Download File

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.