08/04/05
Why companies should use social communication
“To speak with the right
tone”, “to be at the right place” : these expressions refer to social
communication[1]. Commonly
used, they show how important social communication is in everyday life. We will
see that social communication is also crucial within companies.
What is social communication ? Social communication encapsulates all the elements which define the social position of the speakers. It can be ways of looking at the other, faces, gestures (body language), intonations of voice, use of space (furniture) and time (time gaps between the answers), opinions expressed relatively to the other speaker’s opinion... all the signs determining the status of the speakers, defining their relationship. Social communication can be opposed to a communication insisting on meaning in the same way as “to speak to somebody” can be opposed to “to speak about something”[2].
How can social communication be useful in companies ? When negotiating, having a meeting, speaking with his/her chief or his/her colleagues, an employee has to be very careful about the way he/she positions himself/herself in the conversation. Very often, the answer that one would get will depend more on the way the question has been asked than on its very meaning. When the right social communication is used, that is to say the right tone of voice, the right way of looking, the right posture, in a nutshell when the right social position is communicated, one will get a positive answer. On the opposite, if one is not “keeping one’s place” or says a word “in the wrong tone”, one will break the social contract of communication and will certainly get a negative answer. An answer that will have no other function than to punish the wrong social positioning. One will enter into social communication adjustments instead of having a mere answer to the question he/she asked. This is why it is important to have the right social communication when expressing anything in a work environment.
Another example of the importance of social communication can be found when one changes of status within the firm. One will have to change the way he/she speaks in order to get adapted to this new status. A new social communication has to be learnt to frame properly all his/her messages. A chief cannot express himself/herself the same way he/she used to do when he was a subordinate. To communicate the same words, he/she has to change his/her social communication in order to adapt it to his/her new status. It may be firmer, more directive or even more aggressive. The pace of the voice may be slower, the tone louder, the looks may be longer. The body may use more space : spacious furniture may be associated to him/her, he/she may speak from a greater distance. In a word, it may turn into a dominative social communication.
Social communication is
also very important when negotiating. Indeed, very often, a negotiation is
blocked because the negotiators do not agree on their social positions. One
will not accept this concession not because he/she thinks it is very important
for his/her business but because that would put him/her in an inferior
position. This is more about the social positioning than the very sense of the
communication. A concession can be easierly done if it is seen as a gift
instead of a something which is taken by force. Here the tone of voice and the
way of looking at the other person is very important : it estabishes the
relationship between the two negotiators. And empty sentences such as flattery,
with no other meaning than equalizing the relationship, can be of much use.
Further on, it is
fundamental to distinguish what is really important for the other negotiator
and what is said just because of the social interaction. Do you accept a
present because you think it is valuable or because it would break the
relationship to refuse it ? A word is equal to a present in this case : you can
accept or refuse a qualification just because of the social relationship it
entices. Thus, in a negotiation, it is possible to “reformulate” many times a
proposition, the sense of it being the same but the social communication behind
it being different. This permits to differentiate the feeling about the very
content of the proposition and the feeling about the social positioning it
implies.
Last but not least,
social communication is very important in the leadership of meetings. The
person responsible for a meeting has the first role to play in the social
communication between the different speakers. In order for them to be more
efficient, it is very often necessary to lead them to a positive social
communication. This has very much to do with what is also called the atmosphere
of the meeting. Are people aggressive with each other, contesting propositions,
just because they are formulated by other participants seen as ‘enemies’ ? In
this case they would say “no” to the person more than to the proposition. Is
the meeting based on a “yes, but” attitude ; one saying “yes” to the other
participant and “but” to the idea, proposing something better ? It is the
difference between “disagreeing with somebody” and “disagreeing on something” –
the latter attitude being closer to reaching an agreement. The atmosphere can
be either negative and conflictual, or positive and cooperative depending on
the type of social interaction that is imposed by the leader.
This harmonisation of
the meetings can be done through a clear definition of the atmosphere. It is
also very important to determine the hierarchy and the role played by the
different actors. To clarify the social positions of every participant and to
fix once for ever the type of social communication[3]
are good bases to a communication oriented on meanings.
As
a conclusion, social communication deals with the social positioning of the
speakers. Communication is embedded within social relationships and to study
social communication is to study this social part of communication.
Studies and training in
social communication are valuable for companies since they lead to more
efficient interactions between colleagues and more effective negotiations or
meetings.
The
sense of social communication can be developed through a descriptive and
theoretical approach. It is also exacerbated when one is watching a
conversation of two or three people and tries, not to understand the meanings,
but to focus on the definition of the social position of each participant. However,
much in social communication is felt more than clearly understood. It belongs
to the realm of unconscious habits. This is why training can be done through
social theatre or watching documentaries focusing on the social dimension of
communication.
[1] Social communication would be
“communication relationnelle” in French
[2] In a way, social communication can
be seen as a communication about the communication : you communicate the way
you want to communicate (aggressively, kindly...). This is why social scientists
see social communication as a “meta-communication”, that is to say a
communication about the communication.
The term meta-communication is the one chosen
by Gregory Bateson. This sociologist is a pionneer in this field of research.
But we also want to evocate the works of Edward T. Hall for the importance of
time and space, Erwing Goffman for his studies on social interactions, Palo
Alto School (mainly Watzlawick for our concern) and Eric Berne’s Transactional
Analysis for the study of the hierarchy between the two speakers.
[3] here sociologists would say the
“frame of interaction”