My Way of Communication (COM 321 Final)

     

           There is not a day that goes by where I do not communicate with a single person.  I wake up with my wife and am instantly communicating; my kids soon thereafter.  I go to work where, I serve as a Communications Systems Operator (CSO) for the United States Air Force.  My world revolves around creating and building cohesive interpersonal and group relationships and solid communication.  Through my daily interaction with family, friends, workmates, and college classes I develop and refine my capacity for articulate colloquy and cunning parley.

            The first and foremost form of communication that I experience on a daily basis is interpersonal.  The normal interactions I have in a given day are between one other person and me.  This type of interaction between two people is known as a dyadic communication.  Compared to other forms of communication, dyadic communication has several unique characteristics. It is direct, personal, immediate, spontaneous, and informal (Trenholm, 2011). 

            Conversing with a person is where I feel that I shine.  I am able to engage a person and keep a conversation interesting, topical, and oftentimes humorous.  This is something that I have been able to do since I was but a wee lad.  One of the major reasons for this is the family setting in which I grew up in.  I have three siblings, one brother and two sisters.  We were quite close and all had an innate sense of humor.  Humor makes communication enjoyable so therefore we were able to constantly be interacting with each other. 

            I sometimes use humor as a means to break the initial tension of meeting someone for the first time.  First time meetings can be a rigid and dry affair where basic information such as name and job are usually the only things shared.  I have found that if the other person is more comfortable and is enjoying the conversation then more interesting information can be exchanged.  This also helps people remember each other rather than a scenario where one is forgotten immediately following the conversation.

            This first time meeting is also critical in meeting that special someone and forming a lasting relationship.  In Mark Knapp’s relational development model:

The first of the relational development stages occurs during a couple’s initial encounter as communicators and is known as the initiating stage. In this stage, partners work to create a favorable initial impression; observe cues about personality, attitudes, and willingness to engage in further interactions; and look for ways to open communication channels (Trenholm, 2011).

            The key factor to this critical first stage is creating the favorable initial impression.  There is a saying that goes, “The first impression is the last impression.”  Taken literally this means that if you blow this initial first encounter, or first stage of the model, the step to stage two will not occur.  This model and its stages can be applied outside couples and into one’s social life.  Building an intimate relationship is not unlike building a personal or professional relationship with a friend or coworker, just leave the physical aspect at the door.

            When dialogue occurs between two individuals it is important not only to be a good speaker, but also a good listener.  Most people think listening and hearing are the same thing. But listening and hearing are quite different. Hearing is a physiological process that occurs when sound waves are translated into electrical impulses and then processed by the central nervous system. Listening, on the other hand, is a social cognitive process (Trenholm, 2011).  Just because you heard something does not mean you were listening – listening properly truly takes in the message and meaning of the words and allows for deeper and more thoughtful communication.

            When listening to whomever I am conversing with, I have a small set of rules that I consciously follow: 

1. Maintain steady, but not uncomfortable or domineering, eye contact.  This eye contact allows my conversation partner to see that I am indeed actively listening. 

2. Appear attentive and interested.  Nobody wants to talk to someone who looks bored or distracted.  It makes one feel like their words fell on deaf ears or aren’t important enough to be considered.  Acting disinterested is a very quick way to shut of the communicative spigot. 

3. Respond on topic.  I am not waiting for the other person to stop talking so I may speak.  This looks selfish and is not conducive to the flow of conversation.  By responding to what the other person is saying, such as asking a question about the topic or simply acknowledging what was said, makes that person feel like their words have meaning; and if they feel like that, they will want to listen to what you say more.

            By following these simple rules, I have found that people want to talk to me.  I have been told on numerous occasions that I am a good listener.  This is not to boast; I feel that I have been told this because I make a conscientious effort to treat my conversation partner’s words like they are important and give him/her my undivided attention.  Sometimes, however, I have left a conversation and later looked back on it wishing I had listened more.  A facial cue or some other subtle gesture from the conversation partner will materialize in my memory.  I will look back and think to myself that they were trying to tell me something more and it wasn’t attentive enough, and I may get mad at myself.

            It is difficult to read or interpret every different person’s body language.  One person may laugh when they’re nervous, while another may laugh for different reasons.  Some people rarely make eye contact and some others take eye contact as if it’s being used threateningly.  It is important to try to recognize another person’s nonverbal communicative habits and play off of them.  Sometimes what they’re saying with their words is completely different from what they are saying with their bodies. 

