How Communications Works

The Communications Equation is an end-to-end sequence that shows how communications actually works, step by step. It’s the best tool by far to determine how your communications should work, and even better, to help you determine where the problems are and how to fix them before you start to communicate.

The sequence is based on the Shannon Weaver Model of Communications outlined for the first time by Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver in their 1949 book The Mathematical Theory of Communications. I’ve used the Shannon-Weaver model for many years but kept tweaking it as I taught it around the world to make it sound as simple as possible, if not adjusting for things like the Internet, eventually coming up with the version outlined here.

I like this tool because it does two important things:

It breaks down every step in order through all eight stages of communications, and
By sequencing each step, it’s much easier to determine where your potential problems may start or how they influence the outcome of the communications.

As you scroll down, use the blue arrow button in the bottom right-hand corner to bring you back to the top.

The Eight Stages or Components

However, whatever and whenever you communicate, you go through eight stages of how communications works, mostly in order, but in some cases, in an iterative way. Sometimes your choices are deliberate, but many times you make subconscious or automatic decisions.

Here are the eight stages of the Equation.

Sender – the person who has something they want to say aloud to others in a public way. (A private thought not shared isn’t communications.)

Message – a point of view, either objective or subjective, about the topic. Messages only do three basic things: they …

Inform (the audience knows nothing about the topic)
Add (the audience knows something about the topic)
Change (the Sender doesn’t agree with what the audience knows, or thinks they know, about the topic)

Encoding and Decoding – the Sender “encodes” the message by choosing specific words, symbols or images to make it understandable to the Receiver. In contast, the Receiver “decodes” the message extracting the information through the words, symbols or images used by the Sender.

Mechanism (or Channel) – any discipline or tool to distribute the messages from the Sender to the Receiver.

Receiver – the defined individual or group(s) of people the Sender wants to receive the message and change their level of knowledge, opinion, attitude or behaviour. The most common reason why a Sender communicates is because the Receiver isn’t doing what the Sender wants. In other words, if the Sender and Receiver agree, there’s less purpose or urgency to talk to each other.

Feedback Loop – the system where the output of either the Sender or Receiver used by the other party for the next step in the communications. In every day-conversation, we usually call it the dialogue or conversation.

Noise – any interference on the interpretation of how the communications is working, either inside or outside the Sender or Receiver’s head.

Psychological – anything that affects the mind when thinking
Physical – tangible noise
Technological – any problems electronic or digital
Physiological – anything related to how the human body works
Semantic – anything related to language

Change – the outcome the Sender hopes to achieve. Or more specific, the Receiver changes their knowledge, opinion, attitude of behaviour or action so that the Sender and Receiver are now in alignment.

There are four outcomes to change:

We agree
We don’t agree – ok, so now what?
We agree to disagree – ok, so now what?
We need someone else to help or advise, such as a negotiator, mediator, arbitrator – be very careful of this one. Few people like other people to determine their fate.

Oftentimes, if the Change isn’t in alignment, the Communications Equation starts all over again.

One last important reminder: Context is everything.

Examples of Each Stage

Below I’ve provided specific, everyday examples of each stage how communications works.

These lists aren’t meant to be definitive, but hopefully will suggest other roles, tasks, processes or situations, either professional or personal, you may recongise.

The Sender might be a corporate spokesperson, your supervisor, the best man in a wedding party, your mother, a politician.

The Message could a list of ingredients, how a new expense report system should be used, why our organisation needs to change to transform for the future, how to get off the train if there’s a power failure.

Encoding and Decoding is when the Sender “encodes” the message by choosing French or using corporate jargon (words), adding specific emojis or hashtags (symbols), adding photos or pie charts (images). Hopefully the Receiver will know the purpose and meaning of these codes to be able to understand the message.

The Mechanism or Channel might be your voice in a live conversation, email, PowerPoint or Keynote, Tik-Tok, smoke signals, sign language, etc.

The Receiver might be your annoying little sister, customers, the postman, clients, employees, the audience in an auditorium or conference room.

The Feedback Loop could be a hallway conversation, the argument with your spouse who you are CONVINCED is not listening to you, a formal debate, a negotiation.

Noise is any interference on the interpretation of the communications, either inside or outside the Sender or Receiver’s head, including:

Psychological – anything that affects the mind when thinking, such as unconscious bias, self-talk (‘Oh wow, they’re so handsome’), you don’t know the other party who has come into your office without invitation, judgment about their gender (or non-gender)
Physical – tangible noise, such street construction, the clattering of the coffee urn and cutlery as the hotel brings in morning tea
Technological: a bad broadband connection while using Zoom, poor headphones
Physiological – anything related to how the human body works, such as mumbling, talking too fast, sarcasm or humour
Semantic – anything related to language, such as misunderstanding of meaning or context (using unnecessarily complex words, such as use vs utiise, using an annoying word that most people know is not a word “irregardless”)

The Change might be an agreement on where to go on holidays this year, how much to save each month of our household income, a decision about your KPIs for the next year, an improvement in risk management, please don’t tell anyone today is my birthday. In terms of needing another party to help determine the change, one of the most common examples is two siblings going to mom to make a decision (or potentially worse, mom comes and makes the decision for the children.)

