Employee Needs, Silent Communication, and What To Do

Silent Communication appears to be an oxymoron.

It's not.

Silence communicates powerfully. But because it's, uh, silent, the interpretation is left to the recipient.

Is that what we really want?

Dr. Robyn McMaster gets credit for starting this conversation with How Do You Respond To The Silent Treatment?

From her brain-based expertise, she notes:

"When you doubt and feel anxious, cortisol, a chemical hormone literally floods your brain and nervous system. And, it throws you into a tizzy so you do not think clearly."

Which means that silence causes confusion. But we don't like confusion. So we add our own meaning to the silence in order to reach a state of equilibrium. However, Robin's insight shows that our mental state at that time is actually weakened, so that our conclusions may prove to be less than ideal.

Silence doesn't cause a vacuum so much as it does an irrational mental spiral. That's a formula for trouble in any setting.

Making Someone Disappear and Re-Appear

The act of making a suggestion or comment--then being greeted with total silence--can be insidious. Why? It communicates that a person's very existence isn't being acknowledged. It's very different than the impact of "Gee, I don't know if that idea will work or not" or "Let me think about that."

The second shows relational acknowledgment and engagement and can be built upon. The first discounts one's being.

If your 'hearing" silence, ask this: "Help me understand whether my (comment, suggestion) is a questionable one or are you thinking about it?"

Getting the conversation going again--even if the answer is "I think the idea stinks"--is better for the soul than being deemed non-existent. And can probably lead to an actual productive conversation.

What if We...

...began intentionally teaching about the impact of silence?

I confess that after years of leading seminars and workshops I only address the issue when it arises as a question. More often than not, it's in a consulting situation rather than in the classroom.

What I've learned from hearing myself write is that it's time to become purposeful about silence, communication, and what it means, to one's self and others.

Makes sense to me. What do you think?

Related articles you might like:

• Workplace Conversations Can Mean Workplace Security

• You, We, I--Relate and Communicate

• Great Communicating Thoughts from Bert Decker

Comments

[Robyn]

Hi Steve, after your thoughtful comment on my site, you helped me consider it in a very different way and my noodle's stirred ever since. You'll see another perspective.

What I am enjoying here is the way conversations lead to deeper thought. Where once we may have tunneled down to bring out one issue, it helps to go several different directions.

Thanks for adding your brilliance to my post!

[Scott M]

I recently had a manager that did this. He would always wait a beat before responding to anything I said.

Anything!

It got so bad that I avoided talking to him. When I did, I forced myself to NOT try to fill in the silence with additional comments.

I could never determine if he did it on purpose as a sort of psychological ploy (to see what else I would blurt out) or if he was simply unaware of it.

Does anyone out there do this on purpose? If so, why?

[Steve Roesler]

Robyn,

Agreed. It is amazing how a certain topic can lead to digging deeper and deeper about it. This seems to be one such topic.

I'm enjoying it because it combines an easily understandable brain-based explanation with very do-able, practical solutions and responses for both parties.

Talk about a win-win!

[Steve Roesler]

Hi, Scott,

Well, there indeed are people who are purposeful about that silent pause. What we can't be sure of is the intent. The only way to understand that is to describe the impact it's having and ask, in an inviting way, if the person is aware of it and can you agree on a little change in the approach.

Here's the thing.

There are many people who receive listening skills training because they "talk over" other people. One of the techniques they learn is to count to 10 before responding. If it helps the person actually listen better, you'll probably know it. And that's good. If they only remember to count, it doesn't add much!

Certainly there are people out there who enjoy gamesmanship in interactions. But they often do a number of other crazy-making things, too. So, you usually have more than one indicator to confirm their actual intentions.

We can all have one or two habits that are annoying to others. Unless someone cares enough to calmly explain to us what the real impact is, there's not much chance of us understanding that we have to a change.

It's a genuine sign of caring because it requires an emotional investment and some relational risk.

Yet the payoff may be well worth the risk!

Thanks, Scott...

[David Zinger]

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...I hear the space between the notes.

[peter vajda]

some folks are comfortable with silence; some, not so much. Much of one's reactivity to silence as an adult stems from one's initial experience with silence as a child...some households were more silent, where reflective time was part of the process; silence was OK; others were rampant with noise; some folks were allowed time to think; others were made to feel thay had to respond immediately; some learned to think that "If I delay or am silent, well I must be off/stupid etc. in some way"; others, just the opposite;

lots here; the bottom line for me is asking my self consciously, "What story am I making up?" in the space of the silence, about the silence? What's underneath my reactivity? Is this story the truth? How can/do I know?" For me, it's as much about the emotional component as the mental/brain component.

Silence is not to be avoided, just allowed to be what it is; it's one's reactivity to silence that deserves deeper exploration and inquiry.

[Steve Roesler]

David,

Just turn down the volume on your iPod.

[Steve Roesler]

Hi, Peter,

You know, this is one of those areas of relationships and communication that really is, in a certain manner, an oxymoron:

In order to learn more about another's silence, we have to invite them to talk about it.

A personal example might best illustrate this.

When someone gives me a bit of information or fills me in briefly on something factual, I usually don't respond overtly if it's not something that (I think) requires dialog. Especially if it's something very simple. This caused my wife great consternation at times and we still have discussions about it. She feels that acknowledgment of some overt sort (even a grunt) is need to fulfill the relational aspect of information sharing.

So your insight regarding the exploration of one's reactivity to silence is, indeed, an important one.

Thank you...