I've had similar experiences working with people and my big takeaway is that communication is fraught with such little challenges.

Best way I've found to avoid this is to leave as little to assumption as is reasonable to.

A part of me thinks that some of the pitfalls in communication comes from culture, where different groups of people have different expectations of how much to leave to assumption, etc. Hard to really put it clearly, but I would love to read some research around this.

Yup, pretty much this. Thank you!

Yeah but you can't be consistently fully mathematically correct with people around you, its often the parts you don't even realize have some room for mis-interpretation that tend to bite back hardest IMHO

The problem with leaving little to assumption is that is tends to be verbose and people tend not to like to listen to long speeches and will simply not read long text. So, as everything in engineering, it's a tradeoff.

My spouse gets frustrated with me for being too verbose in my requests, and also frustrated with me for following instructions in "the wrong way" when those requests were under-specified in the first place. Knowing "the right level" to communicate requests can be challenging in any relationship, even one with 20 years of shared experience to fall back on.

I micromanager will work around that by splitting the requirements up in tiny jira tasks that cannot be ignore easily, and then follow up daily on every single task.

This completely kills initiative, tough, and may reduce the value added by each team member by 50% or more.

The only time to use such tactics is with someone who is acting in very bad faith and at risk of being fired. It can be done for a while to establish an example, while rewarding better behavior with more autonomy gradually.

If they still ignore the instructions, then that's proper grounds for firing them (even in Europe), and if they chose to leave because of it, well, that's ok too.

Yeah but then you write out a spec that costs you a ton of time, that won't be read, or won't be followed to the letter, and you'll be known as someone who obsesses over specifying things. If you spend that much effort communicating what's needed, you might as well just do it yourself.

(I have no idea what your generalized statement is in relation to btw, so I could be talking out of my ass as well, lol)

The other pitfall of trying to clarify all assumptions is that your message then becomes too long. Then the reader actually will skim over the main points, which makes it worse.

So yeah, it takes a lot of works to communicate efficiency, no matter the length of the end results

I have the opposite takeaway. If I experience that people follow my input too literally, I try to figure out which of the following three applies:

1) I've been micromanaging them too much, and they stopped thinking for themselves. Possibly partly because they were lazy, or annoyed or because they thought it was ok.

2) They don't have the ability to see that my instructions did not make sense in the situation they're in. Maybe they didn't have the training, self confidence or initiative to realize that the instructions were assuming a situation that was different from the actual one.

3) There is real bad faith involved.

Most cases fall roughly under 1). In that case, the proper response is to reduce the level of micromanagement, and let the people figure more things out on their own. That means that even when I spot that they're making minor mistakes, I need to keep my mouth shut. People need to make mistakes sometime so they can learn from them. If they want to discuss those topics with me, I will try to treat them as peers not subordinates. While doing this I also try to make it clear that I expect independent thought.

Then there are the cases that fall under 2). In those cases, I try to give tasks or instructions that are either intrinsically easier, or if that is not possible, I may break the tasks down to more manageable units, while trying to actively provide training and mentoring.

The rarest case is 3) If this is the case, I will provide some push back. Luckily, as a tech lead, I don't have direct reports, so I can refer such cases to the line manager if it gets too bad.

She didn't follow your directions, they seem to have been quite clear, why is that your fault?

Part of communication is also to give feedback about such things

There's possibly a buried lede there, of the GF feeling like she cannot ask questions for clarifications or cannot let the commenter down.

Or infinite reasons:

- Rain distribution isn't uniform, it poured where she was and thought it was necessary.

And/or

- Overestimating time/sunk cost fallacy ("it's just going to take 2 minutes")

And/or

- Giving less importance to ponctuality than others

And/or

- She didn't have one and thought it was a good idea, worth being late

And/or ...

GP expressed the need for an umbrella and she went above and beyond. He now knows that she's the type of person who will do so, so now knows to add a disclaimer to not go out of her way. Or he can just appreciate the fact that she will go out of her way and sincerely express that appreciation.

No fault here for either party. Just a learning experience. And as you say, he can give the feedback that she didn't need to go out of her way as well.

To me the premise "if you haven't left yet" implies "don't go out of your way" and adding that would be redundant. But not everyone sees things the same way so you have to adapt communication individually based on experience.

Exactly, I write a literal message with a literal if/then meaning. She reads it as "my partner is out in the rain and would like me to help".

Of course I think _my_ communication style is "better". But the best communication style is actually the one that communicates your thoughts to the other person, not the one that "makes the most sense".

And meanwhile there are still cases where it will be the other way around and I am going "well I said X, but surely you could have read between the lines..."

So yeah, the best response is to tell her about the miscommunication so she can know better next time, but it's stupid to try and say she was "wrong". It takes two!

It's not about 'fault' really, it's about achieving better outcomes by learning from previous experiences.

Sometimes, people's thoughts for you overpower your explicit directions - she obviously didn't want you without your umbrella.

I know my partner well enough, so I'm not worried about communication with her, but what's hard about communication is that some people take things literally, some people try to read into questions what isn't there, and some people ask ambiguous questions.

I've gotten feedback from some people that my communication is too terse and from other people that it is too longwinded. I can adapt to people I communicate regularly with (like my partner, people on my team, etc.), but it is not possible to do anything with that feedback in terms of first time communication or communication with infrequent collaborators.

This negative framing is terribly disheartening. She went to the time and trouble to pick out an umbrella especially for you, and she did it because this is clearly not the first time so it makes sense for there to be a spare umbrella.

Maybe it’s also time for you to step up and buy her a thoughtfully selected umbrella.

