Today’s blog I needed to give my thoughts after I finished
going over each modality. There are 3
modalities one an email message, second a voicemail message, and last a face to
face video. All of my thoughts are below. Click on link below to see the modalities for
yourself. And let’s see if you agree
with my analysis.
Let's Begin
Email message: If
I were the one receiving this email I get the feeling that the work I had to do
was urgent. Mark’s report needs to be
done as soon as possible because Jane cannot move on her report without it, and
her deadline is coming soon, so now Mark will have to find a way to rearrange
his schedule to finish his end to help her out, wondering why she didn’t tell
Mark any sooner.
Voicemail message:
With this message Jane might of made
Mark feel she needs his help to finish with Mark’s data, even though her tone
was neutral she seemed a bit stressed out.
She obviously does not want to miss her own deadline.
Face to Face: When
I saw the video her, she looked to causal, but her body language gave me a
passive aggressive attitude. The flicker
of her eyes looking in a different direction when talking, pointing her finger
out, not directly to me but she does have a pointed finger. Even the smile at the end was too much to be
making the situation seem friendly but in her mind she must be saying I need
your data now, and I’m not taking it anymore.
After finishing the 3 modalities I would say the voicemail was the most honest and better delivered message of the three. The email message seemed too harsh, where the
face to face showed too much body posturing.
I would probably have gotten annoyed from the email message; because it
is insinuating that I did not do the work as well as the face to face video. Related to f2f, Jane came off as she was
tired of asking for Mark’s data, and wants it as soon as possible. The smile at the end definitely shows she is
trying to hide her frustration. Jane’s
tone of voice is at the same level but her body language relays the opposite
sending an ambiguous message. Dr. Stolovitch
suggested the two best ways for effective solution is avoid unclear statements
and document everything. Jane needed to
be clear in delivering her message not sending mix signals, and if she was
having issues with Mark then she should have document all the times she tried
to communicate with Mark about getting his part done for her.
References:
Stolovich (n.d.), Communicating
with Stakeholders [Video]. Laureate Education. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com.
As I read the posts of our classmates, I am seeing a variety of perceptions of the email message, voicemail message, and face-to-face message. Several individuals thought that Jane seemed less stressed and less urgent in her face-to-face. However, you picked up on a certain body language that indicated Jane was frustrated. I have to agree with you. I felt that she was trying very hard to be very nice and very understanding regarding Mark's inability to complete the report due to how busy he had been. In both the email and the voicemail, Jane also expressed believable sympathy for how busy Mark had been when asking for the report data she needed to complete her report. I think you picked up on a certain falseness in her face-to-face message. To me, this suggests there may be times when face-to-face communication is less effective if the communicator is trying not to convey his or her true feelings. Some folks are quite good at keeping a "poker face" which gives no indication of their real feelings. Others, like me, are less adept at this.
ReplyDeleteWhat are your thoughts?
Neal,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation of the face-to-face interaction by Janet. It did not seem to be sincere to me, and almost passive aggressive. I felt almost scorned, and it made me not want to complete the report. I interpreted the voicemail differently, in that I heard a frantic tone that made me want to get the project done. The font and bold type of the e-mail made me want to get the report out sooner than later, but it wasn't too urgent.
Interesting how we all interpret things differently. It just goes to show that everyone interprets information in different modes, and it is important to present information with those modes in mind.
Chris
Neal,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad I'm not the only one who felt a little less concerned about urgency with the face-to-face communication. It's amazing how non-verbals can influence perception. There seems to be an implied deadline that Mark has already missed, so the e-mail communication was most effective. It was in writing, so that makes is formal. It's unfortunate, but people seem to respond more promptly when they know that there is an e-mail trail regarding their conversations and commitments.
Hi Neal,
ReplyDeleteI have read many of the analysis from team 2 as well as the comments posted by fellow classmates and I am amazed to hear the different interpretations of the face to face model. I do agree with you in that the face to face model was less formal. The person delivering the message did not make eye contact and her gestures were stand off in nature. However, I feel that even with the stand off nature, she made me believe that the report was in fact necessary. She made the effort with approaching the person and did explain the reasons to her concerns and need for the report. If I was approached in person I would have acted on the concerns more so than if I was emailed or left a voicemail, as projects on a day to day basis could come up that I may feel is more important than the report she needs. Dr. Solovich states that always conduct face to face meetings as then everyone is understanding what is needed. He also states that even if a face to face meeting has been done to document any conversations so as to have a trail of what was said.
I always enjoy reading your postings.
Genie