“Knowledge is Power.” In the last few weeks I have begun the task of acquiring the knowledge to become a competent, successful communicator. I have learned that there are many elements to communicating, some obvious and some subtle. I shall attempt some self-analysis to determine how well I communicate; let’s see how “powerful” I am.
To be successful at communication, one must first realize that it is indeed a two-way street; one must grasp the idea that there is a sender and a receiver, and both must work in the process. Of the four possible “perspectives” on communication cited in Sarah Trenholm’s Thinking Through Communication (2008), I have determined I am a proponent of the “psychological perspective.” I feel the sender’s job entails clearly organizing his message, considering his motive in making it, and ensuring that it is successfully received and interpreted. Unfortunately, my “bull in a china shop” approach is often too direct, and I do not anticipate sufficiently that my receiver might misconstrue my motives because of my straightforward delivery. As a sender, I must be aware of how I am perceived, which could affect distortions on the receiving end; other biases on the receiver’s part could also cause the misinterpretation of my message.
Progress, however, has been made. In realizing that my too-direct approach was really self-serving, I have finally been able to adapt and use “equivocal communication” in my replies. Saving someone’s feeling at the expense of truth is now something I can easily live with.
As a receiver, I need to be more mindful. “According to psychologist Ellen Langer, when we are mindful, we are in a state of ‘alert and lively awareness’” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 54). Being aware of distractions, and focusing; considering nonverbal cues; using paralinguistic aids and following Sarah Trenholm’s advice to “become aware of your biases and delay final evaluation” (p. 59) are all tools I need to incorporate into my “listening” mode. Like most people, I am susceptible to personal constructs, assigning characteristics and descriptors to people on a generalized basis. Again, I feel that improvement has been attained as I find myself attempting to “turn off” those negatives that pop into my head upon meeting new people.
In my intimate interpersonal relationships, I have proven myself to be adequate as far as the three sets of tensions that authors Leslie Baxter and William Rawlins perceive that couples experience: expressive-protective, autonomy-togetherness and novelty-predictability dialectics (Trenholm, 2008, p.146). If an intimate relationship is to thrive, there must be a considerable amount of trust embedded within it; this entails honest disclosure on both parts. The degree to which one commits (or does not) to this openness is a barometer for the relationship’s success. I have been very open and honest in my relationships once the barrier of trust has been successfully breached. It is the autonomy-togetherness dialectic, the degree to which one wishes (or needs) to be with the other, where I have been found wanting. Comfortable as a loner most of my life, I have always needed a considerable amount of time away from my partner; which frequently proved to be a problem for her. Neediness and smothering always had me running for the hills. My complacency with “business as usual” in the novelty-predictability could probably be improved.
My relationship with my wife is different from my previous relationships in many ways. I love and appreciate her so much that I put much more effort into the relationship, and try not to be the egocentric person I have been most of my life. Whereas I am probably in the one-up role of dominance most of the time (Trenholm, 2008, p. 148), it is by mutual acceptance; and roles are reversed on a rather regular basis. Though we truly have very, very little conflict with each other, it is an area that concerns me. I find I am unable to proceed in a straightforward fashion with my wife because it often causes her such distress when we do argue; this, unfortunately places us in the gunnysacking category, storing up our grievances until the burden gets too heavy (Trenholm, 2008, p.166). This issue needs to be resolved for as Dr. Linda Vaden Gratch states, “(But) everyone who is a high self-silencer feels depressed" (Leonard, Suzanne. Express Yourself.1996).
As for group interaction, only one comes to mind of late. Three years ago, I was cast in a new and different kind of entertainment at Disneyland. I was among twelve comedic, Improv actors hired along with about eight or nine musicians to create three different shows. The “scripts” were very sparse and really not very good; neither was the direction. Basically, the onus was on the performers to make the whole thing work during a workshop process. This was indeed a classic representation of a group in action as each of the members was interdependent with the rest. We were all highly motivated and so formed a very strong collective identity.
Our work closely followed psychologist Bruce Tuckman’s Five-Stage Model which consisted of the following group dynamics: forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning (Trenholm, 2008, p. 192). As Tuckman suggested, we made tentative steps toward each other in the getting to know one another process. Despite being polite and considerate, we each tried to ascertain who the real talents were, those being potential rivals and yet allies as well; this is the forming stage. Though we did not choose a leader per se, there were a few standouts who seemed to be more on their game than others; just as there were a few who seemed to be more marginal members, even loafers. We then moved on and worked extremely well together to create topnotch material during the storming stage. Our performing stage consisted of recognizing the preferred directions in which to move and structure our material. There was, however, no adjourning stage as each show we’d produced became an ongoing work-in-progress.
