Our interlocutor was overwhelmed by the multitude of questions and options in a delicate case. The casuistry placed us in opposing positions, revealing that self-exclusion from dialogue does not halt the management of the issue through alternative channels. 'There are things that those involved never want to hear, but omitting them is confusing softness with deceit,' he pointed out.
At more than one critical moment, clarity is fundamental, and choosing not to respond is not a valid option. The asymmetry of interpretations can exacerbate what is already bad news for both parties. 'Clarity takes on particular value when communicating undesirable realities,' he emphasized.
It is essential to distinguish between information that can be shared, the available options, and speculative reflections. 'Clarity is a virtue that never hinders improvement,' he stated. Being able to communicate clearly and concretely, even in complicated situations, provides correct illumination to the facts that need to be exposed.
One must be prepared to answer difficult questions, especially when many people are involved and the situation escalates quickly. Consistency and consideration of the meaning for the interlocutors are key. 'Transparency in communication is essential to avoid misunderstandings,' he highlighted.
State the facts transparently and seek to use uniform language to prevent misunderstandings. Reflect on how many similar profiles exist in organizations and maintain consistency in communication. In summary, clarity and preparation for difficult situations are fundamental when communicating undesirable realities to third parties.
