Enter the modern CIO. She posts on her blog, sends tweets with the best of them, connects on Facebook and LinkedIn, scans Technorati and appears on YouTube videos. She communicates with her team via email, video on demand or videoconference. Technology rules!

But this CIO might be surprised to know that her choices of social media, collaborative technology and unified communication products might not be the best choices for her messages.

Today's IT communication challenges are varied and they demand a variety of tools and approaches. Using technology as the primary communication tool might always not be the best choice. There is an alternative. Have you considered going primitive?

The Urban Dictionary explains going primitive as, "Instead of texting a long and detailed story, someone suggests a phone call as a more direct way to have the conversation," as in I'm good with texting but this is giving me carpel tunnel, let's "go primitive" I'll call you tomorrow at 8.

Going primitive—live phone calls and in-person meetings—can give CIOs a strategic advantage for certain critical communications.

The Good Old Days
Remember what it was like to walk in to someone's office, cup of java in hand, and just sit down for a chat? For many of us, that concept is now so foreign, it seems like it's from the BC era (Before Collaboration). But returning to that era might not be such a bad idea.

Going primitive affords CIOs the opportunity to engage on a more personal level, and depending on the purpose of the communication, add an emotional factor that can enhance communication effectiveness and even influence the outcome.

The Primitive Advantage
There is definitely a time to use collaborative and social technologies: Twitter, email, blogs, conference calls, video conferencing etc. all offer great productivity gains and help reduce travel time and expense. But there are definitely situations when live face time trumps productivity.

So when SHOULD a CIO go primitive and what do you gain?

1. When body language can assist or augment your IT message. When your communication could be misinterpreted, when you need body language to aid in understanding, primitive might be a better choice. If the tone of your voice is as important as the message, a live phone call is better than a Twitter or email post with an attached emoticon. Does the audience need to see your facial expression in order to understand the seriousness of a message? In-person can give you that experience.

However, there is one technology alternative that can actually capture the nuances of body language: a really good Telepresence system. Raised eyebrows or a furrow on your forehead can all be transmitted in detail with a sophisticated system. But even with some of the best Telepresence equipment, there is a time when in-person primitive is your best communication vehicle.

For example, you would not want to announce a reduction in IT staff via an email or voice-mail message, and an in-person explanation of a controversial IT initiative allows your gestures and facial expressions to add weight to your argument. The key is deciding on the purpose of your communication. This can influence your choice of primitive vs. technology alternatives.

2. When attempting to persuade or influence. Any communication that is based on persuasion would benefit from a live delivery. Use collaborative or social technologies (Twitter, email, a blog post) when you are simply delivering information or expanding on data points. If your communication needs the nuances of argument and influence, then opt for in-person delivery. Even Aristotle believed that emotional skills could aid an argument and increase

You do not have flash or javascript support.

Average (0 votes)

Reply