Communication Psychology - with Gerhard Ohrband

Most of the following mechanisms are relevant to almost any kind of behavioral change. First, working on communication seems complex and difficult. It is not as though we only need to improve one single thing. Communication is an umbrella term that includes many different skills and behaviors we can — and should — work on: the quality of our voice, body language, the quality of our questions, becoming more empathetic, explaining complicated ideas in a simple way, defending our positions clearly, and many others. As a result, we often feel overwhelmed and do not know where to begin. We feel incompetent in many different areas at once. Second, we fall prey to the so-called sunk cost effect . The sunk cost effect describes our tendency to continue investing in familiar behaviors simply because we have already invested years into them — even when they are ineffective. In communication, this means that people may unconsciously resist changing the way they speak, argue, explain, react ...

In the Republic of Moldova, a former Soviet republic where I am based, many companies increasingly adopt Western HR language and organizational branding. Companies present themselves as open cultures where employees can grow, contribute, and shape both the company and society. In job advertisements, we increasingly encounter phrases such as: “We invite you to become the voice of your community.” Or: “Create a working environment where people feel valued and motivated.” Or: “Contribute to the development of the initiative.” The message is clear: your opinion matters here. You are not merely an employee. You are a participant, contributor, and co-creator. On the surface, this development appears highly positive. Compared to traditional authoritarian organizational cultures, modern HR discourse emphasizes participation, collaboration, psychological safety, and employee engagement. But an uncomfortable question remains: How much of this employee voice culture is real...

In communication psychology and HR practice, one of the most underestimated steps before a difficult conversation is clarifying your own internal position toward the other person. This is not a “soft” or optional step. In many cases, it is what determines whether a conversation becomes constructive, confusing, or emotionally distorted. Mixed Perceptions Are the Norm, Not the Exception A common mistake in professional communication is the assumption that we need a single, unified judgment about another person before we can speak clearly to them. In reality, most workplace relationships are inherently mixed. Few people—outside of extreme cases such as highly polarizing public figures—trigger purely positive or purely negative reactions. More often, several perceptions coexist at the same time: Certain behaviors are appreciated, while others are experienced as frustrating or inefficient. Some traits are personally likable, while others create tension or resistance in a working...

When designing communication training, one fundamental question often goes unexamined: What role should errors play in the learning process? Most training programs implicitly answer this question—but not always in a way that aligns with how people actually learn. In practice, we can distinguish three fundamentally different training approaches , each based on a different attitude toward errors. 1. Proceduralized Training: Learning by Avoiding Errors The first type is proceduralized training . Here, participants are taught step-by-step instructions on how to behave in a given situation. The trainer demonstrates the “correct” way, and the participant’s role is to replicate this behavior as precisely as possible . In this model: The goal is accuracy and standardization Errors are seen as deviations from the correct procedure Learning is based on imitation and repetition This approach is highly effective when: Tasks are predictable and standardized Th...

I myself am guilty of this. For at least 10 years, I have read around 400 self-development books in the business category, from authors like Napoleon Hill, Brian Tracy, and many others. There is nothing wrong with those books. I am still grateful for having read them, and I still occasionally return to similar ones. However, there is something fundamentally questionable in some of them: the assumption that if we want to become successful, we need to study success stories. The idea is that we should interview millionaires, learn how they got rich, and then treat their answers as a kind of recipe. Of course, if we have to choose between advice from successful and unsuccessful people, it seems logical to listen to those who have succeeded. And in fields where success is closely tied to clearly identifiable skills—like music, the arts, language learning, or science—this approach can indeed be useful. But when it comes to business success, things are more complicated. Even in music, t...

  At first glance, this question sounds almost unnecessary. In many cultures, religions, and workplaces, admitting your faults is officially seen as a virtue. We are told that recognizing mistakes is a sign of maturity, honesty, and strength. And yet, reality often looks very different. If you observe public figures—politicians or CEOs of large companies—you will rarely see a sincere admission of fault. A prominent example is Donald Trump , who, regardless of one’s political opinion, consistently shifts responsibility to others—be it institutions, countries, or individuals. Why does this happen, if admitting mistakes is supposedly valued? The answer lies in experience. In many parts of the world, especially in countries shaped by the legacy of the former Soviet Union, people have learned something very different from the ideal. The unwritten rule is not “respect someone who admits fault,” but rather: if you are down, others may push you down even further . In such environ...