“What do you do when you are working with someone who simply isn’t a strong communicator?” asks training specialist Shaun Belding in his Winning at Work e-newsletter  (top-notch reading for anyone in the workplace).

“It might be someone who speaks in one- or two-word sentences. Perhaps it’s someone who only gives you half the information you require, assuming that you already know the other half. It could be that they are communicating to you in their second language, and simply don’t possess enough language skills yet. In some cases, poor communication comes from individuals so intent on using important-sounding buzzwords that they completely baffle the listener. (e.g. ‘We need to granularize the core alignment of the cloud-driven segmentation…’)”.

All these things can be irritating if you happen to be s tickler for accuracy or perfection.  But, whereas you might be somewhat more  tolerant in other circumstances,  it becomes really frustrating when your colleague’s lack of clarity  begins to impact your ability to do your job.

And what makes it harder is that poor communicators rarely have  any inkling of how bad they really are.

So what can you do about it?  Reproaching the offending parties outright for their  sloppiness is  usually  not an option.  Nor is offering to give them lessons written or verbal language skills.  However,  there are solutions.

What Belding advocates is the use of clarifying questions that let your coworker know that they do not make themselves entirely clear.

” Be gentle, and don’t make them feel stupid. For example, if your coworker sends you an email that says,  ‘Pls advise re: customer paperwork’  don’t just email back with  ‘ What on earth are you talking about?’  You’re better to send a message back (or better – call) that says something like,  ‘Absolutely! Just so I make sure I’m getting you the right information, can you confirm which specific customer and paperwork? Thanks!”‘

Although the questioning may annoy your fellow worker in the short term,  the next time he or she comes to you with a query or request,  he or she might present the information more clearly. if that happens, you’ve done a great job, but Belding concludes with a very pertinent warning:

“Don’t be too quick to place all the blame on your coworker. Communication, after all, is a two-way street.

When great communicators deliver a speech, how long do they speak?  Very often, not for long at all. In case you find that difficult to believe, Dave Yewman of Dash Consulting Inc made this brief slide deck to drive home the point. See for yourself the precise duration of history’s greatest speeches – and send this link to corporate executives, keynote speakers and the like who ramble on and on. (Click the right arrow to advance to the next slide):

A few years ago,  consultant Larry Liberty wrote a book called  The Maturity Factor: Solving the Mystery of Great Leadership.  The book stresses that the emotional and psychological maturity of a leader is more important than where they were educated, who they know, or what prior experiences they have.  According to the author, 80% of corporate executives are not fully mature. Most executives are, at best,  what  he calls  “High Functioning Adolescents.”

John Renesch, noted futurist and writer on social and organizational change, wrote a foreword to  Liberty’s book.  Renesch  quotes part of  it  in the May issue of  his newsletter,  FutureShapers Monthly.  ( The entire essay,   entitled Women at Work: Employing the Powerful Feminine is well worth a read;  its primary theme doesn’t concern us directly here but is a fascinating one. )

“Organizations, particularly business organizations,”  wrote Renesch, ” have unparalleled influence on our society today.  The business sector, and the economic system which fuels it, is the de facto leader of the industrialized world. This dramatic shift in global power away from traditional institutions like government has important implications. Never in human history has there been such a universal need for organizational leadership that acts responsibly for the good of all people. The hierarchical, top-down rule that dominated the Cold War era and the benevolent dictator models of some of today’s republics are equally unacceptable. A new, more mature leadership is needed — no, absolutely necessary — to assure that our children and grandchildren live in a time of greater civility, less apprehension about the survivability of the human race and greater compassion for all people on Earth.”

On somewhat similar lines,  management consultant Myra White,  in a recent article entitled  Seeking Competent Leaders,  poses a question that must  be  on the minds of many following  last year’s financial  debacle.  How did it happen that “may of the business leaders in whom we placed our faith, our trust and even our money” turned out to be ” incompetent or (in some cases) out-and-out charlatans”?

Part of the explanation,  asserts  White,  lies “with the fact that we often are more concerned with social skills, likeability and charisma in choosing our leaders than we are with their ability to be effective leaders.”

