communication

communicate world

2009-03-15T02:43:00.007+08:00

Organization communications - dry topic for me.

Such communications are found in business organizations. so, does good communication skills lead to good business?

Certainly, having an MBA is essential for specific job descriptions, as well as for upward mobility in many organizations. Yet, good communication matters lots because business organizations are made up of people.

Research has shown that communication skills have been always ranked as a crucial factor for business people. Normally, they spend most of their time engaged in some form of written or oral communication. Communication in a business organization provides the critical link between core functions.

Why is good communication important to organizations?

Because they could not afford ineffective communication. Everything they do in business is about effective communication to another individual, an organization or the public. Their messages are intended to inform, guide, persuade, build relationships and close the deals.

As in our notes, an employee should accquire oral and written communication skills.

According to the report of the National Commission on Writing:

People who cannot write and communicate clearly will not be hired, and if already working, are unlikely to last long enough to be considered for promotion.
Eighty percent or more of the companies in the services and the finance, insurance and real estate sectors—the corporations with greatest employment growth potential—assess writing during hiring.
Two-thirds of salaried employees in large American companies have some writing responsibility.
More than 40 percent of responding firms offer or require training for salaried employees with writing deficiencies.

In all, ultimate reason is to earn bucks.

ran-duhm

2009-03-08T17:34:00.005+08:00

this is real random. but i just thought of sharing it. :))

" I had a burst of energy today and used it all on-line - tomorrow I'll get to the mundane chores of everyday life.

Many of us North Americans are looking forward to a change in season, one that brings with it a sense of renewal. Others are marking another birthday on the calendar and using the day as the beginning of a new year, one that is brighter, bigger and better than the year before.

For all of us on all our own personal journey and forwhat ever reason remember those who we have met along the way. The people who come into our lives for a reason, a season, or a lifetime. When we figure out which one it is, we will know what to do for each person.

When someone is in your life for a reason, it is usually to meet a need you have expressed. They have come to assist you through a difficulty, to provide you with guidance and support, to aid you physically, emotionally, or spiritually. They may seem like a god-send, and they are! They are there for the reason you need them to be. Then, without any wrong doing on your part, or at an inconvenient time, this person will say or do something to bring the relationship to an end. Sometimes they die. Sometimes they walk away. Sometimes they act up and force you to take a stand. What we must realize is that our need has been met, your desire fulfilled, their work is done. The prayer you sent up has been answered, and now it is time to move on.

When people come into your life for a season, it is because your turn has come to share, grow, or learn. They bring you an experience of peace, or make you laugh. They may teach you something you have never done. They usually give you an unbelievable amount of joy. Believe it! It is real! But, only for a season.

Lifetime relationships teach you lifetime lessons; things you must build upon in order to have a solid emotional foundation. Your job is to accept the lesson, love the person, and put what you have learned to use in all other relationships and areas of your life. It is said that love is blind but friendship is clairvoyant.

Regardless of whether the people in your life are here for a reason, a season or a lifetime, go show them that you love them! "

an email received. sent by another KARENcatton.

thanks, karens. :))

your identity

2009-03-07T18:24:00.012+08:00

The Internet. It has become part of our life.
I wouldnt deny it. Our social life has entered the computer age.

Just like what ms hui mentioned during lecture, we are always on the Internet. It becomes a habit somehow.

Lets talk about computer mediated communication users - us.

We are physically 'invisible', with an option of presenting the ideal personal identity on the Internet. Yet, such fantasy online roles pose risk to real world personal identity. We can choose to appear under any name and consciously create a "personality" with which to present ourselves.

I would say identity is an essential part of the human experience. And the Internet has provided us a new context for identity exploration. Probably a venue to explore a complex set of relationships that is flexible and yet anonymous.

So. Are we the real self when we are on the Internet?

Take msn conversations for an example. Some personalities online are a far cry from their real life ones. Introvert in the real life. Yet an extrovert, when they are on msn conversations. Its like altering between virtual life and real life, putting on different identities.

Some may treat both real life and virtual life identities with no difference. Some are otherwise. Like those who may not find acceptance in real life, which possibly made them turn to the Internet. To search for their ideal identity.

"...what fascinates me is the unstated question that lies behind much of our preoccupation with the computer's capabilities. That question is not what will the computer be like in the future, but instead, what will we be like? What kind of people are we becoming?" - Sherry Turkle, The Second Self (1984)

This is interesting. What kind of people will we become? How far can such computer mediated communication replace human interactions?

If we are too reliant on computer mediated communication, we would probably have difficulty in speaking up in real life situations. I cant imagine having to miss out the entertaining times of face-to-face interactions.

And personally, I hate to think that computer mediated communication will be a substitute for human interaction someday.

something to share :))

selective receivers

2009-03-01T13:12:00.012+08:00

smoking isnt suicide. its murder.

