The purpose of this article is to reassure you when you are communicating with others, particularly when a past 'error' has created self-doubt in your mind. Realistically, there really is no way around miscommunicating; we just need to strive to minimize those situations, while correcting, adapting, and learning as appropriate.
I have been both amused and disheartened by the uproar surrounding Vice President Biden's "shackled" comments during a campaign tour.
Why? Because the same thing happened to me! Exactly the same thing - using the word "unshackled" - in a written communication to non-profit board members.
I care very much about promoting the importance of communicating effectively with everyone with whom we come into contact. Great communication is not easy to do. I often tell people that we are all in the communications business, for if we fail to express our thoughts, then we cannot accomplish any of our goals.
A sufficient amount of time has passed that I believe I can safely share a real example from my past without the media getting all riled up (again).
At the time, I was serving as the chair of a non-profit organization charged with appropriating federal dollars for job training programs. A lot of things were wrong with the federal legislation and, therefore, the governance of the regional organizations across the country. In consultation with the a cabinet Secretary on behalf of the Governor of my state, I was given permission to make some much-needed changes as part of a pilot initiative to see if we could improve the performance outcomes of the organization.
One of several specific challenges was to reduce a 45-person board of directors down to a much more workable group of fifteen. And, a couple of the members of the new 15-person board would also be new, so in total we needed to remove more than 30 people from the board. Our methodology was very straight-forward and the process should have gone smoothly. We used the following as some of our guiding factors:
Having selected the 15 people that would comprise the new board, I needed to advise the "retiring" board members that the decision had been made and thank them for their service. Have you ever had to un-invite a volunteer from a non-profit board? It is not easy to do.
So, I decided to send everybody the same communication at the same time. As was our practice within the organization, email was the preferred method of communication. All board members knew that we were working to reduce the size of the board - it was no secret - and the issue had been discussed in several board meetings. (Of course, those who did not attend the board meetings or read the on-line minutes and/or agendas were, understandably, out of the loop and may not have known.) I don't remember the exact text of the email. However, I do remember the part that became contentious!
In the email, along with explaining the whys and wherefores, and thanking people for their service, etc., I made the statement (or words to the effect) that the retiring board members were now "unshackled" from their service to the board.
In no time, a newspaper reporter was on the phone with me - having received a phone call from a rabble-rouser (or two) - and I was informed that I was being accused of being a racist. Nothing could be further from the truth, so I invited the reporter to my office (about a half a block away from his) and spent three hours outlining the mission of our organization, the changes that were being made, and why. Of course, we discussed the word "unshackled" and its ties to slavery; interestingly, he had called other black members of the board to get their reaction. To my credit, several who had known me and worked with me on community boards for years stated that they knew I was not a racist and that they felt sure my choice of wording was not meant to convey anything upsetting.
After the three-hour interview, the reporter and I walked up the sidewalk together, arrived at the corner where he was going to cross over to his office, when he told me that the article would run the following day, front page (no less), and it would focus on the racial aspects of the board restructuring and my use of the word "unshackled." I was not just saddened by this outcome - I was livid! To make matters worse, when I asked why, the reporter told me that he enjoyed hearing about the mission and operation of our organization, but that he did not think that the readers of the newspaper could follow all that complicated stuff. Unbelievable. I will never forget that day on the street corner with that reporter.
I went back to my office and called the recently retired publisher of the same newspaper and told him what had happened. I asked him what he thought and how he would have handled it if he were the reporter or currently an editor. He told me that he thought the reporter did not do his job - his job being the ability to take detailed and challenging information and turn it into something understandable in the form of a newspaper article. Good point. But the course of events did not change (nor did I request any change). The next day, the story ran on the front page.
For weeks, many people laughed at me on the street and in meetings. I got a few phone calls and a few emails. I do not recall a single person - particularly not a single black person - saying a single word to me about being offended. The one person with the lengthiest quote in the article said she was just so hurt that I would be so insensitive as to use a word so directly tied to slavery that "she could almost hear the chains rattling," or words to that effect. Good grief! What do you do with that?
