How the Word “Communications” Seduces Knowledge Mobilizers into Mistaking Productivity for Impact

10 Questions to Help You Discover Whether You’re Mistaking Effort for Efficacy

Language can be so darn slippery. A single letter can alter a word’s meaning, as in the difference between “communications” and “communication.”

Through my work as a coach and content creator, I run into many researchers and research professionals who confuse the two terms. I also find the same misunderstanding among entrepreneurs who are commercializing research and not-for-profits that are trying to leverage research to drive social change.

The issue is more than semantic. When we focus on “communications” (with an S), it’s tempting to get caught up creating “communication products” (or “knowledge products”) and lose track of the outcomes we want to achieve.

“Communications” can then become a boondoggle that makes us feel creative and productive but delivers little in terms of real impact.

The difference an S makes

In an organization of a certain size, Communications (with an S) is the department responsible for interfacing with the outside world. To use an old-fashioned metaphor, it acts as the printing press for the entity, churning out items such as press releases, reports, web copy, social media content, infographics, videos, and more.

Communication (no S) is something very different. It’s a universal activity in which we all participate, including those of us who create “communications” for a living. At the most fundamental level, communication is the art of forging authentic, meaningful connections with other human beings.

Regardless of what our job description says or the department we find ourselves in, we’re all engaging in communication every day, through various modes. Writing is communication, and so is speaking in a meeting, sketching a concept on a whiteboard, organizing project tasks into a spreadsheet work plan, and frowning when your boss asks you to deliver on that unpleasant task you’ve been putting off for weeks.

More than 20 years ago, when I was trying to wrap my head around how to teach “technical communication” to computer science students, I came across a quote I found tremendously helpful:

Communication is to business as carbon is to life.

While I’ve never been able to track that quote back to its source, those few words instantly illuminated for me the contrast between “communications” and “communication.” It helped me understand that communication (no S) serves as the essence or lifeblood of business processes. It’s the juice that makes procedures, departments, organizations, supply chains, and ecosystems run.

In the same way, communication (in the singular) animates the complex interactions that make knowledge mobilization happen.

We don’t always notice this, however, because popular frameworks describing the flow of concepts and data from research teams tend to take a mechanistic view of that process. As a result, it’s easy to get distracted by a printing-press mentality, to fall into counting “outputs” (different communication products we make) rather than focusing on how we want to influence our target audience.

How productive is your production line?

I’m someone who loves making things. Any day when I’ve produced some kind of artifact—no matter whether it’s a presentation deck, an impact story, an annual report, a video, or a social media post—is a fulfilling day.

Because I get such a kick from creating, I have to watch myself. Unless I consciously focus on the strategic objectives behind a project, I could easily end up manufacturing useless goods,things it feels great to create but don’t deliver authentic value.

Lately I’ve been thinking that this inclination of mine might be shared by other knowledge translators and mobilizers. Here are 10 questions to ask yourself as a quick test.

When you create a communication product, or “knowledge product,” do you:

1. Identify the specific audience you want it reach?
   
   
2. Pay close attention to the audience’s inner world (e.g., thoughts, emotions, beliefs, attitudes, and previous knowledge)?
   
   
3. Consider the audience’s outer world (e.g., physical environment, social and cultural context, practical goals, information needs, and favorite ways to consume information)?
   
   
4. Recognize barriers that could prevent the audience from understanding or caring about the ideas and data you’re sharing?
   
   
5. Learn the “lingo” your audience speaks (which may be influenced by their age, cultural affiliations, professional identity, and so on)?
   
   
6. Articulate the specific way(s) you want the audience to react?
   
   
7. Tailor the form of the product, as well as language and visuals, to adapt to all of the above?
   
   
8. Check to verify that the outcome for the communication product (the desired audience reaction) aligns with your overall objectives for knowledge mobilization?
   
   
9. Estimate the Return on Effort (RoE) by assessing the effort required to make the product compared with the expected impact?
   
   
10. Describe all the ancillary “products” required to get your main product in front of your target audience? (For example, if your main product is a presentation deck to be shared with various stakeholders, have you identified all the ways you’ll need to communicate with gatekeepers and the stakeholders to schedule and organize meetings?)

“Back to basics” could boost your efficacy

If you answered “yes” to most of the above questions, then you probably have a solid understanding of communication as the “carbon” of knowledge mobilization. The communication products you develop should be impactful because you’re designing them with human-to-human communication top of mind. You’re starting with a strategic intent: to persuade rather than merely inform.

If you answered “no” to some of the questions, then you may need to inject more humanity and persuasiveness into the products you’re creating.

Fortunately, that’s simpler to do than you might think. With the right methods and tools, you can quickly learn to tap into the innate sense we all have for connecting with humans relationally, in ways that go beyond transactional information-sharing.

The more attention you pay to “communication,” the more effective your “communications” will become.

A good place to begin is to take your production line back to basics. Scrutinize your wish list of all the tantalizing knowledge products you’d like to create, carefully evaluating the RoE. Then slim it down to those products whose immediate impact should align the most closely with the overall transformation you’re hoping to achieve.

You may find it useful to plot potential projects on an Effort-to-Impact Matrix, like the one below:

Move all the other items into a “parking lot,” a running list of items you can consider down the road. As your research priorities or findings evolve, so may your strategic impact goals and your audience. Just because you can’t justify a creative project today doesn’t mean it mightn’t be the ideal project a year or two from now!

Looking for more practical insights to make your research communication more impactful? Check out the Clarity Connect blog.

To find out about free workshops and get a weekly reflection from me delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe to the Clarity Connect newsletter.