Peter Drucker on Communication #2

2. Communication is expectation. We see/hear largely what we expect to see/hear. The unexpected is usually not received or it is ignored or misunderstood. The human mind attempts to fit impressions and stimuli into a framework of expectations. It resists vigorously any attempt to make it “change its mind,” that is, perceive what it doesn’t expect to perceive.

Before we can communicate, we must know what the recipient expects to see/hear. Only then can we know whether there is a need for an “awakening” that breaks through the recipient’s expectations and forces him to realize that the unexpected is happening.

3. Communication makes demands. It demands that the recipient become somebody, do something, or believe something. In other words, if communication fits with the beliefs, aspirations, values, or purpose of the recipient, it is powerful. If it goes against them, it is likely not to be received or be resisted. At its most powerful, communication affects a change of beliefs, aspirations, values, or purpose.

4. Communication and information are different and indeed largely opposite—yet interdependent. Where communication is perception, information is logic. The more information can be freed of the human component – of emotions, values, perceptions, and expectations – the more valid and reliable it becomes. Information is always encoded. To be received, let alone be used, the code must be known and understood by the recipient.

Similar to my comment in #1, I don’t entirely agree with this. I believe his ideas about many other things are stronger, and plan to make several more posts about them. 

Peter Drucker on Communication #1

Peter Drucker (1909-2005) was a management consultant, educator and author (Wikipedia).  I read several of his books many years ago. He was philosophical yet practical about business. He had many insights. One of them was Management:Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (1973). I recently recalled he had written about communication.

His four fundamentals of communications are:

1. Communication is perception.

2. Communication is expectation.

3. Communication makes demands.

4. Communication and information are different and indeed largely opposite—yet interdependent.

In this post I will only expand on the first one.

“Is there a sound in the forest if a tree falls and no person hears it?” The correct answer is: No. There are sound waves, but no sound unless someones perceives it. Drucker makes this a segue to communication.

It is the recipient who communicates. The so-called communicator, the one who emits the communication, does not communicate. He utters. Unless there is someone who hears, there is no communication. There is only noise.

Perception isn’t logic. It is experience. The “silent language” of gestures, tone of voice, and the context – including cultural and social referents – can not be dissociated from what is said.

One can communicate only in the recipient’s language or his terms, using terms that relate to his experience. The connection between experience, perception, and concept formation – that is, cognition – is much subtler and richer than earlier philosophers imagined.

Fanatics aren’t convinced by rational arguments, because they do not have the ability to perceive a communication that goes beyond their range of emotions.

I believe Drucker's description of the recipient is correct in general, but I personally wouldn't say it is only the recipient who communicates. I think it's a two-way thing. Maybe he had this one-way view due to his work with higher-level managers. Indeed, he writes later in the same chapter about downward communication from managers to subordinates. He writes: [A]ll one can communicate downwards are commands, that is, prearranged signals. One cannot communicate downward anything connected with understanding, let alone motivation." That doesn't sound fully real to me. For example, what about communicating between peers from different work areas? Teachers and students? Client and consultant?