Results-Oriented Communication: From Awareness to Intentional Action

I have taught Results-Oriented Communication, or ROC, for many years in leadership development, workplace communication, conflict resolution, and first-responder settings.

ROC did not begin with me.

Its foundation comes from the Awareness Wheel developed by Sherod Miller, Elam W. Nunnally, and Daniel B. Wackman. Their work provided a practical way to slow down an experience and examine several different parts of it:

I Sense. I Think. I Feel. I Want. I Do.

I was introduced to that framework years ago and have continued using it because it gives people something remarkably useful: a way to separate what happened from what they think happened, recognize what is happening internally, identify what they actually want, and make a more intentional choice about what comes next.

Over time, my use of the model evolved.

That evolution became Results-Oriented Communication.

From the Awareness Wheel to ROC

ROC is best understood as my applied adaptation of the Awareness Wheel.

The current sequence I teach is:

I Sense → I Feel → I Think → I Want → Let’s Do

The foundation remains recognizable, but I have adjusted the sequence and language to fit the way I have found adults actually process difficult conversations, decisions, conflict, and self-talk.

Each step answers a different question.

I Sense — What do I actually know?

Start with what you can observe.

What did I see?
What did I hear?
What actually happened?

This sounds simple, but it may be the most important discipline in the entire process.

Consider the difference between:

“You ignored me.”

and:

“I sent two messages and have not received a response.”

The first statement contains an interpretation of another person’s motives.

The second describes what you actually know.

ROC begins by separating observation from interpretation.

I Feel — What am I feeling?

Next, identify what is happening emotionally.

Frustrated. Anxious. Disappointed. Embarrassed. Concerned. Relieved.

This is harder than it sounds because we frequently disguise thoughts as feelings.

“I feel like you don’t respect me” sounds like a feeling statement, but it is actually an interpretation.

“I feel frustrated” identifies the emotion.

The purpose is not to become overly focused on emotion. It is to recognize the information emotion provides before allowing it to drive the conversation.

I Think — What story am I telling myself?

Once something happens, our minds begin making meaning from it.

We use experience, expectations, assumptions, patterns, fears, and whatever information happens to be available.

Sometimes our interpretation is accurate.

Sometimes it is incomplete.

ROC asks us to notice the story before treating it as fact.

What am I assuming?

What information might I be missing?

What else could be true?

This does not mean distrusting your experience or ignoring your instincts.

It means remaining curious enough to recognize the difference between what you know and what you believe it means.

I Want — What result do I actually want?

This is where Results-Oriented Communication earns its name.

What do you actually want to happen?

Not simply:

“I want them to stop.”

“I want them to admit they were wrong.”

“I want this fixed.”

Go deeper.

What do I want for myself?

What do I want for the other person?

What do I want for the relationship, team, family, or situation?

Sometimes the answer is accountability. Sometimes it is understanding. Sometimes it is a boundary, a decision, a repaired relationship, or simply clarity about what happens next.

When the desired result becomes clearer, the conversation usually becomes clearer too.

Let’s Do — What is the First Right Move?

The original Awareness Wheel ends with I Do: the action you choose to take.

In ROC, I increasingly use Let’s Do because I want the process to move from awareness toward accountable action.

Sometimes that action is collaborative:

“Let’s sit down tomorrow and work through this.”

Sometimes it belongs entirely to you:

“I will make the phone call.”

“I will clarify the expectation.”

“I will apologize.”

“I will stop avoiding the conversation.”

“I will decide not to send the message I wrote while I was angry.”

The next step does not have to resolve everything.

It needs to move the situation in the right direction.

That is why ROC connects naturally with what I call the First Right Move.

ROC Is More Than a Conversation Script

One of the challenges I have encountered teaching ROC—especially when I only have a short amount of time—is that people can understand the five components without understanding how the process actually works.

ROC can look like a script.

It is better understood as a thinking process.

You do not necessarily sit across from someone and announce:

“I Sense…”

“I Feel…”

“I Think…”

“I Want…”

“Let’s Do…”

Often the most important work happens before you ever speak.

Imagine that an employee agreed to complete a report by Friday and the report never arrived.

The internal ROC process might look like this:

I Sense: We agreed the report would be completed Friday, and I have not received it.

I Feel: Frustrated and concerned.

I Think: The story I am telling myself is that this was not treated as a priority.

I Want: I want to understand what happened and establish a reliable plan for completing it.

Let’s Do: Can we talk this morning about what got in the way and agree on a new deadline?

Compare that with:

“You obviously didn’t care enough to get this done.”

Same event.

Completely different starting point.

ROC does not guarantee agreement.

It does not eliminate conflict.

It does not mean lowering standards, avoiding accountability, or pretending every perspective is equally accurate.

It simply helps us enter the conversation with greater clarity about:

What do I know?
What do I feel?
What do I think?
What do I want?
What am I prepared to do next?

An Adaptation Built Through Use

Over the years, I have added other tools around the Awareness Wheel to help people work through those questions.

Emotional vocabulary helps with I Feel.

Thinking traps and assumption checks strengthen I Think.

The Five Whys can help clarify I Want.

The Circle of Influence and the First Right Move help translate Let’s Do into meaningful action.

Those tools have shaped the way I teach ROC, but the underlying Awareness Wheel deserves to remain connected to the people who developed it: Sherod Miller, Elam W. Nunnally, and Daniel B. Wackman.

That does not diminish what ROC has become.

It clarifies it.

Results-Oriented Communication is an adaptation built through years of teaching, practice, experimentation, and application. But good adaptations should still remember where they started.

And that may be one of the broader lessons here:

Use the tool. Adapt the tool. Make it useful for the people you serve. But remember the well you drew it from.

Source

Miller, S., Nunnally, E. W., & Wackman, D. B. (1975). Alive and Aware: Improving Communication in Relationships. Interpersonal Communication Programs.