• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Laura walked up to Carrie and began talking about something as if they had been interrupted a few minutes earlier and were simply continuing the conversation. In fact, it was the first time they had seen each other at work that day, so Carrie had no idea what Laura was referring to.

This pattern is familiar to Carrie because it happens frequently, and when it does she always says, “Wait, Laura, I’m not sure what you’re talking about.”  Laura, too, is frustrated by this pattern and says, “You know . . . the project we were working on last week.” Of course it doesn’t take them long to get on the same page, but the pattern annoys and frustrates them both.

In situations like this it is common to attribute some kind of negative motivation to the other person. Given this pattern, Laura believes that Carrie wants to feel important by controlling the conversation; and Carrie sees Laura as presumptuous and sloppy in her communication.

Fortunately, Laura and Carrie began to see this pattern differently through the communication styles lens as we fleshed out their core processing strengths during a team-building project in the workplace. Here’s what happened:

Laura discovered how her core processing strengths—interpersonal, visual-spatial, and kinesthetic—combined to drive her unique communication style.  Specifically, Laura needs a lot of interaction with others to help formulate her thoughts and feelings. Therefore she frequently seeks engagement with others and because she thinks so strongly in pictures she spends a lot of time connected to her internal visual-spatial world, which, of course, is invisible to others and hard to describe in words. Because she is also kinesthetically strong, her direct experience and feelings are very important in how she processes information.

When Laura was describing her core processing strengths and how she sees them manifesting in her communication style, Carrie had an ah-ha moment and with good humor said, “Oh, now I get it!”  “Get what?” Laura asked.

Carrie found a kind, yet straightforward way to talk about her observation that Laura often starts talking about something in a way that feels like it’s coming out of the blue. Laura immediately chuckled and made a comment about how she could tell that Carrie was often annoyed with her. From there Laura articulated how she has constant conversations in her head and strongly pictures the interaction, her feelings and ideas, so when she sees someone (Carrie in this situation), she assumes a level of involvement externally that has been going on internally.

This type of conversation happens frequently during communication styles programs, and often with good humor. When what is really occurring gets illuminated, a natural problem-solving and relationship repair discussion ensues.  That happened naturally with Laura and Carrie. They decided that when Carrie can’t tell what Laura is referring to she (Carrie) will ask Laura what she’s picturing. With this simple solution, they can now quickly and efficiently manage conversations, where formerly they would have felt frustrated and irritated, even when they managed the content of the conversation to a workable conclusion.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Jacob has a neurological disorder that makes sustained attention difficult for him. He often leaves a conversation that is obviously not finished, which can be disconcerting and confusing to others. His roommate, Bill, has tried to give Jacob verbal clues and direction to keep him better focused, but this didn’t always work. Although Bill understands what’s going on, it’s frustrating for him. At times, he feels like Jacob’s parent, or worse it seems to him that Jacob is self-centered and uncaring, which Bill knows is not the case.

Words are important and we rely on them to achieve meaning and structure to our experience. Words, however, are only one form of structure to help give us direction. When Bill, Jacob, and I talked about the problems they were experiencing in their communication patterns, we decided to take a different approach to structure.

Rather than Bill only giving Jacob verbal cues, we decided to add practical visual, kinesthetic, and logical cues. For example, when they need to talk about something important, they sit at the kitchen table in designated chairs.  Prior to sitting, they put a blue table cloth (only used for this purpose) on the table, construct an agenda attached to a clip board, and make tea. They use the same routine each time they have these talks.

By literally setting the table with the same items (visual and kinesthetic reminders) and creating an agenda (logical) where they can check off items, they create patterns and structures to give Jacob multiple clues to help anchor his attention. Oh, and it is Jacob’s job to cross off items on the clip board as the conversation progresses, so he knows where they are in the process of discussion. This also gives him something tangible to do.

