BSCOM/310T: Interpersonal Communication Week 3 Discussion – Working Together to Make Choices

5.1Cooperation and CollaborationCooperation and Collaboration Transcript
Download Material
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
1. Identify and examine the effects of specific interpersonal communication styles and
behaviors as they pertain to collaboration within an organization.
2. Identify various causes of organizational fragmentation, how division affects
collaboration, and effective strategies to help bridge the gaps.
3. Understand how organizations working virtually must adapt traditional communication
methods to better engage employees and facilitate cooperation.
4. Appreciate the value of cooperation and collaboration as it pertains to individuals’
emotional health and productivity, as well as to an organization’s reputation and bottom
line.
5. Reinforce specific advantages to workplace collaboration, including that of problemsolving as a precursor to more in-depth course study.
Figure 5.1: Behavioral skills are learnable.
Photo by Sora Shimazaki via Pexels.
Teamwork
“If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” —African
proverb
Cooperation is what makes collaboration possible, and collaboration is what oils the
organizational machine. In other words, nothing works well if individuals don’t work
together. From the time we’re small, we’re graded on how well we interact with
others. Keisha won’t share the Legos? Keisha’s parents get a phone call. Trade
Legos for ledgers and watch working adults exhibit similar behaviors, only they’re
often left to muddle through dissension without the help of supportive teachers. But
why let an inability to cooperate cause problems if strategies exist to approach,
manage, and nurture healthy interpersonal communication proactively—especially
when doing so can improve organizational performance and the relationships within?
Collaboration isn’t a buzzword; it’s a way of working that transcends space and time.
Even with an increasing number of organizational employees working oceans apart,
emails, texts, social media, and virtual meetings continue to tie the myriad pieces of
an organization together. Collaboration keeps them together. Engaged. Productive.
Inspired. Driven. Successful. Without it, organizations fail.
With so much at stake, we’ve filled this topic with the essential tools and strategies
you need to get along. We will apply all our fundamental interpersonal
communication skills to teams. It all begins with the approach.
5.2Asserting a Group Mentality
“Everyone is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind.” —Unknown
Collaboration can be defined as a group of people coming together to contribute their
expertise for the benefit of a shared goal. Exactly how they come together is a matter
of some consequence. Does a colleague hold a grudge against another group
member and enter a meeting in anger? Is another colleague distracted by news of a
breakup? Perhaps the lead associate didn’t get a promotion and vies to undermine the
project. Whatever a contributor’s attitude or reasons for feeling a particular way, their
resulting behavior is guaranteed to affect the group’s success.
Considering Communication Style
Being considerate of others’ feelings and one’s own is critical to approaching
collaboration with greater compassion and giving it a chance at success. That doesn’t
mean coddling or broadcasting others’ vulnerabilities; it means empathizing and
adapting to a group’s observed needs rather than seeking to advance one’s own
agenda. As a rule, it’s best to leave emotions at home and bring only respectful
verbiage, tone, body language, and quality listening to the workplace. But it’s not easy
to do since all the skills we’ve addressed in previous topics are tested in group
settings. Circumstances and disruptive personalities can ignite latent emotions in
someone that, once expressed, can polarize, incite, intimidate, or distract other
members of a group from completing the task at hand. So, let’s examine the four most
common approaches observed when people collaborate to understand how the
communication style in each affects the group and, if adjustments are needed, how to
adapt.
Aggressive Communication
“You’re never on time. You never dress well. And you never pay attention.”
Aggressive communication is when individuals express personal feelings and
opinions to advance their own needs at the expense of others’ needs. Controlling in
nature, aggressive communicators can be verbally abusive, physically abusive, or
both. In the workplace, this approach is, at the very least, counterproductive, since the
group’s goal falls second to the aggressor’s goal. The most common way aggressive
communication is achieved is by using forceful language and tone and inflated body
language aimed at subduing or suppressing contrasting viewpoints. The following are
more specific examples:
Figure 5.2: Scare tactics prey on insecurity.
