Communication Breakdown Communication breakdown can be the source or the result of conflict, but it is also important to recognize that

a lack of conflict can also be a sign of communication breakdown. Inadequate training, apathy, misunderstandings, channel noise, differing backgrounds, or lack of respect can all be causes of communication breakdown. The results of communication issues include withholding information, loss of trust, reduced cooperation, reduced productivity, reduced creativity, reduced risk taking, personal attacks, sabotage, complaints, clique formation and team breakup or individual resignation. The North American Blackout of 2003 is an interesting example. One power plant failed to accurately communicate the status of their section of the power grid, causing more than one hundred power plants to go off line, forty million people to lose power, and an estimated six billion dollars in losses to businesses.It is caused by problems which occur daily which allows people to stop their communication. A survey of 560 MBA students with work experience from across the USA helps to illustrate some of the problems that communication breakdown can cause. The table labeled "Hard Costs" shows the number of respondents that can recollect certain hard costs that were incurred due to communication breakdown. The table labeled "Soft Costs" shows the soft costs incurred (Gilsdorf 191-192). The soft costs may result in losses as high as or higher than hard costs, but they are difficult to quantify. As you can see, the effects of communication breakdown are far from trivial. The Society for Advancement of Consulting (SAC) has recently released an article stating that poor communication is more of a threat to the failure of a business than competition or the economy ("Communication Errors Undermining Business.").
Hard costs

# of respondents

Hard cost

11

< $100

34

$100 - $499

24

$500 - $999

82

$1,000 - $9,999

25

$10,000 - $19,999

35

$20,000 - $49,999

11

$50,000 - $99,999

21

$100,000 - $499,999

$500,000 - $999,99

11

$1,000,000 - $10,000,000

Soft costs

# of respondents

Soft cost

124

Lost time

111

Lost employee(s)

101

Lowered productivity, efficiency, or quality

82

Bad image, word of mouth, publicity

80

Ill will

79

Grave erosion of individuals' effectiveness

72

Damaged working environment of relationship

57

Lowered morale

56

Stupid risk or liability

51

Lowered team spirit

46

Lowered trust

46

Lost revenue

34

Waste of money

25

Lost customer(s)

18

Lost opportunity

There are many books written with psychological and linguistic perspectives on communication breakdown. Thats Not What I Meant! by Deborah Tannen explains how ambiguities in our speech can cause people to misinterpret what we intend to say. She also talks about how the majority of what we say isnt in the actual words, but in the way they are said. This involves pacing, volume, expression of emotion (pitch, tone). There is a higher incidence of misinterpretation when communicating between cultures, due to differences in the norms of

meta messages between cultures. Communication breakdown can also be manifested as politeness taken too far. Tannen talks about the Twoedged Sword of Politeness where, in the interest of maintaining relations with others, important things are not said. The motive here is to get along, but people often end up getting along worse when this is done. When communicating, we dont always say what we mean due to what we think others might think of us. This is known as indirectness and is a type of self-defense mechanism. Communicating with others is far more complicated than simply turning an idea into words, saying it, and having it turned back into the same idea. All these complications are places where communication breakdown can occur, frustrating those involved. Richard J. Mayer has a slightly different perspective on breakdown. He came up with the hypothesis that Virtually all communication problems and conflicts between people, no matter how serious they appear, are due to an accumulation of un-confronted and unresolved minor issues, each of little or no apparent importance. (Mayer 3). He studied hundreds of instances where communication breakdown had occurred to come up with this idea. Many of these minor issues are caused by the communication concepts mentioned earlier by Tannen. The new part of this perspective is that major problems are caused by an accumulation of minor issues. He suggests confronting these little issues every time they are encountered. He also proposes the idea that we are more skilled at being competitive than we are at being collaborative, which makes it difficult to work in effective teams. A certain amount of communication conflict within a team is good. Both too little, as well as too much conflict is a type of communication breakdown. Too little communication conflict most likely means either that nobody cares very much or they are all brainwashed to think alike ('group-think'). Both of these factors mean the team is not being effective (Lemmex 2004). In an article about communication breakdown, Larry Lauer says that communication breakdown is inevitable due to the complex nature of human experience and thus interpretation, so the communications need to be reiterated back and forth until both the transmitter and all those receiving messages have a common and

verifiable understanding. He suggests some ways to spot communication breakdown, and suggests we should look for 'activity plateaus' after a goal is met. These plateaus often cause members to be more focused on their personal matters, and communication begins to slow down. Another sign is productivity falling off. A plateau might be due simply to members of a group who feel that their input isnt much valued, and start to withdraw from the group activity. Executive isolation is another sign of communication breakdown. This is the process of a manager suffering from 'head in the office syndrome'. Effective communication is difficult. During times of stress, it is tempting to avoid conflict by spending less and less time with others, and not engaging in verifiable communication with them about the critical issues. Finally, either too few or too many comments, queries or complaints is likely be a sign of communication breakdown (Lauer 1994). It is all a matter of balance between 'foot in mouth' and 'paralysis by analysis'! Communication breakdown is all around us, and is responsible for more problems than anyone takes the time to realize. Through the use of examples, survey results, and various perspectives on the inner workings and diagnosis of communication breakdown, we try to develop a better idea as to why we should want to avoid communication breakdown. The following sections will help you communicate effectively with others so that, together, you can plan and implement effective communication techniques and checking protocols within your group or team. Effective communication within a team doesnt happen by accident; instead, it requires planning and organization, and an effective team leader or facilitator. Planning for good communication in a meeting setting takes even more preparation. This section will discuss how leaders and facilitators can plan ahead for good communication.
[edit]