This type of structure has helped Jacob and Bill have extended conversations that are more satisfying to both of them. It does not fully compensate for Jacob’s attention difficulties, but it does give them both more structure and opportunity to collaborate on the process and content of their conversations, which helps them feel more connected.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

The Communication Styles Framework illuminates how you process information and, therefore, interact with others. The seven processing dimensions (or components, as they are called) combine differently for each individual to form a unique communication style. All seven are active ingredients in each individual, but two or three are most easily identified (Core Processing Strengths).

Other communication styles paradigms are based on personality, roles, and/or gender. These approaches look more broadly at factors that influence specific behaviors, for example, being passive, assertive, steadfast, or compliant. Introversion and extroversion are, perhaps, the most common traits.

While it is useful to be aware of these roles and personality factors, they are general and so don’t offer specific information about the underlying drivers of our communication. The CS Framework, however, does identify those underlying drivers and offers specific tools to help insure successful communication.

Here’s a personal example: I am of an introvert, yet my core processing strength is the Interpersonal Component, which combines with my auditory and kinesthetic processing strengths. This means that I seek engagement with others (thinking out loud) and rely strongly on how the message sounds and feels. Others hearing this description may have a hard time making sense of it. It’s my unique understanding of how I go about processing information, expressing myself, and listening to others. Because there are as many communication styles as there are individuals, stereotyping or pigeonholing is futile.

Although the CS Framework is based on individual strengths, it also helps us understand how our strengths can get us into trouble.  Overemphasizing a strength without recognizing that others may not have the same strength has the potential for derailing communication.  For me that might take the form of expecting too much engagement from others because I have such a strong interpersonal component to my communication style.

Finally, it’s also a good idea to challenge yourself by focusing on a less developed component (for me that would be either the logical or visual-spatial) to see what you notice.  This will broaden your self understanding and encourage you to be more aware of how others experience communication, both expressively and receptively.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Carl is 41 and works as a project manager for a construction company. He’s a hands-on guy who likes his work and likes to play. He surfs, skis, hikes, enjoys good wine and sings in two different groups. His core processing strengths are intrapersonal, kinesthetic, and visual-spatial. Of course he has his own unique incorporation of these attributes forming the foundation of his processing/communication style.

In counseling, Carl was concerned about stress in his life because he was recently diagnosed with an unusual disorder caused by elevated stress hormones. If the stress hormone levels remained consistently high enough, he would sustain permanent damage to one of his bodily organs.

So, we talked about the stressors in his life. He was single, tired of dating, and wanted to settle down. Pressures at work were high because of the recession and shortage of construction projects. Carl’s younger brother had drug abuse problems and was going through a particularly bad time. All of these matters troubled Carl and he worked hard to put them out of his mind.

Carl had always been healthy, worked out regularly, ate and slept well. He had a few close friends, men he went hiking, skiing, and surfing with. Carl was open emotionally, had good communication skills, and shared his hard times with friends. He looked forward to counseling and was motivated to deal with the stresses in his life. He liked trying to figure things out and learn more about himself, but he was also scared because of his troubling medical condition.

Recognizing that Carl had a strong kinesthetic component, I decided to help him focus more on the sensations in his body and less on words and concepts. We did some basic relaxation and imagery exercises to focus and tune into the body. As I was guiding Carl through this process, I asked him to locate the place in his body where he could experience the stress hormones, which he did. Then he practiced calming and intensifying them by moving an imaginary lever on the arm of the chair.  He pulled back on the lever to lower the stress level and pushed it forward to increase the stress.

This was exciting for Carl as he felt more hopeful working with his body than trying to talk his way out of this difficult situation. He practiced each day getting into a relaxed state, tuning into the “area of the stress hormones,” and toning them down. After a couple of weeks of regular practice, Carl was tuning into this process automatically during the day, managing to keep his stress hormones “quieter.” Within a few weeks, his body began to heal and at his next check up with the doctor he was in complete remission.

Working through the kinesthetic/visual-spatial and intrapersonal pathways helped Carl get direct access to a healing process not accessible to words, logic or interpersonal engagement.  The Communication Styles Framework helps us tune into our natural language and illuminates that pathway.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Geraldine gets annoyed with Joseph because he narrates what he’s doing or about to do. For example, if he says, “I’m going to the kitchen and get some crackers,” Geraldine might respond, “Why do you need to tell me that? Are you looking for permission or do you think it’s of interest to me?” “Oh, I don’t know,” he says. . . . They’ve had this conversation many times and Joseph feels like he’s doing something wrong, but he’s always done this. So why does he announce what’s he’s doing?

