"What happens if it rains?"

It is no fun being the party pooper. While everyone around you is excitingly making plans for the company picnic, it is a real downer being the one who steps into the middle of all that enthusiasm and says something like, "But what happens if it rains?" Comments like often such the energy out of any happy time or, at the least, break the upbeat mood that others are enjoying. At first, people may laugh off such a question because they are so caught up in what is a positive exchange. Then, very much like annoying telephone that won't stop ringing during dinner, you repeat that unwanted question: "What happens if it rains?"     


Often, during times of planning and strategizing, it is the public relations professional providing the questions no one wants to address, debate and even think about. They are the one bringing a dark cloud into the room, thus risking unpleasant stares, hard-feelings or even a few choice comments. Nevertheless, this is part of the public relations professional's job. On the one hand, it is important they do this because if something goes wrong, such as an unexpected rainfall, it is most likely they who will have to face the repercussions. On the other, the public relations worker will in all probability have to defend the organization if a  contingency plan was not formulated.


Make no mistake. Public relations professionals like to yuk it up as much as anyone. They, too, want to be part of upbeat meetings where good, fun ideas are put forth and ultimately set in motion. However, as enjoyable as such planning can be, they require at least one present who is looking at things from a realistic, perhaps glass half-empty lens. Such is the lot of the public relations professional. But the good news is that other professionals recognize the value of such a person and therefore support the fact this colleague has to be a fuddy-duddy from time to time. They are aware that being loyal sometimes means being the one who says things others do not want to hear.

W. Barnett Pearce

The primary goal of any act of communication is to generate an understanding among those one is trying to reach that they know what it is you are trying to say. If people do not "get" what it is you are saying, then your attempt to communicate has failed. It does not matter how articulate, polished, smooth, slick or well-planned it might have been, the bottom line is it has fallen short. You, the communicator, must regroup and figure out a different way to reach your audience. That, of course, can be frustrating, time-consuming and sometimes even costly. But such is life in the world of communication, It is a path we all travel each day.


One of the best travelers in that regard was the late W. Barnett Pearce, a communication scholar who passed away a little over two years ago. The author or co-author of 12 books and over 100 essays in an array of scholarly journals, Pearce distinguished himself  by using philosophical ideas to provide a greater understanding of how people communicate. To cite one example, Pearce called for people to let go of the assumption their views are universal, particularly when engaged in a moral conflict with another. People, he wrote, must recognize that other moral positions exist and, therefore, should focus on ways to work through those differences.


These differences are a reality that should not be ignored, he said, because single-minded moral pursuits get in the way of mutual understanding. Sadly, we see far too many examples of this in the political climate of today's world. Men and women of various political persuasion are far more focused on what they view as their universal truth instead of on establishing a greater understanding with those who have a different perspective. The result, as we see, is gridlock and animosity, neither of which does any one any good. My thanks for highlighting the wisdom of Pearce goes out to another scholar, Ronald Arnett, for his assessment of Pearce in the 2013 edition of Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, volume 14.

Beyond Stubborn

When it comes to communicating with others, sometimes it is incredibly difficult. There are those folks who are so locked into their view that they are closed to any conversation, particularly when it comes to topics or issues with which they are quite passionate, In fact, they can be so stubborn or closed to other perspectives what they exhibit is beyond stubbornness. What would be normally considered to be sure-fire icebreakers such as reason, the facts and reality do not get them to re-evaluate their position and/or behavior. These individuals are virtually intractable and, as a result, nearly impossible to communicate with.


One such person died recently at the age of 91. His name was Hiroo Onoda. He was the last Japanese soldier to surrender to the United States which defeated his country, thus bringing to an end World War II in 1945. Onoda did not put down his arms a couple of days or weeks after his country surrendered. Oh no. He held out for 29 years. The year was 1974 when Onoda finally emerged from the caves in the Philippines in which he had been hiding and, in his words, gathering intelligence on the US. One can only imagine what tidbits he had collected. When Onoda was asked why he did not surrender in 1945, he claimed it was because her had not received orders from his superiors to do so.


