Teaming

Today I have the too-rare pleasure of spending the day with my business partner, Jeff. Generally speaking, the fact that we're almost always in two different places (he lives in Minneapolis, I live in the Hudson Valley and New York City; when we're with clients, it's rarely with the same one at the same time) isn't a problem: we communicate well and frequently, and we share a clear sense of where we're trying to take the company and how to get there.

However, when we do get the chance to be in the same room, I really appreciate it. Wonderful, serendipitous things happen that only arise out of the cadences of face-to-face conversation. For instance, this morning we were talking about my new book, and we surfaced and began to develop what I think might be a great idea about creating a quick "Are you a 10?" self-test that people could take to determine how strategically they're approaching their work and their life before reading the book. That ad hoc creative session almost certainly wouldn't have happened on the phone or via email.

It reminds me: even though technology makes it possible for people to work together without ever seeing each other...it doesn't mean we don't need to see each other. There's so much that happens when you're sitting in the same room, looking into each others' eyes; you get so much more nuance about the other person, and how he or she is processing the conversation; the silences carry weight and meaning and become a part of the dialogue in a way that just doesn't happen when you're on the phone; you can build an idea together in a way that's virtually impossible when you can't see the other person's subtle facial responses.

What do you think about this...have you found it to be true?

Comments

[Gannon Beck]

Great point Erika. I'm currently reading "The Definitive Book of Body Language," which can explain one of the reasons face-to-face interactions are so important. The book states that "Albert Mehrabian, a pioneer researcher of body language in the 1950's, found that the total impact of a message is about 7 percent verbal (words only) and 38 percent vocal (including tone of voice, inflection, and other sounds) and 55 percent nonverbal."

Without face-to-face interactions we're missing out on over half of what is being communicated.

[Erika Andersen]

Thanks, Gannon - I love having the research to back up my intuitive experience!

Warmly,
Erika

[Bill Ross]

Hey, Erika,
Nice one. "Have you found it to be true?" Absolutely; and actually, I wrote this up myself in some detail last year:

>> I love the Internet as the meta-tool, and as an evolving art form. (But) with this awesome Swiss Army knife of a tool being utilized to the fullest, there’s still an essential place for meeting and talking with people “in person” -- looking them in the eye, listening to and responding to what they say, on the spot...

>> ...the real world is still like the whole grain: it's only full, complete and really works right when all the naturally occurring parts are there. In communicating with people, that includes tone of voice, touch, body language, hundreds of facial muscles that each convey meaning, scent...

>> One meeting is worth a thousand e-mails.
http://rosswriting.blogspot.com/2007/05/interface-or-face-to-face.html

I love the tone of your work here in general, btw -- such an appealing balance of real-world practical with staying in touch with our humanity, and at its core. (It's all in the balance, hm?)

Thanks for putting your signal out there.

Gannon: 55% non-verbal!? Holy cow!

[Erika Andersen]

Bill -

I LOVE the whole grain vs. white flour metaphor! In fact, I shared it with a group I was working with today, and they all loved it, too -

And thanks very much for your kind words about my blog....

xo
E