CLEAR THE AIR - The Straits Times / Mon, Feb 16, 2009
http://health.asiaone.com/Health/Wellness+%2540+Work/Story/A1Story20090213-121759.html

SMOKING OUT THE SMOKERS - The Straits Times / Thu, Aug 14, 2008
http://www.asiaone.com/Health/Wellness+%2540+Work/Story/A1Story20080814-82276.html

I believe there are much more out there. These anti-smoking related media messages.

Charles Wright identifies the four media functions, surveillance (information), correlation (analysis and evaluation), cultural transmission (education and socialisation of receivers) and entertainment (enjoyment and gratification).

These media messages, I had chosen, are likely to fall into the first three categories.

Providing health-related information, analyzing the dangers of smoking, and of course, for education purposes. The whole idea is to get the smokers to quit smoking.

Yet, I would like to touch on selective processing of the receivers here.

So. What do we receivers do with media messages?
Passive or selective receivers are we?
Most likely, the latter one.

In this case, if everyone were to react the same way with the given message of media messages, I guess we would not need such anti-smoking messages in future.

Everyone sees anti-smoking messages differently, basically dividing into smokers and non-smokers.
The smokers would probably choose to ignore such messages. They already knew the harm of cigarettes, and see no need to focus on the given message.
On the other hand, the non-smokers would probably give more attention to the messages. Perhaps being more conscious of the whole idea.

Well, as mentioned in the first article. The idea of those gruesome graphic pictures does not work on the smokers. They do see the message that was trying to brought across, but they can choose to or not to heed the advice. That is selective processing.

I wonder if any smokers actually do give it a thought, when they see such messages from the mass media. There are tons out there, even one is with them when they are smoking - on the cigarette pack.

Are these messages from the mass media effective? Or rather, is mass media effective in creating such awareness?

I would say yes, to a small extent only. The rest depends on the receivers.

Something aside.
Smokers. Everyone would stereotype them as bad people, or to say smoking is no good. I am no exceptional, until a conversation on this topic with my mentor.

" Its alright to try new things in life. But, you ll have to know when to stop, when it gets real bad for you. Know your limits. "

I thought so too. cause she was one living example.

think people think

2009-02-22T11:17:00.012+08:00

I guess the comic gave us an idea what groupthink is all about.

Groupthink, a term coined by social psychologist Irving Janis (1972), the mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply invloved in a cohesive in-group, when members' strivings for unanimity override their motivtion to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.

Symptoms of Groupthink

Illusion of invulnerability – a group that believes it is the best that loses all sense of reality.

Collective rationalization – members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions.

Belief in group's own morality – members believe in their actions and beliefs are more valuable than outsiders.

Shared sterotypes– taking on the 'us versus them' mentaility, believing that anyone who opposes is stupid or wrong.

Direct pressure on dissenters – members are under pressure not to express arguments against any of the group’s views.

Self-censorship – doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are not expressed.

Illusion of unanimity – majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.

Self-appointed ‘mindguards’ – leader of the group of experts will refuse to hear any argument contradicting his own wishes or the will of the majority.

Under conditions like being highly cohesive, isolated from contrary opinions and ruled by a directive leader, groupthink occurs. Members tend not to give their own suggestions, which in turn leads to the group not having other alternatives/ideas. Normally, decisions made by groupthink have a lower chance to achieving success.

I have to say, groupthink is probably something I would not want in my group. It is true that things do work out the easy way if there is groupthink. Yet, everyone has their own views and their right of say. Why deprive the chance of them speaking up? I believe everyone has a total different perspective on a similar subject. Im looking into the aspect of pressure on dissenters here.

Another thing to mention, the leader of the group with groupthink seems to have a strong influence. Just like the comic shown above. All members go along with the leader, where independent thinking, individual creativity and uniqueness are all lost. A better approach would be to collect ideas from all members, and then to come up with an agreeable one. Or just like other methods we were taught in lecture. To solve the problem of groupthink.

I would say the devil's advocate is a good one. But, he/she will have to be able to take comments or feedback in a positive way.

On a side note. Leaders who are having difficulties, go read page 196 & 197 of our text (Thinking through Communications).

I ll take note. :))

love forever

2009-02-15T12:52:00.022+08:00

nothings gonna change my love for you - george benson

old times favourite. everyone would have heard of the original, so i will share this saxophone version instead. love the part when the guy is having solo in particular.

probably a song you would use it in the first five stages of the Knapp Model. the lyrics would definitely help to express your love for the one in the initiating stage, or rather to emphasize your partner's existence in your life in the bonding stage.

its interesting to see how a couple come together - their love story. this of course, consists not only the sweet moments, but the bitter times too.

ive always wonder. people who are already married. how do you know if he/she is the right one for you? what makes you decide to step into marriage in the first place?
some would say, you cant explain it. you just simply know he/she is the one you would want to spend the rest of your life with.
but then again, there are couples ending up with a divorce. what happen to those promises of forever then?

i have doubts. love forever.

to be honest, i dont really think forever love exists. how sure are you that nothings gonna change your love? no one can predict the future. i would rather say you have found a true love once, but not a love that last forever. because i believe humans do change.

there are cases where couples divorce in their fifties, only to realise that they cannot stand each other after living together for probably two decades. i do admire their courage for doing so. you are just being honest to yourself, or rather have to.
perhaps it has to do with the Equity Theory, which in short means that both parties seek to enjoy the same benefits. in which they did not, and resulted in a break up.
not to deny, there are old loving couples who still hold each others hand while taking long strolls, saying iloveyou every other day or just giving simple warm hugs. thats really sweet.

you cant explain love. its not something you can put into words.
but i would like to say those who are in love, do cherish your partner. never take him/her for granted.

