Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Klingler 1 Overview: In nearly every group or partnership setting, one member of the communicating party faces difficulties delivering concise points and holding others up to the norms established upon first meeting. I have learned throughout the discussions of effective communication in the workplace over this past semester that my primary communication shortcoming occurs when in the group setting due to my expectations of others upholding their ends of the project while I complete my own. The cardinal issue I have found regarding this issue occurs in the group setting but can translate to the other situations in life such as school and home as well. Much of the issue is caused by my inability to clearly explain what I expect of others, as well as my lack of clear description of each contributors part in the final product. Description of Problem: All groups interact by using communication. Regardless of the communication channel used—whether it be through internet, telephone, face-to-face, or through other communication pathways, misinterpretations frequently occur. One feature of communication that I believe is typically underestimated in the group setting is nonverbal communication. Throughout this class, I have realized how much I rely on nonverbal communication compared to legitimate verbal discussion. Nonverbal messages have the ability to convey meaning where verbal communication can only touch upon. Though nonverbal discussion sounds like an impressive and effective way to convey your thoughts and feelings regarding a subject, nonverbal behavior is often difficult for the receiver to interpret in the way that the sender of the messages intended. This is where I struggle. Rather than speak the exact thoughts Klingler 2 concerning a topic of discussion—especially when these thoughts are intense or occasionally harsh—I choose to keep my opinions to myself and leave the decoding of my body language and other nonverbal cues up to the receiver. The biggest issue with this process is the ambiguity of the decoding of messages sent by myself as outgoing messages to the receiver who interprets them in their own way as opposed to the true meaning originally intended. While “nonverbal behavior will imply how the speaker feels” the decoders of such messages may not be capable of recognizing the different emotions portrayed (Adler & Elmhorst 114). Due to my difficulty with clearly explaining my expectations of the group as a whole, as well as individual members in parts, I cause communication barriers to develop simply by failing to do what would have created an effective communication channel where group members could do exactly what they were expected to do because each group member knew exactly what their part equated to and the effect it would have on the group in its entirety. Oftentimes I misjudge how clearly I explain myself originally. For example, a group project for class I was in years ago placed me in a role other than team leader. The person who held that title did not seem to understand the assignment very well and did not delegate small tasks to any of the group members, nor did they provide any specific assignments for any of the group members. Rather than speak up about this, I quietly remained as a peon to be directed to any task the leader gave me, and quickly agreed with any idea produced by the otherwise relatively uninterested group leader. It is safe to say that the project was not very successful and I found myself doing far more work than would have been fair had the group all discussed and agreed on portions to Klingler 3 accomplish individually. Though there are a number of reasons I could blame others for the results of this project, I direct a large portion of blame to myself due to my unwillingness to clarify expectations and individual roles in the group scheme of things. Resources and Constraints: There are multiple ways to learn how to become more effective at communicating wherein the finished product is complete clarity. The primary support that I will acknowledge here is the textbook assigned for this class. In regards to nonverbal as well as verbal or interactive communication, the text explains and identifies the constraints and blockers of effective discussion and message interpretation. The book, along with a prior knowledge of nonverbal communication I have received through everyday interaction and a psychological background, has helped me to identify messages that I send that can have many meanings and possible interpretations. Recommendations: After recognizing how exactly I often send ambiguous messages, I am better capable of preventing these messages while developing messages with fewer possible interpretations. One way I can do this is by using equivocal terms when discussing the expectations and details of projects. By using these types of words, I minimize the possible differences in understanding between my original intent as the outgoing message and the possible interpretation of the receiver, thus making the feedback much closer to the desired response. (Adler & Elmhorst 101). Rather than go behind the majority of the group members’ backs, I have learned that simply speaking up for what I want to occur or have hopes of the group accomplishing is acceptable in this situation (Adler & Elmhorst 280). By establishing Klingler 4 healthy and widely understood standards of what is expected or respectable for the project being discussed, I create a standard for the group members to acknowledge and understand as a group as a whole. This wide-spread understanding of assignments and other such details for the project minimizes possible discord between group members when disagreements or pressure are far more likely to influence productivity. One crucial point in establishing effective group communication by minimizing my ambiguous feedback is the acknowledgement of leadership roles. While the leader often has what is called “position power” where the influence of a person is determined by the significance of their status, in peer assignments or group tasks it is common for leaders to have ”coercive power” as a primary force in encouraging group members to do their part in the project. This type of power is explained as the power to punish or assign unpleasant things for group members to deal with. The remainder of the group often seems to have “information power” wherein members are respected for the depth of their understanding of specific topics or tasks (Adler & Elmhorst 264). These power levels and the extent of respect individual group members have for each other has proven from past project experiences to be of great influence in accomplishing the desired goals set for the end result of the project. To more effectively communicate in group or partnership scenarios, I need to establish norms and express my intended messages while respecting the roles of those involved in the project. I will aim to become less ambiguous in my intentions by seeking to accomplish these three things when involved in the group assignments in school and team projects in the work setting that are undoubtedly going to come along in the next few years. Klingler 5 Summary: The three points above alone are advice enough to enable my communication to become far less ambiguous. I acknowledge that the fault in unsuccessful communication in group settings is not entirely the fault of the other group members— though that may have a part in the predispositions of group members—but rather, by developing my abilities to more clearly and effectively communicate with others in a variety of settings, I find it much easier to clarify my intentions to minimize misinterpretations along the pathway to achieve effective communication. Klingler 6 Works Cited Adler, Ronald B., and Jeanne Marquardt Elmhorst. Communicating at Work: Principles and Practices for Business and the Professions. 9th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008. Print.