Photo by Pixabay via Pexels.
•
Speaking or shouting in a loud voice
•
Pointing fingers
•
Threatening, blaming, criticizing others
•
Not listening, interrupting
•
Standing over others, wide posture, hands on hips
•
Speaking without questioning
•
Impulsive, reactionary
This behavior can produce a range of direct consequences from violence to mild
disruption, often while using a scare tactic as the catalyst. Indirect consequences—
damages that tend to transcend a given experience and pervade a company culture—
include feelings of alienation, intimidation, fear, and insecurity.
While professional guidance or third-party support may indeed be a safe response to
aggression, it’s worth being aware of a less extreme version of aggressive
communication: “you” statements. Many of us not intending to communicate
aggressively do so when we inarticulately express our needs. The quote at the
beginning of this section is a perfect example of what not to do. The speaker may
indeed have valid claims, but he or she hasn’t accepted responsibility for making
them. A less aggressive approach substitutes the finger-pointing “you” to “I.”
“I’d ask that you please be punctual and follow the dress code so that the group
experiences fewer distractions.”
Passive Communication
Figure 5.3: Presentation.
Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels.
“Maddy, you keep notes while the rest of us watch the presentation.”
[Maddy nods.]
Passive communication is characterized by a lack of verbal communication, even if
expressing one’s ideas, feelings, or opinions is welcomed or would be helpful.
Passivists tend not to react immediately to aggression, allowing instead for the
personal effects of such behaviors to accumulate within them. This tends not to bode
well for repeated interactions, which often happen in the workplace, since mounting
feelings usually result in an eventual outburst—and not always toward the aggressor.
Recognizable passive communication is most noticeably nonverbal. Specific examples
can include the following:
•
Being overly apologetic, submissive
•
Retracted body language
•
Avoidance
•
Poor or limited eye contact
•
Being unable to say “no,” lack of personal boundaries
•
Speaking slowly, inaudibly
Passive communication may appear cooperative on the surface as assenting behavior
facilitates the ideas and wishes of a group’s more dominant contributors. But by
diminishing the value of their own unique contribution, passive communicators
effectively limit the potential of the whole. Moreover, a passivist’s depression, anxiety,
or resentment can lower group morale, discouraging cooperation.
Passive-Aggressive Communication
Figure 5.4: Passive-aggressive communication causes organizational headaches.
Photo by Oladimeji Ajegbile via Pexels.
“If Desi manages to come through with his part of the deal, then I’ll do my part.”
Passive-aggressive communication is manipulative and underhanded. A
combination of the above two approaches, this style of communication presents
passively—not overtly expressing needs or feelings—but is motivated by aggravated
intentions. Rather than speak directly to the object of their latent frustrations, passiveaggressive communicators express their message indirectly in the form of
disrespectful or ambiguous comments or actions. This approach is reflected as a
variety of behaviors, but some of the most recognizable include the following
examples:
•
Correcting others while denying a problem exists
•
Sighing, eye-rolling
•
Body language and emotional inconsistencies
•
Muttering inaudibly
•
Deceptive behavior (appearing one way but acting another)
•
Avoidance
•
Sarcasm
By approaching collaboration passive-aggressively, an individual can undermine the
entire group’s efforts by fostering a culture of negativity, despondence, and alienation.
Projects depend on everyone doing his or her part. As our opening example indicates,
teamwork is doomed to fail if any part of the whole is betting against his or her
teammates and excusing his or her own responsibility to deliver.
Assertive Communication
“While I understand the urgency to move forward, my professional experience
reinforces my instinct to get client permission first.”
Figure 5.5: Client permission.
Photo by Gustavo Fring via Pexels.
Assertive communication is an effective alternative to any of the above approaches
and is, by default, the ideal approach to collaboration. It involves expressing one’s own
needs, ideas, and feelings while also considering others’ needs, ideas, and feelings.
