Communication: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 16:47, 7 May 2023

In which the curmudgeonly old sod puts the world to rights.

Index — Click ᐅ to expand: The Devil’s Advocate

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you. Sign up for our newsletter.

On good and bad communications.

Commercial lawyers have lost sight of their primary purpose: not just being expert in complicated fields of the law, but to be able to plainly and clearly communicate that expertise to people who are not.

Those people are called “clients”. Clients — even sophisticated ones — Q.E.D. do not understand as well as they expect you to. If they did, they wouldn’t need your advice.

To communicate plainly, of course, you must first have a real command of your field. But this is asymmetrical: to communicate clearly about a complex field you need expertise. To communicate badly about it, you do not.

It is easy to tell whether good communicators know what they are talking about. It is hard to tell whether a bad communicator is an expert.

Blaggers and charlatans tend to be bad communicators: wilfully poor users of language.

Now, can anyone think of a modern industry that that charges a great deal of money to advise on complicated topics, but is beset with poor communication?

Types of communications

Push communications

“Push” information is sent unasked — “pushed” — to a recipient. Push communications are used to solicit action, and communicate interesting, important, or time-sensitive information and, frequently, both. To solicit action: mail, email, advertisements, posters and billboards, push notifications (digital alerts sent from a mobile app), SMS, phone calls, conference calls, seminars, conferences, webinars. Information that is broadcast without the listener’s input.

Pull communications

“Pull” information is material that the recipient seeks out, when and where the recipient wants it. The recipient dictates, so is best presented as a self-service resource: open, convenient, non-time-sensitive.

Bookshops, libraries, encyclopaedias, hitch-hiker’s guides and internet searches. The JC is, largely, one giant, existential infernal howl of angst in the shape of a pull communication.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{a|confcall|}}'''[[Push communication]]''': information sent unasked — pushed — to a recipient. Push communications are used to communicate interesting, important, or time-sensitive announcements that must be communicated immediately and directly. Email blasts, posters and digital billboards, push notifications (digital alerts sent from a mobile app), SMS, and voicemails are all examples of push communications. Also, a [[conference call]], unless you are the convenor (in which case it is a [[pull communication]]).
+{{a|devil|}}=== On good and bad communications. ===
-'''[[Pull communication]]''': information that is accessible to a recipient when the recipient wants it, on the recipient’s terms. A pull tool is (fnarr fnarr) — ahh, self-service — open, convenient, non-time-sensitive, generally interesting information. The [[JC]] is, largely, one giant, existential infernal howl of angst in the shape of a [[pull communication]]. It is designed to be a resource for people in a moment of interest or need.
+Commercial lawyers have lost sight of their primary purpose: not just being expert in complicated fields of the law, but to be able to plainly and clearly communicate that expertise to people who are not.
-===Communication of change===
+Those people are called “[[clients]]”. Clients — even sophisticated ones — [[Q.E.D.]] do not understand as well as they expect you to. If they did, they wouldn’t need your advice.
-[[Thought leader]]s like to agonise on [[LinkedIn]] about good ways to communicate and consult on [[change]]. It goes without saying one must announce, consult, conduct Q&A, reassure, give reasoning and generally support ones chicklings throughout the [[change journey]].
+To communicate plainly, of course, you must first have a real command of your field. But this is asymmetrical: to communicate ''clearly'' about a complex field you need expertise. To communicate ''badly'' about it, you do not.
+It is easy to tell whether good communicators know what they are talking about.  It is hard to tell whether a bad communicator is an expert.
-Now you either subscribe to a monarchic model where you are a golden source of inspiration surrounded by the silver and bronze officeholders of executive management, beyond whose gilded perimeters lies a sea of functionary dullitude — in which case what on earth are you asking ''them'' for — or you see your organisation as a network of autonomous experts, continually reacting to the market as they perceive it, and which your job is merely to coordinate — in which case what are you doing trying to change things at all?
+Blaggers and charlatans tend to be ''bad'' communicators: wilfully poor users of language.
-It is a rare multinational CEO who is humble enough to adopt the latter approach, so presume the former.  Is it better, then, to preannounce, like a magician — with all the attendant preannouncement, consultation, support and reassurance it entails — and if your plan involves widescale redundancies, for example, just how do you plan to reassure the rank and file about that? — or do you implement under the radar and only announce once it is done?
+Now, can anyone think of a modern industry that that charges a great deal of money to advise on complicated topics, but is beset with poor communication?
-Pre-announcing gives the game away, makes you hostage to fortune, commits you to the first iteration of your plan, and allows the massive slient forces of entropy and resistance that inhabit the upper middle management reaches of your organisation to mobilise against whatever it is you want to do. And mobilise they will.
+===Types of communications===
+==='''[[Push communication]]s'''===
+{{push capsule}}
+==='''[[Pull communication]]s'''===
+{{pull capsule}}
-Just getting on with it unannounced allows you to consult as widely (or narrowly), and with whomsoever, as you need wish, fail, withdraw, iterate, change direction and refine without the glare of publicity and the horned angels of hubris.
+===Communication of change===
-And there is a wider point, too: change should be a gradual affair, allowing the organisation by degrees to to shapeshift into a more suitable direction. By keeping the plan quiet and and making the changes gradually and over an extended period it is more likely that they will work. A preannounced, sudden, 20-degree change in direction, even if, and and indeed especially if, foreshadowed by 6-months of consultation, almost certainly won’t.
 {{c|Communication}}
 {{sa}}
+*[[Push and pull communication]]
 *[[Client outreach]]
 *[[Client communications]]
+*[[Change management]]