Supportive Communication
First, I must say I am sold on this concept and was so as quickly
as I read about it. I finished my
undergrad degree in 1997 and have not been back in the academic environment until
now, so unfortunately, this is my first exposure to supportive communication. I have been a proponent of honest, open, and
sincere leadership/communication since my first few attempts to adapt myself to
the current research trends failed miserably (in my assessment). This is not an attempt at ‘I thought of it
first’ because I did not. What I did was
purely survival, but it worked well for me.
I see supportive communication almost as the missing link to leadership
research. I do not know why anyone would
choose to communicate differently. Supportive communication brings the leader/subordinate relationship from Adult>>>Child to Adult>>>Adult. The
theory is mature, the research is vast and incredibly supportive, and it just
makes since. Supportive communication is
powerful. Its overall impact to the management/leadership
field is extensive. Yet, everyone
wins. The benefits touch everyone involved
and the negatives are limited to having to be taught the skill and it requires
effort do it correctly.
According to Whetten & Cameron, “supportive
communication seeks to preserve or enhance a positive relationship between you
and another person while still addressing a problem, giving negative feedback,
or tackling a difficult issue” (p. 193).
The positive interpersonal relationship being preserved is actually leveraged
to allow the open, honest, and frank discussion between
the two communicators. Based on the mutual respect of the communicators, the end result is
likely a positive relationship that has been enhanced or strengthened by the experience. Supportive communication
is a deliberate, purposeful skill that must be learned and practiced to master. It will require an investment of time and
effort from the organization and the individual managers, but the potential return on that investment
is far greater than just preserving positive relationships during difficult
situations. The individuals in an
organization that promotes a supportive environment are less stressed,
healthier, better performers, less distracted, have less conflict, fewer
problems, and make better decisions. The
organization will likely be more productive, solve problems faster, see
increases in quality, and have less conflicts.
The organization’s customer, in turn, benefits through on-time delivery,
quality product, and more responsive customer service (Whetten & Cameron,
2016).
Supportive communication also helps individuals grow
in commitment to the organization’s goals and objectives as well as form a
trust in management. Quality task-related
communication helps create commitment. On
the other hand, establishing trust is dependent on the quality of
non-task-related communication (de Ridder, 2004). In other words it is not just about what you
discuss, but also how deeply and detailed that discussion becomes.
There are eight attributes of supportive communication. I am not going to list them all here, but I
will highlight the ones that the CEO of Cerna violated in a message to his
company managers.
“We are getting less than
40 hours of work from a large number of our K.C.-based EMPLOYEES. The parking
lot is sparsely used at 8:00 A.M.; likewise at 5 P.M. As managers – you either
do not know what your EMPLOYEES are doing; or you do not CARE. You have created
expectations on the work effort that allowed this to happen inside Cerner,
creating a very unhealthy environment. In either case, you have a problem and
you will fix it or I will replace you. NEVER in my career have I allowed a team
that worked for me to think they had a 40-hour job. I have allowed YOU to
create a culture that is permitting this. NO LONGER.”
Supportive communication is best accomplished face-to-face. Technology such as e-mail tends to limit the
communication as well as make it one sided and impersonal. Sending an e-mail with less than complimentary
content to 400 managers will serve only to insult, anger, disillusion, and
embarrass them. This type of
communication also makes supportive listening impossible. Supportive listening is the highest ranked of
the skills deemed important for managers to possess. The CEO begins the message with an assumption
that is stated as fact. This likely will
make the manager argumentative. The
statement that begins “As managers…” violates several of the attributes. First,
this is a global statement and not specific enough to even discuss. Second it is evaluative and leaves no room for
other possibilities. Third, it is directly
aimed at the people, not focused on the problem. Lastly, it is a disrespectful and inflexible attack
likely to cause a defensive reaction from managers. The very next statement accuses every manager
of creating an unhealthy environment is a disconfirmation statement and likely
to make the managers feel small and incompetent. “In either case, you have a problem…” fails
the ownership attribute. The problem is
all the managers’ fault and the repair is the managers responsibility. The last two lines serve only to make the
managers feel less than the CEO. It is
also threatening to the managers’ flexibility to operate as they deem important
(Whetten & Cameron, 2016).
There is literally nothing supportive about this
communication. It would however do two
things. First it would make the CEO appear to be an immature fool. And then, it would cause wide spread dissent throughout the company among his managers
which, depending on their maturity, could cause a serious snowball effect that
temporarily brings his company to a halt.
In the organization, this short e-mail will cause much more
trouble than it corrects.
References:
De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Organisational
communication and supportive employees. Human Resource Management
Journal, 14(3), 20-30.
Whetten, D. A., Cameron, K. S. (2016),
Developing management skills (Ninth edition).
Pearson Education, Inc. ISBN: 978-0-13-312747-8. (student edition)
No comments:
Post a Comment