Communication has become a significant tool for survival and growth in the evolving world. While in the 20th century, communication was slow, primarily one-sided, and with one person in the center of the message, today, there are different sides and parties, allowing anyone involved to make their unique contribution. With the complexity of communication and the evolving structure and impact on many areas of life and work, communication needs special attention and ongoing analysis to help the communicator become better and more influential and win the auditorium or the group with less effort and more effectively.
While many claim they are “excellent” at communicating with others, others still lack confidence that what they say can or is influencing others for the greater good or future success.
The scenario often goes by that: A person wants to become influential at communicating. They go to a course or invest time to read and practice. What follows is a medley time when the communication goes smoothly and without problems. But after a while, people stop listening to the person and start feeling frustrated, thinking they have lost their “mojo to communicate effectively.” And here is where the investment into new courses, coaches, and all the other tools to help improve starts.
I don’t say that a leader or communicator has to skip some or all of these, but focusing too much on them leads the person in a different direction than the one that may bring the most prominent and potent impact on communication. With the intent to improve here and now, many communicators turn directly to someone who “can help them” within the shortest period. Coaches, mentors, and trainers are waiting for just that moment to make what the communicator may have done by themselves – analyzing the communication and describing the improvement needs and the agenda to reach that improvement. If skilled at reflection and feedback, the communicator often has the skills to do that by themselves, without involving others in the process of improvement so directly and sometimes significantly.
A simple list of questions to help analyze the communication can do more good than the best coach, mentor, or trainer in the area. While the mentioned professionals may have extensive experience, every situation and communication agenda is unique and has more than the apparent information to offer when trying to analyze it and build and improve the agenda. For the leader and communicator aiming to improve, it is crucial to get the whole picture of the situation, analyze it for themselves, and decide if external help is needed.
A list of short questions can help make the analysis part of the communication more detailed. Using this, or a similar list, brings more clarity and focus to the action agenda.
Q: Was the audience analysis complete and on target?
Many people fail to describe how a complete analysis of something looks. Getting to the best solution is only possible if you obtain the correct data in terms of amount or quality. A common mistake people make is to over-analyze, which means that they get more and more data until it becomes so large that it overtakes good analyses and exhausts people. Or the other direction around – data is so small as an amount that decisions are more hunches than logical findings. Focusing here, getting the right amount of data, and structuring the right tools and analysis techniques helps build the ground for the next steps.
Q: Did the audience react as anticipated?
Even the most excellent experts in information analysis may miss the one element that shows how data should be interpreted – people’s reactions. If the need for quality analysis knocks on the door, missing the audience’s reactions and non-verbal signs can easily lead to discrepancies in the analysis. So, considering how people have reacted can help predict future behaviors and structure a recovery plan for each situation.
Q: What points were people most or least interested in?
To engage the audience in the subsequent communication, a good communicator must gather information on their communication strengths and where they need improvement to become more powerful, impactful, and mind- and attitude-changing. Answering current questions in the analysis part improves communication, helps deepen relationships with the audience, and creates trust.
Q: Where did people get confused?
At some moment in the communication process, the audience may become confused. A single word, a phrase, or a whole part of the communication may cause this. While body language can help identify these moments of confusion, no communicator can catch all the signs during communication. Asking for an honest answer can be a helpful tool to collect and then sort and analyze information about confusion. Knowing where to push a little bit creates opportunities for improvement, no matter the topic or the area the communicator is executing.
Q: Where were people most engaged?
Identifying the peak of engagement during a presentation can become a turning point in how the communicator positions themselves in front of the audience. No one wants to attend to perfect communication, but people seek to see improvements based on what they have shared. Identifying the peak engagement moment can help the communicator boost communication in the right direction. Careful analysis of this part of the whole process creates new processes. It makes the communicator more focused on bringing out the best they have delivered as a basis for improvement.
Q: Which engagement tactics worked … and… which didn’t?
Now, all communicators have some strategies and tactics to engage the audience. Some use humor; others show videos; the third part focuses on bringing exciting facts, etc. In some audiences, these tactics and strategies may work as one cohesive approach, but nearly all are successful for the wider audience.
In the analysis part of the communication, what makes a significant impact is understanding which of the methods and tactics have contributed most to the audience engagement. Being honest with themselves and seeing these tactics as milestones in improving the communication process is a crucial turnaround point for every communicator to make communication more impactful to others.
Q: How can we improve feedback mechanisms?
Our world is imperfect, so why should a communicator live with the deception that a communication created can be perfect? There is always room for improvement. Often, a communicator finds a suitable tool and starts using it without even doing a single evaluation of that tool. The benefit of feedback cannot miss the tools that this feedback is collected with. In time, a careful analysis of the number of tools and the impact of each of them on the more excellent feedback pool is essential. This information can help the communicator look deeper into tools, methodologies, and tactics, repurpose and reposition each, and shape the list to those most relevant to the situation and auditorium.
IN CONCLUSION:
Communication is a grounding process that needs constant evolvement, as with many other methods. Getting the best out of each communication stream created and delivered helps the communicator improve their work and provide more consistent, impactful, and relevant messages. That is why the communication analysis must be a constant and evolving procedure connected to each part of the communication to create opportunities for improvement, development, and higher achievements.
The Human place - a path from you to yourself 