It’s been a while since I was on a group tour, so when I signed up for one, I expected the guide to shout information to the group like always. But in Detroit, I was pleasantly surprised to receive my own headset, which allowed me to hear the guide without straining and even let me control my volume. It made the tour much more enjoyable—and informative—since I could actually hear what was being said.
There is no need to (metaphorically) shout to your team either. Think of what tools will allow your message to actually be heard: technology, visuals, analogies, props, one-on-one, and repetition. Communication is only effective if people can receive it.
A sign at the Minute Man National Historical Park is a master class in obtaining actionable feedback. Instead of just asking for comments, the park provided a QR code for visitors to easily make submissions in three areas. The sign reads:
Minute Man National Historical Park belongs to the American people, and the National Park Service wants your feedback. Please let us know if you have identified (1) any areas that need repair; (2) any services that need improvement; or (3) any signs or other information that are negative about either past or living Americans, or that fail to emphasize the beauty, grandeur, and abundance of landscapes and other natural features.
How’s that for specific?
In a similar example, the school district task force I’m on is currently wrestling with wording for an online feedback form about proposed scenarios for facility use. The process has helped the group consider what it needs to learn, rather than just gathering opinions. It would be so much easier to say “give us your comments,” but asking about specific elements can hopefully provide insights that can advance the work.
It’s worth the time to consider what you actually want to know — and what you’ll do with information once you receive it — before deploying a generic form. Invest in the front end by articulating your questions, and you’ll save time by not having to weed through mere opinions on the back end.
One way to build confidence and get over the fear of rejection is to more intentionally track when you propose something and receive a “yes.”
You probably receive more approvals than you realize and focus only on the “no” answers. Instead, consider all these communications that could be denied, but when they aren’t, it’s a win.
Requesting help from a colleague.
Offering a suggestion at a meeting.
Giving feedback on an assignment.
Suggesting a revised timeline for a project.
Pitching an idea about where to go on vacation.
Requesting a variation from a policy.
Asking your housemate if they want to try a new restaurant.
Every idea or ask is an opportunity for rejection—but on the whole, I believe we receive many more agreements than denials. Don’t let your mind track only the negative responses.
In my Global Business Communication class, I required students to interview someone who had international experience. One student recounted the story his subject shared about villagers he encountered in Uganda who routinely eat with their hands. He summed it up this way: “First you have Culture Shock, then you have Judgment, and finally you reach Acceptance.”
It’s a useful framework for cross-cultural communication, but I believe it has broader implications for all types of change. People often have an initial shock reaction when they first learn of the action, and their immediate response may be negative as they dismiss the idea purely because it is a change. Once the new way settles in and people learn more about the idea, there is often acceptance (or at least not overt pushback).
There is so much change happening that it may be beneficial to work on derailing the above pattern to minimize the Shock and Judgment stages. Instead of being surprised when you encounter something new, come to expect it and approach the differences with curiosity. Just because something is not the way you would do it does not make it wrong.
It’s a temptation for high-performing people to say “yes” to the many requests sure to come their way. Others know these ambitious folks will get it done, and the performers know that, somehow, they will make it happen. To say “no” can feel like admitting that they aren’t as much of an achiever as the achiever identity they own.
But there is a difference between “can” and “should.” Maybe the high-performer can work late, be stressed, and put other priorities aside to accomplish the request, but the additional project is not the right one for the organization. Saying “no” doesn’t imply that you can’t; rather, it means you could but strategically choose not to.
There is also a distinction between “yes” and “when.” Perhaps the new request is valid, but it is not a priority. Before automatically agreeing, ask if there is flexibility in the timeline that better corresponds with the current workload and strategy. There may be no need to drop everything to accomplish it, just because the request is recent or from someone of importance.
Another option is to consider “who” before agreeing to a new assignment. Maybe your area is the right one to handle a project, but someone else in the area would be better suited. Consider whether you personally need to accomplish the work before automatically saying “yes” to the request.
Being a high performer allows you to feel good about producing an abundance of top-quality work, but instead of continually taking on more, learn to become more strategic in what you accept. Just because you can do it doesn’t mean it has to be now or by you. Ask “whether, when, and who” before automatically saying yes to preserve your energy and talents for the right projects.
