Components of Communications

George Bernard Shaw said “The problem with communication...is the illusion that it has been accomplished.”

Those who study the practice of communication have developed many principles that give us great insight into the methodology of effective communication. Let’s look at some of them in hopes of improving our processes and the results/outcomes.

Note: For the sake of this discussion, I’m mostly using the spoken form of communication, but the principles would apply for any method, spoken or written/printed.

* It’s not all about me!

It was the American philosopher Henry David Thoreau who said, “It takes two to speak the truth: one to speak and another to hear.”

Communication begins when I (what experts call the “Sender”) have something to put into a form so another person (aka., the “Receiver”) can hear and understand me. I must now determine the best method (or “Channel”) to get my message to them. Not every method works for every message, every situation or every person.

Examples: If I speak German and you don’t, then talking might not be our best communication channel. If I send you an e-mail, but you don’t have a computer (or an Internet connection), we have not communicated. If I’m in New York City and you are in Tampa, a chalkboard wouldn’t be our best method.

But beyond those extreme examples, it’s possible to speak the same language and still not communicate. I may be talking about a “plane” (i.e., airplane) to a carpenter, who is thinking of a tool used to smooth out wood. A clairvoyant can talk me about being on another plain, and I would be still be visualizing the mode of air transportation while the clairvoyant is talking about an alternate reality. By sound alone, the words are the same, but the meanings are vastly different. (We call them “homonyms,” which is not songs sung at a gay church, but words that sound alike but have different meanings.)

* Do I need a Decoder Ring?

The way I communicate is called encoding and those who hear will decode what I say, based on their own understanding of the words, the language, and lots of other factors (as we saw above). Many people try to impress others with their vocabulary or a commanding grasp of technical jargon. If the goal, however, is to communicate rather than impress, we must learn to choose our words carefully. We will want to use words hearers will understand and relate to their situations. As a PR professional, I work with those who do media interviews and one the key points I make is to use words that viewers can understand.

* Hearing is not Listening; Listening is not Understanding

But it’s not just about me talking/speaking. Other people must “decode” (i.e., interpret, translate) my message, using a wide variety of criteria, including their understanding of my chosen language and their concept of what my words mean and their sense of decorum. That’s why it’s so important to use words appropriate to the subject, person and situation. BTW, communication specialists point to this as the concept of commonality.

Example: Expletives may have a place in some circumstances and with some folks, but they can quickly shut down further communication in the wrong situation or with a person whose view on the use of profanity is different. For example, if you are talking to my mother—a woman from the old south, with a mentality of a Southern Lady—and you use course language, she will deem you as crude and crass. She will be polite, but be assured, she is not listening to you. The lesson: if you plan to interject these “colorful metaphors” into conversation, make sure you know the predisposition of the one who’s listening.

The listener will also use my tone of voice, my volume and the speed of my talking to try and understand what I mean. In addition, most people translate using personal, cultural and internalized factors, such as their personality, their own prejudices, mood, etc.

Part of the challenge of good communication is finding the right vehicle to communicate the message to the targeted audience. It’s matching channel with the audience. If we want to get a new directive to our employees, an e-mail might be the easiest channel, but is it the best way? For many years, the accepted means of reaching potential clients has been advertising, but that’s casting a broad net. Is there a better way to reach a specific audience?

Next, we’ll look at some obstacles of good communications.

And they might not be what you expect!