i've always wondered why when there's a "communication difficulty," the person who says what they mean and means what they say is usually the one blamed for it. when someone bursts into tears at work, why are they always "the victim" and the person who was trying to tell them something they didn't like, couldn't understand or disagreed with was "the big old meanie who made them cry"?
we have a wonderful charge nurse -- always helpful, knowlegeable, well-organized. she's a great resource and i really enjoy working with her. her only flaw, if it can be called a flaw, is that she has a very direct style of communication. i overheard a series of exchanges where she was trying to convince a relatively new nurse that she needed to get up to speed with her assessments and nursing care and keep her documentation up to date. i was working next to this nurse, and picking up a lot of her slack. she wasn't keeping up -- and we weren't busy. hortense (not her name, but one you'll likely remember!) kept asking her if she needed help and what we could do to help her get her patient ready to transfer at 1100. myrtle (also not her name) kept saying she was doing fine, everything was ok, etc. yet 1100 came, and her patient still needed a bath, lines pulled, dressings changed and her charting done. myrtle had spent her morning rushing about doing stuff, but not really getting anything done. hortense and i stepped up and got the patient ready and transferred by 1200, the room cleaned and set up by 1245 because we had a new patient coming out of the or at 1300. myrtle continued to ineffectually flit around, but didn't get anything done.
finally, when myrtle complained about taking the new admission because she hadn't had lunch yet, hortense calmly but clearly explained to her that had she been able to transfer her patient by the allotted time, she'd have had an hour for lunch plus another half hour to relieve me for lunch and as it was none of the three of us had had lunch. she wasn't mean about it, just clear and factual. myrtle burst into tears and ran to the manager, complaining that hortense was being "mean to her." hortense and i both explained the situation to the manager, but the upshot is that hortense is being counseled about her "communication skills". i think myrtle ought to be going to the communications class with her. if hortense was too direct, myrtle obviously wasn't direct enough because she clearly wasn't "getting" what hortense and i had been trying to tell her all morning.
so when one staff member bursts into tears at work, why is the fault always seen to be the person who "made them cry." why don't we blame the person who bursts into tears at work? if they were capable of communicating directly and factually and understanding direct communication, they might not need to be talked to several times before the point gets across and perhaps emotions wouldn't be so high for everyone.
