I often blog on the importance of open body language in giving a presentation.  But no less important is openness of language.  Following are 4 keys ways that people test openness of language against the ideal; fail in one of these and your audience will write you off as not forthright, or honest – and ultimately not worth listening to. 

Openness in Intent.  As humans, we believe that actions, especially ones directed toward us, are meaningful, and we want to know the meanings. Children learn early to ask, “ Why? until their parents run out of answers. They are trying to delve into and broaden their understanding of intent.  Because intent is so important to us as humans, clarity of intent lies at the very heart of being open. If I know what you intend, I can understand you, and my willingness to be open to you increases. The simplest way to be clear about your intent is to tell me early in our communication together.

Openness in Responsibility. “ Mistakes were made ” is a classic way politicians use to apologize or admit errors without actually doing so. That’s a passive construction that leaves the crucial actor, the politician, out of it. Unfortunately, we all know what he really means, so once again the politician reveals more than he intends by attempting to conceal. And we assume the worst. Open language therefore favors active verbs.

Openness in Framing.  The first questions on everyone’s minds when people communicate are about the whys of the meeting or event or conversation: Why are we here? Why is this important? Why is this relevant to me? We are trying to frame the encounter, whether it’s a negotiation, a keynote speech, or an intimate conversation. Our first need is to be oriented, and we can’t begin to pay attention to anything else until that’s taken care of.  So answer your audience’s need to know why, and do it quickly, simply, and directly. Clear, honest framing is essential for open communication. If you fail to create the context, that question will dog the proceedings from then on. And if you’re duplicitous about the context, then when the betrayal comes, it will be fatal to trust and the possibility of further open communications.

Openness in Agenda.  In casual communications, this step is accomplished quickly and effortlessly because of understandings that already exist. When two friends meet, for example, one will say, “ Wassup? ” to the other, and the conversation will pick up where it left off. Indeed, it will take a conscious effort in reframing to move the conversation off its usual tracks if one of the conversationalists wants to talk about something serious or different from the normal course of affairs.  In more formal settings, a good communicator knows that openness requires agreement on the agenda in order to avoid problems and recriminations later. The phrase, “ You never told me that . . . ” is a listener’s way of registering that an agenda item was not agreed on. The danger is that when the other person says that, he is letting himself off the moral hook, at least to some extent. You may be stuck with the problem and the blame.

When an issue has been announced, briefly discussed, and added to the agenda, it becomes everyone’s issue. If it is sprung as a surprise later, it will be your problem and your fault. The more intimate the relationship is, the more like a betrayal it will seem. Everyone (until they learn better) has had the experience of neglecting to tell a spouse or significant other some vital bit of information. For example, you go to a party where the host is about to move to Bora-Bora. You forget to tell your spouse that vital detail, who finds out what everyone else knows at the shindig. Brace yourself for an indignant, “ Why didn’t you tell me! ” on
the car ride home. 

Paying attention to these 4 openness issues will ensure that you connect fully with your audience and that they perceive you as an authentic communicator.  I talk more about these issues in my new book, Trust Me:  Four Steps to Authentic and Charisma.