Dummies UK site (click on title) provides the article below, adapted from the book, Neurolinguistics for Dummies.

Seven quick ways to sharpen your rapport

For starters, try some immediate ways to begin building rapport:

* Take a genuine interest in getting to know what’s important to the other person. Start to understand them rather than expecting them to understand you first.
* Pick up on the key words, favourite phrases and way of speaking that someone uses and build these subtly into your own conversation.
* Notice how someone likes to handle information. Do they like lots of details or just the big picture? As you speak, feed back information in this same portion size.
* Breathe in unison with them.
* Look out for the other person’s intention — their underlying aim — rather than what they do or say. They may not always get it right, but expect their heart to lie in the right place.
* Adopt a similar stance to them in terms of your body language, gestures, voice tone and speed.
* Respect the other person’s time, energy, favourite people and money. They will be important resources for them.

Plain language techniques can help you get the message through efficiently and effectively. It takes effort but it’s worth it.

Poorly written documents contribute to inefficiencies, management problems, higher administrative costs, and poor public relations. Clear communication gives you a positive image as efficient, responsive, and friendly. Isn’t that how you want your clients to see you?

Improving your writing saves both time and money. Think of the time spent writing and editing. And the time wasted correcting misunderstandings. Imagine the gains to be achieved by making your written material more efficient and effective.

One of my clients prized brevity above all and insisted that all staff memos be limited to one page. But sometimes clarity requires more text or more space, and clarity is what we are really after.

A few weeks ago, Kenneth W. Davis put it this way:

Be economical

General Rules and Regulations
promulgated under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Rule 13a-19 — Plain English Presentation of Specified Information

---

1. Any information included or incorporated by reference in a report filed under section 13(a) of the Act that is required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 402, 403, 404 or 407 of Regulation S-B or Item 402, 403, 404 or 407 of Regulation S-K must be presented in a clear, concise and understandable manner. You must prepare the disclosure using the following standards:
   1. Present information in clear, concise sections, paragraphs and sentences;

   2. Use short sentences;
   3. Use definite, concrete, everyday words;
   4. Use the active voice;
   5. Avoid multiple negatives;
   6. Use descriptive headings and subheadings;
   7. Use a tabular presentation or bullet lists for complex material, wherever possible;
   8. Avoid legal jargon and highly technical business and other terminology;
   9. Avoid frequent reliance on glossaries or defined terms as the primary means of explaining information. Define terms in a glossary or other section of the document only if the meaning is unclear from the context. Use a glossary only if it facilitates understanding of the disclosure; and
   10. In designing the presentation of the information you may include pictures, logos, charts, graphs and other design elements so long as the design is not misleading and the required information is clear. You are encouraged to use tables, schedules, charts and graphic illustrations that present relevant data in an understandable manner, so long as such presentations are consistent with applicable disclosure requirements and consistent with other information in the document. You must draw graphs and charts to scale. Any information you provide must not be misleading.

In drafting the disclosure to comply with this section, you should avoid the following:

1. Legalistic or overly complex presentations that make the substance of the disclosure difficult to understand;

2. Vague “boilerplate” explanations that are imprecise and readily subject to different interpretations;
3. Complex information copied directly from legal documents without any clear and concise explanation of the provision(s); and
4. Disclosure repeated in different sections of the document that increases the size of the document but does not enhance the quality of the information.

71 FR 53158, 53261, Sept. 8, 2006.

The advice below is taken from an interview with Laura Morgan Roberts in Harvard Business School’s Working Knowledge website called “Creating a Positive Professional Image“

Put your mind to what your image communicates about you and how that affects your message:

Be the author of your own identity.

Take a strategic, proactive approach to managing your image:

Identify your ideal state.

• What are the core competencies and character traits you want people to associate with you?
• Which of your social identities do you want to emphasize and incorporate into your workplace interactions, and which would you rather minimize?

Assess your current image, culture, and audience.

• What are the expectations for professionalism?
• How do others currently perceive you?

Conduct a cost-benefit analysis for image change.

• Do you care about others’ perceptions of you?
• Are you capable of changing your image?
• Are the benefits worth the costs? (Cognitive, psychological, emotional, physical effort)

Use strategic self-presentation to manage impressions and change your image.

• Employ appropriate traditional and social identity-based impression management strategies.
• Pay attention to the balancing act—build credibility while maintaining authenticity.

Manage the effort you invest in the process.

• Monitoring others’ perceptions of you
• Monitoring your own behavior
• Strategic self-disclosure
• Preoccupation with proving worth and legitimacy

This tip sheet is from a course in writing for government at the University of Victoria–home of British Columbia’s provincial government–that will serve you well for general purposes.

