Is communication competency a skill or an art?

I'd like push back on talent being innate and not learned or earned.

Helen Keller proved the world that deaf mutes can communicate effectively and artistically.

My wife, her sister, and our two daughters were and are professional ballet dancers. My wife's sister had natural talent while my wife was clumsy. My wife performed at the opening of the Kennedy Center in serious company. She and her sister went on to the Joffrey Ballet. Coincidentally, our daughters mirrored the same path.

Steven Hawking, with the aid of a computer has learned to become one of the most effective communicators in the fields of physics and mathematics.

Rather than create a long list of people who overcame a lack of talent, ability, and handicaps with hard work, I will close with an opinion. My wife says it is not the most talented who succeed, but the ones who want it most. In my career of training salespeople and in working with kids on a ball field, I concur. We have both watched people overcome a lack of talent, innate ability, and achieve a high quality of performance that if you did not know where they began, you would never suspect how untalented they were.

Nine years ago, I had a minor stroke that wiped out a good deal of my verbal writing skills. My vocabulary diminished and my plans for writing in my fifth decade of life seemed at an end. I spent five years doing word games, writing rubbish, and tripping over my tongue before I began writing about sales and marketing. People who know me know the difference, I do. New people in my life are surprised when they find out.

With faith, consistent, persistent, hard work, and determination, anyone can accomplish anything. The human being is an incredible creature with boundless abilities. Communication can be learned and developed to a high level of art by anyone willing to do “whatever it takes.”

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the answers on communication. A friend gave me a snippet from a news paper years ago. It said, "If you think communication is all talk, you haven't been listening."

I'm still not good at it; but really great communication begins with listening.

Interesting conversation. I believe communication means that a message was sent, it was received, and it was understood. Can communication be taught? Yes I believe it can, but there's more to it. As mentioned, listening is a key component of communication and many people listen for the pause to jump in to take someone where theoy think they want to go, not really listening to what is being said, but rather, for the pause! We believe customers don't care what you know until they know you care, and that's part and parcel of communication.

I would like to build upon what Jim wrote, paraphrased here...great communication is great storytelling. I agree. And at its most basic level, a story is someone, who overcomes something to get what they want.

One of our most effective sessions at our last quarterly sales meeting was an exercise in storytelling. We usually end each session with a personal commitment letter. This last time it was an odd letter, it was a story. The letter had to have the following elements and it had to be hand delivered to their direct manager...

1) Your story has a character (who it happens to) - The character in your story is your team
2) Write down the plot (what happens)
3) Share a desire (what you want)
4) Compose an idea (why you want it)
5) Project a conflict (what do you think will conspire to keep your desire from being fulfilled)
6) One thing your direct manager can do in the next 2-3 weeks that will begin to make the story come true

We have been reading these stories back to the team and it is encouraging and future focused. I do believe everyone can learn to be a storyteller. It is in our DNA as humans

What an interesting discussion! I believe it was Henry David Thoreau who said, "The kindest thing a man ever did for me was to ask me a question and listen to my answer." The thoughts in our mind get all tangled up, kind of like a bowl of spaghetti (no sauce!). When someone asks me a question, or when I write my thoughts down, I pull out the spaghetti strand by strand and I begin to understand myself. "Thoughts disentangle themselves when passing over the lips or through the pencil tips."

When someone listens to me (without an agenda) I begin to know who I am. When I listen to another person (again, without an agenda) I am helping to introduce that person to himself or herself. This can be very satisfying communication. Frana Hamilton, Teacher/Adviser, Community Business College.

Competancy is the baseline skill ... all the stuff we learned in middle school, practiced and refined and, if we are fortunate, edited wisely.

The art takes off from there, and happens when inspiration and creativity infuse the communication with light and vibrancy and resonance such that even people who might otherwise miss the skill gladly acknowledge the art.

Hi Lisa,

I agree with both you and Michael that a skill is taught and learned, the art comes in when that skill evolves into something more beyond what was originally taught.

