Any basic communication model demonstrates that perception comes from our experiences, culture, word choices, values and judgments. We use all of these elements to encode and decode messages; and, communication only occurs when the circles are overlapped. Otherwise, misunderstanding is inevitable. (Campbell & Baker)
Project Managers spend the majority of their time communicating in meetings, phone calls, documenting, writing reports, memos, presentations and emails. The manner and modality a person chooses to communicate the message may have an implication on how the message is interpreted. For example, in this week’s Blog Assignment we were asked to interpret a message as it was delivered in different modalities.
The message was:
Hi Mark: I know you have been busy and possibly in that all day meeting today, but I really need an ETA on the missing report. Because your report contains data I need to finish my report, I might miss my own deadline if I don’t get your report soon. Please let me know when you think you can get your report sent over to me, or even if you can send the data I need in a separate email. I really appreciate your help. Jane
Email:
The written message was received in the format of an email. The content was clear and concise as Stolvich recommended in the video, when “communicating with Stakeholders”. Jane included a purpose, advised about her situation, and included an alternate solution to solve the immediate request. Although her salutation and content were friendly and polite, her tone felt anxious. My initial reaction was a question; why did Jane send an email instead of making a phone call? It produce an internal concern and thinking process in me of why she choose to document in writing that I have not provided her with required information. This was clearly my emotional effect when decoding her message.
Voicemail:
Jane’s voice mail made the message less threatening to me even though she was more demanding in her tone when delivering the message. She clearly stated that because of my lack of response to her need, she would miss a deadline, although her message was polite and professional.
Face-to-face:
Jane’s tone and body language was friendly and professional. Her message was clear and concise, but sounded much less demanding than the voicemail. She clearly confirmed the urgency of her need, and reminder him of the deadline he missed. Because Jane was leaning over the cubicle and her arms cross, it seemed almost as if they were having a friendly conversation.
Although the three modalities are accepted in project management, and Jane’s message were clear and concise, provided the purpose, situation and possible solution, my preferred communication modality is face to face. It allows me to visually communicate, to listen to the tone of the message and the person’s facial gestures as well as their body language (Stolvich) which helps in the interpretation process.
References:
Greer, M. The Project Management Minimilist: Just Enough PM to Rock Your projects! Laureate International Universities
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stolovitch (n.d.) Video Program: “Communicating with Stakeholders” Lecture presented for Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved July 13, 2011, from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5364557&Survey=1&47=7867857&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stolovitch (n.d.) Video Program: “Communicating with Stakeholders” Lecture presented for Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved July 13, 2011, from: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5364557&Survey=1&47=7867857&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Hi Elia
ReplyDeleteI agree that the message was clear and concise. However, I think that Jane did not consider the tone of the message. As Dr. Stolovitch (n.d.) states, 93% of the message is not the words, it is the spirit and attitude of the message. Tonality, timing, and body language also convey a message. The timing of the email, if a follow-up to another meeting, would greatly change the tone of the email. I had not considered this and thank you for your perspective. Since I was assuming that the email was not a first contact, I found it to be somewhat offensive in its tone.
I would also prefer a face-to-face meeting for this message. However, Jane was in a power position, looking down on Mark. She also did not give Mark an opportunity to respond. Since this conversation was conducted at a cubicle, anyone could have overheard it. Therefore, I thought the timing and tone of the face-to-face meeting was inappropriate. Dr. Stolovitch (n.d.) is right to assert that a project manager needs to be a diplomat.
In order to establish which modality of communication should be used, the team should have defined its communication processes before starting work on the project. This would have included how to address the issue of work not being completed (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008, p. 304).
Sue
References:
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stolovitch. (n.d.). Communicating with stakeholders. Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). Video.
Good afternoon Miss. Elia.Lora,
ReplyDeleteYour prelude was very interesting and informative. I am a very visual learns, so the diagram post is very effective.
You discussed that your reaction to the email was, why did Jane not make a phone call? I was thinking the same thing because I am one that reads in too much when I should just take the message as it is. However, with the importance of the message I believe that it would have been much more effective in a phone call than an email. While I was reading the email, I felt as though there was blame for Jane maybe missing her deadline if she does not receive the report containing the data she needs to complete her report.
Great analysis! I enjoyed reading your thoughts and views.
