John Powell
Differences in perceptions influence behaviour (Siero & Doosje, 1993). If that sounds abstract, consider this: a peer dominates a meeting, endlessly sharing their thoughts, or a manager delegates tasks with just a few words. What happens next?! Anxiety driven by guessing games. Frustration over wasted time. Disengagement caused by either overload or lack of information.
Effective communication, long recognised as a key factor in fostering positive behaviour, is directly linked to improved work performance (Gruber, 2003).While widely acknowledged, the idea remains poorly practiced far too often…
In the 21st century communication has become central to various business domains: strategic planning, human capital development, client retention, employer branding, conflict resolution, and crisis management, to name a few.
From managing self, through managing peers and clients, to managing expectations, and managing one’s manager – with all its challenges – the quality of our communication is a barometer of how we manage our inner emotional realms, how we interpret others’ behaviour, and how lost or adept we feel in the process. It influences our perceptions, actions, and emotions, ultimately shaping how we experience work, how well we execute tasks, how we maintain relationships, how we foster culture, and what the business outcomes of it all are.
By addressing the challenges of communication, we can transform how individuals and teams connect, unlocking both personal and organizational potential.
Numbers Talk - Loud and Clear
Thirty-five years ago, a survey (McClelland & Wilmont, 1990) suggested that 60% of employees considered lateral communication a primary problem within organizations. Nearly half (45%) defined peer communication’s quality as inadequate, and 70% recognized the need for improvements in interdepartmental communication. Since then, business and academic contributors have never abandoned the topic. Measures have become more and more sophisticated, and numbers – more and more worrying.
Low production and performance are attributed to insufficient communication by over 60% of
employees in various organizations (Norris, 2014). Conversely, positive communication thrives on meaningful expression, respect, attention, and consideration for others (Berry, 2007). These factors foster trust, collaboration, and inclusivity.
Differences in perceptions influence behaviour (Siero & Doosje, 1993). If that sounds abstract, consider this: a peer dominates a meeting, endlessly sharing their thoughts, or a manager delegates tasks with just a few words. What happens next?! Anxiety driven by guessing games. Frustration over wasted time. Disengagement caused by either overload or lack of information.
Effective communication, long recognised as a key factor in fostering positive behaviour, is directly linked to improved work performance (Gruber, 2003). While widely acknowledged, the idea remains poorly practiced far too often…
“Poor communication is probably the most frequently cited source of interpersonal conflict. Because individuals spend nearly 70 percent of their waking hours communicating—writing, reading, speaking, listening—it seems reasonable that one of the biggest inhibitors of group performance is lack of effective communication. Good communication skills are critical to career success. Polls of recruiters nearly always show communication skills among the most desired characteristics.” (Robbins & Judge, 2013)
Raising awareness about our own behavioural patterns and communication preferences, as well improving our skills to decode others’, is a key factor in positively influencing an organizational success – particularly in process and task execution, culture, project delivery, and performance.
DISC, a four-factor, values-neutral assessment model, has a century-old history of delivering specific, easily applied, and comprehensive insights about our communication patterns and preferences, as well as our value to the team, strengths, fears, and focus. The tool is well-known in the business field and recognizes four main profiles with around 380 blends. The two axes of the model distinguish individuals by their focus - either towards tasks or people, and their energy which may be more outgoing or reserved. The four main types – Dominant, Influential, Steady, and Compliant, form the well-known DISC abbreviation.
People who exhibit high Dominant traits are outgoing with prime focus on tasks. They are direct, quick, determined, and decisive. Having a D type onboard during crises ensures that decisions will be made on time and the action plan will be aligned with the desired strategic outcome.
The Influential type most likely feels at home in Sales. They are people-focused, outgoing professionals with strong interpersonal skills, and ability to engage and inspire others. Having an I onboard during crises will help the businesses to manage the grapevine swiftly.
Support, stability and team spirit are among the key values that S types bring into a team. Having them onboard during crises will ensure that everyone is included in the important conversations, and that no decisions or actions are overlooked or taken prematurely.