I suppose it is easy to treat Onoda either as a comic or a tragic figure. Personally, I find him to be neither. Reading his story, I feel sorry for a person so blind to reality that he became unwilling to make the necessary adjustments to move forward with his life. I certainly do not attach any positive feelings toward his behavior and whatever virtue he felt he was displaying on behalf of his country. Onoda was the ultimate of "stuck." Fortunately, none of us encounter too many - if any - people in our travels quite like this man. Onoda was a fanatic and fanatics, by definition, are far from the best communicators.  

Promoting Openness

Perhaps it is not surprising that as we have become much more technologically proficient, a debate over what is private and what is subject to public record has increased. Further, probably it is even less surprising that the activities of private citizens as well as government officials have become part of this issue, particularly as it relates to their use of social media and the telephone. It was not that long ago when such a focus revolved around whether someone was reading our mail, listening to our conversations, or what meetings are open or closed to the public. These, of course, are still a matter of discussion but now technology has broadened the conversation.


Privacy versus what is public is a broad topic that contains several layers all of which entail communication. One is the privacy of ordinary citizens. Another, and the focus of this entry, is safeguarding the transparency of our government. Citizens have a right to expect their elected officials to conduct their business - the business of the people - in an open and transparent way. Government officials defend this, of course, but sometimes they do not always seem to practice it. What is at stake is how true our nation is staying to what is supposed to be one of its core values: openness.


It cannot be taken for granted that this value is rock-solid and will never be compromised. Communicators can and should play a key role in ensuring any kind of watering down of who we are as active citizens and what we are as a nation that believes in free and open debate never happens. As representatives of officials who work on behalf of maintain the public trust, communicators should see themselves as advocates on behalf of the public their "boss" has been elected to represent. Yes, they want to be loyal to their employer but at the same their employer has a boss, too, and that "person" is the public.  

Helping Quality Sell

There are certain axioms in life that cannot be stated often enough. These include such truisms as "When the student is ready, the teacher will appear" and "If you add to the truth, you subtract from it." These and others speak to various aspects of life in ways I believe many of us can relate. There is one phrase I would love seeing listed as an axiom but, alas, reality tells me it will never happen. It is "quality sells." This phrase is short, to the point and speaks volumes. It directly relates to the practice of communication, particularly in these times when there seems to be as much emphasis on presentation as on substance. The thinking is if a product, and this can include a person, is packaged properly, then people will not so much notice its defects or limitations. The result is something does not have to be of the highest quality in order to be successful.


The hard truth, then, is that quality does not always sell - at least by itself. By "sell," I do not necessarily mean turn a profit or attain a high degree of popularity. Obviously, they are valid measures of success. Rather, I am talking about recognition or acknowledgement that a strong effort has been made with results solid enough to withstand challenge or questioning. How often, for example, have any of us seen co-workers or colleagues put forth efforts of quality only to be passed over by others who are more flashy and demonstrative, yet whose work is of lesser benefit? In my years as a professional right up to my final days before retirement, far too often did such a hard truth cross my line of vision.


It would seem, then, that quality sometimes needs its own amount of packaging, too. Professional communicators can play a key role here. By being constantly on the look-out for people, ideas and even innovations of substance, they can help bring attention to that which otherwise might be overlooked. While it is part of the communicator's job to put much effort into the presentation of a product, they can be doing their client, organization  and even society much good by making sure what they are striving to "sell" is actually as good as the say it is. Further, they can also focus on championing that which does not always catch the attention of those in positions of influence.

The Other Voice

Let me see a show of hands on this. How many of us talk to ourselves? Maybe not out loud but at least with our inner voice. It does not have to be all the time but most likely it is nearly every day. Just what I thought: everyone's hand went up, including mine. We make an editorial comment about ourselves or another person. Perhaps we give ourselves a pep talk or a reprimand. Or maybe we practice or rehearse remarks or thoughts we need or want to share with others. The reasons may be many but the bottom line is there are times when all of us definitely do like the sound of our own voice.


