Communicating Displeasure

I am glad people are not like squids. When a squid senses danger or that something is wrong, it lets out a dark ink and then makes a beeline toward safety. With luck, this ink-like substance confuses the source of the trouble and gives the squid enough of an opportunity to escape and return to doing whatever it is squids do all day. In today's world, I can't help but think if people were like squids, we would be spending all of our days either washing ink off ourselves or squirting people around us with ink. Life would be one constant orgy of ink squirting and ink cleaning. Hmmm. Is there ever a chance the squids could run out of ink? And what about skunks? Could they ever run out of that smelly substance they emit to defend themselves? And here's another question: What's worse, getting sprayed with squid ink or skunk spray? If the two creatures ever met on a lonely street like two gunslingers, who would win?

What squids and skunks do is a form of communication. Just as it with dogs when they growl or snap or bite. Cats hiss, scratch and also bite. All these examples represent very fundamental forms of communication that express different levels of uneasiness and displeasure. Any of us who have been on the receiving end of any of them know them to be effective ways of communication, too. (Full disclosure: I confess that I have never met anyone who has been squirted by a squid.) As humans, we view these examples of how animals communicate as being primitive and so much lower than how we, creatures situated at the top of the food chain, make our displeasure known. While I concede we do communicate negative feelings better than animals, I only do so grudgingly. Often times, we certainly don't do it as well as we could or should.

Not everything that goes on is our lives is to our liking. And, without question, often we are completely justified in being hurt, disappointed or upset at what we see or hear or even feel. At the same time, how we communicate our displeasure says much about is as a person. Are we honest, upfront, fair and respectful? Or do we lash out, purposefully seek to do harm to others, exaggerate our own reaction or not give any consideration to the possibility that we may have said or done something to warrant the negatives actions of others? The manner in which communicate displeasure is an important measure of us as individuals. I know I have room for improvement in that area and my guess is I am far from alone.

Man on the Moon

2012 will mark the 50th anniversary of what has come to be called President Kennedy's "moon speech." It was in the summer of 1962 in Houston, Texas, when the still relatively-new president announced this major undertaking. Within ten years, he said, the United States would land a man on the moon as a way of establishing our dominance in the space age as well demonstrating America's ability to achieve big goals. The speech itself, of course, generated much attention. Plus, over the past half century the fact we actually achieved that goal has been alluded to often as a prime example of one of the great successes in our nation's history. It remains a source of great pride.

In addition to this representing a major scientific achievement for our nation, the declaration and its ultimate success is an important example of successful strategic communication. In terms of communication, so much had to be done and sustained. This to-do list included: identifying key publics to which to share information, generate understanding, garner active support, and establish trust; create a range of specific communication strategies by which to connect with publics; create a series of messages that would need to be expressed and adjusted over an extended period of time; and install a management mechanism to oversee these overriding strategies, the necessary tactics to achieve them, and the personnel to make them happen. Each one individually represented a complex undertaking. Collectively, they are as huge and challenging as the challenge itself.

These are exactly the ingredients that go into strategic communication. By design, strategic communication is a complicated undertaking that requires strict attention from all involved. Granted, striving to land a man on the moon is not an everyday or normal assignment. Nevertheless, the steps that comprise strategic communication, irregardless of the task at-hand, represent a significant challenge because of a fundamental purpose or goal for which it is designed: to persuade. Getting various publics to take certain actions they might not otherwise take is no small thing. Effective strategic communication can make that happen.

A Communication Lesson from MLK

Earlier this week our nation once again celebrated the memory, vision and ideals of Martin Luther King. To me and many others he was a giant, not only in his ability to communicate but in what he communicated: tolerance, peace, harmony and unity. When I think of King I think of the old axiom: "words matter." Though King was struck down over 40 years ago, his words continue to resonate. They endure because of their lasting power and because they speak to the ideals that many long for and some actually strive to make happen. I applaud the wishes of those many and do my best to join forces with the others who devote their lives to making the sentiments of King actually happen.

