>Anytime I see/hear someone rambling in email/on meeting, I know they are not confident in what they are saying.
Well then you are dismissing people unfairly. You won't hear a peep out of me if I don't know the answer. On the other hand, if I have mountains of data that proves my point, or if the problem is nuanced, you'll hear all of it.
I'm working on getting better at distilling that data into short, actionable points for people like VPs (because I'm now at the level where these people read what I write).
But if you were to assume that I'm not confident, based on my inability to boil it down, you'd be drawing the wrong conclusion. You should listen to me because I'm nearly always right, and when I'm wrong, I'm usually the first to identify that fact and provide a solution.
Also I am autistic, which certainly impacts my communication.
> On the other hand, if I have mountains of data that proves my point, or if the problem is nuanced, you'll hear all of it.
I wouldn't consider this rambling. There are many people who just talk to fill space. Their point was made in the first 10 seconds and then they just keep going. IMO, that's very different than going over all the data or explaining a nuance.
Well then you are dismissing people unfairly. You won't hear a peep out of me if I don't know the answer. On the other hand, if I have mountains of data that proves my point, or if the problem is nuanced, you'll hear all of it.
I'm working on getting better at distilling that data into short, actionable points for people like VPs (because I'm now at the level where these people read what I write).
But if you were to assume that I'm not confident, based on my inability to boil it down, you'd be drawing the wrong conclusion. You should listen to me because I'm nearly always right, and when I'm wrong, I'm usually the first to identify that fact and provide a solution.
Also I am autistic, which certainly impacts my communication.