I followed its advice when writing a press release for a federal government department and found the result too clear and readable for the current government’s preferences.

Here is a statement that sums up:
“Remember, the aim of the press release is to have the greatest impact with the fewest words.”

Are you motivated to know more after reading the press release below? The headline for this release mentioned communication pitfalls, so I read this, but it turns out to be an example of poor communication.

“MADHAVAN NAYAR is company leader of INFOGIX, INC., the leading provider of Information Integrity solutions: “With the advent of the Internet, there has been a paradigm shift in the way companies communicate with their customers and deliver customer service. Considering there is such a wealth of information, such advanced technology offerings and such powerful communication capabilities available, why is it that so many of us feel that we are overcharged, underserved and taken for a ride? Why is it that so many organizations deliver such mediocre service and, as a result, stagnate, fail and get overrun by their smarter competitors?” To help companies understand how to avoid these pitfalls in the future, Nayar can explain how to align, focus and mobilize people, processes and products to become customer-driven, so the company can profitably grow and create value. Nayar can also provide expert insight into Information Integrity, highlighting the importance that organizations assure the accuracy, consistency and reliability of their critical information.”

This is the third in the series on apology. It is fortuitus that I found another blog entry just today on Public Apology.

For a look at the apology in the public arena, three items,
one from Harvard Business Review and two from Bernaisesauce.

HB Working Knowledge, A Framework for Apologies

by Barbara Kellerman

Here are some questions that can guide your approach.

• What function would a public apology serve?
• Who would benefit from an apology?
  
• Why would an apology matter?
  
• What happens if you apologize publicly?
  
• What happens if you don’t apologize?

from “When Should a Leader Apologize—and When Not?” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84, No. 4, April 2006.

And from Bernaise Source

Apologizing in the New Media Age… quoting DPK Public Relations

Why Apologies Are A Crisis Communications Staple

• Take responsibility as soon as possible. Apologize as soon after the offense as possible.
• Describe what you did. Don’t be vague or use euphemisms that attempt to tidy up your mess. A short, direct statement is perfect followed by a brief explanation of the circumstances surrounding it to provide context.
• Express remorse. Make your apology as heartfelt as you can without assuming liability. Tone is important here. The statement must reflect genuine remorse.
• Shut up. Afterward, be quiet and listen while people tell you how angry they are. If it’s really bad, they’ll call for your head. Know that you’ve done the right thing and time is on your side.
• Make it right. In such situations, what you DO always trumps what you SAY. Therefore, symbolic gestures matter. Your attempts to correct the problem and compensate those who have been wronged are essential. However, be careful not to promise more than you can deliver…

And again from bernaisesauce an entertaining rif on the sincerity of recent public apologies:

Apology Notes: A Rating Sytem

Red heart – heart felt apology accompanied by meaningful
change in action beyond what was expected

Clear heart – the apology is sincere, with no game changing
action beyond what was expected

Broken heart – meaningless apology mailed in by a PR
department or publicist where bad actions continue

Stephanie West Allen does us the favor of collecting comments and exposing the misinterpretation of the results of a communication study which has taken on mythic proportions–being taught in university communication courses.

You know, it is the one that says that the “meaning of communication is derived 7% from the words spoken, 38% from the tonality, and 55% from body language”–turns out that only applies to ambigous communication.

When the plain language of the message leaves no doubts, meaning need not be found in the external clues.

I just returned from a cross-country trip, and found this in my email, via Newswise:

Some people face their biggest problem with communication when sharing new information with people they know well, newly published research at the University of Chicago shows.

Because they already share quite a bit of common knowledge, people often use short, ambiguous messages in talking with co-workers and spouses, and accordingly unintentionally create misunderstandings, said Boaz Keysar, Professor in Psychology at the University of Chicago.

“People are so used to talking with those with whom they already share a great deal of information, that when they have something really new to share, they often present it in away that assumes the person already knows it,” said Keysar, who with graduate student Shali Wu tested Keysar’s communication theories and presented the results in an article, “The Effect of Information Overlap on Communication Effectiveness,” published in the current issue of Cognitive Science.

“Sharing additional [new] information reduces communication effectiveness precisely when there is an opportunity to inform—when people communicate information only they themselves know,” the researchers said.

In real life situations, the assumptions people make about what another person knows have many consequences, Keysar said. Doctors, for instance, often communicate quickly with each other and miscommunicate because they don’t realize the other physician is getting new information when they are discussing a treatment program, he suggested.