Effective Communicators

Content

1. Introduction

2. Four Factors influencing the quality of Communication
2.1 Better Self-Knowledge leads to more effective Communication.
2.2 Better Knowledge about Interlocutors leads to more effective Communication.
2.3 Adapted Motivation Management leads to more effective Communication
2.4 Understanding of Cultures leads to more effective Communication.

3. Conclusion

4. Annexe
Annexe 1: Johari Window
Annexe 2: Benziger Theory

5. References

1. Introduction

Why are the companies seeking ‘effective communication’? According to the BT Forum Report Communication (cited in Cameron, 2000)^[1] “good communicators lead happier lives […] ; making the effort to communicate is the key to happy relationships with people […] ; the best way to resolve a disagreement between two people is to get them talking […] and many arguments would be resolved if people communicated better.”

Despite these clear positive effects in an organisation, the definition of the concept of communication appears to be less obvious. According to Cameron (2000)^[2] this concept is “’Verbal’, ‘vocal’ and ‘visual’. ‘Verbal’ means the actual words; ‘vocal’ means is linguists’ terms, prosodic and paralinguistic features; and ‘visual’ means gaze, postured and other aspects of body language.” A priori, an effective communication may appear to be only depending on the good will of each member of the organisation to communicate with others.

However, this analysis will examine four major factors influencing the quality of communication. The first variable is the personality and perception of individuals, which is closely linked with the knowledge and judgment that people have about their congeners. The second variable is the particular skills of individuals that allow them to reduce communication’s barriers and noises in order to improve the quality of the communication. Finally the two last variables are the level of motivation that an individual needs in order to transmit a message to the audience, and the impact of the respective cultural background of the interlocutors.

2. Four Factors influencing the quality of Communication

2.1 Better Self-Knowledge leads to more effective Communication.

Ludlow and Panton (1992)^[3] argue that “People are different and we need to understand the nature of those differences and try to modify our interpersonal behaviour to cope with them. […] Two of the basic differences between people are personality and perception. These differences cause people to behave differently towards others in different situations, and cause communication problems.” In addition, Ludlow and Panton (1992)^[4] claim that the personality of individuals, which does not change significantly when the individual has reached a level of psychological maturity, is shaped as a result of the inherited genes, experience and physical environments. This issue implies that the personality is not a variable, which may be easily adapted and controlled by the individual in different situations.

In fact personality is strongly influenced by the individual perception. According to Ludlow and Panton (1992)^[5], the reason is that perception is a process, by which the person selects, organise and interpret sensory stimuli and information in consistent terms with the framework and reference of their personality. Therefore by interacting with people the exchanged information may have a lack of details, which implies that the individual draws a wrong profile of the interlocutor’s personality. In this case, the individual interprets the elements, which have been received and despite the little information, will predict the behaviour of the interlocutor. As a result, the person will anticipate the behaviour of the interlocutor by adapting his behaviour and his way of communicating. The problem appears that the fragment of information gathered at the beginning may lead to misunderstanding when the interlocutor behaves in an unexpected way. In this situation, the knock on effect is the confusion in the mind of the receptor of the message, due to interpersonal communication problems which are linked with the knowledge that people have about others and themselves.

The Johari Window theory (cf. Annexe 1) contributes to improve the effectiveness of the communication between people. Ludlow and Panton (1992)^[6] argue that this concept is useful, because it reduces the perceptual bias in interpersonal perception, by increasing the objectivity and knowledge of themselves about others and themselves. Boje (2003) adds that in order ‘to shrink the Blind’, the individual should ask the feedback from other colleagues. In fact, Hayes (2002)^[7] claims that this technique helps to limit incorrect perceptions, because it improves the self-knowledge and helps to develop alternative perspective on problems. The result is that learning more from others at work, reduces the proportion of unknown about the individual and leads to effective communication in organisations.

Similarly to reduce the Hidden Part, the best way is for example that each member of the group speaks openly to the other members, exchanges his conception of group working and explains his personal objectives to make succeed the group project.

An illustration of this model is when students have the first meeting with a group; members tend to not reveal much about them – at this stage open area is small. By working together the size of the open area of members increases. The result is the effect of two actions: Firstly self-disclosure, which consists in giving more information about their own personalities. Secondly the ‘reception’ of feedback from other members reduces the Blind area by providing information about the person itself. This process leads a group to communicate more effectively, allowing each member to anticipate and understand the behaviour of others.

[...]

^[1] Cameron, D. (2000) Good to Talk? London, SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 149

^[2] Cameron, D. (2000) Good to Talk? London, SAGE Publications Ltd, pp. 40

^[3] Ludlow, R. and Panton, F. (1992) The essence of effective communication. Hemel Hempsted, Prentice Hall International, pp. 5

^[4] Ludlow, R. and Panton, F. (1992) The essence of effective communication. Hemel Hempsted, Prentice Hall International,pp. 6

^[5] Ludlow, R. and Panton, F. (1992) The essence of effective communication. Hemel Hempsted, Prentice Hall International, pp. 6

^[6] Ludlow, R. and Panton, F. (1992) The essence of effective communication. Hemel Hempsted, Prentice Hall International, pp. 7

^[7] Hayes, J. (2002) Interpersonal Skills at Work. New York, Routeledge, pp.185