Advice
The Communication Skills Crisis: Why Most Training is Absolute Rubbish (And What Actually Works)
Look, I'm going to start with something that'll probably tick off half the HR departments reading this: most communication skills training is a complete waste of everyone's time and money.
There. I said it.
After seventeen years of watching businesses throw good money after bad on generic "communication workshops" that teach people to nod appropriately and maintain eye contact, I've had enough. Last month alone, I sat through three different corporate training sessions that could've been replaced by a single YouTube video titled "How to Not Be a Complete Tosser in Meetings."
But here's the thing that really gets me wound up - we're doing communication training completely backwards in Australia.
The Real Problem Nobody Talks About
Most communication training focuses on the mechanics. Hand gestures. Voice projection. Active listening techniques that make you look like a bobblehead doll. Meanwhile, the actual communication breakdowns in workplaces happen because people fundamentally don't understand what they're trying to achieve.
I learned this the hard way during my early consulting days in Perth. Had a client - mid-sized manufacturing company - where the production manager and quality control supervisor absolutely couldn't stand each other. Management brought me in for "communication coaching" thinking it was a personality clash.
Turned out the real issue was that production was measured on volume and QC was measured on defect rates. They were literally paid to work against each other, but everyone wanted to fix it with better "communication skills."
That's like trying to fix a leaking roof with better curtains.
What Actually Works (Spoiler: It's Not What You Think)
Here's my controversial take: the best communicators I know are often the worst at traditional communication training. They interrupt people. They argue. They ask uncomfortable questions.
But they're phenomenally effective because they focus on outcomes, not process.
Real communication skills training should start with one simple question: "What are you actually trying to accomplish here?" Not "How should I structure my message?" or "What's my communication style?" Those come later.
I've seen communication skills training programs that spend weeks on presentation techniques but never address the fundamental issue - most workplace presentations exist because someone couldn't write a decent email.
Think about it. How many PowerPoint presentations have you sat through that could've been a three-sentence message?
The Australian Factor
We've got a particular challenge here in Australia because we've imported most of our communication training from the US, where business culture is fundamentally different. Americans are comfortable with self-promotion and direct confrontation in ways that make most Aussies squirm.
But instead of adapting the training, we just pretend we're all suddenly going to become comfortable with American-style assertiveness. It's like teaching swimming by throwing people in the deep end of a different pool.
I was working with a Sydney-based tech company last year where they'd brought in this expensive US consultant to teach "executive presence." Watching these perfectly competent Australian managers try to fake American confidence was painful. Like watching your dad try to use slang he heard on TikTok.
The Three Things That Actually Matter
After years of trial and error (mostly error), I've narrowed effective communication training down to three elements that actually move the needle:
1. Context Awareness Most communication problems happen because people don't understand the other person's constraints, pressures, or priorities. Teaching empathy is harder than teaching eye contact, so most trainers skip it.
2. Outcome Clarity Before you open your mouth or send that email, know exactly what success looks like. Not "better communication" - actual, measurable outcomes.
3. Feedback Loops The best communicators constantly adjust based on what's working and what isn't. But most training treats communication like following a recipe instead of having a conversation.
Everything else - the body language, the presentation skills, the conflict resolution techniques - these are tools. And tools are only useful when you know what you're building.
The Inconvenient Truth About "Soft Skills"
Here's another opinion that'll ruffle some feathers: communication skills aren't soft skills. They're the hardest skills of all.
Technical skills have clear right and wrong answers. Communication requires reading complex social situations, managing competing priorities, and adapting your approach based on dozens of variables that change constantly.
Yet we treat communication training like it's somehow less important than learning Excel formulas.
I've worked with engineers who can design bridges that'll stand for centuries but can't explain their ideas to the finance team well enough to get project approval. That's not a soft skill problem - that's a business-critical competency gap.
What Good Training Actually Looks Like
The most effective communication training I've seen focuses on real workplace scenarios, not hypothetical situations from a training manual.
Instead of role-playing generic "difficult conversations," work through the actual difficult conversation this person needs to have next Tuesday with their underperforming team member.
Instead of practicing presentation skills with made-up content, help them deliver the budget presentation they're stressed about next week.
The learning happens when people see immediate application to their actual work problems.
But this kind of training is messy and unpredictable. It requires trainers who understand business context, not just communication theory. Most training companies prefer the neat, packageable modules that can be delivered the same way every time.
The Technology Trap
Don't get me started on how technology has made communication training both easier and completely useless at the same time.
Yes, we can now deliver training modules online to hundreds of people simultaneously. But communication is fundamentally about human connection, and you can't learn human connection through a screen.
I've seen companies spend tens of thousands on "interactive" online communication training platforms that teach people to communicate better by... not communicating with actual humans.
It's like learning to swim in a simulator.
The Real ROI Nobody Measures
Want to know the dirty secret about communication training? Most companies measure success by completion rates and satisfaction scores, not actual communication improvement.
"97% of participants completed the module and rated it 4.2 out of 5 stars!"
Meanwhile, the same dysfunctional meeting patterns continue, emails still create more confusion than clarity, and nobody can explain the quarterly strategy in a way that makes sense to the people actually doing the work.
The companies that get real value from communication training measure different things: decision-making speed, project completion rates, employee engagement scores, customer satisfaction metrics.
Because good communication isn't about communication - it's about getting better business results through better human interaction.
Where to From Here?
Look, I'm not saying all communication training is worthless. I'm saying most of it misses the point entirely.
The best communication training I've experienced treats communication as a means to an end, not an end in itself. It's integrated with actual business challenges and measured by actual business outcomes.
And it acknowledges that communication skills are deeply personal and culturally influenced. What works in Manhattan might not work in Melbourne, and that's perfectly fine.
If you're looking at communication training for your team, ask harder questions. Not "What topics do you cover?" but "How will we know if this actually improved anything that matters?"
Because at the end of the day, the goal isn't to communicate better. The goal is to achieve better results through more effective human interaction.
And if your training provider can't explain the difference, you're probably looking at the wrong provider.
Related Resources: