> “Why is it that people sometimes want to cut to the chase? They see incivility as a way to expedite the process,” Goh explained. “Sometimes in an attempt to be more efficient, we do things that make the process less efficient.”
This is a two way street. For those that feel like cutting to the chase is rude, have they considered how inconsiderate they are being when they give a full recap of their weekend activities to the person that just wants to get to the point?
To me, if you are the one doing the approaching and interrupting of someone else's time, then you should abide by their preferences.
i think being terse is a valuable skill. i was aiming to highlight that last sentence:
> “Sometimes in an attempt to be more efficient, we do things that make the process less efficient.”
in the article it is followed immediately by:
> In enacting civility, two themes emerged:
>
> Civility was viewed as preventing a situation from escalating, and ultimately attaining a beneficial outcome. “We would not want events to get out of hand,” said one employee.
>
> Employees believe it is intrinsically important to be respectful and understanding. Said one participant, “consideration should be given to the feelings and ideas of each person.”
i think that civility and being respectful (which would mean curtailing extraneous conversation) is considerably different from wasting someone's time with irrelevant discussion
This conflation of rudeness with terseness bothered me. One can be polite yet cut to the chase ('wasting' only a few words on 'please' and 'thank you') - in fact, I consider this more polite, since it doesn't waste the other person's precious time. Or one can be rude yet long-winded, wasting time ranting or berating people.