Compliant people feel comfortable with complex processes, details, procedures, and usually thrive in Administration, Finance, R&D, and Data Analysis. Having them in your team during crises is likely to result in impressive change management, consistent advancement, and numbers that match.
Despite the broad generalizations that simplify each profile to just a few key features, there are more insights below about creating a collaborative and inclusive culture with the help of DISC.
Improving verbal communication through DISC
In everyday peer collaboration, online meetings, face to face talks, brainstorming
sessions, heated disputes, All-Hands meetings, negotiations and all other forms of verbal
communication, a good understanding of people’s communication preferences is crucial to sorting out three significant struggles, often responsible for poor outcomes – agenda, focus and time.
In an environment with prevailing D traits – either exhibited as a primary team style, or as a
personal preference of a leader or key stakeholder – the agenda needs to gravitate around
gain; it needs to envision the end goal, and avoid crafting a detailed step-by-step plan.
The I’s traits would help balance a cold and formal atmosphere when there is not much time for niceties. The I’s charm and charisma work well when winning over a potential customer is at stakes. They can help break the ice during stale negotiations, or to infuse bright and joyful atmosphere into meetings focused on (not so great) sales numbers.
Stable and gregarious by nature, the S-style is excellent at maintaining the balance between ‘friendly’ and ‘focused’. In group settings, they are happy to assume their most comfortable role as peacemakers, ensuring everyone is heard, no good ideas are wasted, and the forum is successfully orchestrated.
Strategizing step by step in a complex business context and juggling various priorities comes naturally to the C’s. Their slower pace and attention to detail ensure that all policies and legislative requirements are met, and all numbers are correct.
DISC in the world of written business communication
Equally complicated, colourful, and diverse, written business communication is considered high-risk, with facts, density, and length being the three crucial factors and the most common reasons for the ‘broken phone’ effect. Having a basic knowledge about DISC can help craft successful and powerful techniques that support the different styles in conveying their messages while keeping the fine balance between what is important to the sender and how to deliver it so the receiving party’s expectations of clarity, correctness and courtesy are met.
How different people approach facts, what is considered optimal information density, and how the length of a message impacts the receiver’s perceptions and reaction?! These are the three factors that make a significant difference in whether we score on the playfield or feel like muddling through a minefield.
D’s consider a fact any piece of evidence directly linked to the end goal and won’t be offended by a one-liner. They appreciate straight-to-the-point communication in a brief manner.
Short but sweet is the key to the I’s heart, who would appreciate any facts about the who’s or the people involved.
The human factor would be appreciated by an S, as well, who would consider a message clear, consistent and courteous if it is focused on the group involved and answers the ’why’s.
If you have a lot of details or updates to share, make sure you send it to a C – they would appreciate the comprehensive information and won’t struggle to capture the essence regardless how many slides or fancy acronyms you throw their way.
***
Regardless of which aspect of everyday office life we need to address, knowing the basics of DISC can help us understand our own and others’ patterns, preferences, and perks in the complex world of business communication. Its simple, intuitive design and engaging, easy-to-remember language make its insights accessible to anyone navigating communication in a business context.
Contact me today to learn how to integrate DISC into your professional life and your team or organization to enhance overall effectiveness, improve communication and collaboration, and create a more harmonious work environment.
Useful Resources:
Berry, D. (2007). Health communication theory and practice. New York, NY: Open University Press
Gruber, M. (2003). Cognitive dissonance theory and motivation for change. Gastroenterology Nursing 26(6):242-5.
McClelland, V. A., Wilmont, R. E. (1990). Communication: Improve lateral communication. Workforce Management, 69(8).
Norris, B. P. (2014). Descriptions and experiences of communications within a private Dental practice. ProQuest LLC.
Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A. (2013). Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education Limited. 3-11.
Siero, F.W., Doosje B. J. (1993). Attitude change following persuasive communication: Integrating Social Judgment Theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model. European Journal of Social Psychology. 23(5).