pepper | (no subject)

I wish I could use the phrase "It's not what you said, it's how you said it," without it sounding like a complete cliche. Either that, or I need to remember the training I went on about high- and low-context people, and how to cope with them - because the emails I've been getting today from The Annoying Man In Facilities are just so... GRAH. Perhaps he can't express himself very well - but "Do you want me to do it then?" just comes across as hostile to me. Maybe I'm reading into it.

High-context and low-context, in case you're wondering, is about how people talk. High-context people, when asked a question, will give you the answer, and all the surrounding reasons, plus the history of the building, what they had for breakfast this morning, and how their mother's operation went. Low-context people will give you the exact answer to what you asked - nothing more. Both can be difficult to deal with - sometimes you just want a simple "yes" or "no", and not all the reasons for that decision, because you just want to get the email sent and go home, please. And sometimes you need to know a little more than "yes" or "no", and having to drag every bit of information can be like pulling teeth.

It helped me deal with certain people at my previous work - one woman in particular would only give a direct, brusque answer, and I used to find her incredibly rude. But I learnt to see it as just the way she talks, and I could deal with it without taking it personally. (She was, actually, kind of rude, but I think some of that was in response to how other people reacted to her - she probably lived in a world of bad attitudes, and didn't realise she was bringing a lot of that upon herself.)

I started out with a point... Oh, yes: written communication is just as bad, if not worse, as most people aren't trained to express themselves emotionally through their writing. People on LJ are pretty good, but I think that's because it's pretty writing-centric. But people day-to-day don't necessarily know how their writing makes them appear.

I still think this guy is being rude to me, though.

---

See y'all later for the AIM

redial_the_gateHathor rewatch, eh?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Wow, the information on high vs. low context people is really fascinating.

I'm definitely high-context, often rambling all over the planet as I try to give as complete an answer as possible. And oh, by the way, would you look at that...
I can make people's heads explode.

I really do try to curb that in a professional atmosphere though. Because people don't really need to know the entire history of the universe in answer to "When is the next check run?"

Hee. Yeah, it's funny to pin it down - it was one of the few work training things I've been on where I've actually learnt something useful. *g*

I vary (I think it's not a black-and-white thing, just that people tend to be more one than the other). I can be very low-context when I'm in a bad mood, and if asked "Do you know what you want for dinner?" I'll answer, "No." But in writing, I get very high-context - I have to edit ruthlessly, otherwise I end up with long, rambling pieces that never end. And I get very, very, very high-context when drunk. *g*

In a complete aside, I caught a story on CNN this morning about how a study has just shown swearing at work can be good for office morale (just watch when and how you do it). :-)

(I swear, who comes UP with these silly studies?)

Heh! We used to have a quiet room in my previous work, where people could go if they really needed to be undisturbed for a while - perhaps they also need a swear room, soundproofed, so people can just go in and yell for five minutes.

I'd use it.

That sounds like a reality show in the making...

*snerk*

It'd be quite entertaining.

It took me forever to figure out the high/low context thing. I'm a high-context person, so when people give a really short answer I'm left wondering if they're mad at me or something. But then I got this job, and discovered how truly annoying high-context people can be when you just want to transfer their call and don't actually need 90% of the information they're trying to give you. So I try to be mellow about both kinds of people, now.

But yeah, I agree about the writing thing. A lot of people find communication via written method very intimidating because it doesn't come naturally. And I realized that people like us, who do communicate well via writing, can come off as very scary and intimidating to those people. Especially when the whole context thing comes into play, as well.

And I realized that people like us, who do communicate well via writing, can come off as very scary and intimidating to those people.

Hmm. I wouldn't want to make my writing less clear, though, in order to be less intimidating. I definitely do change the words I'll use, depending on context, though.

Actually, my problem with non-friends tends to be that I can't talk / write Business Bollox. People at work use words and phrases that just... don't enter my head. :) (Although it's not too bad, where I am now - I've worked in offices where it's like they're speaking a different language. And such a boring language, too.)

On emotions in writing: I have to dig for information in what people write via e-mail. It's so hard! I don't think people understand that not only what they say, but how it looks is very important. And I don't just mean looks as how it comes across, or which emoticons you use (although that's part of it), but how the text flows from one thought to the next, and which punctuation you use where.

There is a thing called a paragraph break. It is very useful.

I think high-context vs. low-context is something to remember for when I next ask a certain friend something. Maybe I can say, "I'd really like a low-context answer to this question. Just give me the basics, please." Might come in handy.

I'd also love a phrase I can use with my not-boss (we're training a new advisor, and I'm supposed to help but not do everything for him) to say, "This is something you should do--not me," without it sounding rude and impertinent. Not that your situation is equivalent, but...yeah. Boo on dense, rude people.

Ack! broken tag! *cries*

Heehee, and timed to such humorous effect, too. *g*

*mopes some more*

Yeah - I think a lot of people write like they'd speak, because they're simply not aware of things like formatting. It's a useful skill. I know I can send an email out in such a way that will get me a response, but I know other people who'll send out long, wordy things that no one will read and so everyone misses the one or two pertinent bits at the very end.

White space. Love it. Use it. *g*

Heh. I keep wanting to go on a neuro-linguistic programming course - it's creepy how, with the right sort of words and body langugage, you can have a huge, HUGE influence on how other people respond.

And yeah, it's a nice thing to be aware of, the high/low thing - you can prepare in advance for dealing with it. I learnt about it about a couple of years ago, and it still pops into my head fairly often.

I keep wanting to go on a neuro-linguistic programming course

Ooooh...the shiny opportunities for manipulation... I want to do this, too.

Daniel Jackson is the high-contextest high-context person ever.

Oh god yes... witness WoO:

Hammond: "So the loop can be broken?"

Daniel: "Err... There's a section of text on the altar that deals specifically with the geomagnetic storms that power the device. Apparently they recur every fifty or so years - which is why, incidentally..."

Jack: "YES, sir. The loop can be broken."

Sam does it, too, but Sam doesn't try again after she's been cut off.

Poor Daniel. And he can't even get it out of his system by presenting or publishing in academia! Awww.

Actually, I read a story recently that was set in a later season, 7 I think, and had Daniel rambling on and on in a combat situation, and it really bugged me. Daniel's smart enough not to do that, now.

Interesting. I'm definitely high-context most of the time (though I think I can be low-context when needed). I just tend to operate under the assumption that everyone should have as much information as possible.

It's interesting on the writing thing. I think sometimes, in terms of 1-1 communication, I actually do better writing than in person. I've run into problems sometimes because I absolutely cannot hear the tone of my own voice (and only barely distinguish tones in other's voices) so people will think I'm cranky/annoyed/something when I'm actually not at all. Writing doesn't have that auditory problem.