I would also like to add one more angle to this when it comes to communication. For me personally, communication is an extremely important skill that covers so many different areas that it is both a skill and an art.

Knowing what to communicate, who to communicate it to, why it's needed and when it's needed is a skill. However the way you communicate in order to effectively get your point across different cultures, view points, opinions, personalities and backgrounds is where the art comes in.

I think that communication competency is a skill... which can turn into art when you have the mastery of the skill to communicate effectively with your audience - an art that will bridge the gap between cultural divide and language differences.

I’m not sure that art is a good word for this. I guess art could be defined as an exercise of human skill but you need to acquire the skill first and practice it. I can learn to write and speak in most universities. Here is what I will never find in a university – how to listen! When listening and talking/writing coexist, you have the true definition of communication.

It's both, but the transformatoon od a skill into an art is not a natural progression for many.

The potential for eventual aetistry lies in the physiognomy of the brain - how an individual is wired. There are some individuals who will never get good, or get comfortable, or overcome a tin ear because it's just not the way they are wired.

That said, those with the requisite wiring in place can learn a lot about techniques that will make them more effective. And, yes, listening is the most frequently neglected of those techniques.

Knowing the basics of communication is a skill. The Heath brothers have outlined them in their book "Made to Stick."
The book's outline follows the acronym "SUCCES" (with the last s omitted). Each letter refers to a characteristic that can help make an idea "sticky":

Simple — find the core of any idea
Unexpected — grab people's attention by surprising them
Concrete — make sure an idea can be grasped and remembered later
Credible — give an idea believability
Emotional — help people see the importance of an idea
Stories — empower people to use an idea through narrative

But, using these basics well is an art that comes with a great deal of experience and practice.

My personal belief is that communications competency can be taught -- which I guess means I think it's a skill. Although there's a lot of art to it.

When I teach communications, I focus on what I've come to call "The Three P's of Presenting"...

• Pictures -- Create images in your audience's mind
• Personalize -- Use examples that your audience can relate to, either on an emotional level or on a "how you can apply this to your daily life" level
• Plotline -- Make sure that your audience knows where they're headed to when you're communicating to them. This gives what you're saying a sense of purpose. (This goes along with everyone who mentioned storytelling.)

One other thing: I agree with everyone on here who said listening is critical. As I tell a lot of my clients, "There's a big difference between information and communication. Informing is one-way, communicating is two-way."

And it's probably a good guideline not to use the word "I" too much. But I think I failed on that one.

Communication is absolutely a skill, but after a little thought, I can't agree that it is an art. I understand why such a characterization would be applied to communication - due to the intricacies and nuances that must be addressed to do it effectively. But there are many approaches to communication that can indeed be taught and subsequently mastered. I humbly offer my own:

I propose the following “five-step” communication model:
1. Say/send the message
2. Validate the message was received
3. Validate the message was understood
4. Validate the message was accepted
5. Repeat

It is not enough to just say or send the message and assume, well…anything. The sender needs to take the step to ensure the message was indeed received. And even if the message was received, it may not necessarily be understood. After the sender verifies the message has been understood, there may still be disagreement preventing the message from being accepted. Communication can never be based on assumption. Communication must be validated and verified, and that takes legwork and follow through. And finally, the communication has to be repeated. In some cases it has to be repeated again and again. A marketing VP once told me, “You have to tell Sales the same thing five times before they hear it once.” My friend Peter Kretzman (the person responsible for the fifth step) told me a CEO he once knew quoted a source stating that a fact had to be repeated 72 times to be absorbed by the listener. (I certainly hope that is not the case.)

Bill's comment on listening is right on the mark. One can be skilled in the "mechanics" of communicating but lack the ability to listen and understand. Communication is all about sending information and obtaining understanding. The latter is frequently overlooked.

Many people don't really listen. They merely wait for an opportunity to talk and then jump in. If your listening is limited to looking for the gaps so you can get your message out, then you're likely missing the other person's message.

The "art" is in balancing the talking and the listening and ensuring there is understanding between the parties.

