Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Management Features
Gleb Tsipursky
Three reasons companies wait too long to make obvious decisions
Anton Ovchinnikov
The push-pull effects of customization
Maria Guadalupe
A new study suggests that investing in soft skills will result in higher individual—and national—productivity
Christopher Dancy
Not binding, not enforceable, but a step in the right direction
Jake Mazulewicz
There isn’t one magic bullet, but rather a ‘consolidation of subtleties’

More Features

Management News
Connects people and processes across functional silos with a digital thread for innovation
Better manufacturing processes require three main strategies
Technical vs. natural language processing
Recognized as best-in-class industry technology by Printing United Alliance
It’s unethical for companies to use test tasks as free labor
Numerous new USB3 cameras added to product roster
Combines quality and process data from software and devices in holistic production-monitoring view

More News

Claire Zulkey

Management

When It Comes to Communication From the Top, Less Isn’t More

Many managers don’t convey enough information, but those who undercommunicate pay a steeper price

Published: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 - 11:03

A boss who overloads you with information may be frustrating, but one who leaves you in the dark may come off as uncaring.

That’s the key finding from a new study that examines how employees perceive managers who assume that less is more when it comes to communicating at work.

After reviewing thousands of 360-degree leadership assessments in MBA and executive education classes, Francis Flynn noted that complaints about managers’ communication were common and often harsh. “More than just about any other leadership skill, people are fiercely criticized for poor communication,” says Flynn, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business. “The higher up you get, the more brutal that criticism becomes.” Noting this, he and doctoral candidate Chelsea Lide saw an opportunity to examine the quantity and quality of communication between managers and the people they supervise.

In a recent paper, Flynn and Lide examine the concept of “communication calibration.” They find that employees often see their leaders miscalibrating the amount they communicate. Yes, they write, “leaders are often seen by their employees as undercommunicating rather than overcommunicating.”

The importance of how much leaders communicate became apparent during the pandemic, Lide says. “It brought into sharp relief just how important communication was, not only in terms of the message being communicated, but also how often people are checking in with one another and exactly how detailed leaders are being in their communication to employees.”

Flynn and Lide’s research shows that employees’ preference for too many vs. too few messages stems from the perception that even if an overcommunicating leader can’t communicate the ideal amount, at least they mean well.

Overcommunicators “may be given the benefit of the doubt by their employees, who might view them as trying to meet their needs, even if they are not necessarily succeeding,” Lide says. Making an effort can give the impression of empathy, whereas undercommunicators are “not really seen as trying at all. Instead, they tend to be seen as really missing the mark in terms of meeting the needs of their employees.”

Flynn says that these results contrast with prior research that found that information overload hurts employee performance. “Overcommunication may be seen as annoying and a nuisance, but it’s not seen as a damning flaw for a leader, partly because a leader’s overcommunication is seen as an attempt to benefit you, even if it is misguided, as opposed to an attempt to undermine you or simply ignore you.”

Communicating concern

The authors conducted four studies to test their hypotheses that employees identify undercommunication as a leadership weakness more often than overcommunication and perceive undercommunicating managers as having relatively less concern and compassion. “Communication” was limited to task-related messages—not small talk or office chatter.

‘More than just about any other leadership skill, people are fiercely criticized for poor communication. The higher up you get, the more brutal that criticism becomes.’
—Francis Flynn

Flynn and Lide examined qualitative comments from more than 2,700 archived leadership assessments. Less than a quarter of employees rated their manager as a well-calibrated communicator. Leaders who miscalibrated their communication were nearly 10 times more likely to be criticized for undercommunicating than overcommunicating. The assessments also showed that perceived empathy was significantly lower for undercommunicating leaders than for well-calibrated and overcommunicating leaders.

The researchers then tested their model’s robustness in a real-world setting, surveying employees on the perceived quantity of communication they had received from their managers and how much they’d prefer to receive. The results confirmed a lack of congruence between perceived and preferred communication; employees judged their undercommunicating leaders as lacking empathy and, in turn, leadership ability.

The strong, unsilent type

Based on their findings, Flynn and Lide offer advice for leaders: Ask employees about their personal communication preferences, and when in doubt, increase the amount of task-related communication “to send a stronger message of caring and concern.”

Flynn says that many leaders falsely believe they are communicating the correct amount. “It might be that what they need at the start of their relationship with a direct report or any kind of project management role is to suss out the preferences that others have. Figuring that out upfront is going to serve them well down the line to make sure that others’ silence isn’t misinterpreted as a sign of success, when in fact, it’s a sign of struggle.”

If perfect calibration is an unrealistic goal, err on the side of overcommunicating, which relays a desire to see your employees succeed. When a leader overcommunicates, Flynn says, “you might not be very effective at helping, but at least you are not also coming across as completely unfeeling. When you’re undercommunicating, there’s no evidence of any pro-social motivation to go along with an apparent lack of helpfulness.”

These insights may seem counterintuitive to managers who believe in giving employees independence and letting them figure things out for themselves. “It seems to align with the trope of ‘You are your own startup,’” Lide says. “It’s very popular, especially in certain industries, to sell the narrative of complete autonomy. For that reason, I think managers might be biased toward leaving people to their own devices, whether that’s in the employees’ best interests or not.”

Instead, she says, leaders who want to send a strong signal of empathetic concern should try to check in more frequently or add a few more bullets to an email, both to provide guidance and show support. And there may be a time and place for undercommunication, if used strategically.

“You might suffer in terms of being perceived as a leader who engages in tough love, but if that ultimately helps your employees’ development, that might be a trade-off managers have to make for the benefit of the people who work with them.”

First published Sept. 12, 2022, on Stanford Graduate School of Business Insights.

Discuss

About The Author

Claire Zulkey’s picture

Claire Zulkey

Having worked as an editor, freelancer Claire Zulkey appreciates how a competent writer can save precious editorial time, as she has for the New York Times, Atlantic, the Wall Street Journal, and clients such as Red Bull, Subaru, and Slack.

Comments

Quality not Quantity

Thanks for a thoughtful article.

There probably is something to be said for leadership communicating the right amount, and in my experience the right amount usually would be more than what is forthcoming. A lot more.

But the amount of communication is, as we engineering nerds like to say, "necessary but not sufficient."

More important is what gets communicated, and how. A huge part of what is communicated really ought to reflect leadership's LISTENING to its workforce, not just issuing messages from on high. And the job of truly listening is accomplished best by those who practice "go see" - those who get out where the work is done, who show respect and ask questions. 

Done properly, the practice of go-see is a vaslt more powerful form of communication than any town hall, memo, or canned video can hope to be. That's because it communicates respect and trust, which is the foundation for any and all subsequent communication.