Upon reflecting upon King and his message, however, I sometimes wonder if I really could connect with all others, would I want to? In a perfect world, there would be nothing better than having a strong bond positive with others that we know and with whom we interact. But at least in my real world, there are people who are not very nice or trustworthy or particularly likeable. What about them? Do I really want to bond with them? Frankly, no. People I find unlikeable are unlikeable because attributes they possess that I find offensive and negative outweigh ones I view to be more positive. Why would I want to bond with people like that? Why would any of us? Granted not everyone is all-bad. And, granted, opinions I have of the people with whom I interact are totally subjective and probably say as much about me as they do about them. Also, I fully understand my assessment of others are my own.

Nevertheless, there are those in my world that I do not like. Given this reality, what is the best way to effectively communicate with them in lasting ways that generate the kind of harmony that King preached? I believe the key is found in striving to step outside one's own perspective and look at situations through the eyes of others - even people you may not like. Doing that is not always easy, nor is it particularly enjoyable. But it does lead to greater understanding and even a begrudging sense of appreciation at times. It also almost always reveals points of shared interest. Once that is identified, then those commonalities become the "hook" around which effective communication can be built. To me, this is an important lesson that King continues to teach.

Our High-Maintenance Selves

Something all relationships have in common is that they require attention if they are to last or, at least, maintain some hint of a pulse. When the word "relationship" is mentioned, our impulse may be to think of the kind between husband and wife or a person and their so-called significant other. But even if we are not married or do not have a person with whom we have steady connection, all of us are involved in relationships. For instance, there's our relationship with our boss, our co-workers, family members, the check-out person at the local grocery store, etc. Make no mistake, relationships are as much of a constant in our lives as anything. The importance we place on them, of course, dictates our behavior in how we treat each one and steps we take to keep them strong and healthy.

There is one relationship of ours that requires more maintenance and attention than any other. In fact, it is the one that never goes away and that cries out for greater active involvement on our part with each passing year of our lives. I am talking about the relationship we have with ourselves. Think of all the things we do for ourselves every day: bath, brush our teeth, gather and eat food, wash our hair, etc. It never stops. Plus, as we age, our many emotional and medical needs increase. Those who believe they level off or decrease are only kidding themselves. While with age may come wisdom, tagging along right next it is neediness.

Our high-maintenance selves represent a communication challenge of the first-order. We may roll at our eyes at how much attention and work connections with others might require, but none of them compare with what we demand of ourselves. For us to maintain a healthy connection with ourselves, we need to take all the steps that others require: being open and honest, utilizing strategies that keep lines of communication open, and giving us proper and respectful attention. It may sound silly to be talking about a relationship with ourselves this way, but that does not make it any less important. Communication is all about relationships. None is more demanding and, therefore, more important than the one we have with ourselves.

Potential

One of the reasons so many of us admire professional athletes is because we see men and women who are living up to their potential. They are among the best in the world at what they do because they have trained hard and long for years. They have dedicated their lives to achieving excellence at their particular sport. This great commitment gives us enjoyment and often brings the athletes much reward. We watch a runner dash down the track, a tennis player return a blistering serve or a bowler consistently break 220 and we marvel at their skill. As we cheer them on and applaud their achievements, how many of us reflect on our own lives and wonder if we could be as good as they are in our field or profession had we tried as hard as those athletes?

It is not my intent here to suggest most of us do not work as hard as professional athletes or that just because we have not received their fame and fortune we are less important or successful. I do not believe that at all. What I do believe is that in the field of communication all of us have the potential to be as good as any professional athlete. But as it is in athletics, it takes commitment, hard work, dedication, perseverance and a never-ending belief in our ourselves. Communication has its own set of fundamentals much like all sports. These fundamentals range from developing solid listening skills to accumulating a deep depth of knowledge on ways to reach out to various audiences. No matter the communication challenge, the skill set required to meet it never varies. Just as it is in any sport, the trick is to master the required fundamentals and then be able to utilize them with a high level of consistency.

All of us are born with the ability to communicate. Thus, we all have the potential to develop that ability and become top-notch at that particular act. Does that mean if we work hard enough we should be able to stand in front of thousands of people and give a rousing speech? Does we mean if we work hard enough, then all of us should be able to write a great novel every time we set pen to paper? No. Thinking more realitically, with effort and commitmenet we have it within us to learn how to connect with another person in a respectful and lasting manner. We have the potential to help others recognize common interests and challenges. We have the potential to bring people together. We have the potential to help create harmony. Being a positive and effective communication is a skill within all of us. And it is achievable. It is just a matter of reaching that potential.