" Love is the most beautiful of dreams and the worst of nightmares. " - William Shakespeare

i ll have to agree with him.

physical appearance

2009-02-07T10:32:00.021+08:00

Physical appearance is a type of non verbal communication. It is usually associated with one’s dress sense, hairstyle, body types – basically anything on the physical side.

Here is a clip on a recent movie – “Bridewars”, which shows an example of such non verbal communication used.

In this case, the costume designer chose the appropriate clothing that would help project each character’s personality in the movie. We can see the contrast between the two ladies, where Liv (Kate Hudson) being better off than Emma (Anne Hathaway). This was shown where they had different brands and styles of clothing, and the former was able to afford the more expensive stuffs. Even colours played a part too. For instance, Liv was mostly in cool colours wear, while Emma’s clothing had more vibrant colours. These differences were made in their physical appearance, so as to distinct the two characters in the movie.

Say about physical appearance. It decides how people treat and look upon on us. I hate to agree with this, but we cannot deny that physical appearance does matter a lot.

Like in the movie, Liv is a lawyer character. She has to be in the right attire - formal and neat, in order to convince her clients that she is able to handle the given task. If you had watched the movie, there was a scene where Liv was totally out of control. She had her hair dyed blue, and was in improper dress. This made her lose the opportunity of clinching the deal. Thus, this showed how important physical appearance was to her. It affected the way her client thinks of her – having doubts of her credibility.

It is through physical appearance that we draw a conclusion about a particular person without any form of verbal communication used. I must say it plays an important part in the first impression that one gives. It is like meeting new friends on the first day in school. You will first observe, before taking the decision whether or not to approach them. Hmm. Unless you are under forced circumstances.

Yet, looks can be deceiving at times too. One may not necessary be the kind of person that you see him/her as, based on their physical appearance. I guess it acts as a camouflage for us humans at times, for our true inner self are not really shown. Similar to the theory of wearing a mask on your face.

So. Physical appearance is either a true reflect of us or a diguise for us. I think both works for us in different situations.

What is your take?

interactive or transactional

2009-01-23T20:58:00.013+08:00

Communication is the process whereby information is transmitted by the sender to the receiver via a medium. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication)

In our text, we learnt about the three models of communication: linear, interactive and transactional.

Here is an example (somehow) to illustrate the two models.

Bollywood's Bachchan apologises to 'Slumdog' director
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20090123/ten-entertainment-india-bollywood-britai-1dc2b55.html

Bachchan's blog is an example of the interactive model. His personal comments were misinterpret by the Indian media. However, things worked out when the transactional model is involved. Bachchan took the initiative to explain the twisted facts to Boyle through a call. This is sincerity. Though a phone call is not a good example of the transactional model, I think otherwise for this case. Because the message was brought across to Boyle, and he did acknowledged. It probably solved the misinterpretation and shows effective communication.

I would like to dicuss two of the communication models.

Interactive versus Transactional. Which one do you favour?

Facebook and Live Messenger are examples of the interactive model. Whereas face-to-face communication is an ideal one example for the transactional model.

I personally prefer the transactional model. To me, it is more of reality and sincerity. Being able to see the reaction of the person you are communicating with (receiver) makes more sense. Other than the verbal communication, you are also able to observe the non-verbal communication (eg: eye contact and body language) of the receiver. It actually makes the whole conversation entertaining and interesting.

The non-verbal communication plays an important role here. For example, the eye contact will help you to understand if the receiver is genuine in having the conversation with you. If he/she keeps looking away while talking to you, it probably shows that he/she is definitely not interested to continue. In this case, you will get the message clear, and just let him/her off.

Communication through Facebook or Live Messenger (interactive model) is very different. Everything is in the virtual world. Even if the receiver is very expressive, it is inevitable to misinterpret true meanings of the messages at times. For example, when the receiver says "ya" in a Live Messenger chat. Does he/she mean "ya!" in an excited tone, or "ya." in a bored tone? Does he/she have the intention of continuing the conversation?

However, face-to-face communication can be scary too. Imagine yourself in the situation of meeting a stranger, or even trying to talk to your crush. In this case, you would might want to consider the interactive model. I would not deny the adavantages that the interactive model had brought to us. Like being able to connect with your lost-long friends again in Facebook, and know more of others through Live Messenger chats. But, it seems fake to me sometimes. I guess I am more of a down-to-earth kind. Yet to contradict, I do enjoy using Facebook and Live Messenger. ohhumans! :))

So. Interactive or transactional for you?