Stephen covey said of all human communication, "First seek to understand". Good advice to live by.

I agree with Michael...

Communications competency begins with knowing the basic skills of how to get messages across.

The artistry of communications — doing it really well, with flair, with efficiency, with impact, uniquely — is what the really talented communicators develop on top of the basic skills.

Al Shultz
www.alshultz.com

I think a better way to phrase it is: Is it a skill or a talent?

A skill is that which you learn, regardless of innate ability.

A talent is something in which you have an innate ability.

The best communicators have a talent for it, then work hard to improve their skills.

Very interesting question, indeed.
I don't see art and skill as two comparable traits. I see that skill comes from "practicing" your art.
Communication is not exception! To be a great communicator, you need to communicate a lot.
In other words, effective communication is an art and being a great communicator is a skill.

Skill, art and a discipline

I tend to think that 'communicating' is oversimplified. Most of the answers here are very good (I particularly like Gary Hart's) but often address a narrow aspect of the skill (which mode or modes are being addressed such as talking, writing, visual etc.), technique (method of communicating such as story/analogy, example, relevant facts, cause and effect, benefit, etc.) or implementation (sales, training, rhetoric, conveyance, personal, financial, scientific, entertainment, etc.).

Arthur C. Clarke's quote; "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." is something that can have a suitable analog here where art (or talent) stand in for magic. There are many forms, cultures and methods of communicating and the ability to do so is contingent on knowledge and experience within those requirements. A persons ability is contingent on their individual levels of acquisition of the associated knowledge and experience within those required areas. So someone can become a great communicator in one area of expertise or for a specific group while remaining deficient in other areas. All of these are learned skills. The inclination of describing an individual as "a natural communicator" is really only someone who learned these by observation and practice that wasn't necessarily in a formal teaching environment. Sometimes it may even have been a survival skill at a prior time.

The biggest problem in communication is when the person communicating begins to believe that their own skills are above reproach and are unwilling to broaden them to suit the audience (one or more) at hand. Whether it's domain knowledge, cultural issues, business/social environment, the communicator must either know the needs to communicate to a specific audience or at least acknowledge to that audience a deficit in that knowledge. If that deficit goes unacknowledged, the audience is likely to prejudge the information prior to receiving it. This is because the audience has little confidence in the communicator because the audience believes that the communicator has dismissed the information as unimportant, or is being deceptive, or is merely uninformed.

So getting back to the basic question, I think the answer is that it is only an art to those who have acquired the skill (competency) and don't want to spend the time to acquire it. Regardless of the reasons why they don't want to acquire it (whether it's not important to them, a lack of confidence in learning or improving on a skill.) The only exception is a profound physiological deficit that prevents it. Communication is fundamentally a survival skill. How well it's refined is up to the individual and their environment.

An artist is merely someone who has met two dependent criteria:
1. Spent sufficient time to learn the techniques and methods to create their art.
2. Has an audience that perceives that work as art.
If you only meet the first criteria, you are the "unrecognized artist."
If you only meet the second, you are a successful charlatan.

I agree with everyone, it is a skill you can learn and perfect it to an art. I believe most people, especially in business, today understand this concept. I believe the missing link is the work needed to be good at it. Just like ballet, sports, or anything you learn to do, to be great it takes hours and hours of practice. Would we have ever known Michael Jordan had he never stepped on a basketball court. He has the natural ability, but without the desire to hone his skills daily, we would have never heard of Michael Jordan. I find working through Toastmasters and the University of South Florida, that the biggest problem many people have is overcoming the fear of taking that first step.

Communication is both skill and art...I believe once you elevate communication to the level of art,sky's the limit with your ability to connect with people of varying cultures, ages and nationalities.

The skill enters in the understanding of the "process of communication." It becomes an art when you are able to apply this process to connect with others.

As a business owner and leader, I could not have the success I've had if I had not perfected communciation as both a skill and an art.

communication is both a skill and art. A skill to know how to say what needs to be done and an art to know how to say what you want to say so you say it clearly and concisely.

