Frequency Matters: Are We Actually Hearing One Another?

Most communication failures in organizations do not happen because people are careless, unskilled, or unwilling to engage. They happen because people are operating on different frequencies—sending and receiving messages through fundamentally different lenses shaped by role, pressure, power, and context. 

In healthy working relationships, communication feels almost effortless. Meaning transfers cleanly. Questions surface naturally. Alignment builds without excessive clarification. But when frequency is misaligned, even competent, well-intentioned people can leave the same conversation with completely different understandings of what just occurred. 

This is not a problem of vocabulary or volume. It is a problem of resonance. 

Communication Is a System, Not a Transaction 

We often talk about communication as if it were a simple exchange: information sent, information received. In reality, communication is a system. Every message is filtered through emotional state, history, expectations, organizational culture, and power dynamics. What matters is not just what is said, but the conditions under which it is heard. 

Leaders, in particular, often underestimate how much their position changes the frequency at which others listen. A leader may be speaking from a place of strategic urgency, confident that they are offering clarity and direction. The person on the receiving end may be listening from a place of uncertainty, risk awareness, or accumulated fatigue. The words may be identical, but the meaning that lands is not. 

When Frequency Is Misaligned 

Consider a common scenario. 

A manager meets with an employee and says, “I need you to take more ownership of this project. I don’t want to have to check in as often.” 

From the manager’s perspective, this is an expression of trust and empowerment. They believe they are creating space, signaling confidence, and reducing unnecessary oversight. The message is sent on a frequency of efficiency and autonomy. 

The employee, however, hears something else entirely. They are already unsure about priorities, unclear about decision-making authority, and navigating competing demands. To them, “take more ownership” sounds like withdrawal of support. “I don’t want to check in” feels like abandonment rather than trust. They leave the conversation anxious, guessing, and less likely to ask for help. 

Both people are acting in good faith. Neither is wrong. But they are not on the same frequency. 

Over time, these misses accumulate. The manager perceives disengagement or underperformance. The employee experiences stress, second-guessing, and erosion of confidence. What began as a communication issue quietly becomes a performance and trust issue. 

When Frequency Is Aligned 

Now consider a slightly different version of the same conversation. 

The manager says, “I want to talk about how we work together on this project. My goal is to give you more ownership, not less support. Before I change how often I check in, I want to understand what clarity or resources would help you feel confident making decisions.” 

They then pause and listen. 

The employee explains where they feel clear and where they do not. They name the decisions that feel risky and the ones they are comfortable owning. Together, they agree on check-in points, decision boundaries, and what support looks like going forward. 

In this version, the manager adjusts their frequency. They still hold high expectations, but they match them with context and support. The employee hears empowerment rather than withdrawal. The result is not just better understanding, but shared accountability. 

The difference between these two scenarios is not language sophistication. It is attunement. 

Frequency is a Leadership Practice

Strong communicators do not assume alignment. They test for it. They listen for what is underneath the words—hesitation, speed, silence, relief. They recognize that clarity is not proven by how clearly something is stated, but by how consistently it is understood and acted upon. 

This matters most during moments of change, pressure, or uncertainty. When people are stretched, their ability to interpret nuance narrows. Messages need grounding, not acceleration. Precision, not volume. 

Leaders who adjust frequency do not lower standards. They make standards achievable. They understand that high expectations without shared understanding create strain, while high expectations with alignment create momentum. 

Before the next important conversation—with a colleague, a direct report, or a leadership team—it is worth asking a quieter, more disciplined question: 

What frequency am I speaking from, and what frequency is the other person likely listening from? 

Communication improves not when we say more, but when we meet people where meaning can actually land. Because when frequency is aligned, even difficult conversations move forward with far less friction. 

And when it is not, even the best intentions can miss their mark. 

Tuned in, 

DeEtta