How much communication is sufficient?
More photos here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/134827516@N08/

How much communication is sufficient?

Recently, a message on Linkedin on information sufficiency piqued my interest and made me probe how much we value the most used channel in employee communications – email. The question of communications sufficiency plagues communicators and leaders. Overcommunicating can lead to information overload and communicating less can result in lack of clarity and probably the spread of rumors.

An average employee gets over 120 mails a day.The threshold is about 50 per day , after which productivity drops and so does health indicators. The art and science of getting it right is by having a pulse of your communication environment and climate. Knowing when to up the game and when to turn it down matters, while staying consistent and relevant to your audiences. The question is not how much but how relevant is the information employees are receiving. Not getting the information they need, when they need it, results in a lack of connection to the purpose as worse can be perceived as disrespectful. What’s worse, a majority of mails staff get are worthless in terms of information they need.

According to a McKinsey study , ‘the average interaction worker spends an estimated 28 percent of the workweek managing e-mail and nearly 20 percent looking for internal information or tracking down colleagues who can help with specific tasks. But when companies use social media internally, messages become content; a searchable record of knowledge can reduce, by as much as 35 percent, the time employees spend searching for company information.” Not all the information received is useful. Some distract and can reduce productivity when not written well. Studies have indicated that organizations stand to lose millions due to poor communication. Also, some companies have outright banned mails to reduce this epidemic from taking over the lives of their staff. Others have turned to social networks although e-mail still continues to be preferred mode of communication.

As per a study by Slack , key work expectations to perform a majority of roles jobs will evolve by as much as 42% over the next few years, dramatically changing work and organization priorities. So, it isn’t about the number of mails that are sent. It is about the quality of the communication and the ownership rests with leaders and communicators to create systems and processes that empower managers and other ‘power’ users of communication to get right.

When it comes to communication efficiency, it is vital to explore the subject from different perspectives. Does the communication lead to better clarity? Can it result in better acceptance? Has it improved satisfaction among audiences? Did it improve the overall experience and sense of belongingness? A study conducted by IULM recommends dialogue with managers and staff as more valuable to help provide clarity and direction.

The progression is from communication sufficiency to clarity to acceptance to satisfaction to engagement and then to experience can broaden the expectations of measurement and drive a meaningful dialogue with stakeholders.

Rather than getting caught in the nuances of e-mail and channel outtakes, it is important to shift the focus to tackling stakeholder perceptions, understanding and business outcomes.

#

Chip Helm

#1 National Bestselling Author & Speaker Learn more at ChipHelm.net

2 年

The correct, constant , and consistent communication my friend

Russell-Olivia Brooklands (ROB) FIIC

Creator of the Shareable Justifiable Confidence Model - which can support you as an Internal Communication Specialist, while enhancing psychological safety at work, lowering operating costs and increasing brand value.

2 年

Surely the big issue here is that, currently, Internal Communication Specialists are responsible for only a tiny percentage of all the communicating that's happening. So they can't stop the communication overload. And simply banning emails doesn't work because people still need to communicate with one another. And folk still need to receive information. Surely the issue is largely one of skills, procedures and performance measures, thanks to two key factors 1. Humans aren't born with an Internal Communication Gene which would enable them to instinctively know how to discriminate between: - all the 'stuff' they could communicate, and all the people they could sent it to, versus - the content which is relevant and useful and the people for whom it will add value. 2. This genetic 'gap' is not being addressed through training and formal business practices, linked to reward and recognition. This is where IC Practice Governance has a huge role to play, where IC Specialists support (in the first instance) line managers to communicate more effectively in much the same way Finance Specialists support them with their budget management.

Vishwanath Hiremath

Product Mgmt.| De-risking Innovation | Strategy MBA at IU Berlin 2024 - Digitalization, Business models , and AI. Logistics | Travel | E-commerce.

2 年

It is an interesting article with research and surveys on how much to communicate. I was also wondering what if the content or medium of communication was different. We assumed emails as standard medium of communication, I recently studied communication in the context of managerial functions and it is broadly divided into written and spoken communication, however, in this era it should be recorded and live - recorded can be an email, a video, podcast and live can be a text chat, video or audio conference. A good mix of these in relevant contexts and needs ways can make audience more receptive.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Aniisu K Verghese Ph.D.的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了