In Short
When a colleague's communication style is causing confusion across the team, the problem will not fix itself through hints or workarounds. You need a direct, prepared, one-on-one conversation. Done well, it protects both the working relationship and the team.
- Name specific behaviours, not personality traits.
- Describe the impact on the team with concrete examples.
- Listen as much as you speak, and agree on a clear path forward.
Difficult conversations with a colleague involve raising a sensitive issue, such as a confusing communication style, that most people avoid because it risks discomfort, defensiveness, or conflict. Done with care and preparation, they resolve problems that silence never can.
There was a project manager I worked alongside for most of a year before anyone said a word to him. His updates were vague, his emails contradictory, and his verbal instructions in meetings left people heading off in three different directions. The team grumbled amongst themselves. His manager hoped he would figure it out. Nobody said anything directly. By the time someone finally sat down with him, two deadlines had been missed and two good people had asked to be reassigned. He was genuinely surprised. He had no idea. Six months of difficulty, and one honest conversation could have changed the course of it early on.
That is the cost of avoiding difficult conversations with a colleague. The confusion compounds. Frustration builds. The relationship quietly corrodes. And the person at the centre of it is often the last to know.
Why This Particular Conversation Feels Different from Other Feedback
Most feedback is about output: a missed deadline, an error in a report, a process done incorrectly. You can point to the thing, describe what went wrong, and discuss how to fix it.
Communication style is different. It is closer to the person. When you tell someone their emails are confusing or that their briefings leave the team guessing, they can easily hear it as: you are not smart enough, you are not clear enough, something is wrong with you. That interpretation is almost never your intention, but it is often their instinct. The conversation becomes defensive before it has a chance to become useful.
There is also the problem of scale. A communication style that creates confusion does not produce one clean incident you can describe. It is a pattern: small moments, repeated over time, accumulating into a significant problem. That makes it harder to pin down, and easier for the other person to dismiss.
This is worth naming before you walk into that room. You are not delivering news about a bad piece of work. You are describing a pattern that affects how other people experience their working day. That requires more care, more precision, and more patience than most feedback conversations.
"The Conversation You're Avoiding Is the One You Need to Have."
"The Conversation You're Avoiding
Is the One You Need to Have."
Stop rehearsing conversations you'll never have. Say It Right Every Time gives you 115 word-for-word scripts and 16 proven frameworks to speak with confidence in every conversation that matters.
What You Need Before You Sit Down Together
Do not schedule this conversation until you are genuinely ready. Two things must be in place.
First, you need a clear private purpose. Ask yourself honestly: what do you actually want to come out of this? Not what you want to say. What outcome do you want to exist in the world six weeks from now? If the answer is "I want the team to stop being confused," you are starting in the right place. If the honest answer is "I want them to know how frustrated I am," you need to work on that before the meeting. Righteous frustration is understandable. It is also a poor foundation for a productive conversation.
Second, you need at least two or three specific, concrete examples. General statements like "your communication is always unclear" are not only hard to defend; they are almost impossible to act on. Your colleague needs something real to work with. Write down the examples before you go in. Date them if you can. Be precise about what happened, who was affected, and what the consequence was.
If you cannot produce two specific examples, you are not ready for this conversation yet. Gather them first.
A Six-Step Process for Difficult Conversations About Communication Style
Step 1: Choose the Right Setting
This conversation belongs in private. Not in a corridor, not at the end of a team meeting, not over instant message. A quiet space with time on either side.
Give the person notice, but not so much that they spend three anxious days imagining the worst. "I would like to catch up with you one-on-one this week, nothing urgent, just something I wanted to discuss directly with you," is enough. Same day or next day works well.
Step 2: Open Without Ambiguity
Do not soften the opening to the point of obscuring what you are there to discuss. Many people begin with so much padding that their colleague is halfway through a pleasant chat before they realise something important is being raised. That whiplash does not help anyone.
Open directly but without alarm. Something like this works well: "I wanted to talk with you about something specific, because I respect you and I think you would want to know. It is about how some of your communication comes across to the team, and I want to share what I have noticed."
That is clear. It is not an attack. And it signals immediately that you are there as a colleague, not as an accuser.
