Meet Bob, the brilliant problem solver on your tech team. But there's a catch – his direct communication style is causing tensions. Teammates shut down when he points out issues. You talk to Bob, trying to figure out what’s happening, and Bob is bewildered.

“Why do people get defensive when I point out a problem?” he asks. “Aren’t we all professionals here?”

After a few months of this, the complaints start. Angry teammates complain to you about Bob. He’s an asshole, they say. He thinks we’re all idiots, they say.

You talk to Bob about the way he communicates, and for a few weeks Bob seems to rally. His messages are very carefully worded, but it’s like walking on eggshells. Sooner or later, one will crack. A couple weeks into the “change,” a build break takes your deployment system down for two days, and Bob writes a scathing Slack message about all the things the team needs to fix to ensure this never happens again. He’s not wrong, but the way the message is worded makes you cringe. You know what’s coming.

The message is… ignored. His teammates simply do not react, at all. Publicly. Privately, they meet with you and complain that Bob is going to blow up the team.

So, what do you do? Fire Bob? Tell your directs to grow a thicker skin? Consider working in retail?

Understanding communication styles

A class I took years ago introduced three communication styles: direct, emotional, and situational. Direct communicators speak candidly, often without filters, while emotional communicators prioritize connection. Situational communicators adapt to the context. These styles form a hierarchy; direct communicators struggle with emotional or situational approaches. Conversely, emotional communicators may struggle to be concise, while situational communicators are the most adaptable but rarest. 

The first two frequently get upset at each other. Directs are annoyed by the Emotionals’ seeming inability to get to the point, while the Emotionals are offended by the Directs utter disregard for the mental anguish their messages often cause. Situationals watch these two snipe at each other and frequently feel powerless to help. They get both sides but aren’t quite sure how to engage.

Bob is clearly a Direct Communicator, and if left unchecked, he very well might blow up the team. So, what’s a manager to do? 

Work the problem from both ends

Communication is never a one-way street. The receiver of the message plays just as much a role in the outcome as the sender. Even in Bob’s case, you’ll notice that some team members are more upset than others. Why is that? Why does Bob rub some people the wrong way, but not others?

In my experience, the level of confidence on the part of the receiver tends to play a big role here. In other words, senior engineers might be annoyed with a direct communication style, but it’s less likely to get under their skin. The engineer’s level isn’t the important thing here – level is just a proxy for confidence. Imposter syndrome is certainly more rampant amongst the junior population, and so direct messages are much more likely to put junior and mid-level engineers on the defensive.

A skill I try to develop in myself and in those I manage is the ability to differentiate message content from message delivery. I ask my engineers to ask themselves: the asshole delivery method aside, what is Bob actually trying to say, and do you agree with it?

The most common response I get “Yes, he’s right, but…” And the ‘but’ is all about how rude the message was.

The approach

For the sake of this article, let’s put aside general guidance like “enroll everyone in a communications training class.” Hopefully, this is an obvious approach, but, in my experience, often difficult to pull off, especially when the budgets are tight. Instead, I want to focus on what you as the manager can do to improve the situation.

There are two paths to consider. If Bob refuses to adjust his communication style, and it becomes a threat to the team, I might have to consider managing him out. However, the situation rarely becomes this dire. 

Usually, Bob is open to feedback and willing to change. 

With his consent, I address the team directly, saying something like, 'Bob's working on improving his communication. If you ever find his messages could be misinterpreted, let me know so I can help Bob understand how he could’ve phrased it better.'

This shows the team I take the issue seriously. I then involve a few confident engineers who can provide feedback to help Bob improve. It's a win-win situation. 

It’s also important to mention that, for all its advantages, remote work exacerbates the communication issue. There’s no opportunity for informal approaches like “let’s just all go and get lunch,” or “let’s the two of you sit in a room and hash this out.” Zoom introduces a limitation on the communication bandwidth, so it’s even more important to make room for a more “informal” time for the team, like playing online games together (Jack-In-The-Box games are great for this!), ice breakers, etc.

Communication Kills

It always saddens me when I see an otherwise brilliant engineer’s growth potential limited because of an inability to communicate constructively. It doesn’t matter how smart you are: if you can’t work as a part of the team, the team isn’t going to want you. With an early and consistent intervention, it is usually possible to turn things around, or, at least, mitigate the problem into a tolerable state.

And while engineering tends to be a discipline more aligned to introverts and lack of communication skills, the same issues exist in other disciplines as well. I hope this article has given you some tools to turn the communication issues on your team around.

What about you? Have you encountered a direct communicator? What methods do you use to ensure a positive outcome? Join in the discussion, or DM me if you’d like to talk through your specific case.