Stop Teaching Communication Skills Like It's 1985: Why Most Corporate Training Gets It Wrong

Connect with us: SB Nation Community | Medium Articles | Decisive Barcelona | Elephant Journal | Pexels Photography

Walked into a Melbourne office last month and watched a "communication expert" teach 47 middle managers how to make eye contact for two bloody hours. Two. Hours. About looking at people when you talk to them. I nearly walked out, but the coffee was decent and I needed to see how this train wreck ended.

Here's the problem with corporate communication training in Australia right now - we're still teaching people to communicate like it's the Howard era. PowerPoint slides about "active listening techniques" while half the room is on Slack, Instagram, and trying to figure out if that Teams notification means their boss is actually watching their screen time.

The Real Communication Crisis Nobody Talks About

Forget everything you've been told about communication problems in the workplace. The issue isn't that people don't know how to communicate. It's that most communication training completely ignores how humans actually process information in 2025.

I've been running workplace communication training sessions across Australia for nearly two decades, and the same patterns emerge everywhere. Perth mining companies, Sydney tech startups, Brisbane government departments - doesn't matter. The fundamental disconnect is always the same.

We're teaching linear communication to non-linear brains.

Think about it. When did you last have a conversation that followed the neat little structure they show you in training manuals? Introduction, three key points, summary, questions. Never. Real workplace communication is messy, interruption-heavy, context-switching chaos. And that's not a bug - it's a feature.

The most effective communicators I know embrace this chaos. They don't fight against interruptions; they use them as conversation pivot points. They don't stick rigidly to their "three key messages" when someone raises a game-changing question halfway through point one.

Why Australian Workplaces Are Different (And Training Should Reflect It)

Australian workplace culture has this unique thing where we simultaneously value directness and relationship-building. We'll tell you exactly what we think, but we'll also spend fifteen minutes asking about your weekend first. Most imported communication frameworks completely miss this nuance.

I remember working with a multinational that brought in American consultants to "fix" communication issues in their Australian offices. These guys spent three days explaining why "sandwich feedback" (compliment, criticism, compliment) was the gold standard. Mate, try giving sandwich feedback to a Queensland tradesperson. You'll get the most confused look you've ever seen.

Australians communicate in layers. We say what we mean, but we also say what we feel about saying what we mean. We'll criticise an idea while making it clear we respect the person who suggested it. We'll complain about a process while acknowledging the constraints that created it.

Traditional communication training ignores this completely. It tries to make everything explicit, logical, structured. But the real magic happens in the spaces between words, in the shared understanding that develops when people actually know each other as humans rather than just "stakeholders."

The Technology Problem Everyone's Avoiding

Here's where I'm going to lose some people, but stick with me.

Most communication training pretends technology doesn't exist. Or worse, treats it as the enemy. "Put down your phones, make eye contact, have real conversations." This is like teaching swimming by insisting people avoid water.

Your team is going to use Teams, Slack, email, and WhatsApp whether you like it or not. The question isn't how to stop them - it's how to help them communicate effectively across all these channels.

I've seen companies spend thousands on face-to-face communication workshops while their actual daily communication happens 80% through digital channels that nobody's been taught to use properly. It's madness.

The real skill isn't choosing between digital and face-to-face communication. It's knowing which channel works best for which type of message, and how to maintain relationship threads across multiple platforms simultaneously.

Some of the most effective communicators in my network are people who've mastered the art of the strategic video call, the well-timed DM, and the group chat that actually moves projects forward instead of creating notification hell.

What Actually Works (Based on 15 Years of Getting It Wrong)

Early in my career, I was obsessed with communication "best practices." I had frameworks for everything. The perfect meeting structure, the optimal email length, the ideal feedback ratio. I spent years teaching people to communicate like robots, and wondered why engagement scores stayed flat.

The breakthrough came when I started paying attention to the communicators people actually wanted to work with. Not the ones who followed all the rules, but the ones who got stuff done while making people feel heard and valued.

These people shared some common patterns, but none of them matched what we teach in traditional training programs.