            Being adept at interpersonal communications is not only important socially, it can make a very large difference when amongst coworkers in the workplace.  Office communications are often governed by external rules – where inappropriate language can get a person fired.  This can make for an atmosphere of professionalism, but can hinder social bonding between employees.  When people are socially bonded, they are more comfortable and this can lead to a more free exchange of ideas.  This is not to say that rules are bad, it is just important to remember that what one might say amongst buddies in a bar might not fly in the office.

            Being in an office setting doesn’t mean one should avoid interpersonal communications, lest they offend someone.  Quite the contrary in fact, building and refining one’s interpersonal communication skills can lead to better job opportunities. “In their presentation at the Association for Business Communication’s Annual Convention in Montreal, Reinsch and Gardner (2011) reported the results of a national survey revealing that senior business executives maintain that employees with strong interpersonal skills are most likely to be considered for promotions (DeKay, 2012).”

            In many circumstances, communication in the workplace and in social settings takes place between more than just two people.  Whether a person is out with a group of friends or in a working group assigned to tackle workplace problems, there are many circumstances in which someone would need to group communicate. 

            For me personally, I would say that I am both good and bad at group communications.  The good flows mostly through group socializing.  I can keep conversations going and am able to bounce back from the inevitable conversational lull – that silence that inevitably happens no matter how large the group is.  I like to joke around a lot and joking around is one thing that happens very often in the military. 

“Work hard, play hard” is a motto that I have heard very frequently in my career.  This goes double for service members like me in flying career fields.  We are often “on the road,” meaning we are doing a temporary duty in another location.  These locations range from different states to different countries and our free time is spent hitting the town as a group.  More often than not, drinks are involved. 

Most of a military member’s friends are from work.  It is an inescapable fact of military life.  Picture moving to a completely new state or country and you know absolutely no one.  Every military member must go through this.  It’s this fact of military life that breeds a community of easy bonding.  Where a civilian might have trouble finding friends after a move, a military member is pretty much guaranteed a group of friends upon arrival. 

            This group socialization is where I have a sort of weakness.  Sometimes I forget to turn off the social me and enter into the business side.  I have been known to crack jokes when the wrong person is standing behind me (i.e. my commander).  I would not say that this makes me the one fulfilling a “negative role” within the group, but sometimes joking can derail a focused group communication session.  This role is known as the “joker or clown,” in which this person “uses humor and horseplay to divert (a) group from (the) task (Trenholm, 2011).”  This is not always a negative role however it can often break the concentration of group members.

            There are other group roles that I fulfill as well.  I fulfill task roles, which are “behaviors that help the group to accomplish its task (Trenholm, 2011).”  In these roles I am usually the Opinion Giver who “states beliefs or opinions pertinent to group problem or to decision suggestions (Trenholm, 2011).”  This role is important because it gets the flow of ideas started.  It also can break down poor ideas and reinforce strong ones.

            Another role I usually take on is one of the maintenance roles, which are “behaviors that enhance the social climate of the group (Trenholm, 2011).”  Most times I play the part of the Harmonizer, who “relieves tension and mediates disagreements (Trenholm, 2011).”  I am good at recognizing when a group has stagnated and needs to be refreshed.  Sometimes this could be as easy as suggesting a break or injecting some humor (as discussed before, there is a line that can be dreadfully easy to cross there).

            Playing certain roles is crucial for group communications to function correctly.  A group will not successfully communicate if all members do the same type of maintenance roles, so this means that diversity is a key factor.  If everyone is joking around, it is doubtful that the group could complete a project on time.  People play off of each other’s verbal cues and body language.  Some people take offense when they are ignored – not thinking that perhaps the other party was lost in thought or distracted.  Others are very territorial and try to dominate a room with their presence.

            When I am communicating with people, I am not very territorial.  I have a small space bubble, so it is difficult to make me uncomfortable.  I believe this is because I have dealt with many different cultures and some of them talk while standing very close.  It’s either get used to it, or don’t communicate.  Everyone’s personal space differs however.  A psychological study in 1982 found that the term bubble was actually quite suitable.  Subjects, both male and female, were separated in two groups and put in different rooms: one with a high ceiling and one with a low ceiling.  They found that the less head space there was, the more horizontal space was needed for them to feel comfortable.  There was no significant difference between males and females (Cochran & Urbanczyk, 1982).

