Q: The members of my team would like some suggestions for helping our team leader understand there is more than one way to communicate, particularly when it involves giving instructions concerning work assignments that are complex and include more than one person. Our team leader is a "people person" and refuses to communicate in any way other than verbally. We waste so much time waiting for her to return from meetings, get off the phone or whatever it is that claims her time.
Our office is well equipped with e-mail, voice mail and fax machines providing numerous alternatives for communicating effectively. However, she insists that verbal communication prevents misunderstandings. Are we out of line or is this an old-fashioned mindset? What can we do?A: Many of us are guilty of assuming that our preferred method of communication is the best one. It is important to remind ourselves that the point of communication is to give and receive information that is clear and easily understood. If it leaves the "receiver" frustrated or confused, effective communication hasn't occurred. Your supervisor's point is well-taken because verbal communication allows the opportunity to ask questions or clarify instructions.
On the other hand, complex projects involving many steps aren't easily remembered once the verbal communication ends and the work begins. A designated team member might casually bring up the subject in your next team meeting by mentioning that the team has experienced some frustration because information isn't always received in a way that assures understanding by all parties involved.
Then suggest "brainstorming" all the different methods of communication available to the team. Emphasize the point that it's helpful to have written documentation when assignments are complex so that notes can be made and steps checked off when completed. By using the team meeting format, no one is singled out, and furthermore, this certainly is a subject applicable to all.
Hopefully, your team leader will realize that her preferred method of communication isn't necessarily the most effective in all circumstances and for all parties.
Q: Several years ago the family-owned business where I worked closed, forcing me into the job market. At that time I was told that finding a comparable job would take about one month for every $10,000 of salary I expected. In my case, that proved to be a very reliable rule of thumb.
Would you believe that I have now been "downsized" and am once more looking for a new position? Since job application and interviewing guidelines are different, I wondered if this was still a dependable guideline for the amount of time my search will take. What do you think?
A: You do not indicate the specific type of position for which you are searching, which is important because the amount of time it takes to find a comparable job does vary according to the career and/or industry in which you work.
Recently released statistics indicate that the guidelines have changed - and the news is good: Challenger, Gray & Christmas, a well-known outplacement firm, conducted a survey and discovered that during the first three months of 1996, managers and executives faced the shortest job-search time in 16 years. The average time it took an out-of-work manager to find a comparable position was 2.8 months.
This first quarter figure marked the fourth consecutive quarter in which the job search time decreased. The downward trend started in the first quarter of 1995 when the average time was 3.5 months. Bear in mind that guidelines are helpful, but every individual is different and patience and persistence are the keys to conducting a successful job search.