United Methodeviations

Communichaos April 22, 2010

Pastors are generally noted for their preaching and teaching — their communication skills.  Yet, have you ever noticed how often “expert communicators” have so much difficulty communicating?  I have been doing church consultation for almost twenty years, and the number one concern at both congregational and conference levels is often communication.  We know how important it is, we actually know what makes for good/effective communication, we’ve got good messages to communicate, and essentially we’re all on the same side — so, what’s the problem?  I believe there are three main problems we encounter that prevent or undermine good communication: 1) confusing “transmitting” with communication, 2) over-reliance on information as the most important part of communication, and 3) making assumptions about what people “know.”

Back in the dark ages of my college days, I took a communication’s class that offered a very simple five-part definition of effective communication: creation of a message, transmission of a message, receiving of a message, interpretation of a message, and application of (or response to) a message.  Applying this definition of communication to the church, it becomes quickly very clear that we focus most of our energy and efforts on the first two parts, then take for granted the last three.  We create and transmit all kinds of messages: sermons, announcements, newsletters, emails, posters, flyers, billboards, radio and TV spots, websites — on and on.  And we assume if we transmit our messages clearly, then everyone will know exactly what we mean.  But this assumption leads to chaos.  One mentor of mine used to say that the problem with communication (in this case preaching) is that “the preacher thinks purple, says blue, the congregation hears green and sees red.”  What happens to a message once it leaves our control is anybody’s guess.  People hear through filters.  People interpret.  People ascribe meaning and intent.  People sort,sift, ignore, delete.  And through all these layers of processing, a lot can change.  Unless the person communicating makes the effort to make sure what is being received, how it is perceived, and what impact it makes, we cannot say that communication has occurred.  This is why dialogue is so much more valuable than monologue.  Just “transmitting” is no more effective than shouting at the darkness.  It is like the SETI program — the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence — constantly broadcasting data and information in the desperate hope that “somebody out there” will hear it and respond.  But at least SETI is also listening.  The problem in the church is that listening is often the poor second cousin to talking.  Case in point, prayer.  For the vast majority of Christians, prayer is all about what we need to say to God.  Prayers begin by invoking God’s name, then end with Amen — very few people praying give any time in silence to listen for God.  Prayer is all about what we want to say to God, rarely about what God might want to say to us.

(more…)