Argyle’s communication theory: social skills, feedback and behaviour

Argyle’s communication theory explains interaction as a skilled, two-way activity: we communicate, notice how others respond and adjust our behaviour. Words matter, but so do timing, tone, facial expression, listening and the opportunities people have to respond.

The practical lesson is that delivering a message is not the same as establishing understanding. A manager may explain a task clearly from their own perspective, while a colleague leaves with a different interpretation. Effective communication involves discovering that gap and responding constructively.

Michael Argyle was a social psychologist whose work explored social interaction, non-verbal communication and social skills. His ideas are useful beyond career progression: they can inform teaching, supervision, customer service, teamwork and difficult conversations.

Rather than concentrating on the mechanics of the communication cycle, this article focuses on what people can practise: observing without jumping to conclusions, checking understanding, giving useful feedback and changing behaviour.

What does argyle’s communication theory mean?

The phrase ‘Argyle’s communication theory’ is often used in teaching materials to describe a communication cycle. However, Argyle’s wider work concerns social interaction as a skill, not simply a sequence through which messages travel.

In this approach, people have intentions, act on them, perceive other people’s responses and adjust what they do. Someone explaining a new procedure, for example, needs more than accurate information. They also need to judge the pace, invite questions and recognise when another explanation might help.

Several useful principles follow:

• Communication involves behaviour. Interrupting, pausing, asking questions and turning away can all affect an exchange.
• Responses provide information. A question or correction can reveal a mismatch between intention and understanding.
• Social skills can be practised. Specific behaviours are more useful development targets than vague instructions to ‘be confident’.
• Context matters. The same words can feel supportive in one situation and dismissive in another.

These principles do not mean we can reliably read another person’s thoughts. Observation gives us reasons to ask, not certainty about what someone feels.

Where the six-stage communication cycle fits

A common educational version of the cycle uses six stages:

1. An idea occurs: someone has something they want to communicate.
2. The message is coded: they choose words, signs or another form of expression.
3. The message is sent: they speak, write or otherwise convey it.
4. The message is received: the other person hears, sees or accesses it.
5. The message is decoded: the recipient interprets it.
6. The message is understood: the recipient forms an understanding, which may differ from what was intended.

Feedback allows people to check that understanding and make adjustments, continuing the exchange.

This is a useful teaching model, but it should not be treated as a complete account of Argyle’s research. Educational versions vary in their wording and treatment of feedback. The exact six-stage formulation above is presented here as a common teaching summary, not a verified quotation from Argyle.

For everyday practice, the important question is not just ‘Which stage went wrong?’ It is also ‘What could I do differently to make this interaction work better?’

Turn communication knowledge into social skills

Knowing a model does not automatically change how we behave. Improvement comes from choosing something observable, trying it and reviewing its effect.

Make your words easier to act on

Clear communication usually identifies what matters, what needs to happen and what room there is for discussion.

Compare ‘Please improve your handovers’ with ‘At each handover, include outstanding tasks, any safety concerns and who is responsible for the next action.’ The second statement gives the recipient something concrete to do.

In workplaces and learning settings:

• Explain unfamiliar terms rather than assuming shared knowledge.
• Separate essential instructions from background information.
• Break complicated explanations into manageable parts.
• Put important decisions and actions in writing where helpful.

Clarity is not about sounding simplistic. It is about reducing unnecessary work for the person receiving the message.

Listen for meaning, not just your turn

Listening includes allowing time, asking relevant questions and checking whether your interpretation is accurate.

A useful response might be: ‘It sounds as though the deadline is manageable, but access to the system is the problem. Have I understood that correctly?’

This gives the other person an opportunity to correct you. It is more informative than immediately offering a solution or assuming their concern is resistance to change.

Notice non-verbal behaviour without diagnosing it

Tone, pace, posture, facial expression and physical distance can influence an interaction. However, they do not form a universal code.

Avoiding eye contact does not prove dishonesty or disengagement. Silence could reflect concentration, uncertainty, disagreement, anxiety or simply a preference for more processing time.

Use observations to open a conversation: ‘Would it help to pause or go through an example?’ Avoid statements such as ‘Your body language tells me you aren’t interested.’

Use feedback to check understanding and support change

Feedback has two related meanings here. Interactional feedback is the response that helps an exchange develop, such as a question or a paraphrase. Developmental feedback helps someone improve their work or behaviour over time.

Both depend on finding out how something has landed, rather than assuming the intended effect occurred.

Check understanding without making it a test

‘Does that make sense?’ often produces a quick ‘yes’, particularly when the speaker has authority.

More useful prompts include:

• ‘What would your first step be?’
• ‘Which part needs another example?’
• ‘Can we talk through how this will work on your next shift?’

Frame the check as a shared responsibility: ‘I want to check that I’ve explained this clearly.’ This makes it easier to reveal uncertainty without feeling blamed.

