” Management Review, 70, no. 11, 35–36.
DuFrene, D. D., and C. M. Lehman. 2016. Managing Virtual Teams, 2nd ed. New York: Business Expert Press.
GordonHinckley.com. “About.” https://gordonhinckley.com/about, (accessed September 23, 2019).
Greene, J. O. and B. R. Burleson, eds. 2003. Handbook of Communication and Social Interaction Skills. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hayashi, S. K. 2011. Conversations for Change. New York: McGraw Hill.
Kruse, K. July, 2012. “Stephen Covey: 10 Quotes That Can Change Your Life.” Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2012/07/16/the-7-habits/#2712a1b839c6
Polat, V., Gary L., Ali E. A., and O. E. Onat. 2018. “Formal and Informal Communication in New Product Development Teams: The Mediation Effect of Team Trust.” International Journal of Innovation 6, no. 2, pp. 97–111.
Project Management Institute. 2017. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. 6th ed. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Redmond, M. V. 2015. “Uncertainty Reduction Theory.” Iowa State University Digital Repository. English Technical Reports and White Papers, 3, http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/engl_reports/3
Sinek, S. 2009. Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action. London: Portfolio.