Without personal agenda, assertive communication can be delivered with an earnest
transparency that strengthens relationships. Ideal for workplace collaboration,
assertive communicators balance a healthy sense of self-value with respect for their
teammates. As advocates, assertive communicators strengthen relationships by
exemplifying a can-do mentality through a macro lens. This approach is characterized
by some of the following examples:
•
Speaking calmly and clearly
•
Steady eye contact
•
Open, relaxed posture
•
Listening and asking questions
•
Respectfully saying “no”
•
Inclusion, cooperation
Essential to assertive communication is the mastery of “I” statements. Identical to our
solution to the “you” statements in aggressive communication, “I” statements accept a
message and its claim as one’s own rather than blaming others. Among other
advantages, this approach can make instruction and even negative feedback easier to
accept.
5.3Strategic Solutions for Discord
Even if we manage to observe the behaviors mentioned in section 5.2 and meet them
by practicing assertive communication, cooperation can still be disrupted.
Environments within workplaces—those spaces under an organization’s rhetorical
radar—are unbalanced at best. With an increasing number of subject specialists and
intradepartmental subdivisions, organizations have become fragmented, so much so
that achieving a sense of unity can become a job in itself. The primary culprits—
knowledge deficits, information silos, vague expectations, and ineffective training—
disempower employees. But they don’t have to. By embracing a learning culture,
organizations can begin to level the playing field and support more transparent
cooperation and more robust collaboration.
Knowledge Defecits
Figure 5.6: Knowledge defecits.
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio via Pexels.
Research indicates employees lack 20 to 40 percent of the knowledge considered
critical to performing their jobs.1 Worse still, they don’t know that they don’t know. This
knowledge deficit is a significant factor in determining the value of an individual’s
contribution to an organization. Industry leaders call it “unconscious incompetence”
and point out that it exists in every level of an organization, especially amongst more
experienced staff who often fall behind evolving trends.2 This can be problematic for
collaborative exercises since more experienced participants tend to become default
leaders. If operating from a knowledge deficit, these so-called leaders will feign
competence by passing off incorrect or incomplete information rather than admit not
knowing. Accepted as facts, these errors can compromise client and customer
relations and damage a company’s reputation.
What to Do about It
Tailored training is an option, but that would require employees to first recognize and
expose their knowledge deficits. Since neither is likely to occur organically—either as
a matter of pride or the average organization’s intolerance for mistakes—creating a
culture of continuous improvement may prove more effective. Rather than punishing
errors, organizations might encourage saying “I don’t know” and support employees’
willingness to learn with more regular feedback and instructional resources. Helping
one helps the team.
Information Silos
“I know something you don’t know” sounds like a playground taunt, yet it’s the all-toofamiliar unspoken language of vertical communication structures within
organizations. Silo mentality is a reluctance to share information with colleagues from
different departments within the same organization. While a silo can be useful for
protecting sensitive information, not sharing can result in confusion, isolation,
redundancy, resentment, and, ultimately, dysfunction. Siloing is often a symptom of
closed communication at the top of an organization. If leaders don’t open channels of
communication, their employees are likely to keep knowledge close to the vest, too.
This is the opposite of what’s necessary to cooperate: sharing. By withholding
information, or holding information over one another, no one wins.
What to Do about It
A unified vision starts at the top with support from management to encourage
interdepartmental interaction. Collaboration is the solution to silos because it
necessitates teamwork. Specialists from different disciplines will have to share
resources in order to achieve a common goal. But it’s critical that goal is uniformly
enforced to keep individual team members accountable and on task. Incentivized
employees and those receiving regular, constructive feedback will be more likely to
cooperate.
Vague Expectations
Figure 5.7: “What am I supposed to do?”
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio via Pexels.
“So, what am I supposed to do?” is an all-too-common question asked by employees
attempting to deliver on unclear expectations. Research indicates this ambiguity is the
greatest source of stress for almost a third of employees polled3 and accounts for
more than a third of all workplace miscommunication.4 Basically, if an employee
doesn’t understand his or her responsibilities, he or she can’t complete a given task.