When the Michigan Central Station renovation began, there was graffiti everywhere. If vandals could reach the space, it was covered in spray paint, so much so that photographers came from around the world to document the building as an example of urban blight.
As I wrote about in dot #5016, thanks to a vision and a billion dollars, the building has been restored to its former glory—all except for one corridor. There was a debate as to whether ALL the graffiti should be erased from view or whether a section should remain as a testament to the building’s history. After all, it was in that state for 30 years. Ultimately, it was decided that one section would remain.
Before you erase everything in a transformation or renovation process, consider whether something should be left behind. Maybe a piece is left in its original state. Perhaps something is incorporated into a historical display, or showcased in before-and-after photos. Preservation efforts not only share your history, but also make your progress tangible for all to see.
The Radical Candor company conducted a study that codified what we all intuitively know: “direct and respectful feedback is not the norm.” Even though leaders say they want honest communication, employees do not feel safe giving it. As a result, too much goes unsaid that could be helpful to the individual and the organization.
In addition to a culture that lacks psychological safety, people don’t have the skills to provide actionable feedback in ways that can actually be heard and absorbed by the recipient. Too often, people use mitigating language that downplays their meaning; they send a mixed message by sandwiching the correction between positives, or they are so vague that the listener doesn’t understand what needs to change.
In all my classes, from undergraduate to graduate, whether about culture, business, interpersonal communication, organizational communication, or stakeholder engagement, I always have a module on giving feedback. It is a necessary skill to deliver course corrections, and the ability to do it persuasively and with grace will help people succeed.
Feedback is not the “f-word.” It’s a data point that can help align expectations and deliver desired outcomes that benefit everyone. Practice giving clear feedback in low-stakes situations to build your confidence and proficiency for when it truly counts.
I received an offer in the mail for a 4-night hotel stay in Orlando for $299. It’s even in my own private villa and with a $100 gift card to the Planet Hollywood restaurant.
I also received an email from someone offering to help me write and publish my book because he “genuinely sees something special in my content and career.”
I’m reminded of that old Memorex commercial where they played a song recorded on their audio tape and asked: “Is it real, or is it Memorex?” I ask myself the same question when I receive unsolicited offers that pique my interest. Maybe it’s because I have been conditioned to be skeptical, but I’m hesitant to commit to something that seems suspiciously good.
I’m not the only one filled with doubt while reading your messages. Especially in an election year, when politicians are prone to promise without any regard to the truth, it’s important that you provide sources, a way to follow up, and explanations for any claims.
It sounds good to be working on a book while poolside, but how to know whether either offer is legit.
I have watched with great interest the road construction happening near me this summer. The crews are installing a roundabout on the main thoroughfare and have managed to keep both directions open while they do it. I’m sure that’s no small feat — or small expense — as they had to lay a temporary road to expand the shoulder for traffic, then dig it up when it was time to construct the permanent road and do it again on the other side. But the extra efforts have paid off, and the inconvenience has been minor given the scope of the project.
I think there is a parallel to communication. It’s important to keep the lanes open, even when it’s challenging to do so. Yes, it’s easier to close off any input streams and make the decision yourself, but keeping the lines of communication open is worth the effort. You may have to backtrack or create new ways of sharing your message, but it’s much better than closing off the flow entirely.
It would be easier for the workers to fully close the road and do the construction, just as it would be easier to ignore a conflict with someone and close the communication channels. But you want to keep the exchange flowing, even when it’s messy or difficult to sustain that forward motion. Do the work to keep things open.
One of my colleagues astutely pointed out that it is easier to get riled up against something than it is to speak out for something. If things are going well, people tend to say, “Of course, I support it,” and think that showing up to demonstrate that support is unnecessary or obvious, thus giving the loud voices more air. It’s true for public meetings and organizational ones as well.
Better that we give explicit support to the ideas and issues that we believe are good, even if those are the ones in place now. Small pockets of dissent start to feel like a majority view when there is no counterbalancing narrative.
It is unfair to rely on others to be our voice and unwise to let the opposition dominate. Don’t wait until it is a heated debate to make your views known.