            This means that when you’re outside, people will generally allow you to stand closer.  I believe that once inside, people forget the distinction and “invade” personal space.  I generally don’t use my tiny personal bubble to invade other people’s space.  I try to respect that people might not be comfortable when I’m standing 6 inches from their face.  The only people I talk to that close are my wife and kids.  Communicating with my family is something I try to do frequently and in an involved way.

            In my small family I have a wife and two boys, ages 2 and 4.  I share responsibility for the kids, housework, and earning income with my wife.  This means that I view her as my equal.  Our communication is based on our mutual feeling of equality.  Her opinion is just as valid as my own.  When we argue, she is quite apt in the lingual debate department – if not more so than I.  We have very similar views on raising children, which I think is absolutely crucial to keeping a marriage intact after having kids.  And kids are in a different ball park in terms of communication.

Our oldest, who is really 4 and a half, is becoming quite the manipulator.  He has already learned what is right and wrong, so when he does wrong he tries to lie.  He also shifts the blame to his little brother.  These acts remind me of being a kid; where your whole world revolves around curiosity and exploration.  It’s this exploration that often gets my children in hot water.  I feel I do them a fair and balanced form of fatherly justice when they are in trouble.  I try to talk to them on their level.  Not condescending, not mean or angry, just plain talk.  This has yielded some excellent results as it seems the kids would rather do right than get a nice long boring talk.

Communicating amongst my family is something that comes naturally.  Communicating throughout the various organizations I belong to has taken some practice.  In the Air Force, many things are done via email and other computer programs.  So much so that there is protocol and rules for sending emails.  I remember my first lesson in this.  I was a young Airman First Class (third lowest rank in the Air Force) and I just got my first government email address.  I sent off a work related email to a Master Sergeant (a guy with 15+ years in).  He came and spoke with me shortly thereafter on proper email etiquette.

His concern was that I did not preface the email with “Sir” or “Master Sergeant.”  He also pointed out that I sounded demanding – something that my rank did not permit me to do to a Master Sergeant.  And, finally, I did not end the email in a professional manner.  He told me all of this and it made me a better person.  There have been numerous periodicals written on what is called “Netiquette.”  There are some very simple rules to follow in professional emails:

1. If you can’t say it face to face or don’t want it to turn up in court, don’t say it.

2. Check spelling, proofread, and use discretion.

3. Use email to transmit factual information, not to criticize colleagues.

4. Don’t use email to communicate sensitive personal messages (Conlin, 2002).

            Now that I have been around a while, I know the protocol on email in interoffice communications.  This has served me well in both my professional and personal endeavors.  Using respectful verbiage and proper etiquette will pay off dividends for a person.  Using this and the myriad of other skills I have learned over the last decade might just help me to land my dream job, an Air Force public affairs officer.

            Coupling these personal skills and attributes to my work-content skills, I feel that I could make a formidable candidate.  I am skilled at Microsoft Office, numerous RADAR, radio, and data systems, and am good at research.  These skills were taught to me during my Air Force job training and I put them to good use in my current position.  It’s all about how marketable you make yourself.  I want my resume to pop.

            The pursuit of communications perfection can be a complex and arduous affair.  To truly master the art, one has to develop his or her interpersonal, group, and organizational communications skills.  While I have a well-developed interpersonal ability, I sometimes lack in a group setting.  Only time and maturity will move me past this shortcoming.  Organizational communication skills take time and effort to master.  It also may take a mistake or two before a person can really learn how it’s done.  With such a connected world, we are a species obsessed with verbal and written interaction.  It only makes sense that we strive to develop and hone those skills so we can better communicate with our fellow man and woman.

           

References

Trenholm, S. (2011). Thinking through communication. (6 ed.). Pearson Education.

DeKay, S. H. (2012). Interpersonal Communication in the Workplace: A Largely Unexplored Region. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 449-452. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu.

Cochran, C. D., & Urbanczyk, S. (1982). THE EFFECT OF AVAILABILITY OF VERTICAL SPACE ON PERSONAL SPACE. Journal Of Psychology, 111(1), 137.  Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu.

Conlin, M. (2002). Watch What You Put in that Office E-mail. Businessweek, (3801), 114-115.  Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu.