Five Keys to Interpersonal Sensitivity

In a fascinating study, Rod Hart and Don Burks studied the relationship between “expressive” communication and “instrumental” or “rhetorical communication.” Expressive communication is very attractive in business because it involves frankness, honesty, openheartedness and non-manipulative intentions. As attractive as it is, it rarely provides people with effective means for creating and managing relationships—very important tools for people in today’s flattened business environment.

The research surfaced three communication tendencies for interpersonal communication. The first, which you see often in business, is the noble selves tendency: the notion that people should not adapt to other people or to situations in any way that violates their beliefs, attitudes or values. Sometimes this is a commitment of the individual, but more often it’s a practice growing out of lack of tools to make adaptations. The second, which can be seen as “sucking up,” is what...

they called the rhetorical reflectors. These are people who present a different picture of themselves to every person and in every situation. They are careful to reflect the image that they think others want them to present.

Rhetorical sensitives, in contrast, are easily the most effective communicators. Their transparency and authenticity make it possible for them to create and sustain mutually beneficial relationships. These rhetorical sensitive differ from the noble selves and rhetorical reflectors because they act on the basis of five significant beliefs:

1.       Role complexity. They believe people are capable of a large number of different roles, each of which represents an authentic part of their identity. Mentors, for example, can be nurturing, demanding, directing, supporting or even disciplining in their responses to circumstances. In short, they expect to deal with the same person differently in different situations. So seemingly conflicted identities are never a surprise to them.

2.       Significant flexibility. They reject rigid patterns of communicating and are comfortable adjusting their communication to different situations. Even when it may violate social norms. For example, they might ask questions about interests or personal attitudes in some situations, even though most would view that as personal overstepping.

3.       Not placating. They reject self-censorship when others disagree, believing they should not sacrifice their ideas or perspectives merely to placate others. My teasing, smart-ass response which usually brings laughter fits them: “You have a perfect right to be wrong.” (And so do I.)

4.       Communication appropriateness. As opposed to not placating, they believe, for example, that there are occasions when silence is appropriate. Some situations which involve personal, interpersonal, or organizational risks are so great that not communicating is the appropriate response. In some situations expressing one’s feelings can only harm the relationship or worsen the situation. This competency obviously demands great skill in understanding others.

5.       Communication tolerance. They are tolerant of the need of others to search for the best way to communicate ideas and feelings. They ignore nervous silence and simply wait. That means also that they readily allow others to revise their communication when necessary and they allow themselves the same right.

If you sense a lack in some of these skills and would like to improve, here’s how to go about it.

• Select a single skill you’d like to work on.
• Break that skill into the smallest possible chunks.
• Try it on in a non-threatening situation.
• Ask a trusted colleague to observe you, describing what’s going well and what one chunk you need to work on still more.
• Work on using this skill in several differing situations.

Recognize that when trying on a new skill, it may feel awkward or uncomfortable at first. It normally takes practice several times a week for a four to six week period before a skill is fully internalized.

In sum, recognize that all people communicate as reflector, noble selves and rhetorical sensitives to some degree. Each profile reflects tendencies that have been encouraged or discouraged by our backgrounds, training and experiences. But rhetorical sensitives have much more awareness of their own and others’ communication, values, awareness, needs, expertise and even intelligence. Their ability to build and maintain rich relationships differentiate them from the hoi polloi (“the many”).

The research found that employees who have positive influence on their organizations have a number of the attributes of the rhetorically sensitive. Most importantly, they operate from a complex view of other people. Instead of seeing their colleagues as good or bad, smart or dumb, they describe others in multi-faceted terms. Admittedly, these competencies take time to develop, but in today’s world, rather than technological expertise, rhetorical sensitivity is the sine qua non of personal and career success!

Sensitives understand how complicated people really are. And, significantly, they are able to identify situationally relevant cues and use the cues to guide their choices of rhetorical strategies.

See Hart and Burks, Rhetorical Sensitivity and Social Interaction