Casting Aside Finger Pointing

One of the characteristics of any kind of traumatic event or situation is that it often brings out the best in some people and the worst in others. Something terrible happens and there are those who truly rise to the occasion, face it bravely, and actually help confront what has transpired. A perfect example would be the many first responders in New York City on September 11, 2001, who risked and, in some instances, gave their lives trying to rescue others following the terrorists' attack. Then, there are those, who take a terrible circumstance and actually make it worse due to their own narrow thinking and inability to look at matters beyond their own ego or perspective. Sadly, we are seeing examples of this in the aftermath of the recent shootings in Tucson, Arizona, in which six individuals, including a federal judge, were killed and a number of others, including a member of the United States Congress, were seriously injured.

As I write this the "blame game" involving numerous media commentators and politicians from both liberal and conservative persuasions is in full swing. The so-called debates and endless finger-pointing that are going on as to who contributed most to the killer's actions are both disheartening and unhelpful. At this point, I am grateful that at least everyone agrees the mentally-deranged gunman is the primary culprit. Hopefully we will never lose sight of that truism. There are, however, important questions to discuss, debate and, ultimately try to address. What motivated the killer to do what he did? What role did our society play in contributing to the environment in which the killer felt his actions were necessary? What role can members of society, including public figures and social and political commentators, play in helping create an environment in which unstable individuals are not able to gain such easy access to weapons of destruction? These, I believe, are a few of the overriding questions worthy of discussion.

As citizens, all of us are responsible for helping create and maintain s safe and positive society for ourselves. Thus, we should all play a constructive role in seeking answers to the challenges we share, a number of which were highlighted by the killer's devastating actions. Effective and responsible communication can play a major role here. Leaders should (1) bring together groups of people with various perspectives and from varied backgrounds to begin discussing what happened in Tucson and the issues relating to it; (2) ensure they are respectful and honest in their dialog and remain focused on the relevant topics; (3) put forward suggested solutions; (4) share the suggestions with the public; and (5) present them to decisions makers who can actually affect change. These kind of steps puts us on a constructive path and gets us away from the needless finger pointing that contributes nothing to making our lives better and more safe.

Empty Gestures

The 112th Congress of the United States is now in session. The Republicans are in the majority so it is their show to run for the next two years. Their first act of business was to read the U.S. Constitution, that document on which our form of government is based. The leadership let it be known that this has never been done before in the history of our country, so, they emphasized, taking the time to do this was and is a big deal. I have no problem with paying tribute to the Constitution. If anything, more should be done to highlight public awareness of what is, in essence, the foundation of our nation. But I could not help but wonder what the purpose of this act really was. My guess is the Republican leaders were attempting to demonstrate in a subtle way how much more they respect the constitution than the Democrats and how their actions over the next two years will adhere to the tenants of our nation's document more closely than anything the Democrats did before them.

I found the whole episode to be insulting much like I did the time when the most recent President Bush dressed up like a fighter pilot and pretended to land a jet on top of an aircraft carrier. (Appropriately, as part of that event, he then proceeded to give his infamous "mission accomplished" speech.) Just as that whole charade reeked of deception and false bravado, so, too, did the reading of the Constitution as initiated by the Republican leadership. To pretend their level of patriotism is higher than any one else's is dumb, childish and as untrue as anything could be. On top of that, what did this reading accomplish? What benefit did it bring to the Congress, to our nation and to addressing the many challenges our nation currently faces? In a word: none.

Often times acts of communication revolve around symbolic actions that are designed to drive-home larger points and speak to a greater-good. The act taken by Rosa Parks when she refused to move to the back of the bus is but one of many great examples. A more recent example is President Obama's decision to freeze the salaries of all federal employees. What the Republicans did, however, addressed neither of these; nor was it meant to. The entire premise of their act was hollow because its purpose was meant to do nothing more than promote their own egos and sense of self-importance. The result is they only made themselves look silly and petty and did nothing to elevate their profile in the eyes of the general public. For gestures to succeed, they must emerge from a solid foundation. Gestures designed to communicate a message need to do more than hype hype. That's what the Republicans ended up doing and that's why it did not succeed.