Step 3: Describe the Behaviour, Not the Person
This is where most attempts at difficult conversations collapse. People reach for words like "confusing," "unclear," or "disorganised," and the person across from them immediately feels judged rather than informed.
Stick to observable, specific behaviour. The test is simple: could someone have filmed what you are describing?
A poor version sounds like: "Your updates are always confusing and people never know what you want."
A strong version sounds like: "In last Tuesday's briefing, you shared three different versions of the deadline. Afterwards, I had three separate colleagues come to me asking which date was correct. The morning was lost while people tried to figure it out."
The second version is not kinder. It is more precise. And precision is what makes it actionable rather than accusatory.
How to start a difficult conversation that's blocking your team's synergy offers further guidance on opening these exchanges in a way that holds the relationship intact from the first sentence.
Step 4: Name the Impact on the Team
Your colleague may not see the downstream effect of their communication. Most people do not. They send the message that makes sense to them and move on. They do not sit in the next forty minutes of confusion that follows.
Be direct about the impact, and make it about the work, not about emotion.
"When people leave a briefing unsure of the direction, they either make assumptions and go the wrong way, or they stop and ask questions, which costs everyone time. It has been affecting the team's ability to move forward cleanly."
Do not dramatise this. State it plainly and let the facts carry the weight. This is not the moment for frustration or blame. It is the moment for honest information.
Step 5: Ask Before You Prescribe
Here is where most people miss something important. They deliver their observation, name the impact, and then immediately propose a solution. What they have done, at that point, is delivered a verdict with a sentence attached.
Before you suggest anything, ask a question. Give your colleague the space to respond.
"I wanted to share that with you because I think it matters. I am curious: how does it land for you? Is this something you have been aware of at all?"
Two things can happen here. Your colleague may recognise the pattern and have their own sense of why it happens. That is valuable information and it makes the path forward much clearer. Or they may be genuinely surprised, which is also important to understand before you agree on next steps.
Either way, you need to hear them before you move to solutions. How unmet needs drive team conflict and what to say to restore synergy speaks directly to this: sometimes a communication style that looks like carelessness is actually a signal of something else the person is carrying.
Step 6: Agree on Something Specific and Follow Up
A conversation that ends without a clear agreement has done half the work. Both of you need to leave with a shared understanding of what changes and what happens next.
Keep this simple and mutual. "Could we agree that before the weekly briefing, you send a written summary of the key decisions? That gives everyone a reference point if questions come up afterwards." That is specific, achievable, and easy to check.
Then follow up. Not in a surveillance way. A brief check-in within a week, even just two minutes before a meeting, shows that the conversation was not a one-off complaint. It was the beginning of something better.
If you are working through a more structured approach to resolving the underlying tension, the D.E.A.L. method for resolving conflicts that are fracturing team synergy gives you a reliable framework to carry through the follow-up phase.
When the Conversation Happens Remotely
Remote or hybrid teams add a layer of difficulty to this process. You lose tone of voice, facial expression, and the physical signals that tell you how someone is receiving what you are saying.
A few adjustments help. First, insist on video for this conversation, not text or voice-only. You need to see the person. Second, build in more pauses. In person, silence feels natural. On a call, it feels like a technical problem, and people rush to fill it. Let the pauses sit. Third, summarise more explicitly at the end. In a room together, you might leave with a shared sense of what was agreed. Over a video call, that sense is easier to lose. Put the agreement into writing and send it as a brief follow-up message the same day.
If this conversation is happening because a colleague's communication style in written channels specifically, such as emails or chat messages, is creating the confusion, address that channel directly. Give examples from those messages. Do not make it abstract.
For situations where communication confusion has already sparked visible conflict in a meeting setting, how to handle conflict during meetings gives you tools for managing those moments in real time.
Where These Conversations Go Wrong
The mistake: Starting with "we" or "the team" to soften the message. Why it happens: People want to avoid sounding like they are singling someone out. What to do instead: Own your own perspective. "I have noticed" is more honest and less alarming than "everyone has been saying." Triangulated feedback feels like ambush.
The mistake: Listing too many examples at once. Why it happens: You have been holding this for months and once the door opens, everything comes out. What to do instead: Bring two or three strong examples. More than that, and the conversation shifts from feedback to indictment. Your colleague will stop listening and start defending.
