Explaining Misunderstanding
March 27th, 2006 by HalI'm doing quite a bit of reading and research as I'm writing my book. Over the weekend I was reading about philosophical hermeneutics, the study of how we understand what is written, stated, or performed. I'm sharing a quote today from Hans-Georg Gadamer:
"(H)istory does not belong to us; but we belong to it."1
One implication is that we have no chance of understanding what others mean in their writing and speaking without first coming to appreciate our own historical way we arrived here today.
All projects have a predisposition for misunderstanding.
What does this have to do with projects? In all but straight-forward acts of coordination, we are more likely to misunderstand and be misunderstood than not. When we share opinions on what is good and bad, where there's opportunity and risk, what options for action are opened or closed, and what is possible and not possible, we are speaking (or listening) from a perspective of historical pre-judging. For instance, what has been good for me before shapes how I listen when others speak.
In planning conversations on projects I see people who tend not to be reflective either about their own situation or how it is they understand others. I rarely see people taking care to ask good questions. I do see people saying, "I agree," or "I disagree." Without reflection and inquiry we are destined for misunderstanding. That eventually leads to poor project results.
All projects have a predisposition for misunderstanding. AEC projects have a bigger chance due to the contracting approach that brings strangers together and that teams only come together infrequently. This is compounded by the urge for being in action — real action involving design or construction — that leaves less time for reflection and inquiry.
Avoid the urge to move quickly from planning to action. Take a little more time for reflecting on how you understand what has been said and then ask some great questions. These are actions that build a shared context for being effective in action with each other.
- Gadamer, Hans-Georg, Truth and Method, p 276, 1989. [ ⇑ back ]
Related Posts
- Ask Two Great Questions to Minimize Misunderstanding In my last posting I wrote about misunderstanding and a few things we can do to avoid it. One of the best practical a...
- Dare to Be Naive I've been doing quite a bit of writing lately about lean and kaizen. I'm taking a break today from sharing my own wri...
- Planning, Scheduling, and Forecasting Glen Alleman took me to task for yesterday's posting Misunderstanding Project Planning as Anticipation. He wrote a ra...
- Combining Lean and Agile in Construction Agile and Lean theories were used to design the mechanical and electrical construction processes. The success of a lea...
- Combining Lean and Agile in Construction Agile and Lean theories were used to design the mechanical and electrical construction processes. The success of a lea...
March 27th, 2006 at 8:21 pm
Excellent post, Hal. Projects by their nature are staffed cross-functionally, so of course the personal perceptual filters of each function/department get in the way of effective communication. Each project team member is asking “what’s in it for me?” or “what does this mean to me?” (or at least they should be asking these questions more). I instruct clients and students alike to ask “why” up to five times to delve into the real meaning behind the comments or questions. Still, misunderstandings persist. Great post to make us think on a Monday.
April 9th, 2006 at 6:55 pm
Thanks for a gret post Hal.
You might be interested in reading a few of the papers on our site. We have been studying how differences in institutions — i.e. beliefs, values, norms, conventions, customs, and rule-systems — lead to misjudgements, misunderstandings, and conflicts between project participants who originate from different organizational and national contexts.
Ryan Orr
Collaboratory for Research on Global Projects
http://crgp.stanford.edu
August 23rd, 2006 at 12:24 am
Hal,
Your posting states the obvious.. but that is why it is so good.
It is too often I run into such miscommunication issues while at work that it takes all my effort and sense of humor not to lose my marbles.
For the projects I manage it is not just the individuals’ differences in personality or manners that is the root cause of all of the misunderstandings I have to work out; it is compounded by as Mr. Orr states: “project participants who originate from different… national contexts.”
I am an American based in Japan overseeing R&D here and in the US, production and implementation of new designs is in China. Unfortunately the voice of reason is often forgotten by members of the group. Most often heard on all sides: “we do it this way, so why can’t they??”
Most failures are caused by the tendancy of individuals at seemingly unrelated times to protect that way of thought and do not take the time to stop, listen, absorb, and think over what is at hand before moving on. Then despite the known language barriers, too many people act without following up or confirming obscure information properly. Yet, everyone will be immediately up in arms ready and willing to play the blame game when a misunderstanding related problem comes to a head.
In today’s world of international business, this is a daily issue. Yet it is not stressed enough in the education of those coming up through the ranks. More often it is a side note to -how to analyze “your” position in order to be right.. which is “success”!
Everyone wants their own side to win when if one side fails we all lose.
And as you well know the costs from that are large.
So it is wonderful to find people like yourself furthering the call to bring attention to the pitfalls of misunderstanding.