Communication skills (writing or/and speaking) are the essence of business and I believe that it starts as a skill and once a person is senior enough it is becoming more into an art.

Communication is both a skill and an art. It is not enough to know how to turn a phrase in an eloquent fashion, either verbally or written. With any communication there is a sender and a receiver; therefore, one must know his or her audience. Timing and the method of communication are important factors as well. For example, it is clearly inappropriate to fire an long-time employee in an e-mail, when it is obvious that more personal communication is required in that situation.

Communication is about conveying ideas and getting someone to act on those ideas. I am reminded of the Dean of Students at my university many years ago as he addressed incoming freshmen. He told us that the most important word we would hear in college was "communication." At the time, I sloughed it off as it were the kind of advice Benjamin Braddock received in The Graduate, when his uncle told him he had one word for him..."Plastics." I learned over time that Dean Field was absolutely right on. The ability to communicate, either verbally or in written form, is indeed one of the most important skills/arts a person could develop, for that ability can open doors that would otherwise be closed.

Communication: Language is a skill. It can be tested for the mechanics. Selling is an art. It can only be guaged by the final result.

I'm not sure it can be jammed into either category. To a great extent it is a skill that can be honed, but there are some people who just have the knack for it. When I went to college in late 40s, early 50s, communication meant learning to talk and to write. Finally people wised up and now listening skills are being given almost as much attention as speaking and writing skills.

As to its being an art, some people seem to have a natural ability and some seem not to - it can be learned to some extent but if one doesn't have the natural ability, it is much harder to learn.

It feels so good to be listened to and so demeaning to try to speak and not have anyone listen to one's message.

Communication is an essential skill. It needs to be mastered as part of one's college education and reinforced periodically with employee training.

A person who is less able to communicate effectively with customers, management, and others outside of the immediate peer workgroup is not going to have as much success as those who can.

This is a fascinating discussion and I'm inspired by all of the contributors to offer my own thoughts on the subject. I've come to understand Communication as a process of taking a tacit thought from one persons mind, transforming it via some media into an explicit form, with the objective of re-creating it, or at least version of it, as a tacit thought, in someone elses mind. It can be done crudely, or skillfully or artfully. It seems to me the talent of the commuicator then is expressed in their ability to understand the context of each communication opportunity, and make the best decisions on the "what", "why", "who", "when" and "how."

This is a fascinating discussion and I'm inspired by all of the contributors to offer my own thoughts on the subject. I've come to understand Communication as a process of taking a tacit thought from one persons mind, transforming it via some media into an explicit form, with the objective of re-creating it, or at least version of it, as a tacit thought, in someone elses mind. It can be done crudely, or skillfully or artfully. It seems to me the talent of the commuicator then is expressed in their ability to understand the context of each communication opportunity, and make the best decisions on the "what", "why", "who", "when" and "how."

Communication is a skill.

Communicating well is an art.

Communication is a form of expression. Be it verbal, non-verbal or any other. An artist expresses through his painting, a writer through his words, a singer through voice modulation etc. The art for these is inborn. The skill obviously can be developed on likelihood and inclination.

'Competency' part of it is the talent-which is an innate art. The actual communication process is the 'skill' which can be developed and improved on through practice and learning.

Hope this suffices as an answer.

This is too deep a visceral question to satisfactorily answer cranially, don't you think? There is no part of any human interaction that does not fall within the definition of communication. Even the manner in which we copulate will communicate all manner of information; love, tenderness, protection care, lust, selfishness, anger, sacrifice....

In coaching, there is a core truth that I seek to convey- people will listen to your words only if your words agree with your actions. For example: everyone gets a pennant ring or no one does. If a manager preaches team but his decisions to reward/discipline are based on strictly individual criteria, everyone will understand that their survival and betterment depends on looking out for #1. They will soon enough pay no heed at all to the words.

So, actions are also communication, right? Are actions art, or skill? For many, they are neither, for many people put no more thought into their daily decisions and activities than they put into tying their shoes.