Joseph and I explored this question, and he wondered if there was some deeper psychological issue: Did one of his parents do this when he was growing up? Did he need permission because he is so lacking in confidence?  Is he so self-centered that he believes people are interested in his every move? You can probably see where this is going. None of these hypotheses had any merit.

Finally Joseph said, “I do it for myself. I’m not really talking to anyone else.  There’s something about hearing that organizes me.” “What do you mean by ‘organizes’?” I asked. Joseph then went on to describe how hearing the story is grounding and keeps him focused. He is a musician and song writer. He hears and feels the rhythm and melody in words. His experiences become organized by telling and hearing the story, something that can be hard for others to understand.

When Joseph shared his insight with Geraldine she understood better, and because she knows Joseph so well it made sense to her. But that doesn’t mean she isn’t annoyed when he announces what he’s doing. The difference now is that she doesn’t load it with inaccurate meaning as she once had. And now Joseph is more aware of it, so he can sometimes curtail it and often uses humor by rapping his actions or singing á la opera.

Using the communications styles lens to better understand our behavior and that of others doesn’t mean all troubled feelings disappear into happiness. This understanding, however, does help to unload the inaccurate, psychological meaning we’ve given behaviors, putting them in a context that allows us to interact with others more flexibly and with greater compassion.

There’s a tag to Joseph’s story. . . . While coming to understand the reasons for his narratives, he realized Geraldine’s routine of inefficiently wending her way through a parking lot to find a parking space, a behavior that drives him nuts, was routed in her not-so-strong visual-spatial skill. Joseph can size up the visual field in an instant, easily knowing how to navigate it but  Geraldine cannot. The visual field is hard for her to immediately make sense of. Understanding this has helped Joseph relax and realize that it’s not important that it takes Geraldine longer to find a parking place. Whatever meaning he had given this behavior in the past evaporated and we had a good chuckle over it.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

As often happens when teaching the Communication Styles Framework, someone will spontaneously say, “Oh, I just realized something I’d never thought of before.” This happened recently during a workshop with a management group.

The discussion centered on how differently we organize our workspaces, which was actually a side discussion that began when one member expressed frustration from having a messy desk. A coworker remarked that she has a messy desk, too, but “I know where everything is and can easily put my hands on whatever I’m looking for.” Someone else chimed in that she can usually picture right where she puts things.

I commented that my visual memory is poor, so I have shelves or a counter to spread out on, eliminating piles. If something is in a pile, I won’t remember it’s there. With shelves or a counter, I need to scan each item to remember I have it.

The most interesting comment, however, came from Lucien (not his real name, of course). “I remember where I put something by feeling where I put it.” As he said this he mimed with his arms moving in different directions, placing papers in different locations in space. “It’s kind of a muscle memory,” he continued. “I can’t see where I put it, but I know where it is because I remember the actual movement of putting it there.” There was a quiet pause as we all absorbed this new information.

In my usual articulate manner when something like this occurs, I said, “Wow, that’s so cool” . . . Seriously, I probably did say something like that because I’d never heard that from anyone and I hear many unusual comments in similar group meetings around the framework. Paying attention to these seemingly quirky observations is important. They are clues to our processing modalities and, therefore, our communication styles.

Lucien is strongly kinesthetic and a doer. He learns by gaining knowledge through direct experience and can seem impulsive, thoughtless, or foolish.  Now that his coworkers better understand his processing style, they are less likely to judge him and more likely to find constructive ways to interact with him when he does dive right into something.

Our discussion that day led directly into recounting a past experience (with good humor) when Lucien did something that seemed impulsive and ended up being embarrassing but was really part of his need to gain knowledge from direct experience. As the group revisited the incident and put it in a different (more accurate) context, they automatically began talking about how they all could have handled it differently. Recognizing Lucien’s need for direct experience also led to discussing how creative he is and how well he thinks on his feet. His taking direct action and adapting as needed afterward certainly suits him well—and usually benefits the whole management team.

