And in contrast to it, things are distinguished.

 

Today we will not talk about communication, but rather we will talk about lack of communication.

We have heard a lot, read books, and even attended training and lectures that talk about the importance of the leader exercising effective communication with those around him, and the great impact of communication on the success of the organization whose leaders practice effective communication with its employees.

 

But we will not realize the meaning of the word “communication” unless we experience the meaning of “non-communication”.

Here, I ask you, dear reader, to lend me your heart and mind, so I will go with you on a journey through time.

 

The time is 1957, and the place is Massachusetts, USA.

Where one of the castles of the world of technology was established, the Digital Corporation for the production of technological equipment.

A company that promises success, and is already achieving it, it has nearly one hundred and twenty thousand employees around the world, and its profits exceed fourteen billion dollars.

 

The company continued to achieve successes under the leadership of its founder, Ken Olson, whose leadership is trusted by his employees, the company’s engineers, and even its shareholders.

 

Until the day Olson was elevated from president of the company to chairman of the board and was replaced by Palmer.

Here, some employees and shareholders felt troubled, and Palmer did not pay attention to communicating with his employees and engineers, who are the pillars of the company. Some of them left the company and joined the competitors’ companies.

 

The shareholders heard that the cadres had fled, and the company’s position in the stock market collapsed, and what made matters worse was the meeting of the board members without the presence of the company’s president, Palmer. In fact, the chart that was presented during the meeting, which contained the names of the members of the board of directors, did not contain the name of the company’s president.

 

 News of the meeting leaked to the press, and everyone was sure that the chair of the company was empty and that the company was in great confusion, so the value of the shares plummeted, and the shareholders rushed to sell them.

And the company turned from a rich institution to a debtor company in a very short time.

 

And after the collapse, which led to the sale of the institution to the competitor Compaq for less than a quarter of the price.

 

Surprisingly, in one of the press interviews with Palmer, he denied that he had left the position of the company’s president and that his failure to attend the meeting in Massachusetts was because he was in another meeting at the company’s branch in Washington, and it is clear that the lack of communication with his administration was the cause of this confusion.

From the chart in which Palmer’s name did not appear as president of the company, the journalists communicated with the secretary who prepared it, who made it clear that she did not put Palmer’s name because she did not know how to put all the names in a small space, so she was content with what she could include of the names of the members of the board of directors.

 

This was the end of a great fortress of business, and a natural consequence of the “lack of communication”.

 

Now let’s go back to the present day, and imagine, dear reader, if the company’s leaders communicate effectively with each other, with their employees, and with the shareholders, what would the company’s situation look like today?

Unleash your imagination and tell me in the comments what you see.