Communication skills 20

[ParabolicTet]

My obervation is that good communication skills are much more valuable than technical knowledge. Typically an engineer with good communication skills will always move up fast no matter how weak their technical knowledge is. These are the ones who dominate meetings with non-value added comments that just state the obvious.

For example in a technical review they will bring up the simplest and lowest priority issues to discuss and waste 20 professionals time. Why do these engineers get so far and why is their non-value added chit-chat so respected by engineering managers?

Personally I speak only when I feel the team may be overlooking something. I never waste people's time with trivial comments that can be addressed one-on-one.

I need to learn to speak up more but first I would like to understand why technical knowledge ranks so far behind good communication skills? In fact I believe strong technical knowledge is actual a liability in the engineering world. This is because you analyze things from a different perspective from these technically inept engineering managers. As a result you either end up confusing them or annoying them by not following conventional analysis methods.

Your thoughts and experiences?

http://web.peoriadesignweb.com/eos

 

[BJC]

There are ways and classes that will help your speaking. I kkow many people who seemed to have developed good speaking skills in Toastmasters.
Speaking well is one thing but the ability to explain complex ideals simply ( without talking down to people or making them feel stupid )is a great asset. Along with that goes the ability to examine and analyze situations and problems and express them in understandable terms, not necessarly simple terms as some things defy simplistic approaches.
Engineers tend to count beetles on the trees when the first thing that may be needed is a map of the forest.

 

[corus]

Being able to do a good presentation and to speak well at meetings has always been looked on favourably by management, and that person will in due course be promoted into their midst.
I've always regarded management as like a compost heap. Put enough of them together in one pile and they will spontaneously combust and burn on for hours, or even days given a decent expense account. One who can fan the flames and prolong a meeting with a good half hour presentation on 'Leverage of Knowledge Synergy' will go far.
Besides, it's probably best to promote them out of the way as they probably weren't very good on the technical side of things anyway. This is why they dribbled on at technical meetings stating the blindingly obvious.

corus

 

[GregLocock]

Frankly, isn't this a bit silly? If I can't communicate my ideas /in whatever form/ then I might as well get walled up in a cave somewhere.

Equally, if I have nothing worthwhile to say, it might be a good idea to shut up.

Communicating isn't a hard skill, you are taught to communicate to your peers in uni, now all you have to do is talk to the non-technical people. If you find it hard to tell them what you are trying to do, I suggest that quite often it is because you don't truly understand it. On the other hand I would agree that some bits of engineering /are/ very hard to present to a non technical audience, but if you can't give an example showing why something is better, then it must be an odd application, in my experience.


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[jstickley]

Here's a thought --

Do you really want your most technically competent individuals out of positions where they are most effective? I'm not saying managers in general are less competent, but rather this -- given the choice between moving the best engineer to management (where his/her skills are no longer used to their full extent), and moving a less technically apt (although more well rounded) engineer to management, I'd take the latter.

The simple fact is this: managers don't have to be the most technically competent individuals to do their jobs well. They do, however, need to be well-rounded: leadership skills, interpersonal skills, communication skills, seasoned judgment, technical knowledge, ability to think strategically, etc.

 

[PSE]

For some people, talking through and re-stating the obvious or trivial points aids there thinking process. Others are capable of working problems internally without verbalizing. In a forum such as a meeting, you likely end up with both personality types together. It then becomes a challenge for the organizer to keep things on track. An agenda published and distributed in advance of the meeting can help. If the minutia is presented in the agenda, it may not have to be hashed through in the meeting as it gives verbalizers something to work on beforehand. If the major discussion points are included in the agenda, the internally analytical personalities have a chance to mull through it so that they have answers to contribute. With luck (as this certainly does not always work), the meeting can be one to discuss problem results and build consensus for the next actions.

For career effectiveness (with or without advancement), communication ability is a critical skill. For managerial types, the emphasis may be on verbal skills. For technical types it may be on writing. Try to figure out your audience and match the presentation method(s) accordingly.

Regards,

 

[GregLocock]

I almost agree, but when push comes to shove it is going to be you, personally presenting /your/ ideas, to a cynical crowd.

Engineers like finely written logical reports. Trouble is, no one reads them.

Failing that engineers present Dilbertian bullet-point laden Powerpoint presentations and read them to a bored audience.
Most of the audience will catch a few Zs, those who are awake won't understand what is going on.

Throw your laptop away. Speak without notes. Scribble on the whiteboard or OHP (it makes you look mad, but clever). Find the one, two, or three, CRUCIAL graphs that make your point. Explain them to the second thickest guy in the audience. Twice. For extra points refer back to the first one so people have a chance to catch up.

Remember, you can only make, on average, one point per minute. If you can't explain the logical steps in the time available, just show the start and end conditions, and offer to explain it if anyone wants to know how you got there.

I'm not too enamoured of the formal public speaking course I did, I got more out of one I did on presentation skills, which was to do with confidence and presentation, rather than talking. Just treat it like a black ski run, bum in, chest out, shoulders wide, and lots of attitude. After all, you do /know/ your stuff, don't you?


Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[COKA]

From my experience, those with poor technical knowledge, but good communication skills tend to compensate their lack of knowledge by saying comments that state the obvious so that they feel more important and more part of the meetings for example. From what I've seen around, engineering managers are usually not engineers, so when they hear someone speak-up, it stands out.

