Yes, sometimes not everyone's communication style works for every culture or group of people.

That's just how it works. Humans are messy like that.

If we just shrug our shoulders about that then that opens the door to all kinds of discrimination. People generally find it easier to commuicate with people from the same culture, for example.

you're right, we should actively work to remove the advantages that those elites that can communicate clearly and effectively have. There should be quotas for positions that are dominated by the best performing communicators, as determined by 360 reviews. Additionally, those identified as such should be forced to work remotely, on a 5 second delay and throttled bandwith connection.

Can't get around those pesky face to face interactions. Better to implant an equality-enforcing device under the skull to zap the brain every few seconds.

At some point being able to convey what is in your brain to another human and use that to influence their actions is a fundamental human skill. If you're bad at it you'll be at a disadvantage, simple as that.

Effective communication is very easy to identify. Either it produces the required results (everyone understanding the problem and cooperating to produce and implement as close to an optimal solution as possible given resource constraints) or it doesn't.

> Either it produces the required results (everyone understanding the problem and cooperating to produce and implement as close to an optimal solution as possible given resource constraints) or it doesn't.

And how can you tell? If a project fails, is that because people didn't have a shared understanding of the problem, or did they understand it fine and just weren't able to find a solution?