Setting clear expectations requires transparency and is often most critical at times of
organizational change or restructuring. Much like information silos, this problem often
starts at the top with senior staff holding onto information, while their subordinates are
left to gather information for themselves, a process that breeds distrust, insecurity, and
disloyalty. None of these is conducive to collaboration.
What to Do about It
The most direct solution is to set clear performance and behavioral expectations from
the moment an employee is hired. As an employee, if you’re not receiving adequate
information, ask for it. Still not clear? Seek clarification. When working together, it may
be helpful to document group and individual expectations so there can be no
disagreement between members about what was said. Vague expectations are an
easy problem to fix in an organization whose members are treated as equals and
valued for their individual contributions.
Effective Training
Figure 5.8: Effective training.
Photo by fauxels via Unsplash.
Organizations spend billions of dollars on employee training and professional
development.5 But most of it is missing the mark. We’ve already asserted the average
employee’s knowledge deficit and the systematically generic nature of most training
programs intended to fill the gaps. But even if material is tailored to individual’s needs,
rarely does the infrastructure exist within an organization to provide adequate followup—a key component to ensuring that information learned is applied.6 This could be
why six out of ten employees still suggest firm-wide training and a wider range of
communication tools as ways to improve workplace communication;7 what they’re
getting isn’t working.
Effective training with clear expectations that equip employees with the knowledge and
tools necessary to perform their jobs is the first step toward breaking down an
organization’s interior walls. Without divisions, employees can collaborate more easily.
If everyone has been given the same information and adequate support to apply it,
then individuals within groups will be less likely to experience or abuse significant
power differentials—represented on the scale of aggression to passivity—and be
motivated to share knowledge and expertise for the benefit of the whole.
Previous
5.4Doubling Down in Digital
Doubling Down in Digital Transcript
Download Material
If each of the aforementioned challenges exists in environments where employees
share the same physical space, organizations must work exponentially harder to
navigate collaborative solutions when employees are oceans apart. As we’ve
discussed in previous topics, remote teams lack the advantage of frequent in-person
interactions—ideal for building trust and camaraderie—and must make fervent
efforts to communicate earnest displays of empathy, openness, and respect by any
means possible. Fortunately, opportunities to collaborate exist before any project
begins since many employees will require patience and support from their
teammates while they adjust to new communication tools. And once up and running,
team members can cooperate to establish clear goals and ground rules to level the
playing field, no matter the realities of their unique physical spaces. Any display of
cooperation at this stage could go a long way toward building foundational trust and
camaraderie.
Binary Basics
Figure 5.9: Video call.
Photo by Julia M Cameron via Pexels.
Of course, remote teams will still work from a disadvantage: research reveals “a
face-to-face request is 34 times more successful than an email.”1 And if the saying
“out of sight, out of mind” is true, then remote employees must work twice as hard to
remember they’re even part of a team, let alone valued contributors. Finally, as
we’ve previously covered, an email can just as easily get lost in the shuffle or
misinterpreted without adequate context. So, what can be done?
Once technological needs are met, remote teams must sprint back to the basics to
ensure traditional approaches to interpersonal verbal and written communication are
adapted as appropriately and effectively as possible for virtual collaboration. The
following strategies are some of the best solutions for remote teams:
Ask for information. Asking for information exposes one’s vulnerability, relinquishes
control, and invites others to lead. By revealing a knowledge deficit, a team member
displays trust in his or her teammates to respect their deficiency and help fill the gap. This
trust discourages tendencies toward aggression and passivity by asserting value in others’
contributions. For remote teams, the request must be explicit, since collaborators will be
less able to intuit others’ needs without nonverbal cues.