They communicated in stories, not bullet points. They remembered previous conversations and referenced them weeks later. They asked follow-up questions that showed they'd actually processed what you said. They shared their own uncertainties and decision-making processes, not just final conclusions.

Most importantly, they treated communication as relationship maintenance, not just information transfer.

The Empathy Trap That's Killing Real Connection

Here's an unpopular opinion: the corporate obsession with empathy is actually making workplace communication worse.

Don't get me wrong - understanding other people's perspectives is crucial. But the way most organisations teach empathy turns it into a performance rather than a genuine skill.

"Show empathy by saying 'I understand how you feel.'" "Mirror their body language to build rapport." "Use their preferred communication style."

This checkbox approach to empathy creates communication that feels calculated and manipulative. People can sense when someone's following a script versus genuinely trying to understand their situation.

Real empathy in workplace communication looks different. It's being willing to change your mind when presented with new information. It's acknowledging when you don't understand something instead of pretending you do. It's admitting when your initial reaction was wrong.

I've seen more authentic connections built through honest confusion than through perfect empathy techniques.

The Meeting Problem That Everyone Complains About But Nobody Fixes

Every workplace communication audit I've done in the past five years identifies the same problem: too many meetings that accomplish nothing. And yet every solution focuses on meeting structure, agenda templates, and time management.

The real meeting problem isn't structural - it's cultural.

Most meetings fail because people attend them in performance mode rather than problem-solving mode. Everyone's focused on looking competent, covering their own responsibilities, and avoiding blame rather than actually working through the issue at hand.

The most effective meetings I've observed have this quality where people forget to manage their image because they're genuinely engaged with the problem. These meetings often run over time, go off on tangents, and produce outcomes that weren't on the original agenda.

They also build more trust and alignment than any number of perfectly structured status updates.

The solution isn't better meeting discipline - it's creating psychological safety so people can focus on the work instead of managing perceptions.

Why Your Communication Training Keeps Failing

Most organisations approach communication training like a vaccination. Get everyone through the program, tick the box, assume the problem is solved.

But communication isn't a skill you learn once - it's a practice that evolves with your relationships, your role, and your organisation's changing context.

The companies that actually improve their communication culture treat it as an ongoing conversation rather than a training event. They create space for people to discuss communication breakdowns when they happen, experiment with new approaches, and adjust their practices based on what's actually working.

They also recognise that communication effectiveness is highly context-dependent. The communication style that works brilliantly in a crisis might be completely wrong for a strategic planning session. The approach that builds trust with your direct reports might undermine your credibility with senior stakeholders.

Where To Focus Your Energy Instead

If you're responsible for improving workplace communication, here's what actually moves the needle:

Create more opportunities for informal interaction. The best workplace relationships form through casual conversations, shared experiences, and low-stakes collaboration. You can't force this, but you can create conditions where it's more likely to happen.

Address the underlying organisational dynamics that make honest communication risky. If people get punished for sharing bad news, raising concerns, or admitting mistakes, no amount of communication training will create openness.

Focus on communication recovery rather than communication prevention. Teach people how to repair misunderstandings, address conflicts directly, and rebuild trust after communication breakdowns.

Most importantly, model the communication culture you want to see. If leadership communicates through defensive emails and closed-door conversations, that's what everyone else will do regardless of what the training materials say.

The Bottom Line

Effective workplace communication isn't about following rules or mastering techniques. It's about building relationships that can withstand the inevitable misunderstandings, competing priorities, and organisational pressures that make work communication challenging.

Stop trying to eliminate the messiness of human communication. Start helping people navigate it more skillfully.

Your people don't need another workshop on email etiquette or presentation skills. They need permission to communicate like humans rather than corporate robots, and support in building the kind of working relationships that make honest communication possible.

Everything else is just window dressing.

The companies that figure this out first will have a massive advantage in attracting and retaining talent who are tired of pretending to be communication machines. The rest will keep wondering why their expensive training programs don't actually change anything.

Start with your next conversation. Make it a real one.