First, I viewed the email message. It starts out with Jane
communicating empathy for Mark’s situation – he’s been busy, maybe he was stuck
in a meeting all day. Then the email explains exactly why Jane needs the
information right away, and it outlines specific steps Mark can take to fix the
problem. My first impression is that
this is a great way for Jane to communicate with Mark about the missing report.
Next, I listened to Jane’s voicemail. It’s worded exactly
the same as the email – she sounds very polite and makes connection with the listener.
Her tone of voice is very understanding. I felt like in this case she should
have asked for a return call or email with a specific deadline: “Please get
back to me today – you can reach me in my office until 5, or send me an email
anytime.”
Finally, I watched the video of the face-to-face message. I
was unimpressed with this one. First of all, there wasn’t a conversation at all
– it was completely one-sided. One of the benefits of face-to-face conversation
is that it allows back-and-forth communication, and this clip totally left out
that part. Jane’s tone in this clip sounds too apologetic. The tone of this
message was not as direct as the voicemail message, and her body language seems
like she’s almost hiding from the confrontation (behind the cube wall). Another
problem with this one was that Jane seemed to be too formal in her language –
usually face-to-face interaction is somewhat less formal than written
communication.
I think this activity suggests the importance of taking into
account several factors when deciding what type of communication modality to
use. Budrovich and Achong explain that It’s
important to tailor communication strategies to the needs of each stakeholder,
and I think this is very true – without knowing Mark’s communication style or
personality, it’s hard to decide which communication method would be most
effective (Laureate Education, Inc.).
References:
Laureate Education, Inc. (2010). Communicating
with Stakeholders. [DVD], Dr. Harold Stolovich
Laureate Education, Inc. (n.d.).
Strategies for Working with Stakeholders. [DVD], Budrovich and Achong
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.
Jen, you're right about observing the context in which the communication modality would best suit the circumstance. "Communication climate is the invisible concept of how communications are conducted within a workplace environment," Arif, Zubair & Manzoor (2012) state, and I believe that as you noted, the implied meaning, tone and delivery can each have an impact on the communication tone. As you mentioned, I'd be hard pressed to decided on just one method of communication for Mark without knowing his role in the project and his performance to date, the circumstances that might be affecting his work (such as other projects that might have taken precedence), or whether the organizational culture itself is more information and personal or formal and structured. Each one of these elements affect both the verbal and nonverbal modalities of communication, and which would be best in this situation.
ReplyDeleteArif, S., Zubair, A., & Manzoor, Y. (2012). Innovative work behavior and communication climate among employees of advertising agencies. FWU Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1), p65-72.