In this week's communication exercise, “The Art of Effective Communication”, the same message was delivered in three modalities: via email, voicemail, and face-to-face communication. The intention of the exercise is to interpret each message and the potential nuances. What are the subtle differences in how the message, delivered in three different formats, might be interpreted by the recipient?
The email version evoked images of a slightly desperate and stressed sender. While the tone seemed understanding that Mark (the recipient) was legitimately busy, I projected an image of sender that was a little stressed out. The same message delivered via voicemail came across as no nonsense, direct, with a slightly edgy or perturbed tone. It was the least “friendly” sounding of the three. The face-to-face delivery portrayed a woman who conveyed a message that was much less stressed; perhaps even low key. She was direct and clear about what she needed, but her message seemed the friendliest and the least stressed about the situation. A big plus: you could see her smile. I didn't "hear" a smile in the voicemail. Nor did I "read" a smile in the email version.
This exercise provided an interesting and effective way to prompt consideration of how the same message may be interpreted through different delivery modalities. In fact, it made me think of a recent work experience. In my professional world, 95% of my work is conducted virtually – via email, voicemail, instant messaging, or virtual web-meetings. (5% being occasional long distance travel for face-to-face meetings, etc.) Last week, I was invited to a three day, offsite meeting that was held at the home of one of our organizations Directors. The intention was to provide a creative space that would inspire open, creative and innovative thinking. At one point, during day two of the face-to-face session, one of the participants said to me in a surprised voice, “I never realized how comical you can be.” I said, “Really? I guess I can come across as pretty serious on some of our calls.” She replied – with surprising emphasis, “Yeah, you can be pretty intense on some of those [project] calls!” I was really taken aback by this because I consider myself very approachable, funny, positive, but always strive to be professional in my interactions. It seemed I may have been misunderstood or that my complete personality hadn't been coming through during our project interactions. At the end of our third day, we all debriefed and shared our ideas regarding the value of meeting face-to-face versus the usual virtual communications. Several of us commented enthusiastically on how valuable and effective it had been to be able to work together face-to-face … including the woman who had commented on her different perception of me since meeting for the first time. The exchange made me realize that it is very difficult to get a well rounded sense of someone (or their message) strictly via email, voicemail, or conference call. There truly is something refreshing about good old face-to-face meetings once in a while! The key learning is: Be mindful of how your messages/interactions may be interpreted by others who don’t know the whole you!
Reference
Media: The Art of Effective Communication was retrieved on 01.20.2011 from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/EDUC/6145/03/mm/aoc/index.html
Beth,
ReplyDeleteAlthough we did not have the same reactions to each of the modalities I can see your frame of reference. While I did not think about when I read the e-mail, there a sense of stress from the sender.
I think that most of communication in the business world is now done via emial because it is quick and easy; however the wrong message can be interpretted pretty easily. I have an experience similar to yours in terms of being misunderstood, although I was not being misunderstood. One of the SMEs at my position is former military man, and always writes in caps, whether in email or handwritten. He had a few of us thinking he was quite rude an demanding, but come to find out that is how he had to write in the military and has continued since. So he was not being demanding afterall.
Hi Beth,
ReplyDeleteThe key point-"Be mindful of how your messages/interactions may be interpreted by others who don't know you." supports Dr. Stolovich when he indicates that communications should be friendly and respectful. (Stolovich, 2011) He also mentions the most effective communication is face-to-face or live. Your picture does show a friendly approachable person and also the positivity in your writing. Not communicating with stakeholders is probably the only poor choice a stakeholder can make. Any of the three given this week are secondary or substitutes for real face-to-face interactions. A message can be given in many ways and does bridge many distant spaces. Interesting post! Maureen
Hi Beth,
ReplyDeleteI have had a similar experience in my work. I have worked with a large development company in India on many projects over the past 5 years. This past September, the project manager I work with traveled to my office to work with me for two weeks. This time was unbelievably productive compared to our 100% virtual communication via email and conference/online meetings. One comment he made was, "Now I understand why you need certain changes or projects done very quickly." He was able to see my working environment and the different people that called or stopped by my office to find out about programs we were developing. Had he not seen this, he may have thought I was being unreasonable in my demands.
With this case study, If Mary knows Mark she would be wise to select the communication mode that best suits his personality. If Mark is someone that ignores email or never answers his phone, then a walk to his office is the only method that will be effective.
According to Solovitch, Effective Communication should have a positive spirit and attitude.
The personality of the recipient is a factor to consider (2011).
Resources
Stolovitz, H. “Communicating with Stakeholders” [Online video]. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?
Hi Beth,
ReplyDeleteYou made some great points in your posting when you stated that "The exchange made me realize that it is very difficult to get a well rounded sense of someone (or their message) strictly via email, voicemail, or conference call." To be honest I had never given it much thought but it makes perfect sense when I think about it now. No one can know exactly who you are through an email communication. Portny et al "states both written and verbal communications- as well as informal and formal communications are useful, meaningful ways to share and collect important project information" I think that shined through in your post by meeting at your Directors home in a more informal athmosphere. You all learned more about eachother both personally and professionally.