There are two great qualities about our inner voice: it has our best interests at heart and it is honest with no pulled punches. The result is when our inner voice speaks we listen and weigh what it says. This does not mean we always pay attention to it, but without question we draw comfort from the fact it is friend not foe. Thus, our inner voice, or as  I call it our "other voice," represents the qualities of a solid and, yes, needed public relations council. It helps us process difficult times, light-heated moments, aspects in life we do not quite understand, and even come up with strategies on how best to contend with  and fulfill our own goals and needs.


I do not mean to make this "other voice" sound as if it is another person inside us. Obviously, it and us are the same. My point is this voice represents the kind of relationship a public relations professional should strive for with a client or chief executive officer. Speaking truth to power is not always easy, of course, but by establishing a solid reputation for being credible, loyal, empathetic, respectful, objective and honest, the professional communicator can provide an invaluable service to leaders with whom they work. Achieving such a position does not happen over night, of course, once reached, the amount of benefit fulfilling such a role brings great benefit with it.

Tie Goes to the Runner

There are certain situations in life where particular rules apply. These rules are hard-fast and seemingly would take a decree from the All Mighty to be reversed. For instance, in baseball there is the famous "tie goes to the runner" rule where if a throw is caught by a fielder at a base the same time a runner's foot touches that base - a tie - then the runner is declared "safe." Another example applies to drivers. If a person is backing out of a driveway or parking space and runs into a passing vehicle that has moved directly into the backing car's path, then the driver of the vehicle backing out is in the wrong. End of discussion.

These are man-made decisions that do not even require witnesses. We accept them the same way we do gravity - what goes up must come down. There is no debating that one either. These hard-and-fast rules are designed to remove any grayness from specific incidences and thus prevent those involved from being stuck in some sort of endless debate. Perhaps this is just as well. When people argue perception, it is not easy deciding upon the one that is more correct than the other. So, unshakeable solutions have been put forth to head off a potential impasse. On the other hand, there is a level of frustration inherent in such a "solution" because sometimes the tie should go to the fielder or the driver backing out of their driveway is in the right.    

Communication has many gray patches and few, if any, black-and-white spots. In fact, in many ways it is a practice that is all about perception. Perhaps this is what it so frustrating at times; such a challenge for those who attempt to put forth a message that others will understand and even act on. Even in our day-to-day lives this grayness almost guarantees we will face moments when seemingly simple interactions go off-track due to the absence of hard-and-fast rules. This just goes to show how all of us must keep trying hard to communicate the best we can under any circumstance. We do not have the safety net that a predetermined solution provides.

Rolling Up Our Sleeves

As we move into a new year, the world's population is slightly higher than 7.2 billion people. Further, the United Nations projects by 2050 that number will grow to nearly 10 billion. The hard truth is that, with few exceptions, we cannot get away from each other. Everywhere we turn there is another person. Even on those days when we wish to avoid others we still have multiple encounters. And if we actually do go a full day with seeing another person, again with few exceptions, we will see definitive signs that we are not alone. That, in fact, is the bottom line truth: we are not alone. And in the coming decades we are going to be even less alone than we may be now. 

Given this reality, what this means is it is in the interest of all of us that we do a better job getting along. No matter one's political affiliation, religious doctrine, social preferences or geographic location, this fundamental truism is a challenge all of us share. To do this requires that we dedicate or in some cases rededicate ourselves to being the best communicators we can be. Writing this, I can almost see anyone who reads it roll their eyes. Such a statement, on the surface, may not be all that different than the pledge most of us make several times per year: "Tomorrow I'm going to start on a diet."

As go our communication abilities so goes the world. The less we get along the more difficult time we will have in sustaining our planet, not to mention the existence of all living creatures, including us, that inhabit it. Why this particular commitment requires we roll up our sleeves rather than giving it a passing nod is due to one certain truth about communication: most of our communication efforts fall short. This is true for professional communicators and the rest of us, too. All too often our communication overtures or strategies either fall short, are ignored, misinterpreted, or drown out by other communication efforts. That can be changed if we accept this communication challenge.