Personal Understanding and Interpersonal Communication - Essay Example

Personal Understanding and Interpersonal Communication In a dynamic, changing environment, communication becomes critical for organizations. Among a number of communication skills that are important for employees in order to succeed in this environment are listening, assertiveness and the knowledge of non-verbal signs as the way of communicating with each other. We tend to regard listening as a passive, automatic process that just happens rather than as a skill that is essential for good communication. Yet in reality effective listening is a skill that needs to be developed as a prerequisite for successful practice of the more 'active' skills of speaking and writing. Meanwhile, non-verbal communication (NVC) is something that we do not pay attention to during communication as well as to listeing as it performs functions of face-to-face interaction that do not rely primarily on the content of what we say. Here we are concerned with how we make ourselves known through, for example, a look, gesture, postural shift or trembling voice. At the very outset, however, it should be stressed that distinguishing between verbal and nonverbal communication is not as conceptually straightforward as it might at first seem. As for assertiveness, this quality is nowadays required from professionals and it is a skill that is of importance when dealing with family, friends, peers, superiors and subordinates. It is pertinent to interactions between different groups of professionals, especially where differences of power and status exist, and it is of relevance to interactions between professionals and clients. Let us take a close look at all of the above listed communication techniques that promote the understanding on the workplace. Non-verbal communication In a piece of early but still influential work, Laver and Hutcheson (1972) distinguished between verbal and nonverbal, and vocal and nonvocal communication. Vocal behaviour refers to all aspects of speech including language content and accompanying expressions such as tone of voice, rate of speech and accent, etc. Nonvocal behaviour, in contrast, refers to all other bodily activities that have a communicative function such as facial expressions, gestures and movements. These are sometimes referred to as body language. Verbal behaviour, on the other hand, is taken to mean the actual words and language used while nonverbal behaviour refers to all vocal and nonvocal behaviour that is not verbal in the sense defined above. This system seems therefore to insert a sharp and clearly recognisable dividing line between the verbal and the nonverbal, until it is realised that verbal communication has a nonvocal element. It encompasses types of gestural communication such as formal sign language that one may have expected to find listed as nonverbal. According to Richmond and McCroskey (2000) precise definitions that introduce hard and fast distinctions between verbal and nonverbal communication are illusory. Instead they suggested teasing the two forms apart by pointing up broad differences. As such, by comparison, verbal messages: - rely much more heavily on symbols (i.e. words) as part of an arbitrary code; - tend to be discretely packaged in separate words rather than represented in continuous behaviour, as in gaze; - carry more meaning explicitly rather than implicitly; - typically address cognitive/propositional rather than emotional/relational matters. Remland (2000) further noted that verbal interchanges must take place sequentially (i.e. participants must take turns) but interactors can communicate simultaneously using a nonverbal code. We tend to be less aware of the nonverbal accompaniment to much of what we say, than we are of the actual words spoken. While we often carefully monitor what is said to achieve the desired effect, how we are saying it may escape censor such that the reality of the situation is 'leaked' despite our best efforts. In other words, NVC can be thought of as a more 'truthful' form of communication through the insights that it affords into what may lie behind the verbal message. This is the 'window on the soul' assumption. It is only true to a point. Even in the case of facial expressions, it would be wrong to assume a simple, direct and unerring cause-effect relationship with underlying emotional states. Certain facial displays are regulated in keeping with the social context, making them more or less likely to be exhibited perhaps in exaggerated form (Chovil, 1997). Social intentions and motives can be at the root of such expressions rather than blind emotional states (Izard, 1997). Skilled interactors can learn to control what their bodies say as well as the messages sent in words. The work of 'spin doctors' with politicians and other influential people in the public eye does not stop merely at verbal manicure. Appropriate facial expressions, looks, gestures, and tones of voice are all included in the packaged end-product. Part of the 'repackaging' of Mrs Thatcher, as she became one of the most formidable politicians of her generation, included the use of a somewhat lower vocal register. Formerly, her rather high-pitched voice was thought to create an unfavourable impression of feminine hysteria rather than the assured gravitas of an esteemed, international statesperson. A significant age effect was also reported by McNeil et al. (2000), but the complexity of the verbal message played a part as well. They discovered that accompanying gestures that complemented instructions aided comprehension for pre-school children but not those in kindergarten. Likewise gestures at odds with the verbal information were detrimental for kindergarten but not pre-school children. This effect disappeared, though, when the verbal message was simplified. Nonverbal cues can also complement language in other ways involving propositional and emotional messages. Sympathising with someone is done much more convincingly when the sympathiser's overall demeanour mirrors what is said. Listening