It is very difficult to be confident of your abilities and to be sure of the inability of others. Though taught as we always are to be openminded, there are times you have to put the stake in the ground, make an assumption about someone and move forward with that assumption in mind.
With that assumption in place, I feel that some people don’t understand how to mature in conversational skills with time. As you grow in age and in stature, you simply need to act your age in office. It is a complicated web of interactions and adding another variable of your whacko personality does not help in any manner. Part of it is to appreciate ambiguity and take it in your stride.
Ambiguity appears in several ways. I have found it appear when one is instructed to do a certain job. I have also seen it appears when you one is part of a brainstorming session. However, how to deal with it needs to be learnt and those who learn it well really gain a lot of respect. Ambiguity in a task is very common. The incorrect approach to deal with it is by asking for details from the person who has given you the job. The correct way to do it is to make an effort yourself and develop some options. People who dint understand this, or argue against this approach take several tacks – a) Im not experienced enough to think about options b) My boss is a micromanager c) I am lazy. For the first tack, I feel that it is an excuse taken by people who lack confidence. They should read more, understand that we are all generalists and that asking others (other than your boss) is always an option. For the second taxk, I agree that micromanagers exist. However, even the worst of micromanager will not mind having given a few starter options. Of course, in utopia, you would know exactly what your boss is thinking about for you to complete the job without seeking any clarifications whatsoever. And for the final tack; there is no hope.
Brainstorming sessions are also an obvious place for ambiguity to exist. These session can be person-to-person or involving several people as a group. With experience, I have seen that even in these settings, the people who do not insist on nailing down the specifics are the people who gain more respect. I am not saying that specific examples should never be a part of brainstorming session. However, successful people always remember that an example is to explain the broad point and hence getting stuck in an example defeats the session entirely. The worst offenders are the people who want to believe, maybe because ambiguity is an uncomfortable construct, that they can merrily list down all the possible cases, find a solution for each, and solve the problem in black and white. Clearly that can never happen since you can never cover all aspects. So what ends up happening is that meetings run by such individuals end up unsuccessful since they were unable to ‘nail down’ the problem. Successful brainstorming meetings don’t fall into this trap and dive in and step back from examples to emerge with a broad understanding/gameplan.
