Effective Communication in Risk

“We de-escalate ourselves and others by how we choose to handle risk communication.”

-Anna Hampton

Facing Fear: The Journey to Mature Courage in Risk and Perseucution

A common question asked about leading teams in risk is:

"What does effective communication look like in high risk cross-cultural situations,

especially between leaders and field staff?"

There are clear qualities of communication that are helpful, and clear list of qualities that are unhelpful and even increase the risk level of staff and increase the organizational exposure to risk.  

These qualities are more than "gut level."  As one leader stated, after talking with certain staff in a high risk situation the leader felt connected and described the feeling with "I got it," but when talking with other field staff, "I feel a lack of trust in them and that I learned nothing new." 

Effective communication practices of mature individuals are characterized by:

• Transparency - of what is going on and internal feelings

• Openness - of what is troubling and what are joys

• Sharing of self - without having to be asked a million questions

• Sharing of Ministry

• Specific stories - demonstrating God's activity and their awareness of His activity

• Volunteering of information

• Initiation of communication with the leadership

Talking with field staff in high risk who do not share easily can feel like "pulling taffy" or like trying to draw out rebellious teenagers. There is a build up of communication experiences and behaviors that all point to a breakdown of trust between the leadership and the field staff.

Organizations with high risk tolerance often end up tolerating untrustworthy behavior that actually opens their organization up to a high and uncomfortable level of risk exposure.  

Ineffective Communication is Characterized with:

• Defensiveness

• Lack of transparency

• Lack of volunteering information

• Wielding information as power/tool

• Closed communication (1-word / short answers to open questions)

• Argumentative in a passive-aggressive manner (lack of inability to disagree nicely and work out differences of opinion respectfully)

• Lack of Empathy with leadership and others

• Leadership has the uneasy feeling that they are not getting all the information from field staff

• Leadership commonly feels a lack of trust in the staff. 

Henry Cloud has a book titled, Necessary Endings:The Employees, Businesses, and Relationships That All of Us Have to Give Up in Order to Move Forward.  In that book, he describes the 3 types of people Proverbs describes, and particularly, Chapters 5-6 talk about when to know when to end a partnership.  The more clarity there is for effective behavior and communication between organizational leaders and field staff, especially in high-risk cross-cultural situations, the more effective the ministry will be.  

How good are we at connecting to others and cultivating quality communication? Shepherding our teams well includes helping each person become more self aware. This includes training on dangerous attitudes and biases. I’ll just briefly discuss dangerous attitudes in this article.

In our 2-day RAM Training, we discuss some of the most dangerous attitudes in high risk.  Field staff demonstrating these attitudes possibly expose their organization to an uncomfortable level of risk than is already naturally present.  

Studies show that what that most often prevents us from risk mitigation is our minds. During times of high risk, it is common for things to get in the way of our cognitive functioning.

Here are some common dangerous risk attitudes:

Defiance

While some degree of boldness is a positive mental resource for persevering through risk, defiance can hinder our ability to respond appropriately. Defiance causes a person to focus on winning instead of continuing.

Resignation

This dangerous attitude can sometimes look like fatalism. When we feel like there is nothing we can do to cope with dangerous situations, we are on unstable ground for sure.

Compulsivity

Compulsive people manage risk through action. The problem is that it is not a well-intentioned activity. Driving forward without evaluating the road ahead can be hazardous indeed.

Comparison

It is sometimes tempting to look at what others are doing when we are confused. That is not a completely flawed approach, however, but it does have limits and falls far short of mitigating through one’s own careful discernment and analysis. “So if everyone jumped off a bridge …”

Denial

Believing that we are somehow immune from being impacted by danger causes us to avoid dealing with it in the first place. To effectively manage risk, one must first acknowledge exposure to the threat.

For the sake of Christ and His Kingdom, it takes discernment to know when to end partnerships and move people along. These are not easy situations or conversations to have or decisions to make. May God give organizational, regional, and team leaders wisdom to know how to best lead field staff entrusted to you. 

For more on Risk Communication, see chapter 13 in my 2nd book, Facing Fear: The Journey to Mature Courage in Risk and Persecution.

(1) Sheep Behavior