By identifying Lucien’s strengths and how those strengths can also get him into trouble, this team engaged in a discussion that brought them greater understanding about themselves and each other. Without making judgments, they put past observations in a new context, which allows them to better support one another, problem-solve more creatively, and collaborate more productively.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

My brother is a math whiz, has a strong logical mind, and once said, “I use the language of logic and math to communicate what I see in the visual-spatial realm.” Of course I was intrigued and had an intuitive sense of what he was describing but it’s so far from my personal experience that I was also baffled.

Working with management teams in businesses and organizations, I’ve often encountered people in finance who remind me of my brother, and recently I heard a description of processing in the logical and visual-spatial realms that was especially illuminating and intriguing. While talking about his role and confusion about communicating effectively with others in the organization, the CFO said, “I think in spread sheets, only they’re three dimensional. I can picture the numbers but more importantly see how they connect to the different areas of the organization, how they all relate to each other.” This was a bit of a show stopper for the team members.

What was he really saying? He understands the bigger picture around the finances of the organization because he can visualize how everything relates through money. He sees these numerical relationships in three dimensions.

Because no one else in the room does that, the CFO needs to find a way to communicate his ideas about finances in a way the others can understand. How to do that became a collaborative, trial and error process, and this in itself—discussing what everyone needed to achieve understanding—became a team-building activity.

Collaboration around the Communication Styles Framework is by its nature non-threatening. The conversation that evolved for this team was as important as the solutions they discovered because the discovery process taught them about each other within a problem-solving paradigm that they can replicate in other situations. This type of problem-solving most often results in durable and transferable solutions, so when another complex situation arises that requires good communication, they can draw on this experience to guide them to success.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Robin has a small landscape design firm with three employees. Barry, the oldest of the three has ten years experience, is very talented, and wants to buy the business from Robin, who is getting close to retirement. The other two employees are younger and in the novice phase of their careers.

Robin respects Barry, seeing him as hard working, sincere, and ambitious without being driven. Although Robin also genuinely likes Barry, he’s never been able to establish the kind of rapport he’d like. He wishes the two of them could have very open, heart to heart type discussions, but his attempts at getting closer leave him feeling awkward and out of synch.

Through the communication styles lens, Robin is an external, spontaneous processor (thinking out loud). He is genuinely friendly and enjoys talking with others. He uses his hands a lot for self-expression and often refers to images and feelings in a poetic style.

Contrasting that, Barry is more of an internal processor, needing to think through his feelings and ideas (intrapersonal) to formulate thoughts and positions before meaningful engagement with others. He makes lists throughout the day, quantifies times and tasks naturally, and has a very reasoned (logical) approach to his life and communication.

Observing their processing/communication patterns, it became apparent that Robin was trying to engage spontaneously with Barry, popping into his office and quickly running something by him for an opinion or just to share information or find out how Barry was doing. Barry’s reserved responses frustrated Robin, and at times he felt rebuffed and hurt.

Robin tried to confront this pattern head on by asking Barry if something was wrong between them. Barry seemed confused and rattled by Robin’s question, which caused more awkwardness . . . and of course, Robin then began drawing varied conclusions: Barry is having problems at home with his “controlling” wife, Barry doesn’t trust or respect Robin, Barry is withdrawn and depressed, etc.

It’s hard not to draw psychological conclusions based on the above observations, yet there is another way of approaching the communication patterns Robin observed. My first suggestion was based on the assumption that Barry is stronger intrapersonally and Robin stronger interpersonally.  Therefore if Robin pops into Barry’s office, he should request a mutually satisfactory time for them to talk and let Barry know what the agenda is, so Barry can have an opportunity to think about it ahead of time. My second suggestion was for Robin to organize his visual-spatial pictures in a logical format (list, task flow, etc.) so Barry, with his logical approach, could quickly understand them.

