In addition to the diverse points already made above, each of which has value, I would add that I sometimes delay voicing my view to encourage full team engagement. Some team members tend to be talkers while others hold back... so while I usually come to voice... I consciously delay it until others speak first; sometimes even prompting team members to speak if they don't volunteer.
Of course if I sense something is going off the rails and "needs managing" then I speak up forcefully.
But certainly silence is a tool in the kit.
Thank you Scott for your insight. I like the statement where is a tool in your kit. Saving Changes...
Staying silent when speaking up is needed is an example of Kim Scott's "Ruinous Empathy". Unfortunately, this is one of the ways in which a toxic culture can persist.
However, under the right circumstances, staying silent can speak volumes. For example, if someone has made a suggestion and a key stakeholder who is known to be vocal chooses to remain silent it could be a sign that they are not supportive.
Kiron
It can be pervasive or empowering.......so true Saving Changes...
communication can be modeled to be an interaction between a sender and a receiver, includes verbal and non-verbal modes, and can be explicit or by omission (which needs a common understanding of the context - you cannot notice that there is something missing when you do not know what should be there).
Yes - silence can be meant as a statement of the sender. The question is if the receiver understands that statement. It depends e.g. on the receiver's level of empathy and listening skills, understanding / agreeing on the context or just if it is easy to neglect a statement. Which are dependent on culture and personal capabilities of the receiver.
If - as a sender - you want to make sure that your statement is understood, you should convey that message explicitly and not by omission. A leader should make sure that their message is understood.
Being silent can have unintended consequences, for example in a relationship both sides think they have a common context and understanding and can try to express strong wishes by silence. If that is not understood, I have seen big troubles coming up.
You are so right on how the receiving end of the message could have a very different interpretation of silence, if they even notice. Good reminder that communication is two ways. Saving Changes...
Wade HarshmanScrum Master| GDITIndianapolis, In, United States
"Silence is consent" is a common phrase, or at least one version of it. But there's a thing called Warnock's Delimma which is worth considering. It says there is no way to properly interpret a lack of response.
In my case, silence might be consent, but probably not. It's as likely to be a form of protest. I'm usually happy to state my consent or support. Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Deneb
Sometimes silence is the best course of action. You have to evaluate the situation and determine what best serves the bigger schemes of things in the project or situation. It could be temporarily silence where you speak out later at the right moment.
RK Saving Changes...
Mahesha PanditCTO| Rhytify Technologies Private LimitedBangalore, Karnataka, India
Yes, silence is indeed a statement. In Sanskrit, there is a proverb – Mounam sammathi soochakam (Silence is an indication of acceptance). I am sure that every culture around the world has an opinion about the merits of being silent.
To answer your first question, YES, I have chosen silence at the table as a response. I have held back my opinion. In a tabled discussion, I have seen the “silent response” getting propagated. Others present at the table notice the silence of one member and draw their own conclusions.
To answer your second question, YES, I have chosen silence when a few statements are made. Silence allows the statement to sink in. Then we have statements for which silence would be the most appropriate response.
I also believe that silence is an action. Sometimes we need to let things pass. By being silent, we let things pass.
Nice set of questions … I couldn’t be silent after reading these questions … Saving Changes...
Tim PodestaDirector of PM/PMO| Former BP- now IndependentPenn, Bucks, United Kingdom
Feb 29, 2020 9:01 AM
Replying to Scott Smith
...
In addition to the diverse points already made above, each of which has value, I would add that I sometimes delay voicing my view to encourage full team engagement. Some team members tend to be talkers while others hold back... so while I usually come to voice... I consciously delay it until others speak first; sometimes even prompting team members to speak if they don't volunteer.
Of course if I sense something is going off the rails and "needs managing" then I speak up forcefully.
But certainly silence is a tool in the kit.
I would say silence is a choice - either to save a response to another time having listened and reflected or to let the moment pass. Speaking up is a choice as well for the opposite reasons. Saving Changes...
Anton OosthuizenSenior Business Analyst / Project Manager| Self EmployedPretoria, Gauteng, South Africa
Keeping silent when you have a definite opinion is often passive aggression that will eventually boil over and become ugly.
You might keep quiet in order not to derail the meeting and have a sideline discussion regarding the issue afterward and that might be a good strategy but should be used with caution. Saving Changes...
Riad AlhammoudProject management| LanganAbu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
It depends on many factors like work environment, culture. I prefer to be a silent rather than speak when knows already will not respect my opinion or I will be attacked in the future. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