One of the communication skills often overlooked is that of listening. The importance of listening is now widely recognised across many contexts. For example, in the business sphere, Stewart and Cash (2000:39) reported how: Surveys of hundreds of corporations in the United States have revealed that poor listening skills are a major barrier in nearly all positions from accountants to supervisors; good listening skills are considered critical to entry-level positions, effective performance, high productivity, managerial competency, and promotion within most organizations. In their review of this field, Wolvin and Coakley (1996) found that some 70 per cent of the top US companies, including corporations such as Ford, Delta Airlines, IBM, Bank of America and Pacific Telephone, regularly provide listening training for their employees. These findings were confirmed by Goby and Lewis (2000) in a study of the insurance industry, where staff at all levels, as well as customers (policyholders), regarded listening as the primary communication skill. Likewise, in a study of 1,000 salespeople, Rosenbaum (2001) found that the ability to listen in depth to client needs was a defining characteristic of success. For professionals in most fields this is therefore a core skill. Knowledge of, and expertise in, listening techniques are central to success in interactions with clients and other professionals. For example, in their empirical investigation of this area, Hargie et al. (2000) identified listening as a key skill in community pharmacy practice. Indeed, for those whose job involves a helping or facilitative dimension, it has been argued that the capacity to be a good listener is the most fundamental of all skills (Nelson-Jones, 1997). In terms of personal well-being, 'Not only is listening a valuable skill, it is also conducive to good health. Studies have shown that when we talk our blood pressure goes up; when we listen it goes down' (Borisoff and Purdy, 1991: 5). However, this may also depend on the amount of effort we devote to listening. Brilhart and Galanes (1998) reviewed research that showed how those who are actively trying to listen to, remember, and understand, what another person is saying show signs of concerted physical activity including accelerated heartbeat, whereas those not listening at all to the speaker have heart rates that often drop to the level of sleep. Listening is a central skill at the earliest stage of personal development. The infant begins to respond to a new world by hearing and listening. Wilding et al. (2000) illustrated how neonates are able to discriminate between their father's voice and that of a male stranger, and infants prefer to look at their mother's face rather than a stranger's. They showed how babies rapidly develop the ability to combine visual and auditory stimuli, so at age 6-12 weeks they become distressed when shown a video of their mother in which the speech and visual content are discrepant. In fact, listening is at the heart of communicative development, since the child has to learn to listen before learning to speak, learns to speak before learning to read, and learns to read before learning to write. In this sense, listening is a fundamental skill and the foundation for other communication skills. For this reason, we term listening a prerequisite skill on which all other interactive skills are predicated. To ask the right questions, be assertive, give appropriate rewards, employ apposite self-disclosure, negotiate effectively, open and close interactions, and so on, you must engage in concerted listening. As aptly expressed by Robbins and Hunsaker (2001:35), 'if you aren't an effective listener, you're going to have consistent trouble developing all the other interpersonal skills'. Indeed, many of the problems encountered during social interchange are caused by ineffective listening. Not surprisingly, research studies have shown a range of benefits that accrue from effective listening in both personal and commercial contexts. Assertiveness Assertiveness is an area of study with a long history. It dates back to the pioneering work in the field of behaviour therapy by Salter (1949), who recognised that certain individuals in society had specific problems in standing up for their rights. As a result, the skill of assertiveness was introduced during therapy in an attempt to help such people function more effectively in their everyday lives. Since then, the skill has attracted enormous interest, reflecting the importance of this aspect of social interaction across many areas. A huge volume of research has been conducted, and assertion training (AT) programmes are now widespread and at many levels. Professionals must possess the ability to be assertive, and so AT programmes proliferate in this area (McCartan, 2001). This is because a key feature of assertiveness is that it is an aspect of interpersonal communication that can be developed and improved. As Rakos (1997:290) pointed out, 'assertion is a learned skill, not a "trait" that a person "has" or "lacks"'. It is a skill that is of importance when dealing with family, friends, peers, superiors and subordinates. It is pertinent to interactions between different groups of professionals, especially where differences of power and status exist, and it is of relevance to interactions between professionals and clients. Early definitions of assertiveness were fairly all-embracing in terms of interactional skills. Lazarus (1971), for example, regarded assertiveness as comprising four main components, namely the ability to: refuse requests, ask for favours and make requests, express positive and negative feelings, initiate, continue and terminate general conversations It is obvious that this conceptualisation of assertiveness is very broad, encompassing almost all forms of human interaction. Indeed, in the US, as Kelly (2001:172) pointed out: 'the terms "assertion training" and "social skills training" were often used in interchangeable fashion; it was not recognized that assertiveness represents one