By Mary Tucker | Senior Communications and Content Manager | IAEE
We’ve all been there – working with someone whose communication style feels like nails on a chalkboard, or whose approach to decision-making seems completely backwards. Our first instinct? Label them as “difficult.” But what if we’re missing something crucial?
Sharon Andrade, Founder of HLeadership, challenges us to reframe this common workplace frustration in her upcoming IAEE webinar, People: Difficult or Different? With years of experience in leadership development, Sharon believes that the key to organizational success lies not in trying to change people, but in understanding that their communication preferences and needs might simply be different from our own.
In this enlightening session, participants will explore the critical distinction between perceiving others as difficult versus acknowledging them as simply different. Sharon will guide attendees through discovering their “intent” versus their “impact,” providing practical strategies to navigate diverse communication styles with grace and effectiveness.
We sat down with Sharon to dive deeper into these concepts and learn how this shift in perspective can transform workplace relationships and drive organizational success. Her insights on leveraging diverse communication styles, building trusted relationships, and enhancing teamwork offer valuable takeaways for anyone looking to improve their collaborative effectiveness.
Read on to discover how recognizing and appreciating diversity in communication styles can unlock your team’s full potential, and don’t miss the chance to join Sharon for the full webinar experience.
You will delve into the distinction between “intent” versus “impact” in communication. Can you share a specific example of how someone’s good intentions might create a negative impact due to different communication styles, and how awareness of this gap can transform workplace interactions?
Sharon: Here is a common example. A leader, feeling the pressure of an upcoming deadline, reiterates a strong and abrupt directive to the team. Her intention is to create urgency and ensure everyone is on board with the importance of the timeline so that they can be successful together. She genuinely believes the team might now realize how critical it is. However, the impact can be quite different. The team might interpret her tone or approach as a lack of trust: “Does she think we don’t get it? We already know – does she not trust us to follow through?”
This gap between intent and impact often stems from different communication styles and assumptions. The leader’s intention was to support; the team felt questioned. Awareness of this gap is essential – when leaders pause to consider how they might be received, especially by someone of an opposite communication style, it can transform how they engage. Taking time to understand impact builds stronger relationships and prevents unnecessary tension.
In your experience, what are the most common communication style differences that cause people to label others as “difficult”? How can leaders quickly identify when they’re falling into this trap versus recognizing someone is simply different?
Sharon: There are a few, but I’ll provide one common example which involves how people make decisions. For example, an expedient decision maker tends to move quickly. They are action-oriented often thinking out loud and expect immediate reactions or buy-in from others. Whereas a process-oriented decision maker prefers to pause, reflect and consider implications before responding. They value thoroughness and structure, and they may not feel comfortable reacting immediately.
The expedient decision maker may view the other person as slow, resistant or disengaged. The process-oriented decision maker may view the other as pushy, rude or inconsiderate. The key is for leaders to notice their own reaction: If you feel impatient, misunderstood or dismissed, pause and ask, “Is this really resistance or is it a style difference?”
You will teach participants how to connect with different communication preferences. What’s the difference between adapting your communication style and compromising your authentic self? How can people maintain their integrity while still being flexible?
Sharon: This is such an important distinction. We focus on behavior which can be intentionally adapted to improve connections and understanding – without compromising who you are. Adapting your behavior based upon the situation, people and environment is a core element of emotional intelligence. Behavior is what you do, while personality is who you are. You are not changing yourself, rather you are choosing to flex in service of better communication.
It also goes back to intent. When your goal is to connect, not control, you are honoring your integrity while making space for others. It’s about meeting people where they are and not staying stuck in your own style out of habit or indifference.
Many organizations claim to value diversity, but struggle with communication diversity specifically. What is one practical strategy teams can implement immediately to better leverage the strengths of different communication styles?
Sharon: I come back to Steven Covey’s fifth habit: Seek first to understand, then to be understood. So often, we focus on getting our point across or influencing others to work the way that we do. But the first step is to develop self-awareness – understanding your preferences, strengths and blind spots. From there, shift your mindset: “What if this person’s opposite strengths could help address my blind spots?”
Rather than resist differences, be curious about what they bring. Taking time to understand yourself and their approach will enable you to bridge differences and together achieve greater outcomes than either of you could alone.
When you’re working with someone whose environmental preferences, social settings, or quality orientation differs drastically from yours, what’s the first step in building a trusted, respectful relationship?
Sharon: Once you have developed self-awareness and a clear understanding of how your preferences differ from others, the first step in building trust and respect is to identify what they need from you. We often focus on what we need to do our best work, but effective collaboration begins when we shift that focus outward. One way to start is to adapt your approach to better align with their preferences and needs.
For example, if they tend to communicate more slowly and methodically, you may want to slow your own pace to create comfort and connection. If they prefer stability, take time to understand what they need to navigate an upcoming change successfully. This isn’t about changing who you are, but rather demonstrating respect by meeting others where they are.
For leaders who want to create more inclusive communication environments, what’s the biggest mindset shift they need to make, and how can they model this “different, not difficult” approach for their teams?
Sharon: Creating more inclusive environments starts with a mindset shift from knowing to curiosity. Leaders often move quickly toward goals or to implement initiatives, confident in their direction. But when your mind is already made up, there is no space for other voices or perspectives. Curiosity requires leaders to slow down and ask:
- “What am I missing?”
- “What haven’t I thought of?”
- “What is being left unsaid?”
These questions invite others to contribute in meaningful ways. When leaders model a mindset of curiosity, welcoming different perspectives and methods rather than seeing them as obstacles – they signal that different isn’t difficult, it is valuable.
