American View: Should “Miscommunication” Be Classified as a Strategic Security Vulnerability?

This is where I believe Ms. Sampson’s account seems to fall apart: if she truly heard the stranger at the sink say something outrageous, she could have easily cleared things up with a question:

 

Stranger: “I’m going to wipe my hands on my [bleeped].”

Sampson: “Sorry, what?”

Stranger, confused: “I’m going to wipe my hands on my jeans.”

Sampson: “Oh. Right. Of course! Sorry. I misheard and was a bit thrown.”

Stranger, pausing in confusion: “What did you think I said?”

Sampson: “I swear, I thought you said, “I’m going to wipe my hands on my [bleeped].’”

Stranger: “WHAT?!?” [bursts into laughter]

Sampson: “I know, right? I mean, how would that even work for drying anything?”

Stranger: “Maybe it’s made out of terrycloth?”

[both women laugh, finish cleaning up, and return to their pub pals unoffended]

As I said: the way the “loo hullabaloo” was described in the article just doesn’t seem realistic. The supposed comment, the lack of reaction, the “sense of threat” … it all comes across as fabricated like something from a teen fanfic story. I can’t prove that, and I won’t assert it; it’s just how the tale hits me, given my own experience with humans communicating.

 

Specifically, I should disclose, are my own persistent challenges communicating. As someone left permanently hard of hearing thanks to years of military service, I have a great deal of difficulty understanding other people’s spoken statements. Between my inability to hear anything at certain pitches and constant tinnitus, any acoustic interference or distraction will comically disrupt my ability to properly parse other people’s speech, especially when I’m not familiar with the speaker’s voice. My brain attempts to construct meaning from slivers of syllables, often without applying context. Since it’s my brain frantically trying to create meaning, what I think I hear is usually surreal and nonsensical. I can empathize with someone who heard the word “jeans” and mistakenly interpreted it as “[bleeped].” It happens.

 

This voice translation problem is such a constant strain in my parse that I frequently ask people to repeat their statements when I suspect I might not have deciphered them correctly. My friends and colleagues are quite familiar with my requests. When it comes to strangers, I share why I’m asking so there are (hopefully) no hard feelings. “I have hearing damage and I want to make sure I didn’t misunderstand you.” 99% of people I ask to repeat themselves are gracious and accommodating, as the want to be understood. Sure, it’s a little awkward sometimes, but it’s worth the embarrassment to ensure I don’t accidentally pass someone the salt and pepper spray.

 

This vocal communication frequently comes up at work. In fact, it’s been my constant annoying companion since I first took part in a night infantry ambush drill with 2nd Brigade, 49th Armoured Division back in the summer of 1989. Our platoon burned off hundreds of rifle and machinegun rounds in the space of a few minutes with no hearing protection. I’ve had the tinnitus ever since, and it’s only gotten worse. I’ve had to work around the problem in the Army, in the Air Force, in corporate life, and at home. There’s no cure; only mitigation.

Given my painful familiarity with incomprehensible conversations, I consider miscommunication to be one of the most dangerous internal threats facing organisations. Depending on which study you cite, somewhere around 90% of all insider threats are non-malicious and/or unintentional. They arise from good people making mistakes. Workers think they’re doing the right thing because they don’t know better or because they misunderstood what they were told.

 

I’ve seen this occur frequently, especially in large and complicated projects. Meaning gets lost between key stakeholders and Bad Things Happen™. Deadlines are missed. Deliverables are unusable. Mistakes must be cleared up. Tasks must be restarted from square one. Schedules slip. Budgets bust. All because something essential got lost in translation. This is normal!

 

Interpersonal communication is, I believe, the most important activity that all critical path activities rely on. Leaders, project managers, and supervisors from the bottom of the pyramid to the executive boardroom must constantly QC people’s work to ensure that everyone is doing the right things the right way for the right reasons because anything that can be misunderstood will be misunderstood. Call it “Murphy Slaw.”

 

This is why I think Ms. Sampson’s claim can serve as an effective cautionary tale for business leaders. Even if we set aside her claim’s undercurrent of prejudice, the “I heard an offending word” part of her story shows just how far out of control a situation can get when a listener misunderstands an innocuous comment. In this case, just ONE WORD processed incorrectly in a listener’s brain seems to have set off a tempest in a fusspot that’s likely to cause unnecessary interpersonal strife that will interferes with working and social life all over the UK. All of which could have been prevented if the weak link in the conversation – the message’s receiver – had mitigated the well-understood risk that affects every verbal exchange by asking for clarification.

 

This is why I believe all strategic governance models should explicitly call out miscommunication as a recurring, omnipresent, and potentially serious strategic vulnerability.

 

You can’t wholly prevent misunderstandings, but you can minimize their frequency and potential impact through pre-emptive mitigating techniques: speak clearly, write things down, confirm receipt, agree on key terms, etc. Your people deserve no less.

 

B-sides, as an influential litre in your organ striation, it’s the lease you can due.

 

 

[1] Today I learned that Brits use the word “cubicle” to refer to what Americans call a “restroom stall” and New Yorkers call a “luxury condo.”

[2] A proper clinical term for male anatomy that you can’t use in a newspaper cartoon.

 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*

 

Rollover article summary: Weird how strategic security governance models don’t explicitly call out miscommunication as a constant and impactful vulnerability.