I would appreciate the thoughtful gesture, but I would rather have 20 more minutes with my signifiant other than an umbrella. And that's the point of the article. Disrupting a work pipeline to answer an executive question might be fitting here. Sure they would have liked the answer to their question (umbrella) but they didn't want to lose 20 person hours to that question.

Good communication is key.

And spend 20 mins less waiting in there rain for them

The category error I'm highlighting is conflating a relationship with management.

Seems to be an epidemic of that around here.

> she did it because this is clearly not the first time so it makes sense for there to be a spare umbrella.

Where are you getting this information from?

IMO there is nothing wrong with the comment you're replying to. They didn't say that they didn't appreciate the gesture. Just that it taught them that they needed to be more explicit about the priorities of requests.

> Where are you getting this information from?

A different thread of conversation in this post is arguing over what good faith means.

The above poster is clearly not showing good faith because they're assuming negative behaviors. That's where they got the information from.

> Where are you getting this information from?

The very first clause in their remark gives that this is a typical and repeated scenario.

> They didn't say that they didn't appreciate the gesture

Neither did I. The point being made is that social relationships are not a valid analog for senior management.

> This negative framing is terribly disheartening. She went to the time and trouble to pick out an umbrella especially for you, and she did it because this is clearly not the first time so it makes sense for there to be a spare umbrella.

What a giant leap. Thinking like that is a sure fire way to have relationship problems.

Respecting your partner's executive choices and self-assigned preferences, and recognising that they follow motivations of their own, leads to relationship problems?

Only for those carrying the controlling/abusive danger flag.

> Respecting your partner's executive choices and self-assigned preferences, and recognising that they follow motivations of their own, leads to relationship problems?

Not what I said, and quite unrelated.[1] Moreover, it is not what you said, even if that's what you meant. You said:

> She went to the time and trouble to pick out an umbrella especially for you, and she did it because this is clearly not the first time so it makes sense for there to be a spare umbrella.

These are significant assumptions to make. Jumping to conclusions like that will lead to relationship problems.

Of course, I could go on and talk about how the behavior could be problematic even if the assumptions are true, but it depends on the particulars of the two people involved. Certainly, if the assumption is true, the behavior is not necessarily a positive one. Intentions matter. As do outcomes. Don't ignore the latter.

[1] And yes, that could trivially lead to relationship problems, and could also trivially lead to relationship bliss, given how generic your comment is.

> Jumping to conclusions like that will lead to relationship problems

Good grief. No, it will lead to a moment of amused bonding over the burgeoning umbrella collection you now share, and a perpetual anniversary in my calendar labelled "New umbrella day".

The point I'm making, and shall reiterate, is that maintenance of social relationships is utterly dissimilar to how we manage organisations.

I think that's a uncharitable reading of a post that goes:

1. I took this action.

2. It had this impact on another person.

3. I should have taken a different action!

Funny how you recognise in the last sentence that you actually made a communication mistake but are still trying to blame her.

How are they blaming her?

Imagine you're his partner reading this. How would you feel?

If I was their partner I would read this as, "Oh, they understand that we have two different ways of communication and they are changing their own behavior instead of asking me to change mine so that we both end up saving time/money. This is what it looks like to be a good partner? Pointing out that your partner thinks differently from you is not the same thing as blaming them for something.

Could you explain, in your own words instead of putting the responsibility on me to interpret your meaning, how they are blaming their partner for the interaction?

Indifferent, probably. The thing missing from the post is the conversation where the miscommunication was identified and discussed, so I don't know how his partner would feel. In this hypothetical, I'm the partner, and I'm the kind of person who knows all relationships have communication errors. If we recovered gracefully, then saying "20 minutes late and $20 down" is hardly dirty laundry. Would probably even appreciate that he uses it as a reminder of how to reduce ambiguity communicating with me, as I have my own reminders of how to reduce ambiguity communicating with him.

Maybe it would help to explain how you would feel. I would get a good chuckle at recalling this particular memory.

> Imagine you're his partner reading this.

No. Do not imagine it nor ponder it. Go right to her and ask.

And in the long run, she needs to be coached to articulate without being asked every time (if that is the case with her).

Generally, when people start imagining how I feel about X, they are wrong over 50% of the time, which leads to an escalation of problems. Don't wonder how I feel. Ask me explicitly.

As for the wider discussion: The path to Hell is paved with good intentions. I struggled with this often until I read some negotiations books, all of which said "Don't give credit to someone who did something for you that was of no value to you, and signal to them that this is of no value so that they do not expect a concession from you as a result." For random one offs with random people, it's fine to appreciate their (totally wasteful) effort because you don't have to deal with it often. But in a long term relationship it becomes a currency and causes long term stress. Not only are these efforts creating problem for you (money wasted, time wasted, etc), in the long run the other party will expect credit for it, which will feel like an added insult to injury.

> if you haven't left yet

I don't think OP have made any communication mistakes.

That reaction will lead to a beautiful umbrella collection ;)

I’ve had those kinds of things in a relationship too - both with a partner ‘taking initiative’ to do something for me that I didn’t actually ask them or want them to do - and vice versa, partner hurt that I didn’t take initiative to do something for them that they didn’t ask (but secretly wanted) me to do.

Either way is unnecessarily frustrating, and while I’m willing to be a little bit patient while I train people out of the practice, sometimes it’s just not tenable. If you pause, take a breath, try to think critically, and both pre-answer anticipated questions and ask questions for clarification - better communication and more reasonable expectations are absolutely achievable. You’ve just got to be willing to commit to working on it. Not everybody sees the value in that unfortunately.