When is a door not a door? When it's ajar of course...

In my Communication seminars I often enjoy asking a seemingly bizarre question which brilliantly illustrates the point that words absolutely do not mean the same thing to everyone. (and that meaning is separate and distinct from words...but that's another article for another day)

I ask everyone to place their feet on the ground, their hands in their laps. I suggest they take a nice long slow breath and concentrate on the first thing that pops into their heads when I say the next word.

I wait a beat or two, and then say a simple word like ‘Cow' or ‘dog' or ‘horse.

What is obvious at one level is interesting at another. Most people think of the animal I mention (however from time to time I get some interesting interpretations of ‘cow') and each participant has a full visual, auditory and kinesthetic representation of the thing mentioned. What is crucial to notice is each of their pictures, sounds and feelings associated with the word are completely individual and unique.

No dog, cat or cow has ever been described in the same way. Even when I had a couple in the course who had a cat, they each had a different internal experience when the word ‘cat' was mentioned.

What is fascinating is that the participants can't describe the thing very well but when I ask questions (is it near or far? Black and white or colour? Moving or still? In focus or fuzzy? Etc) they know the answers immediately.

Each person in the world has a unique vocabulary which is based generally on the common vocabulary that each of us shares and specifically on the individual experiences each of us has had.

When two people are communicating, there are often 3 (or more) distinct vocabularies at work. Each person has their deep unconscious understanding of word meanings, and for the purposes of communicating quickly and effectively, there is a surface or accepted meaning. So each of us has our own experience vocabulary and we guess at a common vocabulary based on our assessment of the other person's life experience, status, position, income etc.

In other words we can agree that when talking about a horse, the subject is a four legged animal that some people ride on the back of. (I'm already in murky territory: some people could be offended by the riding bit). Specifically however what would be happening internally for each communicator would be wholly dependent on his or her own history with horses.

The lesson here is to know your audience. It's easy to say, "You know - just like Bill Clinton.", but depending on the audience and what the context is, the message sent may not resemble the one received.

To avoid communication trouble in the workplace or anywhere else for that matter let this serve as a reminder to understand that our understanding of words may not be the same as everyone else, and if we aren't getting our message across, it is incumbent upon the communicator to take responsibility for his or her communication.

The meaning of communication is the response you get. The meaning is therefore determined by the receiver, and their response leaves clues as to if the intended message sent was the one actually received, and how to adjust the next communication so it more closely resembles what the message we wanted to get across in the first place. When we find the doors of communication closed, by changing our understandings and methods, and trying again, we might find the next time they more resemble something entirely different.