This post describes my reactions to three different deliveries of the same request for information (Laureate, 2010). In this scenario, a Jane seeks overdue information from her colleague, Mark, so that she can use that information to meet her own deadline. Her approach in each scenario (email, voicemail, and face-to-face) is to hand Mark an “out” for his tardiness, by acknowledging that he has been swamped and tied up in meetings.
I read the email version first, and was bothered by Jane’s “wishy-washy” tone. She seemed to be apologizing for bothering him with her request that he meet his deadline. When I heard the exact same words over the phone, the speaker’s tone was firm and professional. Though she used exactly the same words, Jane’s tone (firm and professional) did not seem to let Mark off the hook. The third approach was to use the same exact words in an in-person visit to Mark’s cubicle. In this scenario, Jane is friendly but professional as she points out that Mark’s delay may cause her to be late for her own deadline.
It was interesting that the same words came across so differently in the email version. I wonder if others who read it may have “felt” it differently than I did. This is a good illustration of how emails can be misinterpreted. Having no audio or visual cues can leave the reader wondering what the writer’s intent may have been. Where professional emails are concerned, I conclude that it may be best to stick to statements of fact, and specific questions or instructions.
Laureate Media (2010). The art of effective communication [Video podcast]. Retrieved March 13, 2011, from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/EDUC/6145/03/mm/aoc/index.html
Effective communication: I often teach on the art of leadership. As I read your post I remember sometime from a book I often use as a reference. The book is The leadership challenge by Kouzes & Posner. One of statements they made is this: “The overall quality of work improves when people have a chance to fail.” As you probably know, this is not to advocate for failure but the endeavor (Kouzes & Posner,2007). I’m sure you have overcome the short sightedness of that event. After all you can talk about it. I’m sure someone has said this, “great leaders learn to communicate”. Look at you now!
Liz, it’s interesting that you and I had two very different interpreataions of the email. I thought that Jane came across as harsh and accusatory and you took her as being “wishy washy.” It really does play up the fact that written messages can easily be misinterpreted. If there’s one thing I’m learning from this class, it’s how important it is to be as up front and honest as possible. It’s a lot easier said than done. Hopefully, realization is the first step to action!
Hi, Leslie! Something I notice time and again in the distance learning environment is that the written word is really slave to the interpretations we put on it. More than once I’ve come across very different interpretations of the same written material. As you say, clarity is critical!
I did not see Jane as being harsh and accusatory at all – especially in her face-to-face interaction. The first thing I noticed was the ear-to-ear grin and this took away from the seriousness of her message. I am going to take this to be similar to what Leslie referred to as ‘wishy-washy’. In her voice mail I saw Jane being a bit firm and desperate and this created a sense of urgency to the situation by allowing Mark to know that she was depending on his cooperation for him to submit the information so that she could complete her report.
In reading the blogs I have come to realise that we all interpret messages differently and I can see the different views based on our particular culture and socialisation.
Leslie
It was indeed an odd feeling having read the email and then listen to the voice mail. I had to re-read the email to try to get an idea on the tone that Jane wanted to get over. In the voice mail, I was able to immediately pick up the tone of urgency in her voice. In terms of the face-to-face situation, I would have ignored Jane if she had approach me with a smile and empathy instead of reinforcing the urgency for the report.
I was thinking that the face-to-face form of communication would have been the one where the sense of urgency would have been more evident especially since Jane’s facial expressions and body language would have been to her advantage to show what she was saying. This would have been an example of what Dr. Stolovitch (2010) probably meant when he said the communication is more than words. In the military, when we discuss this issues we say that “a message is not only conveyed information, but the emotions that give the words meaning”. We also make a point of distinguishing between communication and effective communication. I would say that the voice mail message would have been an effective form of communication for Jane as it would have lead to “the desire response” and not just a response.
I also learned that in order to communicate effectively it helps that we know our audience. This may account for the manner in which Jane spoke to Mark face-to-face since she was more firm in her voice mail and very ‘careful’ in her email (not knowing how Mark would have interpreted it.
Although face-to-face communication would have been chosen to be the best method of communication in this instance I believe that the voice mail would have been more powerful and effective. The key element in Janes’ messages was urgency and the voice mail convey this the best to me.
I enjoyed reading your perspective of this assignment as mine took a slightly different angle.
Dreana
References
Stolovitch, H. (2010) “Project Management and Instructional Design”, (Laureate Educcation Video Production) Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.
Leslie and Dreana,
As I read everyone’s blog and the associated comments it is interesting to see the differences in interpretation of the messages. I think Dreana’s point about being able to read the e-mail over again is important, the re-reading gives you time to consider what the person intended as well as giving the reader time to calm down from whatever emotion they might be feeling (hopefully, if the e-mail is written correctly.
I just went back and reread the text and realized that the e-mail is only three sentences. Dr Stolovich advised avoiding ambiguity and documenting everything – the email is fairly direct and documents the facts (Stolovitch, 2010).
There is one section that I would edit that would further change the tone – “…but I really need an ETA on the missing report. Because your report contains data I need to finish my report…”. I would not use “but I really” or “because”, rephrasing without those words could make the message completely unambiguous.
Reference:
Stolovitch, H. (2010). Video Podcast: Communicating with Stakeholders. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com
Mark, I might go a step further, and suggest that instead of asking for an “ETA” of the missing paperwork, Jane should instead set a very specific deadline for Mark. She should not be apologetic about asking Mark to get his part of the work done on time.
Hi Liz!
I think Jane was just requesting for the data she needed to meet her own deadline. However, the text modality of communication serves as a means of keeping records for documentation and for proof. Though text might enable and encourage systematic thinking and might require less reliance, it could present misconceptions on the part of both the writer and the reader, due to some misinterpretation of words. In this particular case, Mark might not even check his email due to fatigue.
The audio and video modalities could disrupt the processing of important arguments, data, evidence, and might cause the receiver to focus on other source that were not directly relevant to the quality of the message (Mann, 1997). Nevertheless, the voice modality carried more weight. In my atmosphere of tiredness Jane’ southing conversational voice promoted my willingness to receive the message, perceive it correctly, simple, direct, straightforward, open, honest, and complete communication without any arm twisting.
I would like to submit that the three different modalities: as written text, audio, and video reveal some of the aspects of communication technologies that influence the 21st Century communication. The most effective medium of effective communication would be the combination of all three modalities in one hypermedia system, necessary for most companies as they react in the global market.
Reference
Mann, B.L. (1997). Evaluation of presentation modalities in a hypermedia system. Computer & Education (28)2, 133-143.
Hi Liz, great point that you bring up about tone of voice. The e-mail message leaves too much toward the imagination of the receiver in my opinion.
I definitely felt that there was a bit of hesitancy with all modalities, but there is no doubt the sense of urgency increased as the level of human interaction increased.
Justin