It isn’t uncommon for CIOs to fall into the same trap. They treat their org chart like a collection of software modules, with well-defined ways for outsiders to interact — basically, like they’re invoking subroutines — and assume all other executives look at the enterprise the same way.
But just as there’s no perfect org chart, so there’s no perfect way to prescribe a department’s outputs and the inputs required of other departments so they get those outputs.
The solution is conversation
What goes wrong, isn’t, of course, limited to IT design documents. These just illustrate the point, which is that when we rely on documentation to communicate we’re asking for trouble, and usually find ourselves in it.
Welcome to the solution. It isn’t particularly complicated. It’s that when people need to understand each other, they need to talk to each other, interactively, using the (I hope) well-known guidelines for active listening. In particular:
- Express interest: The person or people you’re listening to need to be confident you’re actually care about what they have to say about their thinking.
- Let the other person talk: Even if they aren’t talking about the subject you want them to talk about, pay attention to what they want to talk about. They need to get it out of the way before they can focus on what you need.
- Focus: Letting them talk is one thing. Letting them talk forever is something else. At some point, encourage them to focus on the subject you need to talk with them about.
- Ask (1) — clarify: If, as the communicator’s target, you aren’t clear what they mean, ask for additional clarification.
- Ask (2) — re-state: If, as the communicator, you aren’t confident the person you’re communicating with understands you, ask them to re-state it — in their terms, not yours.
- Ask (3) — finalize: As communicator, ask how to phrase whatever the conclusion is when the time does come to document it.
- Remind: When the documentation is complete, walk through it, face-to-face, with the key stakeholders to confirm that it reflects the conversations you’ve already had with them.
If this seems a bit idealized, perhaps it is. You can’t always get face-to-face with all stakeholders, and the bigger the subject the harder it is.
There are also linguistic issues to contend with: If you and the other person don’t have a language in common that you’re both fluent in, relying on a document can be more effective than attempting a conversation.
So in the end we have to accept that sometimes we do have to rely on documentation to communicate. Like, for example, right now as you read these words.
