How do you synchronize work when you can’t talk to each other? What allows people to know who you are and what you are accountable for if you can’t tell them? One way is through the use of “signage” which refers to the use of any kind of visual graphic created to display information to a particular audience. And when people ignore the signage, it can create problems, as I recently discovered.
Signage is a critical part of an effective infrastructure that allows for “silent” (non speaking) communication. We rely on signage every day to navigate through work. Signage is used to guide and direct traffic, get us into and out of buildings, and tell us which restroom we should use. Signage, in the form of uniforms, also makes it possible for us to know who we are talking to, who belongs to which group, and what people are accountable for. We depend on signage to help us coordinate work. Given our reliance on signage, therefore, it should not come as a surprise that failing to play attention to it can create performance breakdowns.
I work on a conference project where people are assigned to different teams. Each team has a particular accountability and must coordinate their part of the conference with others. One way we distinguish who is on which team is by the type of name tag they wear. That way, when the conference is happening, we can tell instantly who is suppose to be in certain places and who isn’t – all without ever talking.
In a way, it is like the way the teams on the flight deck of an aircraft carrier distinguish themselves by the color of their uniforms. Since the flight deck is loud, oral communication is not always possible or effective. And, because the deck is dangerous, it is imperative that coordination get done or people die. One way the Navy accomplishes the necessary coordination is through the use of colored uniforms.
Although the conference I work on is nothing like the flight deck of an aircraft carrier, effective coordination of it nevertheless requires being able to know who is who quickly, and in many cases, quietly. We do that though name tags.
Recently the client we do the conference for said that a new person was going to be at the conference doing work for them. “No problem”, we said, “what name tag will he wear?” Rather than answer the question, they proceeded to explain what he would be doing at the conference and why it would be important and valuable. They didn’t understand that we were asking a question about infrastructure and they answering a question about activity – they are not the same.
We didn’t want to know what he would be doing, we wanted to know how to “tag” him so that people at the conference could appropriately coordinate with him. We explained that if he wears a conference participant nametag, he will be related to in one way, but if he wears a conference worker nametag, he will be related to in another way. No one will ask (or even care) what activities he is engaged in other than as they relate to his name tag.
All this over a name tag????!!!!! Yes, because that is the power of infrastructure. It is one of the key elements we use in coordinating with the world and each other. I suspect that there are far more breakdowns and upsets related to issues of infrastructure that many of us imagine. In our case with the conference, the client had no idea they were violating a piece of infrastructure we rely on for coordination. Instead, they believed we were being resistant to the person (“You don’t like him?” they asked) and what he would be doing. Each time we would ask about the “name tag”, they would try to explain what he would be doing. We were not communicating and both sides were upset, but for different reasons.
I am beginning to wonder how much things like “resistance to change” or “poor performance” are a function of infrastructure breakdowns rather than motivation, leadership, commitment, etc. What do you think?
