107467227218663579
Heath Row at the Fast Company blog points to this article on good vs. bad gossip in organizations.
Basically it says that bad gossip is bad for the organization, but when people say nice things about each other, that’s good for the organization.
That might bit of a bit simplistic synopsis, but I feel like these researchers have missed a big opportunity.
When I am working with organizations who complain that they have communication problems, I always ask about gossip. I ask how long it takes for a juicy rumour to propagate through the organization. People usually respond with some lightning fast time.
I always point out that this means that there is no communication problem, the problem is that people are just not passionate enough about issues that are “communication problems.” This always leads into nice discussions about working with more passion, rather than devising some useless set of easily broken communication commitments.
I am interested in understadning HOW gossip works, and harnessing that dynamic to deal with “communication problems” in organizations.
In my experience, communication problems generally fall into three types:
1. I can’t get the information I need. This is a dynamic in larger organizations where individuals feel like they don’t have access to information they need to work better, stay on top of the organization or be prepared for events. This complaint usually precedes an unworkable solution, whereby everyone guesses what everyone else needs and provides the information BEFORE the demand for it arises. I suspect that aggregated weblogs and RSS feeds might be a more realistic way of doing this, but the solution usually requires that the complainer actually learn where the information lives and go get it. Regularly scheduled Open Space meetings would be a good idea too, to connect those people who have the information to those who need it.
2. There are too many rumours/lies/trust issues here.. This one can result in pure poison. The fact is that you cannot stop people from telling lies, spreading rumours or abusing trust. You can create a work environment where these situations are minimized through management practices that are based on respect and trust. But the bottom line is that gossip will always be a part of groups. Dealing with this requires well grounded management combined with healthy individuals that have a capacity for absorbing negativity and letting it go. This is a life practice, and organizations are the perfect places to refine that practice. The bottom line is that wishing gossip away is just plain unrealistic, so individuals need to change their attitudes towards gossip. Trust me, it’s the easier of the two solutions.
3. Hoarding information. Knowledge is power. Hoarding knowledge means acquiring power, right? Some folks believe this and so they are reluctant to share information for fear that it will give their rivals at work a leg up. The fact is that knowledge is power in a competetive environment, but within an organization, not sharing knowledge is a huge competetive disadvantage. And, as Cluetrain points out, even withholding knowledge from your market may sink you in the long run. The world is opening up and success lies that way.
I’m still interested in harnessing the power of gossip to act as a lubricated information channel for useful stuff. Information spreads quickly because people care about it. If people find a way to care about work in the same way, work information will spread quickly and fairly accurately too. So what are the other characteristics of gossip that turn it from an obstacle to a tool?