These two adjustments had immediate positive results. Although Robin likes the idea of being spontaneous and free wheeling in his conversation, it doesn’t work for Barry. Giving Barry time to prepare and creating some order around the discussion allows both of them to be more open and communicative. The structure frees them to connect better emotionally and have some spontaneous conversation, as well.

Thinking about and accounting for style differences first, offers a straightforward opportunity for problem-solving before delving into the potential psychological and emotional roadblocks. The sequence matters.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Seven-year-old Willie was having trouble on the playground with Dylan. Every time they played together, they fought, and it had reached the point that just approaching each other resulted in bad feelings and conflict of one sort or another. Their parents tried to encourage them to simply avoid each other. Although this seemed like a straightforward solution because each boy acknowledged not liking the other, it just didn’t work. Their teacher, Ms. Comstyle, tried talking with the boys individually and together without success. The principal even intervened, which did have an effect . . . short term. Needless to say, everyone was frustrated.

Then Ms. Comstyle focused her communication styles lens and realized that Willie has very strong visual-spatial skills, so she devised a new plan taking this into account. She asked Willie to picture a big red stop sign, which he could easily do. Next she had him picture Dylan walking toward him on the playground. Finally, she asked Willie to picture the stop sign between him and Dylan. Each step was easy for Willie: he was very good at picturing and enjoyed the details.

Willie worked with Ms. Comstyle every day for a week, picturing the scene with the stop sign between him and Dylan. The following week without being told to do so, Willie reported excitedly to his teacher (and then later to his parents) that he kept himself away from Dylan on the playground because he could picture a big, red stop sign that reminded him to stop and go in the other direction.

I’ve coached many teachers to think about a child’s communication style strengths when figuring out ways to solve a problem academically or socially. Focusing on strengths, when a lot of attention has already been paid to weaknesses, shifts attention and allows for more creative problem-solving. In this case, it gave Willie a new tool to work with as he grows and develops.

• Share this on del.icio.us
• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on LinkedIn
• Email this to a friend?
• Stumble upon something good? Share it on StumbleUpon
• Tweet This!

Justin worked hard to stay connected to his team. He interacted daily with each of the six members whether he needed to or not. It was just his way—make pleasant conversation to keep things friendly, ask personal questions about member’s kids or vacations, and keep up to the minute on project details. No one doubted Justin’s motives. They knew his heart was in the right place, that he wanted everyone to get along and cared about doing everything well. But . . . they all found him annoying, and it was beginning to erode the overall positive working environment.

The owner of the small marketing agency where Justin works began to notice the tension and tried to find out what was going on. The team’s quality of work was good; that wasn’t the issue. She discovered, however, that there were no weak links in the team and everyone basically liked their roles and what they did, so she concluded that it was a personality conflict between Justin and his team and recommended communication training to help them learn how to discuss these personality conflicts.

When we illuminated the communication styles differences of team members, some things were immediately clear. Justin’s way of continuously interacting reflected his strong interpersonal nature, naturally causing friction with the four members who were more intrapersonally oriented. Just identifying that difference cut down on some of the conflict.

More interestingly though, Justin also discovered that his strong visual-spatial orientation manifested in a way he had not recognized before. “My mind pictures spirals,” he said. “There are spirals  connecting to spirals, and I pick up data from other people and attach it to one or more spirals that I naturally visualize. It’s how I think and organize my mind—and of course no one else realizes what I’m doing because it’s invisible.”

Following up with the team, we made other important discoveries. Two team members have strong logical components to their processing/communication styles and organize information in sequence on a timeline. One of them said, “You mean everyone doesn’t do that?”—a serious and rhetorical question.

What happened next was actually great fun and energizing for the team. Justin placed a large sheet of paper in the middle of the table and sketched his internal spirals, attaching words and symbols signifying the data he had gathered from a recent project. Another team member drew a time line and organized his data along the line. Others participated by making various markings to connect information from the spirals and the timeline.

The spontaneous and creative solution that emerged for this once-struggling team was natural and exciting—and not at all a conflict of personalities.  Recognizing exactly how our strongest communication style components manifest often creates pathways to group problem-solving and team
building.