Sample Problems with Each Step

Communications works when each step is effective and efficient. But more likely, individual (or multiple) problems arise at any stage.

If you want to ensure the proper communications works, or even improve your communications, identify what the problem might be at each stage and fix it before you begin communicating.

Below are the problems my workshop participants have brainstormed over the years as a guide. As before, the lists are not meant to be definitive, only suggestive for you. If you think there’s anything missing or would like to contribute to the lists, please add your thoughts or comments below.

What could go wrong with the …

Sender? They are …

Not prepared, they approach the situation without any background knowledge or context
Not interested, nor engaging, nor passionate
Not clear on their purpose from beginning
The wrong sender; someone else who has more relevant or credibility should be speaking
Only concerned about themselves or their own agenda, doesn’t give a whit about the Receiver
Doesn’t understand non-verbal communications
Not a good listener
Little charm or charisma
Lack of self-confidence
Not sensitive to the environment of their communication
Too reliant upon their perceptions, biases or stereotypes to understand the Receiver

Message? It could be …

Not clear – or, only clear to the Sender
Not organised, message is out of order or wrongly prioritised
Not understood: Sender assumes the Receiver knows more than they do about a specific topic, or the Receiver doesn’t know anything (or doesn’t want to know anything) about the topic, or either/both parties are wrong about what they think they know about the topic
Too complex: too many points to remember
Too simplistic
Is based on subjective information, but presented as objective
In the wrong language (corporate speak or jargon, talks in acronyms, too highbrow or too lowbrow)
Written for the Sender’s mouth, not for the Receiver’s ears
Not pitched at the right level (not appropriate, too detailed, etc.)
Delivered too fast, slow; hard to understand, thick accent

Mechanism? It could be:

The wrong mechanism (a person writes an email when they should go talk to them in person, relies on fast broadband in a rural area)
Used wrongly (X/Twitter for something complex; Instagram but not visual)
Not well-used or well-known by Receiver
Chosen by the Sender, when the Received should suggest the Mechanism
Technical issues with the mechanism (not everyone had unlimited broadband or speed)
Chosen poorly, so Receiver mis-trusts both the mechanism and the Sender (someone sends a complement by an indirect mechanism which doesn’t have the same impact as receiving the complement directly)
Slow, so the speed of communication doesn’t keep up with other aspects (timelines, for ex)

Receiver? They are …

Busy, wrong time, distracted (can’t listen)
Not in the mindset to listen (doesn’t care, not interested, apathetic, sees no value)
Disagrees from the start, bull-headed; doesn’t listen
A know-it-all, even if they aren’t in reality
Confused
Already made up their mind (or has preconceived notions or inaccurate knowledge) before the conversation takes place
Not ready either psychologically (overwhelmed) or physiologically (environment is too loud)
Confused by Sender (not the right Sender, Sender has no credibility to talk on a specific topic)
Uses bias, stereotypes, or wrong perceptions of audience
Jumps to conclusions without enough time or explanation
Has no questions, has no way to follow-up with the Sender

Feedback Loop? It is …

Broken: one or both sides not listening, or worse, listening only for what they want to hear, not what the person is saying
Difficult: because it’s the wrong mechanism (for ex, email where people tend to read between the lines)
Wrong time or not enough time: not the moment to discuss or debate
Not consistent: again, no listening
Full of too many voices or individuals: the argument gets lost
Misunderstood: both sides are generally agreeing, but not
Too fast: many people don’t like being articulate on command
Without proper questions
Both/either party doesn’t know how to address conflict, or fails to explore alternatives
Both/either party loses patience

Noise? It is …

The physical, psychological, physiological or semantic influences haven’t been considered in advance, in particular how to eliminate or minimise these influences for the conversation
Physical: loud distractions, visual noise
Psychological: bias, self-talk, lack of self-confidence
Physiological: mumbling, talking too fast, using sarcasm or humour that doesn’t translate to the other party
Semantic: lack of meaning or context, sing the wrong words (utilise vs use)

Change? It is …

Change too complex to implement
Overwhelming: where do I start?
Change too vague
Asking for too much change or too little
Change is too fast, not enough time to do whatever the Sender is requesting
Requested change isn’t aligned to business plan or strategy, either long- or short-term
Moving goal posts (management isn’t consistent with what change it wants)
No incentive to change

What system(s) have you used to understand how communications works, step by step? How do you decipher the problems in communications? Are there any issues missing in this article? Please feel free to add your thoughts and comments below.