White identifies several leadership types prevalent in the business world today, all of which fall short of the ideal: the servant leader  who serves the people he or she serves rather than controlling them;  the emotionally intelligent leader  who has social charm , empathy,  self-awareness and self-control;   the transformational leader who provides people with a vision of a better world and motivates them to transcend their self-interest; and finally the charismatic leader – who emotionally energizes followers with an inspiring vision of the future and convinces them that he or she is the heroic figure who can make this vision real.

But even though many of these characteristics may be cause for admiration,  they do not necessarily mean that the leader we have chosen will deliver results.  “Research has not found that leaders who are socially adept or liked or admired are more effective.”

White acknowledges that likeability and charisma are desirable qualities.  They have value in energizing and  motivating followers to achieve a leader’s goals. But in a complex world where countries and businesses  are globally intertwined, can charisma be enough?

As White aptly puts it:  “Sport teams  pick people based on their competence and ability, not their social skills and charisma . Why shouldn’t  businesses and organizations follow suit?”

It’s something that happens in the best of organizations. The boss drafts a report and asks a staff member to proofread it. The assistant brings the report back with a section marked and says, “I don’t understand what you mean here,” to which the boss replies, “Oh, that’s technical–it’ll be clear to the lawyers when they review it.” Two weeks later, the lawyers ask for a rewrite of the same section.

To consultant Dianna Booher, this is a scenario that’s all too familiar, as she points out in her Communication Tip of the Month e-newsletter:  ” People always assume the confusion happens on the other end of the communication–that what they themselves say is perfectly clear and that the other person just missed it somehow.”

Very nice – at least for your ego.  But in business communication, you may be asking for trouble if you assume too much.  Wise communicators never take their skills for granted.

Want a good gauge of your own clarity, or lack of it?  Beware the blank stare!

Need additional signs that your message just might not be getting through? Booher offers the following:

Lack of questions. (You call for questions at the end of a presentation, and there are none. Or, you bring up an idea in a meeting and you’re greeted with only polite smiles.)

Unexpected responses. (People respond irrationally to what you say, such as with anger, withdrawal, silence, or denial.)

Lack of coordination. Things “fall between the cracks” in coordinating projects.)

Low morale. (People feel discouraged that they can never “get it right” when, in fact, projects are frequently delegated without essential elements for successful completion.)

Rework. (Projects have to be redone because the instructions weren’t clear the first time. Or, extra work was completed “just in case” to “cover all the bases” because somebody wasn’t sure what was needed.)

Bottom line remains as always: fuzzy words lead – at very best – to fuzzy action. Only with clear words canyou expect clear action.

As one who appreciates the infinite value of good health, I don’t believe whoever invented Coca-Cola did a favor to the human race. But I take my proverbial hat off to the Coke employee in this little anecdote related and commented upon by Angela Sinickas of Sinickas Communications, Inc.

A woman tried to buy a Coke from a vending machine, but it malfunctioned and swallowed some of her money. By a happy coincidence, the worker from Coca-Cola who refills the machines showed up at that moment. Hearing her story, he apologized, returned her money and offered her a Coke for free. Praiseworthy in itself, but there’s more.

The woman insisted on paying for her drink,  but took the opportunity to express her shock at how much one had to pay for a bottle of Coke nowadays. The worker commiserated with her about how high prices were, but explained in the nicest way just how much the higher price of oil affected the cost of his product, from the oil used to make the plastic bottle to transportation costs. He mentioned specific percentages and dollar figures. He quoted how low Coke’s profit margin actually was on that bottle she’d just purchased.

A good ending, but how did he know so much?

So how did that potentially negative encounter with the Coca-Cola brand end?  The customer didn’t walk away believing that tomorrow she would be paying less for Coke than she did today, but she certainly left with a far more positive feeling both for the brand and for the way her concerns had been addressed. And that, after all, is what good customer service is all about!

But  how did the vendor maintenance man,  who presumably  ranked pretty low in the corporate pecking order, happen to be so knowledgeable on the intricacies of product costing?  One must assume, points out Ms. Sinickas, that he was appropriately briefed , whether on a formal or informal basis, by someone inthe company who served as an internal communicator. And the successful imparting of that knowledge requires a careful definition of goals followed by meticulous planning and preparation.

In Sinickas’ words:  “Especially in difficult financial times, the more we communicators can do to help our employees learn what they need to know in order to interact more positively with customers, the more we demonstrate our own value to the bottom line. Let’s be sure we actually measure that ultimate behavioral impact we have, not just whether our employees heard our messages.”