Theme 3 of 5: Effective communication as a moral duty

Philosophy, Engineering and Technology

Theme 3 of 5: Effective communication as a moral duty

#philosophy ?#communicationskills #engineeringeducation

Disclaimer: these short thought articles are the interpretive summary of the writer attending the forum of Philosophy, Engineering and Technology (fPET2023), please refer to the references and authors provided to authentically explore the ideas presented.

With communication being one of the essentials in any job description not to mention a core life skill we have all had to learn from infancy, the impetus to develop good communication skills in engineering and design needs little persuasion. However, where does good communication come from in principle? Dr Andreas Spahn from Eindhoven University of technology (TU/e) suggests in his talk “Conflict, Compromise or Consensus? – Social Media and Democracy” four pillars for good communication: that it is directed to the truth, authentic, appropriate in its form and comprehensible.

It seems good common sense. However, it is possible that the truth can be subjective, in that although absolute truth may exist and may be irrefutable, it is seen through our human lens along with its limitations, different experiences and narrow scope. It is this lens and consequently how it is interpreted which is what can make the truth subjective. A more accurate point may be to communicate the perceived truth. This could also recognise that truth can’t be monopolised by any one group or persons or nation. This is an interesting discussion when considering wicked problems, where many voices and views are needed in collaboration towards solving challenges. The transactional model of communication comes to mind here.

Second to truth is to be authentic. In this case the intent and purpose must be clear. In an economy where what you do and what outcomes you achieve are the key metrics, intentions don’t seem have a place in our KPIs (key performance indicators). Being genuine shines a light on the transparency and values of the engineers, designers and companies. How can we nurture authenticity in our professions? While self-interest will always need to be put in check, the answer should be multifactorial: ethics education, on the job practice, policies and processes that puts value in accountability, not to penalise but to correct and develop, and so on.

In practice how does communication manifest as poor or effective i.e. to be appropriate and comprehensible? Back to Andreas Spahn’s talk, communities ideally need to be able to deliberate to reach mutual consensus. In a non-ideal world, our communities often debate and come to a compromise else risk the least ideal scenario of all: conflict where communication breaks down and fails to fulfil its role.

On an individual and personal level, what can an engineer or designer do towards the ideal of deliberation and consensus? In teaching we readily bring in a range of communication mediums to build this communication skill with our students and many of us will dive into conflict resolution, active listening and so on. However, most of these communication exercises focusses on one way information traffic to a narrow audience of peers or neighbouring disciplines. Therefore, have we fulfilled our duty of care - our moral duty - in ensuring students develop their role as communicators to wider audiences and not just the technically trained? And to also ensure, within our ability, that what is communicated is understood?

Spahn highlights that you need to reflect on what is there, express it to others then react or act on it. Sounds very similar to Gibb’s reflective learning cycle taught in our schools: observe, reflect, plan, act then repeat. Perhaps there is still room here to adapt Gibb’s cycle as a framework for communication in a professional setting:

Observe – reflect – express – plan/re-plan – act

Repeat...