It struck me as odd that I was supposed to avoid using a word that had never held any emotional connection to me - I was neither black, nor was I around when slaves were "shackled, " nor was I around when they were "un-shackled" for that matter. (Interestingly, neither were the ones complaining about the use of the word... ).
Of course, the newspaper extracted an apology from me. Yep, I sure was sorry I had used that word - it had cost me lots of time, embarrassment, and distress. Of course, (in my opinion) that was the purpose of the call to the newspaper that led to the article. There were some other twists and turns to the situation, but "shackled" was the key.
The worst outcome of the article is that the complaints - no matter how ridiculous or uniformed (yes, uniformed - if somebody could complain that they heard chains rattling, for goodness sake, then I was certainly free to complain that I didn't, wasn't even around, and didn't mean to be offensive in any way!) - was that the series of events harmed long-standing relationships and caused me to second-guess myself for a good while when trying to communicate. In fact, I guess that this situation still haunts me, at least subconsciously.
The "take away" for readers of this article is not about words or race: I want people to feel confident when they try to communicate - even if something goes wrong and they miscommunicate. Good communication is hard enough to do on even the best of days and on the easiest of subjects. Sure, somebody can gripe and complain, but there is likely an ulterior motive on their part if you are attacked to the extent I was in the example shared above. You have to learn to overlook the ulterior motive.
Upon reflection, there were two specific actions I could have taken that might have prevented the situation:
Notice that I mentioned not only "proof-reading" the email, but I mentioned checking it for proper "tone." This has become an important issue in my writing. It relates directly to my desire to communicate well and my acknowledgment of the difficulty in doing so. Someone unfamiliar with the issue can help with the tone; if the writing just doesn't flow right, or sound appropriate, or succeed in communicating the point intended, then it is helpful to know this prior to publication.
Nobody likes being accused of something they did not intend. Accepting the fact that a leadership position places you in a position where a misspeak is even more likely, my advice is to do your best, avoid getting bogged down in the fray, and keep on trying to communicate the very best you can.
I have been both amused and disheartened by the uproar surrounding Vice President Biden's "shackled" comments during a campaign tour.
Why? Because the same thing happened to me! Exactly the same thing - using the word "unshackled" - in a written communication to non-profit board members.
I care very much about promoting the importance of communicating effectively with everyone with whom we come into contact. Great communication is not easy to do. I often tell people that we are all in the communications business, for if we fail to express our thoughts, then we cannot accomplish any of our goals.
A sufficient amount of time has passed that I believe I can safely share a real example from my past without the media getting all riled up (again).
At the time, I was serving as the chair of a non-profit organization charged with appropriating federal dollars for job training programs. A lot of things were wrong with the federal legislation and, therefore, the governance of the regional organizations across the country. In consultation with the a cabinet Secretary on behalf of the Governor of my state, I was given permission to make some much-needed changes as part of a pilot initiative to see if we could improve the performance outcomes of the organization.
One of several specific challenges was to reduce a 45-person board of directors down to a much more workable group of fifteen. And, a couple of the members of the new 15-person board would also be new, so in total we needed to remove more than 30 people from the board. Our methodology was very straight-forward and the process should have gone smoothly. We used the following as some of our guiding factors:
- Attendance - those who had missed multiple meetings were removed
- Conflicts - those with conflicts of interest were removed
- Duplicative Skills - for example, if we had three social services workers, we reduced that number to one
- Missing Skills - for example, if we did not have anybody representing a certain skill, say accounting, then we added one
Having selected the 15 people that would comprise the new board, I needed to advise the "retiring" board members that the decision had been made and thank them for their service. Have you ever had to un-invite a volunteer from a non-profit board? It is not easy to do.
So, I decided to send everybody the same communication at the same time. As was our practice within the organization, email was the preferred method of communication. All board members knew that we were working to reduce the size of the board - it was no secret - and the issue had been discussed in several board meetings. (Of course, those who did not attend the board meetings or read the on-line minutes and/or agendas were, understandably, out of the loop and may not have known.) I don't remember the exact text of the email. However, I do remember the part that became contentious!
In the email, along with explaining the whys and wherefores, and thanking people for their service, etc., I made the statement (or words to the effect) that the retiring board members were now "unshackled" from their service to the board.
