The perils of assumptions & half-information

You know those simple examples that reinforce the fundamental principles of effective communication, well how about this one for raising the question, ‘Is incomplete information better than no information?’?

There was I last Monday, at an early and peak hour for commuters, purchasing my train ticket via a new machine recently installed on the departure platform. Maybe I was half asleep or maybe I only read half the options for destinations and ticket types, but I became the reluctant holder of a single version – clearly marked as ‘ONE WAY ONLY’. At least I entered my destination correctly. Splutter, mutter, damn and blast, the single ticket cost nearly as much as a 2-way journey [I always find this a difficult mathematical equation to grasp].

Aboard the train and in answer to my question, the conductor confirmed that, ‘Yes, there is a way to upgrade my ticket and pay the difference; just head to platform 1 upon arrival. In future, though, it may be best to purchase the ticket on the train’. Hmmm…

A window seat meant I had to wait to leave the train before attempting to move against the flow of commuters moving en masse towards the filtering system of the exit barriers. Although my heart sank at the sight of the long queue for the help desks on platform 1, it provided some reassurance that it was not only me making wrong choices on this particular morn.

The speed of the ticket administrators was impressive. I quickly got issued with new tickets to make up the original shortfall, FULLY absorbed the instruction to keep all of my tickets together, and then headed towards the exit barriers. 

Okay, now here’s where incomplete info comes into play. To exit the station, commuters have to insert their tickets into the automated ticket feeders cum barriers [sorry I don’t have a technical term, though I know there must be one]. Instead of my ticket being shot back out at me as the barrier released, it never re-emerged from the machine. Why? Because it was a single ticket type. How did I know? Because I asked the commuter behind me on the way out. Where did this leave me? Late for a meeting across the other side of the city holding a 2-way ticket substantially deficient in value and, therefore, unredeemable against a return journey.

Checking in for that return journey, the ‘deficient’ ticket would not permit me access to the station via the automated ticket feeder cum barrier, but the human ticket handler did [reminding me why I much prefer to speak to a person than deal with a machine]. Paying another visit to the platform 1 administrators, ‘Yes, the automated feeders keep all single tickets’, ‘No, the top up tickets would not let you in or out of the station’, ‘Next time ask the human handler [my term, rather than theirs] to grant access/exit’, and ‘The conductor might let me ride on the train without re-purchasing a full price single ticket if I told him my story’. Great stuff!

Although this is a simple tale of woe, it does represent some of the trials and tribulations of information-sharing and communication.

I made a mistake in my choice of ticket initially, highlighting the necessity – on future occasions – to scan ALL options before making my selection with my eyes wide open. The extra time and care taken at this initial point would have saved me considerable time later in the day.

The train conductor on the outward journey provided me with full information and signposted me appropriately to the help desk; no problem there.

The platform 1 administrators, although courteous and prompt, missed out a crucial piece of information, ‘Don’t use any of the tickets to exit the station via the automated feeder cum barrier; instead head for the human handler’. 

In any 2-way communication, there’s responsibility on both sides to share and receive information. There’s also responsibility on both sides to ask questions, although sometimes information seekers won’t know what they don’t know so have to rely on the knowledge and experience of the information givers.

How often do we share information in a hurry, casually, without any real conscious effort? Is incomplete information better than no information? It may enable the information seeker to complete part of their journey, but is very likely to cause confusion or frustration and waste everybody’s time at a later stage.

Assumptions made by both parties can result in information gaps and misinformation which can end up leading people in the wrong direction altogether.

If you are an information seeker, never doubt the advantages of asking questions like, ‘What do I need to know to be able to do X?’, ‘What problems might I encounter?’, ‘What extra information would it be good for me to know now?’.

If you are the information giver, pose questions, ‘What do you know already about doing X?’, ‘When did you last do X?’, in order to be able to share ‘This is what has changed’, ‘This is what you need to know/do now’.

Irrespective of the subject matter, become more conscious – for a while at least – of communications around you and the quality of information shared. Then decide whether it’s worth your while to invest in understanding the needs and current position of the information seeker before you proceed to share good quality, relevant information…

PS  I did not incur extra costs on my return journey!