orgcomania

One of my favorite "theoretical" observations is that communication is "a taken-for-granted" activity. Most of the time most of us communicate with no need to think about our communication at all. We ask questions, give answers, take turns, and generally get involved in conversations with no need to think about what is happening. Imagine if every time you were in a conversational situation you had to think about what you were going to say. I don't know what conversations would sound like but it wouldn't be the way they sound now. For the most part we say thank goodness it is so easy. Given the large percentage of our time that is invested in communicating, human interaction would grind to a halt if it were a necessarily thoughtful experience.

On the other hand, however, the mindlessness of communication has its drawbacks as well. Because we can communicate reasonably well without thinking, we often forgo the opportunity to be highly effective through mindfulness. To be mindfull, as communication practice, means to recognize that we face constant choices in what we say or don't say and in how we say what we say. Being mindful means recognizing that in even the most mundane conversational acts we are making choices. Being mindful is not a simple process. It is not possible to simply flip the "mindful" switch and begin being mindful in our communication. Being mindful is a process of communicating. It is something that must be learned and practiced. To be mindful means making a choice to be engaged in all conversations and to monitor what you are saying and what others are saying to you. The textbook talks about phatic communication and scripts. The mindful communicator certainly doesn't completely eliminate scripts and phatic communication. The mindful communicator does, however, make a choice to use scripts or communicate phatically. The non-mindful communicator is not even aware he or she is using scripts or phatic communication. The bottom line is that to receive the payoff that comes from being a mindful communicator one must choose to work hard at communicating. One must choose to work hard at staying mindful even in communication that can easily be accomplished mindlessly. It's a big challenge but one that pays off handsomely in effective communication for those who make the committment.

To put the issue of mindfulness into a larger framework, I believe we live in a time when thinking is discouraged. We are surrounded by authoritarian messages that reach conclusions for us. In the civic, commercial, and religious realms experts provide us with prefigured conclusions ready to adopt without thinking. The messages from the authorities in all of these areas come to us slickly packaged and wrapped in emotional appeals making it easy to consume them whole without any mental processing. "News" broadcasters offer us pre-formed opinions and reduce debate to off-putting shouting and screaming. The thoughtful consideration of opposing views is never modeled, let alone advocated. Consideration of issues is always put in a "my way or the highway" form. There is no suggestion that there even is a middle ground let alone that one could be or should be created. Commercial messages have blurred information and persuasion to such an extent that it is difficult to even find information presented without a desired end. Product placement and issues management have completely blurred the line between advertisement and content. Identifications appeals are so flawlessly constructed that people advertise for products without even realizing they are advertising. Even religion has pushed followers to be less and less aware of the thoughtful theology behind beliefs. Around the world, religions are becoming more fundamentalist and less ecumenical as they, too, adopt a "my way or the highway" perspective. Twenty or thirty years ago the greater religious movement was to find similarities at the core of belief and for religions to emphasize the common concerns that crossed religious boundaries. Now, it seems, the major religious movements are driven by the desire to use their definitions of what is right or true to condem those with other beliefs. In all three of these areas, the value of thinking, of thoughtful consideration of alternatives, seems to be pushed more and more to the sidelines. Increasingly we hear the skeptic, the person who thoughtfully considers alternative views, ridiculed or reviled being anti- this or anti- that. The growing tendency seems to be to offer dichotomies and suggest that there is no middle ground for thoughtful consideration. The president's well publicized "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists" dichotomy was one recent example. The recent presidential campaign was an extended case study in either-or thinking being offered as the only way to approach issues.

From this perspective, the material on mindfulness and integrity is a small manifestation of a much larger societal issue. I challenge you to realize that you are the makers of society. It's cliche perhaps, but your generation will be the next to decided what type of world we live in. Don't give up on thinking. It may not be popular but it's the best hope we humans have!!

Not everything that an organization does is about communication. There are organizational problems that are not communication problems. A good business degree undoubtedly offers insight into organizational function that a communication degree does not. The opposite is also true. It is important for those of us (i.e. you) who are students of communication (I'd go so far as to say communication scholars but I don't want to scare you) to use all that we know about communication to make the relationships and small groups in organizations work to their maximum efficiency and effectiveness. What this chapter stresses is that it is also important to use what we've learned about communication to maximize the communication of the organization itself. I am amazed at the number of times that an organization sends out messages that directly contradict the way the organization wants people to interact with it. We are uniquely able to see these places where there is a mismatch between organizational message and organizational intent.

Here is my example of a tale with a happy ending that begins with a mismatch between an organization and an intent that is very important to it. Back in the days before I had braces I was one of those people who was, to put it mildy, dentally challenged. I have spent much of my adult life working with dentists in the various cities I lived in to save my teeth. With incredibly crooked and crowded teeth it was very difficult for me to keep them up. Several dentists said that my teeth were so bad there was no way I could even have braces. I was determined to figure out a way to get braces and kept taking care of my teeth the best I could. After several root canals, painful periodontic work, and other difficult dental procedures I had grown to really dislike the who idea of seeing a dentist. So here's the story. I visited a dentist office in Salt Lake City one summer. I'd not been to this dentist before and went with some fear. After I got to the office, got checked in and finally saw the dentist I had, for me, what was an unexpected and pleasant experience. The dentists (a husband and wife team) were incredibly caring and sensitive. They were developing a practice that specialized in dentistry for children but it was evident that they truly understood how unpleasant an experience with the dentist can be and went far beyond the extra mile to make the experience as positive and productive as possible. I still remember that they let me choose from about eight flavors of topical anesthetic to put on to numb the gums before they injected novacaine. The dentist laughed that they had so many flavors because it really made a difference to the kids that they could choose a flavor. I laughed too but was secretly thankful that I had found such sensitive dentists.

After they had finished with the dental work we had an opportunity to talk (they were used to listening to people talk with half their mouth novacained up, fortunately) and they asked me what I did. When I told them I taught organizational communication they asked me how their organization communicated. I told them I thought they did a really good job but one thing had been interesting to me. While they clearly were concerned about their patients I told them that I had noticed that the first paperwork you filled out was the insurance and financial responsibility paperwork. After you had completed that you got to the paperwork where you shared your dental history and the problem you were having. I told them that normally it wouldn't have struck me but that it was so different than all the other messages I was getting that it really stood out to me. I had good health care coverage so it wasn't an issue with me but it did seem inconsistent. Many, if not most, organizations would have dismissed this as too small of a matter to worry about. After all, my impression was overwhelmingly favorable. A tribute to these dentists is they took it very seriously. They hadn't even considered that their clipboard with forms communicated a message. I assured them that it wasn't a big deal but that "one cannot, not communicate." (Yes, I used that in the conversation!)

The bottom line is that when I came in several weeks later for my follow up appointment I noticed right away that the paperwork on the clipboards at the front desk had been changed. The form that asked you to describe the reason for your visit was on top, the dental history was second, and the financial forms were on the bottom. That was my last visit to that dentist as I moved back to Texas for the new school year. I have remembered them very clearly (this visit was over ten years ago) and I'm sure they've done very well. To me they embody a concern for organizational communication that truly shapes the organization and, ultimately, helps the organization succeed.

What do you think?