Jackasses and Carpenters

"Any idiot can write a blog." How well I know. This comment was made to me not too long ago by a colleague in a conversation we were having about social media. I confess that I only nodded when he said this and did not admit to being one of those, uh, idiots. Maybe I will come clean the next time I see him. But then again, maybe not. But whether I do, I must acknowledge there is much truth in that blunt statement. Let me explain by referring to a wise observation attributed to Sam Rayburn, the late Speaker of the United State House of Representatives, in 1953: "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a good carpenter to build one." Being critical without explanation or alternative suggestions, expressing off-the-cuff opinions not based on fact or experience, or acting without regard of consequences represent examples of actions of which all of us are capable. They are easy to do. By themselves, taking them does not matter how old or young we are, what our level of experience might be, how knowledgeable or ignorant we are, or even what our motivations might be. They can be taken for no other reason than to be heard and for our own satisfaction.

While there is nothing wrong with wanting to be heard and then taking whatever steps are necessary to satisfy that need or desire, it is important that action be viewed in perspective: any one can do it. By itself, there is nothing particularly special or overly beneficial about it. It is questionable whether this kind of action even advances a conversation or enlightens whatever subject that triggers it. More often than not, it is little more than self-serving noise. But attempting to add to or shed light onto a topic or to an observation, or in the case Congressman Rayburn's initial statement, build something, represents an attempt at the best kind of communication. In essence, that separates the responsible communicators from the self-serving noise makers.

All of us wanna-be communicators should try acting as carpenters when we decide to be heard. Make a connection. Build a relationship. Even if that interaction or outreach is short-term, do what you can to create a foundation and make the communication exchange one that is meaningful to both you and the receiver. This can be done in many ways: a message that includes the concerns or interests of others, being respectful and polite, or even a simple smile. What and even how we communicate says as much about us as it does the message we are trying to get across. I understand this kind of effort may make communicating more of a challenge, but at the same time - like a sturdy barn - doing so helps gives you, the communicator, and your message a much greater chance of having a positive impact.

Raising the Bar in 2011

It is official. 2011 is now here. The first day of the new year and of a new decade is no longer knocking at the door but is inside our "house" and is settling in for a long stay. The question that remains, of course, is what kind of visit will it be. Will it be one filled with acts of kindness, productivity, good deeds and advancement? Will it be one highlighted by needless bickering, selfishness and self-serving behavior? Or will it be one that contains acts from both columns? If history is any indication, my guess is we will see it all. There has never been a time in our nation's history or, for that matter, the history of the world when acts of good will and not-so-good will have not occurred at the same time. As a species, that is what humans do. It would help, of course, if there was a universally-accepted definition of what acts constitute "good" and what "bad." People can and do disagree on this. Individuals tend to rationalize their behavior in a positive way even if the majority of others do not agree with that perspective. Thus, at least initially, we tend to view everything we do and even feel as being "good" or making sense. Usually, the label "bad" comes into play in our assessment of the actions and views of others.

I do not see this reality changing in 2011 or in any other year for that matter. Given that, the question then becomes what can be done to increase the amount of positive behavior in our world while decreasing the conflict that arises from differences in interpretation over what is good and what is not? For me, as always, the answer is found in effective communication. There is nothing wrong with having perspectives on various matters, including behavior, that run counter to how others might view something. Conflict and misunderstandings often occur, however, when we fail to adequately explain the reasons behind our thoughts and actions and when we fail to try and better understand the perspectives and justifications of others. Doing so will not eliminate disagreement, but raising the bar on our efforts to explain and understand will, by definition, make for smoother interactions and encourage efforts for people to seek common ground with each other.

I do not know anyone who does not wish to better times for themselves and for others at the start of a new year. We all, on some level, want to "get along." Unfortunately, in big ways and little ways at times our own perspectives and justifications get in the way of connecting with others. For 2011, I hope all of us can raise the bar - at least a little bit - in two ways: our efforts to achieve a better balance between how we view our behavior and perspectives with how others view theirs; and how we turn that enlightened awareness into results that not only improve our ability to get along but also advances our desire and need to be part of positive strides in the world.