Author, Rosa Antonia Carrillo
Introduction:
How You Respond to Employee Concerns Matters: Building Trust and Open Communication is the 3rd article in a series dedicated to sharpening our communication skills. We began with Ed Schein’s Humble Inquiry and Karl Weick. Now I’d like to explore Mark Johnson’s theory of the connection between mind, body and reason. I trust you will find this as useful as I have.
Do your communications build trust or do they fall flat?
I recently consulted with an organization seeking to address employee dissatisfaction regarding safety management processes for injuries and prevention.
We conducted a survey and the comment analysis grouped them into four themes:
- Theme 1: Company Prioritization of Production Over Employee Well-being
- Theme 2: Inconsistent and Inadequate Support for Injured Workers
- Theme 3: Lack of Accountability and Communication
- Theme 4: Negative Impact on Employee Morale and Well-being
Management, including the safety team, initially responded with assurances of reviewing policies, improving training, and fostering open dialogue. However, the feedback received indicated that these assurances were not well-received. Instead of building trust, it went down.
A key reason for this disconnect lies in the differing communication styles between employees and management. The employee comments contained terms such as:
- “They stabbed us in the back.”
- “Management doesn’t have our backs.”
- “The company threw him under the bus.”
- “They’re spying out there and thieves on each other.”
- “Management doesn’t want you to get hurt because it is too much paperwork.”
- “There is a sign in the parking lot that says, ‘we care about you and your family.’ …People are working seven days a week, 12 hour days. They don’t give time to care about your family.”
These comments exemplify what Mark Johnson[1] terms “embodied cognition.” This concept, while sounding academic, simply means that people find meaning and reason based on emotions and bodily experiences. It’s a departure from the traditional view of cognition as purely language and logic-based.
Neuroscience research, like that of Antonio Damasio[2], supports this idea, suggesting that decisions are often rooted in emotions, with a final “gut check” needed for approval.
This table below illustrates the stark contrast between the initial management responses, which were more formal and detached, and the employees’ expressions, which were more visceral and emotionally charged. The revised responses aim to bridge this gap by acknowledging the employees’ embodied experiences, incorporating their language, and focusing on collaborative solutions.
What do you think about the revised responses? Will they build trust?
Initial Management Response |
Employee Quotes |
Revised Management Response with Embodied Language and Collaborative Solutions |
| “We understand the concern that production goals sometimes overshadow individual well-being.” | “They stabbed us in the back.” “Management doesn’t have our backs.” | “I hear your frustration loud and clear. We’re forming a task force to create a sustainable workload plan that respects your time and energy. Your well-being is the foundation of our success.” |
| “We acknowledge that there have been inconsistencies in how workplace injuries are handled.” | “The company threw him under the bus.” | “We’re sorry for the times you’ve felt left behind. We’re forming an advisory group to help design a clear injury reporting and support system to ensure you feel cared for and supported.” |
| “We recognize that there’s a need for improved communication and transparency.” | “They’re spying out there and thieves on each other.” | “We’re tearing down those walls and building bridges together. We’ll host open forums, create feedback channels, and work together towards greater transparency, trust, and collaboration.” |
| “We understand that the current situation has negatively impacted morale. We want to create a workplace where everyone feels valued.” | “Management doesn’t want you to get hurt because it is too much paperwork.” “There is a sign in the parking lot that says, ‘we care about you and your family.’ …People are working seven days a week, 12 hour days. They don’t give time to care about your family.” | “I can see how heavy the atmosphere has become here. We’re forming a committee to design initiatives that uplift and celebrate our team. Together, we’ll rebuild the spirit and pride we once had.” |
Conclusion:
Both Karl Weick (sensemaking) and Mark Johnson (embodied cognition) provide valuable insights into how we interpret the world. Their work highlights the importance of recognizing the role of embodied experiences in communication and decision-making.
We cannot separate the mind from the body. The physical environment, the way we’re treated, and the quality of our relationships all affect our thinking. Responding to employee concerns with empathy and an acknowledgment of their embodied experiences is crucial for building trust and fostering open communication. It’s a call to embrace a more holistic view of communication, one that honors both the mind and the body.
What do you think about the revised responses? Are they building trust?
[1] Johnson, M. (2017). Embodied mind, meaning, and reason: how our bodies give rise to understanding. University of Chicago press
[2] Damasio, A. 1994. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
