by Steve Adubato, PhD
When we communicate, we often confuse quantity with quality. We obsess over “how much” we cover in a meeting or “how many points” we review in a conversation or sales presentation. We obsess over having as much information as possible in our PowerPoint presentations because we confuse “data dumps” with truly effective, engaging and relevant communication.
Consider the case of Jim Smith, who was recently leading a critically important sales meeting with his senior team that was facing serious challenges in the marketplace. Sales were down, the company was getting too many rejections, and they were losing existing clients. Simply put, things were moving in the wrong direction and Jim wanted to confront these problems and identify tangible solutions.
Going in, he prepared six bullet points that he wanted to cover. Yet, it quickly became clear that the first item—“What are the biggest reasons why we are losing business?”—was generating tremendous intensity and a heated discussion. That question introduced several other related issues having to do with the way individual sales people were approaching prospects, as well as existing clients. Were they pitching too hard and not listening enough? Were they not identifying specific needs and challenges facing clients? What were competitors doing to make the connection with clients and prospects that we weren’t? The questions and issues continued as Jim facilitated the discussion.
After about 30 minutes, one sales manager named Bob Jones interjected saying; “We’ve been on this topic for half an hour. Isn’t it time we moved to the next agenda item?” At that point, Jim responded; “But Bob, can’t you see how important this is? This first agenda item is at the core of all of our issues. If we don’t address this, then nothing else matters." Somewhat agitated, Bob responded; “But Jim, how long are we going to talk about this? I feel like we are not making any progress. I vote we just move to the next item.” Which, ultimately, the team agreed to, in spite of Jim's reluctance.
There are several communication lessons here. The biggest is that our meetings are too often packed with agenda items that we attempt to cover, instead of better understand or debate. Further, many professionals measure the effectiveness of a meeting or any communication situation from a quantitative perspective. It’s just like in a college or high school when a teacher is more concerned about “how much he covers” as opposed to what extent he is understood.
Just because you said it doesn’t mean they understand. Our view of communication is too often one-way driven. We measure ourselves based on how much we say when we should be focusing more on audience-centered communication. What did they take away? How can they use this information? How relevant is it to them? What are THEY going to do now?
In the sales meeting described above, the team should have focused only on the first agenda item/question, and then generated specific actions tied to clear deadlines. The goal should have been to get the sales team to “buy-in” to those actions and deadlines and commit to improving their situation. By moving to the next agenda item and leaving the first one hanging in mid-air, Jim, as team leader, created a prescription whereby future meetings will have those same questions and issues back on the agenda.
My advice? Cover less information, but focus more on fewer items in a more comprehensive and action-oriented fashion. Less is definitely more when it comes to meetings and other communication scenarios like sales presentations, classroom lectures, etc. Quantity should never be confused with quality in the communication game.