In healthcare, NICE’s guidance on patient experience recommends adapting communication to people’s needs and checking understanding. It is sector-specific guidance, but it provides a useful example of these principles in practice.

Give feedback about behaviour, not personality

‘You need a better attitude’ offers little direction. A more useful approach describes what happened, explains its effect, asks for the other person’s perspective and agrees a next step.

For example: ‘In yesterday’s meeting, you started responding before Priya had finished explaining the issue. We did not hear the full account. What was happening from your perspective, and how could we handle that differently next time?’

This is a practical application of behaviour-focused feedback, not a formula attributed to Argyle.

Receiving feedback also involves judgement. Ask for examples and consider changes, but do not assume every criticism is accurate or fair. A preference for one communication style is not automatically a legitimate performance requirement.

Two examples from workplaces and further education

These illustrative examples show how attention to feedback and behaviour can change an interaction.

Example 1: a college tutor supports an apprentice

During a progress review at an English FE college, a tutor tells an apprentice to ‘be more reflective’ in their evidence portfolio. The apprentice nods, but the next submission still lists tasks without explaining decisions or learning.

The tutor could interpret this as a lack of effort. Instead, they check what the instruction meant to the learner. It becomes clear that ‘reflective’ was unfamiliar assessment language.

The tutor shares an example and asks the apprentice to explain one workplace decision: what happened, why they chose that action and what they would do differently. Together, they turn the explanation into a short written reflection.

The tutor has changed several behaviours: using concrete language, demonstrating the task and checking understanding through application rather than a nod.

The Education Endowment Foundation’s feedback evidence summary supports feedback that helps learners understand and address gaps. Its evidence is primarily school-focused, so it should inform rather than be treated as direct proof of effectiveness in FE apprenticeships.

Example 2: a supervisor improves a shift handover

A warehouse supervisor introduces a revised handover process during a noisy shift change. Nobody asks questions, but the evening team later misses an unresolved delivery issue.

Rather than blaming colleagues for not listening, the supervisor reviews the conditions. The explanation competed with noise, staff were preparing to leave and there was no shared written record.

At the next handover, the team uses a quieter location and a short checklist. The incoming shift summarises outstanding issues, and the outgoing shift corrects any gaps. A named person records each agreed action.

The improvement is not simply a more confident speaker. It combines a better environment, observable checks and a clearer process. Where safety is involved, these communication practices must support, not replace, formal procedures and training.

Make communication accessible and fair

Communication difficulties are not always deficits in someone’s social skills. The format, environment or expectations may create the barrier.

A colleague may need written instructions, captions, a quieter meeting space, accessible documents or additional processing time. Ask what helps rather than making assumptions from a diagnosis or appearance.

Acas guidance on reasonable adjustments explains employers’ responsibilities towards disabled workers. Communication support may be an adjustment, not an optional courtesy or something the individual should overcome through training.

Power also matters. An apprentice may be reluctant to question an assessor; an employee may avoid challenging a manager. Inviting feedback is only useful if people can respond honestly without being punished or dismissed.

Limitations and common misunderstandings

Argyle’s work offers a useful perspective, but it does not explain every communication problem.

Non-verbal signals are not universal. Their meaning varies with the person, culture, relationship and situation. Do not apply a fixed body-language checklist.

Communication is not always orderly. People speak simultaneously, revise their meaning and respond through several channels. The cycle simplifies that complexity.

Understanding is not agreement. Someone can understand a request perfectly and reasonably challenge it.

Better communication cannot repair every organisational problem. Understaffing, contradictory instructions, discrimination and inaccessible systems require action beyond individual skills practice.

Social skill is not conformity. Development should help people participate effectively, not require everyone to make eye contact, sound extroverted or imitate a manager’s preferred style.

Your next step: practise one behaviour

Argyle’s most useful lesson is to treat communication as responsive social behaviour, not one-way delivery.

Choose one recurring interaction this week, such as a learner review, team briefing or supervision meeting. Decide what shared understanding would look like, then practise one change: replace jargon, pause before responding or ask the other person to summarise the next step.

Afterwards, review what you actually observed. Was the action clearer? Did a misunderstanding emerge earlier? Ask the other person what helped and what still needs attention.

Small, specific changes are easier to practise and evaluate than trying to ‘be a better communicator’ all at once.

Sources and further reading

• Michael Argyle, Bodily Communication, second edition, 1988. A foundational text on non-verbal behaviour. It is not cited here as verification of the exact six-stage wording used in educational summaries.
• NICE: Patient experience in adult NHS services, recommendations. Professional guidance on communication, individual needs and checking understanding in healthcare.
• Education Endowment Foundation: Feedback. An evidence summary about feedback in education, primarily drawing on school settings.
• Acas: Reasonable adjustments. Guidance on removing or reducing disability-related disadvantage at work.