In considering my usual “task role” in group situations, I would say I am both “Opinion Giver” and “Evaluator-Critic”, terms adapted from Kenneth Benne and Paul Sheats (1948, pp. 41-49). Disliking conflict that often seems ego-driven rather than truth-seeking-driven, I am not what Benne and Sheats would consider an “Initiator-Contributor.” I prefer to let the instigators exhaust their ego issues and when the real work commences, feel better suited for seeing what does and does not work. I think I am good at recognizing superior input and how it can be modified to its ultimate suitability. As for what Benne and Sheats refer to as “maintenance roles”, I am the “Standard Setter”; not allowing the group to settle for mediocre output.
This probably has something to do with my territoriality; I am protective of my interaction territories and am extremely conscious of my personal space. I take great offense at having my personal space violated and do, in fact, sense myself acquiring a defensive hostility when it occurs. My communication also shuts down.
Now I find myself in search of employment and must evaluate what my selling points to a potential employer are. In Thinking Through Communication (2008), Sarah Trenholm lists three categories of skills that a job applicant should consider when analyzing his self-worth. These categories are: work-content skills, transferable skills and self-management skills (p. 234). It is hard to say what my work-content, or job specific, skills are as I am trying to widen my net and find a position in a field in which I have no experience. The tangible aptitudes I do have are good computer skills as I have taught all levels of most Microsoft Office applications as well as Visio, a flow-charting program. In a previous position as Shipping Supervisor for an antique-reproduction furniture company, my proficiency in Word came into play as I created many documents and templates in my mission to restructure an inefficient system. I also assisted our IT person to create a custom shipping/order status program.
As for transferable skills, those that are valuable in any work situation, I would include the ability to find solutions; to organize; to be efficient; and to communicate well. Overall, in analyzing an existing, inefficient system, I excel at visualizing how to restructure and organize.
My self-management attributes, or personal strengths, are that I have a good work ethic; I am responsible and very resourceful; and I enjoy finding answers and solutions. Beyond those, I feel that my abilities in communication are up to par; and that is a must in the organizational world. “[Researchers] Lull, Frank, and Piersol (1955) found that 96 percent of corporation presidents surveyed acknowledged a definite relationship between communication and corporate productivity” (Garnett, James L., Marlowe, Justin & Pandey, Sanjay K., 2008). In the business world, I understand the hierarchy that exists and the channels through which information must flow. I do speak and write in a clear, concise, and more importantly, professional manner. I am also aware that though all behavior in that environment should be performed objectively and professionally, humans are involved and so, egos are as well. My basic communication knowledge tells me that people decode messages according to their subjective “garbage” and one must certainly not ignore this fact in the workplace.
So as a current student of Communication, I have already been given some very functional tools for assessing messages that I both send and receive. I honestly feel that I am taking this information to heart and becoming more aware of bad habits that I have in the communication department. I am also more conscious of looking at how receivers can be manipulated to achieve the sender’s intent. That is one aspect of communication that makes me uncomfortable; the fact that manipulation is a guiding force. If a sender’s motive is generally good (and I could not begin to get into a philosophical discussion of defining “good”), then “the end justifies the means.” However, self-serving manipulation, I feel, is a dangerous and powerful weapon.
I have become powerful in my acquisition of communication information. I am becoming self-aware; and I am finding ways to guard against being a victim of “evil” manipulation. I am not Superman, but I am getting more and more powerful!
References
Benne, Kenneth & Sheats, Paul (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 41-49.
Garnett, James L., Marlowe, Justin & Pandey, Sanjay K. (2008). Penetrating the performance predicament: communication as a mediator or moderator of organizational culture's impact on public organizational performance. Public Administration Review: Washington. Mar/Apr 2008. Vol. 68, Iss. 2; pg. 266, 16 pgs. Retrieved November 29, 2009 from ProQuest database.
Leonard, Suzanne (1996). Express yourself. Psychology Today: New York. Mar/Apr 1996. Vol. 29, Issue 2; pg. 20. Retrieved November 29, 2009 from ProQuest database.
Leonard, Suzanne (1996). Express yourself. Psychology Today: New York. Mar/Apr 1996. Vol. 29, Issue 2; pg. 20. Retrieved November 29, 2009 from ProQuest database.
Trenholm, Sarah (2008). Thinking through communication: an introduction to the study of human communication. Boston: Pearson
No comments:
Post a Comment