Blog Assignment: Communicating Effectively
EMAIL
How did your interpretation of the
message change from one modality to the next?
What factors influenced how you
perceived the message?
There
is no telling when Mark will receive the message, and it seems like more of a request
than an order.
VOICEMAIL
What factors influenced how you
perceived the message?
It
sounds again like a mousy request rather than an order for Mark to help Jane. However,
we have a saying in the military “ An emergency on your part, does not constitute
an emergency my part” For Jane to get Mark
to act; we are going to need to directly interact with him.
FACE TO FACE
Which
form of communication best conveyed the true meaning and intent of the message?
If the intent of the message is to communicate
with Mark to give an ETA on the missing report then the Face to Face communication
is the way to go.
I agree that face to face delivered the message that urgency was an issue and that Mark's response was probably "hang on I will email it now!... Done!"
ReplyDeleteThe other efforts were futile as they did not convey much of anything.
Hey David I agree with you and Pam that the face-to-face method is the best course of action. Although it was not listed as an option for this exercise where do you think a phone conversation would rank in possible communication methods?
ReplyDeleteI agree, I get so frustrated when people do not check their emails. Voicemails get about 5 seconds of listening time before I delete them. So face to face is the best, but is not always possible. For example, if you and I were involved in the same project, we would use nothing but email. I think in that case a preset timeframe of checking twice a day or something similar would be needed.
ReplyDeleteDavid,
ReplyDeleteYou say “email is more of a risky format to rely on when communicating.” Portney et al. however say that written communication on the other hand is formal communication that is “pre planned and conducted in a standard format in accordance with an established schedule. Portney contends in order to minimize misunderstandings and hurt feelings, one should confirm in writing the important information that was shared in informal discussion. In this instance, this seems to be a follow up to a previous discussion and the promised report is still “missing”. If the communication were an inquiry of whether Jane could have a copy as opposed to the “ETA on the “missing” report” then I would agree that a verbal request in a face-to-face encounter might be sufficient. However, as this is affecting Jane’s productivity and appears to be a follow up request, Jane should use a formal written communication form to cover herself. While it is nice to think that when working on a team, everyone has the same team as you do, this is not always the case and people have other hidden agendas you may be unaware of which might leave you holding the bag or in this case leave Jane with a report she is unable to complete but has no backup to prove that she has made the request verbally of mark on more than one occasion. There do not appear to be any witnesses in the face-to-face discussion either. In ID projects, “team members often have never worked together before and some may not even know each other (Portney et al., 2008). Formal communication in written form will present factual data more efficiently, assist you in choosing your words so as to minimize any misunderstandings and most important provide a paper trail which is not open to misinterpretations. It is also important to hold Mark “accountable if he has accepted the responsibility to complete the assignment. Holding people accountable is appropriate and necessary if they've accepted the responsibility to perform (Portney et al., 2008, p. 299).” How will you hold Mark accountable if you have no formal communication showing he accepted responsibility?