Thinking Out Loud » strengths

Time and Timing

Bob — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 21:37:14 +0000

I’m very aware of time. What time it is, how long something will take, the number of days before an event. I look at my appointment book several times a day, making, changing, and remembering when I have appointments and mapping out the time-flow. I’m also the kind of person who gets ready and shows up very early for appointments and events. I began doing this as a child. Keeping accurate time playing a musical instrument, however, has always been challenging, and although I’ve done a lot of organized singing as an adult, my timing skills with music remain weak.

My time estimation skills are also weak. I frequently err in determining how long an activity will take. Left on my own, I will calculate three activities taking a total of two hours, when in reality they take five or six hours. Likewise, I can overestimate: planning several hours for something that takes barely one. So, I’ve learned to ask others for feedback as part of my planning efforts.

My interpersonal timing skills, however, are strong. I innately sense what to say when, which fosters clearer communication and greater understanding. I’m not talking about the art of making good conversation. I mean the way of listening and feeling the rhythm of the conversation, knowing when to ask a question and when to be silent, naturally modulating my voice and creating an emotionally safe environment. The timing involved in each of these “activities” comes naturally, although having over 30,000 hours of office counseling “practice” helps.

Timing and time, related but different—a strength, a weakness. Our human capacities have different dimensions. In one way they can work smoothly, efficiently and effectively. In another way they can be erratic, out of synch, and cause problems. As I continue to observe and study the details of how we interact with ourselves and others, I am amazed at the nuances of our capacities and how paradoxical they can appear.

Get Shareaholic

Collaboration or Interruption

Bob — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:46:46 +0000

Get Shareaholic

Ellen is a project manager in a small software development firm. She is well organized and enjoys working with people. She has enough of a technical background to connect with her team and excels in her management skills. Her boss, Jeri, is an idea person, very creative and tireless. Dedicated to the company and the mission, she is the heart of the organization.

Jeri and Ellen recognize their different strengths and styles and genuinely respect one another. The team, however, began complaining to Ellen that Jeri was driving them crazy. Jeri frequently interrupted tasks by floating ideas, asking seemingly random questions, and suggesting alternative ways of doing things. Individual team members felt put on the spot and often didn’t know how to respond. Was Jeri looking for them to give an opinion or make a decision? And where did Ellen fit into this? The general perception was that Jeri was indecisive, was not so subtlety undermining Ellen’s authority, and perhaps didn’t respect her. Ellen, too, was getting frustrated with Jeri.

As morale dropped, Ellen suggested to Jeri that some team building and communication training might be necessary. Although Jeri was reluctant, she deferred to Ellen’s judgment. Jeri hadn’t consciously experienced the negative morale but knew that Ellen was sensitive to others and was likely correct in her assessment.

What we discovered in the team workshop was that Jeri didn’t understand the effect she was having on the team. What had been the disruptive and random discussions she had initiated with team members were constructive to her. They had helped clarify her thinking and provided an important link for her with individuals on the team. She liked the one-on-one, thinking-out-loud conversations that connected her with the people she worked with. Jeri is naturally collaborative but hadn’t recognized her impact as an authority figure.

The team members hadn’t seen Jeri’s talk as brainstorming. The function of her discussion wasn’t clear, let alone the focus. Because Jeri is Ellen’s boss, the lines of authority were confused for the team, and individuals often wondered if they were getting different “orders” than those Ellen had given them.

From understanding the communication styles and purposes, we saw a need for a new group working structure to accommodate and support the differences. Jeri and Ellen began meeting daily, first thing, instead of weekly as they had been. These daily meetings were short and allowed Jeri to think out loud with Ellen about product development and to elicit from Ellen who on the team could help her with any specifics she needed. During the meeting, they could also address other work-flow processes and management or policy issues.

Clarifying impact, roles, and specific communication structures eased tension in the team. Jeri and Ellen worked together more closely, drawing on their strengths and establishing clearer boundaries for themselves and the team as they collaborated on decisions.

Get Shareaholic

Keeping Styles Fluid

Bob — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:28:19 +0000

Get Shareaholic

A recent question in the Communication Lab prompted the writing of this piece. The questioner was confused about how he “used” the interpersonal and intrapersonal components. He clearly sees himself as intrapersonally oriented, yet with his wife (also strongly intrapersonal), he is more talkative, much more interpersonally driven. Specifically, he initiates most of the let’s-sit-down-and-discuss-this requests, tries to share more about what he’s going through, and asks questions about her process. This caused him to question his understanding of the communication styles framework.

The communication components aren’t solid blocks arranged in an orderly and predictable fashion. Yes, they are building blocks in a sense, but they are more liquid than solid. They’re like muscles—some employed more often than others, perhaps, and all necessary to shape your communication style. We all employ the seven communication components whether we are aware of it or not. Our strengths, however, stand out in a way that makes them more consciously identifiable. In the situation described above the questioner easily identifies his intrapersonal component because it is so active and a part of his identity. Yet with his wife, he draws on his interpersonal component to foster connection and communication . . . and how wonderful that he does, or the risk of too much silence and distance could cause real emotional confusion and pain.

We can and do adapt our communication style to our relationships, and it’s important that we do. Often we do it in subtle, intuitive ways that we may not be aware of. This is very common in the workplace and can be related to the role one has and what the job requires. You may find it helpful—and interesting—to look at the communication requirements of your job and how they match your natural strengths. [There is an activity in the Communication Styles Workbook designed for that purpose.] This also gives you a good opportunity to see how your style may not work so well for you on the job, a topic I want to address in a future Thinking Out Loud piece.

How we use the components of our communication style ideally is a fluid process: strengths we employ at home and at work may be very different. Several people have commented that at home they tend to think out loud, whereas at work it wouldn’t be appropriate, and often the requirements of your job draw on a particular component to a degree that it might not be very active by the time you get home. Think, for example, of a massage therapist (kinesthetic component) who tires of making physical contact at work and doesn’t need or want much by the time s/he gets home.

The relationship always plays a role in how our communication style components configure. The communication style of the other person, the roles we are in, the setting and circumstances—all these factors influence how we express ourselves, although how we receive information stays largely the same.

Get Shareaholic