Share. This may sound elementary, but it’s the best defense against silos. Offering
information preempts a team member’s request. Sharing information is another display of
vulnerability and reflects one’s willingness to work with the team, not against it. In a remote
setting, this will likely mean giving teammates access to various files and accounts or
creating a whiteboard where notes can be shared publicly. In this way, no one member
becomes a gatekeeper for information that is useful to the group.
Show interest. In the absence of a water cooler, coffee break, or cubicle conversation, it
can be difficult for remote team members to comfortably engage in casual dialogue. Yet,
this simple act of well-intentioned curiosity can show someone you care and that you value
them as part of the team. By taking a moment at the beginning of a virtual meeting to ask
after another’s health or family, a team member sets a tone of compassion that can lead to
more robust cooperation. Remote teams with fewer members are better able to support this
approach.
Encourage feedback. We’ll spend an entire topic on this subject (Topic 5), so suffice it to
say, regular check-ins with teammates and direct reports can be critical to creating a safe
space for handling negativity, criticism, or complaints. This is especially important in remote
settings where individuals are physically isolated from their teammates and lack perspective
on what issues or dynamics others may be navigating to make them behave a certain way.
In between dedicated feedback sessions, seize opportunities to display attention with words
of affirmation and supportive nonverbal gestures.
Set goals. We’ve already established how clarity is critical to effective communication.
Remote teamwork is no exception. Team members that don’t know the goal or his or her
responsibility to that end can quickly feel alienated. Alienation breeds doubt and insecurity
and a disinclination to cooperate with those who hold the keys. By setting clear targets as a
group, everyone gets a say in the goal and its proposed trajectory. Creating daily and
weekly collaboration schedules can help with follow-through since participants won’t be left
to wonder who should call who when.
Pitch in. Kindness inspires kindness. Working remotely is hard for everyone. So instead of
complaining about it at the risk of lowering group morale, why not offer to make a difficult
situation a little easier? Establish start times and end times for interminable meetings to
respect collaborators’ time and energy. Pitch in to relieve a teammate’s regular task of
taking notes. Or offer to stay late on a call to address group concerns. Any effort to alleviate
stress, including keeping a sense of humor, will make working together easier and more
enjoyable.
5.5Why a Cohesive Culture Matters
“No man is an island.” —John Donne1
In life and in organizations, people need to work together. Yet, maybe you claim to
work faster on your own or concentrate better when a colleague isn’t asking for
updates. Or maybe you get through the day without ever seeing another human.
Maybe you’re a sole proprietor. The truth is, even you aren’t working alone. Whether
selling to an international client, texting with a friend for moral support, or reviewing
website metrics collated by an outsourced IT specialist, business is made possible
by and through others. Business is an exchange of goods and services with people
as its backbone. This is why the efforts described in section 5.4 to grow stronger
relationships are worth the trouble: they make business more profitable and
relationships more fulfilling.
Figure 5.10: Collaboration.
Photo by fauxels via Pexels.
What follows is a list of some more specific organizational benefits to collaboration
that will reinforce its value on both a macro scale and micro scale.
Problem-solving: Inevitably, something will break or won’t work or for any number of
natural, human complications and can’t be resolved without help. In an organization, fixing
that could mean anything from seeking a fresh perspective from a colleague to requesting a
quick brainstorm session with the team. Whatever the case, by pooling knowledge, skills,
and expertise, team members are better able to talk through problems and discuss potential
solutions to get projects back on track. But don’t wait for a problem before seeking
assistance. If cooperation is baked into company culture, teammates will be not just
available but willing to help prevent a problem from occurring in the first place.
Unification: Demonstrated by our strategies to eliminate workplace silos, unification
includes any efforts to break down divisions within an organization to help it run more
smoothly. Where teams don’t exist or partners aren’t named, take initiative to form or name
them, especially if tasked with a project that exceeds the boundaries of one’s own expertise.
Bringing together people with specialized skills to achieve a shared goal creates potential
for synergy, with individuals feeling respected for the value of their unique offering.
Camaraderie born from this exercise can form lasting ties between team members and
encourage future collaboration with other organization members.