I do not think that communication is that easy. Some people are just not comfortable talking in front of audiences. Period. It doesn't make them less competent or not 100% knowledgeable about their material. Talking in front of people is not for everybody, and often words don't come out the way they were supposed to.

Coka

 

[IRstuff]

As indicated by Greg, communications skills are complementary to engineering skills. If you can't talk your way out of a wet paper bag, you're not going to be effective as an engineer.

>> You'll be OK as a journeyman engineer who takes direction from someone in charge.

>> You will not garner the respect and confidence of your peers or superiors if you cannot clearly present your ideas or argue in their defense.

Also, all of our top engineers are excellent communicators.

TTFN

 

[melone]

Knowledge is powerful only when it's shared....

 

[Dennyd]

"Knowledge is good."
- Joseph Faber, Founder of Faber College

 

[Maui]

If a skilled and competent engineer can effectively communicate his ideas to his peers, then he will more likely than not be effective in his professional endeavors. But being effective does not necessarily translate into being promoted to higher ranking positions within a particular company. Obtaining a promotion depends upon much more than technical knowledge. You need to possess the right attitude (as defined by the current management hierarcy) so that you are a good "fit" with the existing management mentality. You must be flexible and adaptable in terms of changing priorities, project management, customer issues, etc. While a gifted engineer knows how to tackle difficult technical challenges, he may be somewhat lacking in dealing with non-technical co-workers that supervisors are forced to interact with on a daily basis. Engineers are trained to be engineers, not managers. An exceptional employee is skilled and competent in both disciplines, and is not often encountered. If you find someone who possesses both skill sets, let me know. I'd like to work for him.


Maui

 

[denoid]

"Never miss a chance to shut up"

Will Rogers

 

[ParabolicTet]

Actually I have been a member of Toastmasters for a few years, but never really got into it. Now I am really hoping to get much more actively involved in it as I see improving communication skills as the "best bang for the buck" thing for me to do.

 

[jmw]

Many presentation training schools advocate various ploys for keeping the audience awake. Certainly, presenting has become a much more scientific based skill these days and less of an art form making it accessible to all engineers.

The only area of consern for me in any such endeavour is that of humour. I have found, from bitter experience over the years, that management have no sense of humour and no sense that they are missing something wonderful when they hear everyone enjoying a good joke.

Happy laughing employees are something alien to their understanding of good management. Seriously, humour is fine everywhere except with management. To them it can suggest a degree of levity that do not find appropriate to the serious matters at hand and can misunderstand your use of humour.

Howver, a good book is "I can see you naked" (can't find my copy at the moment but a web search will turn up the details)which is as good as any to discover some of the art of presentations. A good preenter will make you feel so good you'll buy anything! So when someone is doing well it may be that it is his communication skills that are admired and not his suspect engineerign skills.

JMW

http://www.viscoanalyser.com

Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[plasgears]

I have been a member of Toastmasters on and off for ten years with advanced level credentials (Able TM, ATM). May I recommend that you bring your skills to the public to really polish your style.

I volunteered for a local candidate forum several years ago, and it went well; my wife did the timing. I gave it authoritative but gentle control. At the end of the meeting a young lady came to ask how I did it. A few days prior she ran a League of Women Voters forum, and it was an out-of-control shambles. I told her my success was because of Toastmaster training.

On another set of occasions I gave smoking clinics for the Amer. Cancer Society (ACS). They asked me also to do detention classes in high school for students caught smoking. To dramatize the effects of smoking, I obtained a section of cancerous lung from ACS. It had the expected attention-getting effect.

Toastmasters has a new specialty speech in the advanced manual entitled "The Eulogy," in which I was instrumental. On the occasions of the passing of several relatives, I gave the eulogies in church. Without fail I am asked how I did it. It was Toastmasters.

Join Toastmasters. It's worth more than the time and money spent. Of course, I put it to good practice in the work environment.

 

[jmw]

"I can see you Naked"
Thanks to Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0836280008/102-3910027-3079306?v=glance

JMW

http://www.viscoanalyser.com

Eng-Tips: Pro bono publico, by engineers, for engineers.

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[SLTG]

I used to work for a senior engineer who was very effective communicator to everyone, not just to engineer but also to sales people. He didn't get any promotion at all. The fact is he still hold his position till now.

I think to be a good engineer, you must communicate well.

SlTG

 

[IRstuff]

There's also the factor that if you are a good engineer and happy at it and being reasonably paid, then there is no reason to march up the anthill with everyone else.

Personally, I have neither the inclination nor desire to be a manager.

TTFN

 

[johnwiss]

The communication is important and it is more than looking confident and smooth in front of customers or management. It involves writing concise and clear documents/design notes etc. It involves making sure no one misunderstands a task or expectation (you don't need perfect english for these). I get the most compliments from people who say to me later that it is clear that I really am excited and interested in the material I am presenting and that makes them think:

1) I know what I am talking about.
2) I am honest and my opinions can be trusted.
3) I make them feel good about the project.
4) I am "invested" in the project and will make it succeed.

And most important of all you need to communicate at the appropriate level to each member of the audience and respond at the correct level. A business development person will be told that something is good because it improves performance which differentiates it from a competitor's offering. A scientist will be told it improves performance due to a unique approach or algorithm that you explain in detail (if appropriate). If the bus/dev person and scientist person relate to your comments then your communications skills are perfect.