The mistake: Accepting a vague agreement at the end. Why it happens: Both people are relieved the hard part is over and nobody wants to risk the mood. What to do instead: Push gently for something specific. "What would that look like for you in practice next week?" keeps it grounded.
The mistake: Raising this in front of others, even briefly. Why it happens: The moment arises in a meeting and it feels efficient to address it there. What to do instead: Wait. A public correction, even a gentle one, closes people down rather than opening them up. How to de-escalate arguments during meetings can help you manage the meeting moment without turning it into the feedback conversation itself.
For situations where a communication pattern has escalated to the point where two colleagues are genuinely not cooperating, the D.E.A.L. method for defusing tension between colleagues who refuse to cooperate offers a structured path through the harder version of this work.
And when the relationship has already suffered a more serious breakdown, the B.R.I.D.G.E. method for rebuilding working relationships after genuine breakdown gives you a longer-form repair process.
Your Pre-Conversation Checklist
Use this before you walk into the room. Every item should have a clear yes before you proceed.
- I can name the specific communication behaviour I am raising, not just a general trait.
- I have at least two concrete examples with dates, contexts, and effects on the team.
- I know what outcome I want from this conversation, not just what I want to say.
- I have booked a private time with enough space on either side.
- I have a short, direct opening sentence prepared.
- I have a question ready to ask after I share my observation.
- I have a specific, achievable agreement in mind to propose at the end.
- I am prepared to hear something that changes my understanding of the situation.
If you can put a genuine yes next to each of those, you are ready. If two or three are still uncertain, spend another twenty minutes in preparation. The conversation will be better for it.
The Work Does Not End When the Conversation Does
Here is the truth of it: one good conversation rarely fixes a deeply ingrained communication pattern. What it does is open a door. Your colleague now knows the impact of their style. They have a specific change to try. And they know you cared enough to tell them directly rather than letting it fester.
Your job after that conversation is to notice and name the improvement, however small. "That briefing summary you sent before the meeting was genuinely helpful" takes five seconds and builds more momentum than an hour of follow-up feedback.
Difficult conversations with a colleague are not one-off events. They are the beginning of a better working relationship, built on honesty rather than patience wearing quietly thin. Most people avoid them because they are afraid of making things worse. In my experience, the conversations people avoid are almost always the ones that, had they happened six months earlier, would have saved everyone involved a great deal of difficulty.
The conversation your team needs you to have is probably the one you have been putting off. Prepare well, speak directly, and trust that the other person is capable of hearing you.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
What are difficult conversations with a colleague?
Difficult conversations with a colleague are direct, one-on-one exchanges that address a behaviour or pattern causing real problems, such as a communication style that confuses or frustrates the team. They require care, preparation, and a willingness to stay in the discomfort long enough to be heard.
How do you start a difficult conversation about a colleague's communication style?
Start by naming a specific behaviour, not a character judgment. Describe what you have observed, when it happened, and what effect it had on the team. Asking for their perspective early signals that you are there to solve a problem together, not to deliver a verdict.
What should you say in a difficult conversation at work?
Speak in the first person and anchor your words to specific, observable events. Avoid general accusations. A phrase like, "I noticed in last Tuesday's briefing that three people asked the same clarifying question afterwards, and work was delayed by half a day," gives your colleague something concrete to respond to.
Why do difficult conversations about communication style feel so hard?
Because communication style feels personal. When you question how someone communicates, they can easily hear it as an attack on who they are. Without careful framing, the conversation becomes defensive before it has a chance to become productive, which is why preparation matters so much.
How do you follow up after a difficult conversation with a colleague?
Check in briefly within a week. Keep it low-key: a short message or two minutes before a meeting. Name what has improved, even if the change is small. This signals that the conversation was never about scoring a point; it was about building a better working relationship.
What if the colleague becomes defensive during a difficult conversation?
Slow down rather than push harder. Acknowledge what they are feeling with a simple phrase: "I can see this is difficult to hear, and I want to make sure I am being fair." Then return to the specific observation. Defensiveness often softens when the other person feels genuinely heard rather than cornered.
