Putting it in writing: writing memos that clarify an employee's understanding of a manager's words or actions can help reduce confusion and improve workers' morale and productivity.

Workplace productivity, liability, and morale depend to a considerable extent on how effectively people communicate about what will be done, how it will be done, and who will do it. Many (if not most) workplace problems involve some type of faulty communication about these objectives. Resolving such problems rests on three assumptions: (1) each person is accountable for what he/she says and does; (2) a troubling or confusing message always has greater impact when the force of authority is behind it; and (3) the written word takes precedence over the spoken word.

A common type of faulty communication faced by many employees (but rarely handled satisfactorily) is the dilemma of conflicting messages from managers or supervisors. That is, on some occasions the boss says or does things that convey one message about what's expected of the employee, and on other occasions the boss says or does things that convey a contradictory message. This practice provokes in employees an uneasy feeling that "there's just no pleasing" this person--a feeling that no matter what one does, it's wrong.

A person who sends such messages without being held accountable for them is like someone walking in the sun and pretending not to cast a shadow. Supervisors and managers who change their (unwritten) policies or procedures as they go may call it "flexibility," but it's really inconsistency. Often, it's an attempt to avoid making a difficult choice on some matter and instead trying to "have it both ways."

Changing plans based on convenience creates liabilities for everyone. It sows confusion and leads to lost time, lost money, and unbearable frustration. To add insult to injury, the person who causes the confusion often doesn't acknowledge the resulting dilemma.

ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION

Workers who face conflicting messages can start doubting their own competence and intelligence. But the problem lies in the messages being conveyed, not the employee's intelligence. No one understands nonsense, and trying to make sense of nonsense always creates a great deal of stress.

There's a way to handle this dilemma without accusing or blaming anyone. It involves using documentation to simply state a few facts and ask for help in understanding them.

The manager's spoken words and behaviors are "facts," since they are verifiable events. The messages the employee derives from such words and behaviors are also "facts," since only the employee can say how he/she interpreted them. A brief memo can present the boss's statements and/or actions and the incompatible messages the employed received from them.

This is not some kind of adversarial attempt at "entrapment." The employee is simply stating that he/she is confused and asking for clarification about what message the boss meant to send.

It's important that such a memo--and any response to it--be put in writing. And to prevent being left at a disadvantage if there is no response, the employee can conclude the memo by letting the boss know which message he/she plans to follow until or unless directed otherwise.

Following are examples of situations where this approach can be used:

Situation 1

While performing an assigned, routine troubleshooting task, Tom discovers a related problem and fixes it. His supervisor, Melanie, tells him he "overstepped" his assignment. The next time, Tom does only as he is specifically directed, and Melanie tells him he's "not being thorough enough."

On the following occasion, Tom asks Melanie what approach she'll want him to take, and she replies, "Don't you know how to do your job? Why did we hire you?" Tom could send Melanie this memo:

At times I get the message from you that I should do nothing beyond my specific assignment, but at other times I get the message that I should do whatever it takes to be thorough. I'm confused. Until you notify me in writing which one you mean, I'll follow the first one.

Situation 2

Hilda, a pharmacist, has a store manager, Tammy, whose customer satisfaction goals can only be met by filling prescriptions in ways that bend or break state regulations. Whenever Hilda mentions this, Tammy voices support--and in her next breath emphasizes fast, convenient customer service.

Hilda must address these messages to both follow and disregard the rules. Sending the following memo can save her a lot of worry and self-doubt:

This is to confirm that whenever convenience and regulations are at odds, I'll follow the regulations. Please notify me in writing of any concerns about this.

Situation 3

Kerfs manager, George, tells him that when he's absent, Ken is in charge. But whenever George returns after being away, he criticizes the decisions Ken made or questions him at length about them. A memo from Ken to George might read as follows:

When you told me I'm in charge of things while you're away, I got that message, but your criticisms of decisions I make in your absence give me the message that I'm not in charge. I'm confused. I'll resume this responsibility as soon as you clarify this for me in writing.

(In a variation of this situation, the problematic behavior of George might be that he repeatedly--and disruptively--checks on Ken by phone.)

Situation 4

Rita struggles with confusing messages about who's in charge. She often finds that her subordinates have complained to her manager, Neff, about a decision she has made, whereupon Nell will reverse the decision. Having her authority undermined exasperates Rita and also reduces her effectiveness, both by necessitating stressful, last-minute changes and by leaving her wondering if her next decision will be overruled.

Instead of feeling paralyzed by doubt and confusion, she could send Neff a memo like this:

I fully acknowledge your authority to override my decisions without notice. When you do so, I'll assume you'll take care of any resulting conflicts or problems. If this is not acceptable, please let me know in writing.

RECOGNIZING AN OPPORTUNITY

Below are more examples of memos to bosses. Each one identifies specific statements or actions and the incompatible messages they conveyed. The sender's dilemma is presented in a way that explains the confusion and makes the need for clarification obvious.

When you talk to me privately about a problem you're having, I get the message that you want my help. But when you criticize or ignore my suggestions, I get the message that you don't want my help. I'm confused. Before I offer you any more suggestions, I need you to clarify this for me.

When you announced your "opendoor" policy, I got the message that I can come to your office when I need help. However, when I came yesterday and you rolled your eyes, sighed, and tossed your pen down, I got the message that I should not come to you. I'm confused. Until you clarify this for me, I'll follow the message I got at your door

Every time I've been asked to train someone for the job of field inspector, I've gotten the message that I'm qualified for that position. But when I've applied for the position myself, I've been turned down, giving me the message that I'm not qualified for it. I'm confused. Before I'm asked to train anyone else, I need this clarified in writing.

Each time I've compiled the system report the way I recalled you telling me to do it, you've later told me that you wanted it done a different way. I'm confused. As far as I can see, this problem will continue unless you communicate your expectations in writing. I'll be glad to continue doing this job as soon as you inform me in writing how you want it done.

Though each of these memos is simply an attempt to solve problems cooperatively and improve communication, a boss who mistakes such a memo for criticism might say, "Well, no one else has a problem with this." The employee can reply, "I don't know about anyone else. I'm saying I'm confused. Can you help me?"

A defensive boss, meanwhile, might label an employee who sends such a memo a "complainer," a "troublemaker," or "insubordinate." The employee can reply, "Actually, I'm trying to clarify things so I can do my job. Can you help me out?"

Even a boss who resorts to making a veiled threat, such as, "Maybe you just can't handle this job," can be answered respectfully, "Actually, what I can't handle is this confusion, but I think we can clear it up," would be an appropriate response.

In general, an employee can justify any request to put something in writing by stating that it's needed for the sake of clear communication and to avoid confusion or misunderstanding. Using this justification demonstrates that you want to improve matters and recognize an opportunity to do so (whereas people who tend to avoid accountability usually mistake it for a threat). Reducing confusion is the ultimate "good cause," and putting things in writing is a highly useful tool for accomplishing that goal.

by Jack Boghasian, Ph.D.

Jack Boghosian is a licensed clinical psychologist practicing in Southern California. His new book, Practical Solutions for Job Stress (AuthorHouse, 2005), is based on an intensive treatment program he has run since 1995 that has helped more than 1,500 individuals with work stress. In addition to his clinical practice, he works as an organizational consultant.