In no time, a newspaper reporter was on the phone with me - having received a phone call from a rabble-rouser (or two) - and I was informed that I was being accused of being a racist. Nothing could be further from the truth, so I invited the reporter to my office (about a half a block away from his) and spent three hours outlining the mission of our organization, the changes that were being made, and why. Of course, we discussed the word "unshackled" and its ties to slavery; interestingly, he had called other black members of the board to get their reaction. To my credit, several who had known me and worked with me on community boards for years stated that they knew I was not a racist and that they felt sure my choice of wording was not meant to convey anything upsetting.
After the three-hour interview, the reporter and I walked up the sidewalk together, arrived at the corner where he was going to cross over to his office, when he told me that the article would run the following day, front page (no less), and it would focus on the racial aspects of the board restructuring and my use of the word "unshackled." I was not just saddened by this outcome - I was livid! To make matters worse, when I asked why, the reporter told me that he enjoyed hearing about the mission and operation of our organization, but that he did not think that the readers of the newspaper could follow all that complicated stuff. Unbelievable. I will never forget that day on the street corner with that reporter.
I went back to my office and called the recently retired publisher of the same newspaper and told him what had happened. I asked him what he thought and how he would have handled it if he were the reporter or currently an editor. He told me that he thought the reporter did not do his job - his job being the ability to take detailed and challenging information and turn it into something understandable in the form of a newspaper article. Good point. But the course of events did not change (nor did I request any change). The next day, the story ran on the front page.
For weeks, many people laughed at me on the street and in meetings. I got a few phone calls and a few emails. I do not recall a single person - particularly not a single black person - saying a single word to me about being offended. The one person with the lengthiest quote in the article said she was just so hurt that I would be so insensitive as to use a word so directly tied to slavery that "she could almost hear the chains rattling," or words to that effect. Good grief! What do you do with that?
It struck me as odd that I was supposed to avoid using a word that had never held any emotional connection to me - I was neither black, nor was I around when slaves were "shackled, " nor was I around when they were "un-shackled" for that matter. (Interestingly, neither were the ones complaining about the use of the word... ).
Of course, the newspaper extracted an apology from me. Yep, I sure was sorry I had used that word - it had cost me lots of time, embarrassment, and distress. Of course, (in my opinion) that was the purpose of the call to the newspaper that led to the article. There were some other twists and turns to the situation, but "shackled" was the key.
The worst outcome of the article is that the complaints - no matter how ridiculous or uniformed (yes, uniformed - if somebody could complain that they heard chains rattling, for goodness sake, then I was certainly free to complain that I didn't, wasn't even around, and didn't mean to be offensive in any way!) - was that the series of events harmed long-standing relationships and caused me to second-guess myself for a good while when trying to communicate. In fact, I guess that this situation still haunts me, at least subconsciously.
The "take away" for readers of this article is not about words or race: I want people to feel confident when they try to communicate - even if something goes wrong and they miscommunicate. Good communication is hard enough to do on even the best of days and on the easiest of subjects. Sure, somebody can gripe and complain, but there is likely an ulterior motive on their part if you are attacked to the extent I was in the example shared above. You have to learn to overlook the ulterior motive.
Upon reflection, there were two specific actions I could have taken that might have prevented the situation:
- I could have more carefully re-read my email and waited a day to send it. (I follow this practice now with all the articles I write.)
- I could have asked someone else to proof-read the email - for content and "tone." (I follow this practice sometimes with my writings, but not always.)
Notice that I mentioned not only "proof-reading" the email, but I mentioned checking it for proper "tone." This has become an important issue in my writing. It relates directly to my desire to communicate well and my acknowledgment of the difficulty in doing so. Someone unfamiliar with the issue can help with the tone; if the writing just doesn't flow right, or sound appropriate, or succeed in communicating the point intended, then it is helpful to know this prior to publication.
Nobody likes being accused of something they did not intend. Accepting the fact that a leadership position places you in a position where a misspeak is even more likely, my advice is to do your best, avoid getting bogged down in the fray, and keep on trying to communicate the very best you can.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét