Rhetorical Mastery | The Perfect Response

Organizations often talk about the value of finding employees with “soft skills,” meaning abilities to communicate and work well with others. This is not a given. In fact, current media use patterns have lessened the chances that younger Americans will need repair their initial instincts to be other-centered. Here are some questions that explore some of the dimensions of these attributes. The questions represent general patterns, with room for individual exceptions. How many did you correctly guess?

1. If I am with a work colleague and my phone rings, a reasonable course of action is to pause our conversation, offer a brief apology, and take the call.

A. Yes
B. No

2. Prior to a meeting of a work team you will lead, it’s a good idea to send around a brief agenda of items to be considered.

A. True
B. False

3. It’s ok to leave your phone on and in sight during a committee meeting, especially if it is in a silent mode.

A. True
B. False

4. Video meetings on Zoom or other services can be just about as good as meetings that happen in the same room.

A. True
B. False

5. In a meeting of colleagues it is probably better to call out someone’s mildly offensive comment immediately, rather than pointing it out to them later in private.

A. True
B. False

6. It is probably a waste of time to ask member in a new taskforce of 10 to introduce themselves before a meeting starts.

A. True
B. False

7. You have a meeting with your team. One member often contributes too much and pulls the group away from the subject at hand. Assuming everyone fits around a rectangular conference table, where is the ideal place to ask that person to sit?

A. Along the table length.
B. In a chair opposite the leader at the other end of the table.
C. It does not matter.

8. A problem-solving group will usually make better decisions if the boss is also in the room.

A. true
B. false

9. Generally, the human efficiency curve for most individuals increases throughout the workday.

A. True
B. False

10. The best way to prepare for remarks that you must give to a room of colleagues is to write out what you want to say so that they can be read back clearly in your presentation.

A. true
B. false

11. Being anxious before a presentation is normal and usually helpful.

A. True
B. False

12. In research on gender differences and communication

A. Women are more likely to favor asking for clarifications or raising questions.
B. Men are more likely to favor stating their opinions on a topic.
C. Neither are true.
D. Both are true.

13. Withholding making a final decision in a meeting because differences remain is most clearly associated with

A. Quakers
B. Catholics
C. Lutherans

14. Working in a group is likely to increase the chances that there will be dissenters who will oppose an emerging group consensus.

A. True
B. False

15. Job reviews and terminations are rarely easy for managers or employees. Even so, it is acceptable to deliver negative evaluations or separation to an employee without necessarily meeting them in the same space.

A. True
B. False

Answers:

1. B. No. Something in our nature leads us to imagine an urgent message waiting in an unanswered call. But rarely do calls deserve such priority. The person(s) in your presence should be considered first. They deserve your undivided attention.

2. True. With a few exceptions it is a courtesy to all of the meeting participants to indicate the focus of the meeting. They may want to prepare. Or they might appreciate the chance to look over materials that will be considered in the meeting. It borders on the rude to spring a significant surprise on group members, if the meeting is to gain their input.

3. False. Leaving your phone screen on and in sight of others is a distraction to you and communicates your view that you may soon have something better to do. Ditto for laptops, which have turned into common props used to fake meeting-related work. New messages and e-mails can wait. Since we do not multitask well, give your attention to those in the meeting. If you feel like you really don’t need to be there, simply excuse yourself.

4. False. Zoom and its counterparts are useful. But because they are mediated through limited images and often poor sound, they represent a degraded way to connect. The inconvenience of being in the same space is often offset by the added communication information received when you see a whole person.

5. False. A seriously egregious comment may need an instant response, but a comment made in innocence or ignorance rather than with malice can be better addressed privately. And forget the urge to do some virtue signaling. Criticism of another in public usually means a loss of face and defensiveness for the person that receives it. In private, the offending comment can be corrected without inflicting the deeper harm of a more public reprimand.

6. False. It is worth the time to ask members who may not know each other to introduce themselves, if their comments are brief. Our identity is affirmed in our name. It will also be possible for more of the business that transpires to be done on a first-name basis.

7. A. A rectangular table has power positions and weaker locations. On a corner side a constant contributor might be reined in by not having easy eye contact with all members of the group. That may ease their urge to dominate. The power positions are at the two ends of a table. Everyone can see people in these locations.

8. B. False. There can be extraordinary circumstances where the boss is needed to supply crucial information, but case studies suggest that participants in a meeting are more forthcoming with new ideas without concerns about pleasing the boss or guessing their preferences.

9. B. False. Count yourself lucky if this pattern cited in the question fits you. In fact most are less productive toward the end of a routine workday. A mid-afternoon “slump” is common.

10. B. False. A good rule of public speaking is to prepare notes for what you intend to say, but to stop short of preparing a manuscript to read to a group. Most of us are boring readers. We are usually more interesting when we amplify ideas we have prepared as talking points worded in what feels right in the moment. Most of us can be good at this type of extemporaneous speaking, which more closely duplicates natural conversation. But few of us have the skills of actors to breathe life into a prepared script.

11. A. True. What researchers call “communication apprehension” is common and can be useful. An extra shot of adrenaline can make you more motivated to succeed and perhaps even more animated. But repress the urge to remind your audience of your jitters. They will want to hear what you say more than they want to hear about your fears. Focus on the message, not yourself.

12. D. Both A and B are true. In settings where there may be some differences of opinion, some research indicates that men are most comfortable affirming what they believe. On the whole, women will seek ways to bridge differences in belief.

13. A. Quaker traditions value reaching a consensus before proceeding with an action. If doubts among a group exist, they would be less likely to force a vote that will end in a divided result. This is a worthy goal for any group, if not always possible.

14. B. False. With exceptions, groups tend to exert pressure on “dissident” members to accept the thinking of the majority. In some classic studies this is known as “groupthink.”

15. False. Of course it is possible to fire someone via some medium. But it is usually a cruel communication choice. When at all possible, life-altering decisions affecting an employee should be delivered face to face.

CEOs can more easily act alone. Legislators can assume that applies to all leaders. But college presidents must show more forbearance.

If we thought making a corporation secure in the 21st century was difficult, we should acknowledge that the folks that manage large and small institutions of higher education have it even tougher. Recent and over-covered protests at Columbia, UCLA and elsewhere have added to these administrators’ woes. The job of president at a large university has become almost impossible because the contradictory demands of the stakeholders. There is a widespread misperception that the leadership at most schools can simply enforce policies that they establish. That may be true at Space X or A.T &T, but that is not usually how academic governance works.

The best -run campuses have a governance structure more complex that the standard corporate model of a board and senior management, where a top-down pattern still exists. Corporate rhetoric includes a lot of talk of “teams” and “creative units.” But the gap between academic and corporate governance is huge, except in the exceptions of some religious colleges and, more generally, on issues related to finance and budgeting. The idea of “faculty governance” means less in those cases, but extends to most other functions within a university.

This idea of joint deliberation means that many decisions affecting academic research and teaching programs are made in consultation with faculty and staff. This requires a lot of committees, time, and patience. If it works, the university functions like a big machine with many motors pulling mostly in the same direction. A president typically manages the managers (typically, the provost, various student service units and deans) who help sort all of this out, again, with considerable faculty input.

**_{Robert Hutchins, a widely admired president of the University of Chicago in the 1930s and 40s.}**

All of this is one reason it was cringeworthy to recently see members of Congress treat college a handful of college presidents with disrespect. The accusation: not taking a definitive action in response to evolving campus protests. They wanted the kind of decisive decisions that only a simpleton would expect from a diverse and more democratic enterprise. In the process, they ignored the values of academic freedom, the fostering of diversity, and a long-standing tradition to make the campus a place of open inquiry. The reductive nature of those questioners was breathtaking, but brutally effective in ending the careers of presidents at Columbia, the University of Pennsylvania.

There is a degree of arrogance in play when a legislator in a “hearing” uses it to abuse a leader trying to juggle the needs of a diverse constituency. Hearings are often opportunities for “show horse” legislators to give angry speeches masquerading as questions. Individuals in big deliberative bodies have little power by themselves, but they can parade their best version of a ruthless interrogator in a committee hearing. In our deteriorating political culture that is frequently enough. And that is what we got when some small-minded McCarthys made accusatory statements to some college presidents about alleged support of antisemitism on their campuses. In the process, Representatives Virginia Foxx and Elise Stefanik in particular ignored the machinery of collective governance that is still in place on most campuses. They wanted to hear about orders that were unilaterally carried out. They wanted to see faculty firings and student dismissals.

The spirit of collegial problem-solving is a frail notion that is easily crushed by such bullies. A person can demand that a student who made racist comments be expelled from a University, but strict enforcement of such a rule would end the careers of more college students than we might think. Intellectual and academic freedom needs a softer touch. CEOs can act alone, and legislators can pretend that all leaders can. But college presidents must demonstrate more forbearance.

Endless Challenges.

As a faculty member I probably showed too little sympathy for our presidents and provosts. But even a cursory glimpse makes it clear that their responsibilities have become tougher. A growing number of students with serious mental health challenges have added a degree of dread in administrative offices. No one wants to call a parent to report that their young person has overdosed or taken their life. In addition, many Americans have soured on the liberal arts, replacing the goal of nurturing intellectual curiosity with an emphasis on “customer service.” Discovery and curiosity have declined as goals that should flourish. Meeting poorly conceived job expectations has partly replaced them. In my college years almost before the discovery of electricity my friends would have been mortified to have our parents call a dean or a President to challenge some aspect of our education. Now, some young adults seem to expect to be parented for most of their lives.

Additional challenges face college leaders today, among them: the decline of public respect for public institutions, the need for more onerous campus policing, and a reluctance in some states to sufficiently fund colleges. One result is the requirement that a president be good at the retail politics of seeking financial support from various constituents. At many institutions they must also raise enough money to support the next class of increasingly scarce first year students.

And then there are campus sports. Participating in a sport can anchor a student. And many presidents lavish praise on their university teams as assets that everyone can rally behind. But I have taught many students whose only reason for being on campus was to play on a varsity team. And because some teams raise money for their institutions, presidents must sometimes function as de-facto managers of sports franchises. Generally speaking, our European cousins have been smarter by keeping American-style professional athletics separate from the life of a campus.

It is increasingly the rare individual who welcomes the challenge of building bridges manage all of the needs of those who feel that a university is their place. There seem to be fewer days when Presidents can focus on leading a great institution engaged in fostering great academic advances. A campus is now the world in miniature, with more of their leaders preoccupied with defusing an endless series of social, political, and economic tensions.

The Perfect Response

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IN A DISTRACTED AGE

Category Archives: Rhetorical Mastery

How Good Are Your ‘Soft Skills?’