Learning: The byproduct of successful team building is learning. Simply by uniting subject
specialists, individuals stand to learn from one another. But since defensive or aggressive
behaviors can still undermine communication efforts, it can be helpful to ask questions,
listen, and give back a constructive perspective. Also, share information, mistakes, and
ideas of your own so teammates can learn and offer feedback to you. This exchange will
create a safe space for not knowing, learning, and open sharing. And if practiced
consistently, it can pervade the workplace to create a culture primed to learn.
Open communication: By working together, especially in small groups, team members
inclined to hide or silo can’t. Collaboration, by its nature, opens new lines and methods of
communication between departments that might otherwise never interact. While it may take
extra work for those disinclined to speak up in a group, any effort—on their part or the
group’s part to make him or her feel comfortable doing so—is worth it. Successful founder
and CEO David Hassell put it this way: “By maintaining regular, direct communication with
team members, you’ll gain valuable insights into the operations of each department and be
able to resolve issues quickly.”2 Knowing one’s value is appreciated by others fosters a
culture of sharing and increased dedication to realize organizational goals.
Morale: In an organization whose culture is safe for sharing, trust grows. And where there’s
trust, there’s increased productivity, innovation, loyalty, and, usually, happy people. Working
together to meet a common goal tends to have this effect, and better still, positivity is
contagious as one successful group experience encourages the next. It’s an appealing
quality looking in from the outside, too, as organizations are more likely to attract candidates
seeking to work in open and engaged workplaces.
Efficiency: In the spirit of doing more with less, collaboration helps organizations save time
and money. Individuals within cohesive groups can learn from each other’s sometimes
costly mistakes rather than repeat them. Direct client collaboration reduces the chance of
miscommunication and accelerates the rate of sales. Teammates hold teammates
accountable so that when someone drops the ball, those invested in seeing a project
through will ensure he or she rises and delivers. And speaking of high morale, happy
employees tend to stick around. Since a new hire can cost an organization more than
$4,000,3 high retention rates can be a welcome boon to the organizational budget.
5.6Summary
Figure 5.11: Cooperating to find solutions.
Photo by fauxels via Pexels.
Collaboration requires moving toward others, leaning in to difficult relationships, and
cooperating to find solutions to reach a shared goal while respecting individuals and
their contributions. It’s not an easy balance to strike considering that all the
strategies we’ve covered in previous topics get applied to the often volatile dynamics
of a team. But we’ve also reinforced how worthwhile any effort to cooperate can be,
not just for the organization but also for the individuals doing the work. That said, as
with any good thing, collaboration can be overdone. Research indicates employees
spend an average “80 percent of their time in meetings or answering colleagues’
requests.”1 This leaves little time for an employee to actually do his or her share of
the work. And that workload may be lopsided depending on how it was delegated in
the first place. So to accomplish true synergy and reap the benefits of effective
collaboration, an organization’s leaders must assert thoughtful standard practices
and invite staff input into that process, keep lines of communication open by
practicing transparency, share mistakes as learning opportunities, and, above all,
lead by example.
BSCOM/310T: Interpersonal Communication
Week 3 Discussion – Working Together to Make Choices
Materials
Textbook
Vannella, E. (2021). Interpersonal communication. MyEducator.
Tools
MyEducator®
Respond to the following prompt in a minimum of 175 words.
In Topic 5.2, we introduced Maddy and Desi. Their passive communication styles were
negatively affecting the performance of the group. Intentions to keep the peace by staying quiet
only served to embolden the aggressors’ controlling behavior.
Share a time when you may have affected others because of your own communication style by
describing how your attitudes or feelings affected the way you communicated with others.
•
•
•
•
Describe your body language or your manner of speaking.
How did group members react to you?
Did you change your behavior after seeing or hearing others’ response to you?
Applying the strategies you learned this week to our scenarios with Maddy and Desi,
what would you say or do to improve communication among team members without
making it worse?