Courtney
Elia,
ReplyDeleteI genuinely appreciated that you lead your post with a model of communication. This was a perspective that I had not even considered until after I had written my post (not until I was responding to Clint’s post, in fact), and it very much changed my perspective on the exchanges. My initial post would have been very different if I had had the foresight to begin where you did.
As I’ve looked over other people’s posts, it’s interesting that many of us seem to have found at least one of the modalities to come across as ‘anxious’, though there’s a lot of diversity about which specific modality we found to be the ‘anxious’ one. For example, I described the voice-mail as being ‘anxious’, where you described the email that way.
As I touched on in my response to Clint, I don’t know how to account for this. Age? Gender? Our mood when we sat down to consider these messages?
David McCandless (2009) created an infographic (http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/colours-in-cultures/) showing how the same color is interpreted differently by different cultures. If something as ‘simple’ and ‘objective’ as color is interpreted differently, why should it surprise us at all that something as subjective and complex as a message is interpreted differently by different people?
Or is it just a matter of preference? When it comes to making aesthetic judgments (this is pretty, that is ugly), ‘fluency’ has a strong impact (Belke, Leder & Strobach, 2010). That is to say the more familiar you are with something, the more likely you are to look upon it favorably. Did you find, as I did, that you tended to prefer Jane’s message in the medium that you generally prefer to get messages? I liked Jane’s message as an email because I happen to prefer email. You stated that you preferred face-to-face.
Budrovich (Budrovich & Achong, n.d.) advised us to, “Tailor your communication strategy to fit the specific needs of each stakeholder – find out what matters to them, not what should matter or what matters to me, and then adjust your behavior to fit that & make it convenient for them”. Now I’m wondering if there’s really any other lesson here besides that.
References:
Belke, B., Leder, H., & Strobach, T. (2010). Cognitive fluency: high-level processing dynamics in art appreciation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 4, 214-222.
Budrovich, V. & Achong, T. (n.d.). Practitioner voices: Strategies for working with stakeholders. [Video]. Retrieved from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/Walden/EDUC/6145/03/downloads/WAL_EDUC6145_03_B_EN-CC.zip
McCandless, D. (Designer). (2009). Colors in culture. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/colours-in-cultures/
Hello Elia,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your interpretations of the sample modalities.
I found that I preferred the face to face interaction as well but it made me think that we, as instructional designers, need to explore ways to get this same type of communication in an online environment.
For example, Gao, Noh and Koehler of Michigan State University did a study comparing communication of students using role playing in Second Life (online environment) versus face to face. They found:
It was found that students produced similar amount of communication in the two environments, but the communication styles were different. In SL role-playing activities, students tended to take more turns, and have shorter exchanges in each turn-taking than in FTF environment. Students also tended to generate more concept-related dialogues in SL, though they may not be as elaborated as those in FTF environments.
(Gao, Noh, and Koehler, n.d)
In addition, the technology of online communication, including web conferencing, instant messaging, video messaging and video emails, are becoming more and more dynamic every year and should be utilized to increase the use of face to face-like interaction in online learning environments.
Thank you.
Gao, F., Min Noh, J., Koehler, M., n.d., Comparing student interactions in second life and face-to-face role-playing activities, Michigan State University
Interpreting meaning from the varied message presentations is highly subjective given different backgrounds and concerns that the sender and receiver will have. Regardless of individual interpretations, the one thing every modality has in common is that the original message has inherent flaws in its choice of words. The original message has me believing the situation is critical for Jane, but her wording does not allow her to effectively present that circumstance. Notice that the message makes use of three conditional phrases that negate Jane's concern: "…I might miss my…", "…when you think you can get…" and "…even if you can send…". With just simple change of wording, each of these phrases contains inherent concern and emphasis: "…I will miss my…", "…when you will get…" and "…when you will send…".
ReplyDeleteThe critical selection of your words in a message allows you to include emphasis that is missed in the original message from this exercise. Our course text calls it, "sharing the right messages with the right people in a timely manner" (Portny, et al. pg. 357). Jane needs Mark to react positively to her message so my point of using better words helps make it the 'right message'. Additionally, you can make a variation of another point our text presents; effective communication is to tailor your message to the your needs and concerns (Portny, et al., pg. 363) when the greater consequence will be affecting you
Reference:
Portney, S.E., Mantel, S.J., Meredith, J.R., Shafer, S.M., Sutton, M.M. & Kramer, B.E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ:John Wiley & Sons, Inc.