Reading: 5.6—Healthy Communication

5.6 Healthy Communication: Much of the conflict in a church comes from poor communication, miscommunication, or lack of communication, and a conflicted church cannot effectively reach a lost community. There are many facets to healthy communication but two stand out in my experience as paramount: Make No Assumptions and Go Directly to the Source. We’ll take a look at these two here.

Make No Assumptions: 

Assumptions frequently lead to misunderstanding which is the antithesis of healthy communication. The previous two sections dealt with clarity; ministry clarity and role clarity. One way of thinking about clarity is that clarity leaves no room for assumptions. No two human beings ever see the same thing in exactly the same way, so when we operate on assumption, and fail to acquire clarity, we are bound to have miscommunication or poor communication. As I’m writing this, I’m realizing that the flip side of Make No Assumptions is Always Get Clarity. If you are the one providing the communication, that would suggest Always Provide Clarity. Healthy communication is clear and precise, so, if you’re on the end of providing communication, Always Provide Clarity, and if you’re on the end of receiving communication, Always Get Clarity. Make No Assumptions!

The terrain of assumption expands when there is a lack of communication. When communication is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, would be receptors of communication are left to figure it out for themselves, to fill in the blanks, i.e., to make assumptions. Guess what? No one can read your mind, and what might seem obvious to you might not be so obvious to the person that needs your communication.We’re back to the dynamic of Make No Assumptions.

Think of it this way: if you fail to communicate, clearly and precisely, you’re forcing your would-be recipient to assume or guess. Typically, in such cases, there is only one correct assumption or guess, while there is a myriad of incorrect assumptions or guesses. Do the math! The chances of your recipient making a wrong assumption is far greater than his or her making a right assumption. A lack of communication leads to miscommunication which is poor communication, and this lack blocks or erodes your ability to work effectively with staff and leaders. They are left to wonder and wander in the dark, hoping to guess rightly as they make assumptions.

Go to the Source:

Another facet of communication that is rife with poor communication concerns hearsay or even gossip. An alternate description might be “third-party” communication. As communication passes from person to person, something gets lost in translation and that something has to do with perspective, clarity, language, and even truth. I once was told that every communication has at least six elements: 1. what you meant to say, 2. what you thought you said, 3. what you actually said, 4. what your listener actually heard, 5. what your listener thought he heard, and 6. what your listener wanted to hear. Let’s just say that communication between two people can be complicated. This complication increases exponentially when you add a third, fourth, or fifth party. So, bottom line, when conflict in communication arises, the wise person will go to the original source to get to the root of the real and true communication. 

In recent years, a communications trend has surfaced that centers on the use of candor. This stems from the observation that candor is often in short supply in interpersonal communication when safety and trust are in question. In Creativity, Inc., Ed Catmull writes, “There is no doubt that our decision-making is better if we are able to draw on the collective knowledge and unvarnished opinions of the group. But as valuable as the information is that comes from honesty and as loudly as we proclaim its importance, our own fears and instincts for self-preservation often cause us to hold back,” (Creativity, Inc: Catmull, p. 85). I served in a ministry for a season that wasn’t a safe place for truly sharing “unvarnished opinions,” and candor was off the table in favor of carefully guarding what I said, when I said it, and to whom I said it. Communication in this context was very unhealthy.

Kim Scott, in her book, Radical Candor, adds, “The key to getting everyone used to being direct when challenging each other (and you!) is emphasizing that it’s necessary to communicate clearly enough so that there’s no room for interpretation, but also humbly. I chose ‘candor’ instead of ‘honesty’ because there’s not much humility in believing that you know the truth. Implicit with candor is that you’re simply offering your view of what’s going on and that you expect people to offer theirs. If it turns out that you’re the one who got it wrong, you want to know. At least I hope you want to know,” (Radical Candor: Scott, p.10).

In my thinking, candor fits well with the idea of Going to the Source because the bottom line that you are seeking is to get to the truth, the unvarnished or candid truth, and the best way to do that is to go to the source.

GiANT Worldwide, in its treatment of communication, speaks of Provisional, Plan, and Promise. They exhort communicators to make sure they have classified their communications in the appropriate category. A Provisional communication is one that is contingent; it includes an “if.” If certain conditions occur then I might do such and such – provisionally. A Plan communication carries a bit more weight as a statement that I am planning to do such and such, but, just because this is the plan doesn’t necessarily mean that it will come to fruition. A Promise communication is the strongest of all as a statement of promise or commitment that I will, in fact, do such and such. The problem, of course, is when folks are not clear on the category, e.g., if I make a statement that I consider provisional, and my recipient takes it as a statement of promise, there will likely be problems down the line. So, we’re back to clarity and making no assumptions. Be absolutely clear as to whether your statement is a Provisional statement, a Plan statement, or a Promise statement.

Finally, here’s a communication tip from Chip Heath and Dan Heath from their book on communication, Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die. As mentioned previously, in this book, the Heath brothers speak of six key qualities of an idea that is made to stick. This is their way of describing effective communication. The six qualities are:

Simplicity

Unexpectedness

Concreteness

Credibility

Emotional

Stories

Perhaps you noticed that S-U-C-C-E-S almost spells SUCCESS. Despite omitting an “S,” it’s a great book on communication that I highly recommend. Putting all six together might go like this: Present your idea as a Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, and Emotional Story. This formula also works well as a methodology for Vision Casting because it’s a recipe for memorability, i.e., stickiness. 

Working with staff and leaders effectively must include a solid platform of healthy communication that eliminates assumptions and that seeks out the source in the event of conflict or simple misunderstanding.  Candor should be elevated to a position of high value with statements clearly categorized as Provisional, Plan, or Promise.