Faulty Communication Responsibility

I found it thought provoking to read the material regarding “Improving Faulty Communication” (26).  While there wasn’t an in-depth look at this subject in Chapter 1 or 2, I’m hopeful there will be more said on the subject in future text.

Over the years, I have been known for a few “Barbara-isms.”  A couple that can be aptly applied for my discourse on the subject of faulty communication is: “Leadership is always the problem, and communication is always the answer,” and “It takes two to make a relationship [of any kind] work, and one to make sure it doesn’t.” 

I believe faulty communication is primarily seen in our culture as being the source, or sender’s responsibility, and that we tend to view the sender as the leader in communication.  I don’t think this is always true.   I contend it is equally as important, if not almost more important, for the receiver to actively listen to the message for the sender to best be understood.  That is not to remove responsibility from the sender to communicate clearly, being certain to use “code” familiar to the receiver, or provide opportunity and a safe environment for the receiver to give feedback; but moreover, it is to say that the receiver must take the responsibility to minimize impeding “noise” or “competing internal stimuli” so that the sender’s message can be properly interpreted. 

I believe faulty communication can best be repaired when there is a willingness to look into the receiver’s responsibility, regardless of whether the sender and/or receiver have had shared experiences or not.  This would seem to be possible only if the sender has articulated their message in a respectful tone.  But even then, if the receiver is not actively listening responsibly, it won’t matter how well the sender delivered the message.  I think it’s all too easy to immediately point the finger at the sender when there is faulty communication occurring because they are the audible participant, when, in my opinion, the listener has a significant responsibility, too, and one that is more challenging to successfully assess because it’s often taking place internally.