Here are some basic rules of communication that could improve communication flow in a business. Some of them are fundamental “rules of engagement” that could set the overall tone for a company. Others are specific concepts for categorizing and measuring communication flow.
The idea is that the link between communication and action can be measured and reported. We do this for financial and product flows: Why not do it for our communication?
These ideas map to my concept of a new kind of email tool. Part of the idea requires that the sender classify every message as one of the following types: Information, Request, Order or Confirmation.
Rule 1: IROC. Classify all communications as one of the following:
- Information: No reply required.
- Request: Reply options are “Yes” or “No” (System asks “why?”). No response is considered “No”
- Order: Reply options are “Accepted” or “Rejected” (System asks “why?”). System follows up aggressively when it gets no response.
- Confirmation: Reply options are “Yes” and “No” (System asks “Why?)
Rule 2: Passive approval. “Yes” is assumed for all intra-company requests unless you hear “no” within 48 hours. “No” requires a rationale.
Rule 3: Brevity. Use short words. Use short sentences. Use short paragraphs. Be clear.
Rule 4: If it wasn’t said by email, it wasn’t said. “I told you on the phone last week,” “I told you in the hall” etc., are unacceptable.
If you have questions or ideas please post them in the comments section.
Did you like this? If so, please consider buying me a coffee! Tags: business, clarity, communication, effective communication, email, email communication, measurement, measuring communication effectiveness, rules for business communication, Ways of working, wow
4 comments
Hi Dave,
This reminds me of the IBIS framework established by Jeff Conklin to address “wicked problems,” in which all chunks of a dialog are characterized into one of a few types: Questions, Ideas, Arguments (in support or opposition to the Ideas), etc.
Compendium is a tool for mapping these dialogs using IBIS. The result is mind-map-like illustrations of the flow of conversation. Fascinating stuff, if you ask me.
http://compendium.open.ac.uk/institute/about.htm
Best, Noah
Dave,
I try to use a similar method with all of my business communication, though systems like this work exponentially better when everyone in an organization is using them–meaning, everyone does it, and everyone understands it.
However, I think something is missing: a lot of the work I do requires what amounts to miniature RFIs. So one other category of email is “Request for Information.” Examples include:
“Who are the associates you would recommend to prepare and give the presentation to the board next month?”
“Which days are you available for the conversation with that potential partner?”
“When do you estimate the project will be finished?”
There should be an equally rigorous set of recommendations (and expectations) for response to questions like these. I think the onus is on the sender to set the parameters:
“I need to hear back by Friday.”
And then the onus is on the receiver to either respond with an answer by the set date or to reply immediately that the date won’t work:
“I won’t have the full project map from the contractors until Monday. Can you wait for a reply until then?’
This complicates things (it’s not a simple Yes/No, with an implied Yes) but it’s also reflective of a lot of everyday work.
What do you think?
Yes I agree. It might be interesting to try to map the Q-tools to this framework.
New reader asks: “please clarify ‘(System asks “why?”)’ – could you recommend some reading, or is there perhaps an article about some of the conventions that are in use here?”
One Trackback
business messages…
[...]Dave Gray » Some rules for effective business communication[...]…