For those of us that do, perhaps it is still neither art nor skill. Perhaps it is just honesty, for indeed I would sooner listen to an open, honest verbal hack than a silver tongued liar.

Together, let's put the fun back into work!
Belldon Colme
belldoncolme@gmail.com

I'm not sure whether it is a skill or art. I've seen great conversationalists who are not great communicators, I 've seen people with well developed listening skills who aren't great communicators.

I think great communication starts with caring---if you don't care, the quality of the communication will always suffer.

In the book Fail-Safe Leadership, the authors discussed this issue of competency more specifically a competency based model of performance versus a results based model. Essentially competency based models limit development of talents, skills, etc. while results based model expand development. My answer goes back to what David Brock said because the question appears to be based upon how people view the word competency.

My domain of expertise is the Call Center - where Communication Competency is considered a 'Soft Skill'.

There are jobs where having excellent speech isn’t crucial. A Contact Center isn’t one of them. A Call Center job demands that an Agent be able to communicate to the satisfaction of callers.

The Call Center Agent is ambassador to your customers. The Human Voice & ‘Telephone Personality’ of the Agent provides your Brand’s human face – and delivers value when it comes to the kind of service your callers expect.

The Agent’s voice makes an immediate & lasting impression on your customers that can portray your Brand as either:

Friendly or Impersonal
Confident or Timid
Warm or Impatient
Relaxed or Nervous
Knowledgeable or Scripted

Studies show that 58% of communication is through body language – 35% through how it was said - and only 7% through the content of the message.

Without the advantage of body language Agents must be able to "connect" with customers. Agents must be able to take full advantage of their vocal inflection – tone - rate of speech - the words they choose - and of course – listening skills.

Studies of consumers ranking their satisfaction with Agents have shown that they rate their Like/Dislike of their experience with a Contact Center 81% on the basis of Vocal Liking (how the Agent sounded) - and only 19% on the basis of Verbal Liking (what the Agent actually said).

Tone of voice – rate/pace of speech - and the emotional content of the words used by the Agent - help to define closer feelings and a stronger bond of involvement with callers.

When an Agent talks too fast - it’s a sign of stress – anxiety - nervousness - being in a rush. Talking very fast or uninterrupted conveys that the Agent isn’t in control. Consumers want to interact with Agents who sound natural – relaxed – comfortable – knowledgeable - and confident in their communications.

Vocal inflection/intonation is the pitch & emotion with which an Agent talks. A low voice tone (low pitch) is considered by most to be sexy & appealing – just think of the difference in low pitch between Barry White & Michael Jackson – or Bonnie Rait & Sarah Brightman.

Volume is the loudness of an Agent’s voice. When people are tired or upset their voices tend to fade - and they will be asked to "speak up". Agents need to speak loud enough to be heard - but not so loud that they sound overly aggressive or forceful.

If an Agent’s Rate of Speech is too slow they lose the attention of callers. On the other hand – callers aren’t able to follow & understand if the Agent speaks too rapidly.

The quality of an Agent’s voice is its most distinctive & individual characteristic. This is where the essence of warmth - understanding - and ‘likability’ come into play. The advice about smiling as you speak to enhance vocal quality is true. Being angry - upset – or impatient negatively affects vocal quality. So does poor posture.

The price of poor articulation is high in Call Centers. Agents must enunciate/pronounce their words very clearly - or callers will misunderstand them. Faulty articulation - incorrect word pronunciation – and poor language usage give customers the impression that an Agent is sloppy - careless – or lacks knowledge. Over usage of pause words like “um” and “uh” convey indefiniteness & uncertainty about what’s being said - and sometimes just plain dumbness.

Top performing Contact Centers drive their Revenue & Performance through superior hiring tactics. We help employers gain better insight & more accurate predictions as to which applicants from a pool of Candidates would perform up to, or beyond their established standards. You can find out about a Free Trial of SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software at http://www.telesoftsystems.ca/64201.html