The importance of context

picture credit: Mikhail Nilov

Everything we sense, feel, think, and do happens in a context. Anthropologists distinguish high-context and low-context behaviors. Typically these refer to styles of interpersonal communication, where high-context denotes that non-verbal aspects of communication (such as body language) are more important than the content of the message, while low-context denotes that the content of the message is more important. Extending this concept to encompass other aspects of being, we can imagine two archetypal patterns of thought and behavior:

High-context

• Non-verbal communication – content is less important than context such as body language, subtext, setting, timing, seating plan, …

• Broad picture of the relationship within which the interaction is taking place

• Respect and goodwill are freely given

• Wider implications of actions get considered, including second, third and fourth order effects. System thinking prevails

• Long-term view

• Motivation from doing long-term good for society

• Actions for the good of society

Low context

• Verbal/written communication – content of the communication is paramount

• No need for a relationship to be established first

• Respect and goodwill are enforced by law

• Specific result is sought and tested for. Unintended consequences are not (much) considered. Linear thinking prevails

• Short-term view

• Motivation from finding short-term benefit for oneself or one’s team

• Actions for the good of the individual

Both kinds of behavior can be useful in the right situation. While many of us have a preference for one of the two archetypes, in practice we mostly navigate somewhere between the two extremes. Misunderstandings can arise when we are not aligned with others. A couple of examples:

• Some years ago I hosted a group where people were meeting each other for the first time. At the start people were chatting about their family backgrounds, where they went to school and what contacts they had in common (high-context behavior, implicitly creating more clarity about the nature of their relationship). After a while I felt like we should address the business of the meeting and said so (low-context behavior). This was not well received, and, even though we then proceeded to address the agenda points, I realized I had made a mistake. My insistence on low-context behavior in that situation made it harder for me to build good relationships.

• On another occasion I was pitching an idea to a group. Before pitching, I wanted to know more about the people I was pitching to (high-context behavior), while they simply wanted to hear my pitch (low-context). While the pitch presentation of itself went well, the mismatch in approach to context left everyone feeling unsatisfied.

How can we become more aware of what approach is appropriate, and how can we switch between high-context and low-context if we want to? I find it useful to consider any interaction between two or more parties as taking place on three levels simultaneously:

• Context level: what is the history and nature of the relationship between the parties? How does the other feel about it? How have recent events affected how they feel? How do I feel about it? How have recent events affected how I feel? How do we want to change the development or trajectory of this relationship?

• Process level: what is the process by which we will arrive at an outcome from this interaction? How well aligned are the parties on following this process?

• Content level: what is the matter at hand? What do we need to convey to each other about it in this interaction?

Using this categorization helps me notice what needs attention. Have we been addressing content for a while? Then it’s a good idea to check in on process and on context. I find the most satisfying interactions switch between the levels and touch on all three, if only briefly.

When facilitating Sustainability Sprint workshops my fellow coaches and I have one facilitator concentrate on content while another concentrates on process and context. Responding to how people are feeling (most often from non-verbal cues such as people’s body language) is key to maintain energy and presence in the workshop, and leads to productive outcomes.

How do your thought patterns and behaviors take in context? What do you do to be aware of yours and others’ preferences? Please leave a comment.