specific kind of interpersonal competency'. It would seem that training in this field was introduced and found to be beneficial before the concept of assertiveness was defined with any precision. Dissatisfaction with this state of affairs led to a more focused study of assertion, based specifically on the theme of standing up for one's rights in a sensitive, competent, manner. This latter interpretation is the one given by most dictionaries, and a perspective usually held by lay people, and it is the view adopted in this chapter. While differing definitions of assertion proliferate within the literature, useful definitions of assertive behaviour can be found in two of the influential texts in this area. Thus Lange and Jakubowski (1976:38) stated that 'assertion involves standing up for personal rights and expressing thoughts, feelings and beliefs in direct, honest, and appropriate ways which respect the rights of other people'. In like vein, Alberti and Emmons (2001:6) stated that 'Assertive behavior promotes equality in human relationships, enabling us to act in our own best interests, to stand up for ourselves without undue anxiety, to express honest feelings comfortably, to exercise personal rights without denying the rights of others.' Both of these definitions emphasised an important component of assertion, namely respect for the rights of other people. The skilled individual must therefore achieve a balance between defending personal rights while not infringing the rights of others. Assertiveness can be conceptualised as comprising two broad response classes-one negative and the other positive. However, most research and training efforts have been devoted to the negative, or conflict, components, since this is the aspect of assertion many people find particularly difficult. The skill of assertion serves several main purposes. Most of these relate to the ability of the individual to respond effectively in an assertive manner. However, linked to the behavioural repertoire are functions to do with protection of personal rights and respect for the rights of others, as well as the development of feelings of confidence and self-efficacy in being able to respond in a self-protecting fashion. The type of assertiveness used can determine the extent to which each of these functions is fulfilled, and so knowledge of types of assertiveness is of vital importance during social encounters. Furthermore, personal and contextual factors also play a crucial role in determining the effectiveness of assertive responses. Bibliography: 1. 2. 3. Chovil, N. (1997) 'Facing others: a social communicative perspective on facial displays', in J. Russell and J. Fernandez-Dols (eds.) The psychology of facial expression, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4. Izard, C. (1997) 'Emotions and facial expressions: a perspective from Differential Emotions Theory', in J. Russell and J. Fernandez-Dols (eds) The psychology of facial expression, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 5. Laver, J. and Hutcheson, S. (eds) (1972) Communication in face-to-face interaction, Harmondsworth: Penguin. 6. McNeil, N., Alibali, M. and Evans, J. (2000) 'The role of gesture in children's comprehension of spoken language: now they need it, now they don't', Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour24:131-50. 7. Stewart, C. and Cash, W. (2000) Interviewing: principles and practice (9th edn), Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill 8. Stewart, L. (2001) 'The importance of addressing issues of applied ethics for communication scholars and consultants', American Communication Journal 5(1): http://www.acjournal.org/holdings/index.htm. 9. 10. Stivers, T. (2001) 'Negotiating who presents the problem: next speaker selection in pediatric encounters', Journal of Communication 51:252-82. 11. Wolvin, A. and Coakley, C. (1996) Listening (5th edn), Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. 12. Goby, V. and Lewis, J. (2000) 'The key role of listening in business: a study of the Singapore insurance industry', Business Communication Quarterly 63: 41-51. 13. Rosenbaum, B. (2001) 'Seven emerging sales competencies', Business Horizons 44:33-6. 14. 15. Hargie, O. and Marshall, P. (1986) 'Interpersonal communication: a theoretical framework', in O. Hargie (ed.), A handbook of communication skills, London: Croom Helm. 16. 17. 18. 19. Hargie, O., Dickson, D. and Tourish, D. (1999) Communication in management, Aldershot: Gower. 20. 21. 22. 23. Hargie, O., Morrow, N. and Woodman, C. (2000) 'Pharmacists' evaluation of key communication skills in practice' Patient Education and Counseling 39:61-70. 24. 25. 26. 27. Nelson-Jones, R. (1996) Effective thinking skills, London: Cassell. 28. 29. 30. 31. Nelson-Jones, R. (1997) Practical counselling and helping skills (4th edn), London: Cassell. 32. Borisoff, D. and Merrill, L. (1991) 'Gender issues and listening', in D. Borisoff and M. Purdy (eds) Listening in everyday life, Maryland: University of America Press. 33. Brilhart, J. and Galanes, G. (1998) Group discussion (9th edn), Boston: McGraw-Hill. 34. Wilding, J., Cook, S. and Davis, J. (2000) 'Sound familiar', The Psychologist 13:558-62. 35. Robbins, S. (2001) Organizational behavior (9th edn), New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 36. Salter, A. (1949) Conditioned reflex therapy, New York: Capricorn Books. 37. McCartan, P. (2001) 'The identification and analysis of assertive behaviours in nurses', unpublished PhD thesis, University of Ulster, Jordanstown. 38. Rakos, R. (1997) 'Asserting and confronting', in O. Hargie (ed.) The handbook of communication skills, London: Routledge. 39. Lazarus, A. (1971) Behavior therapy and beyond, New York: McGraw-Hill. 40. Kelly, J. (2001) 'Mood and emotion in groups', in M. Hogg and S. Tindale (eds) Blackwell handbook of social psychology: group processes, Malden, MA: Blackwell. 41. Lange, A. and Jakubowski, P. (1976) Responsible assertive behavior, Champaign, IL: Research Press. 42. Alberti, R. and Emmons, M. (2001) Your perfect right: assertiveness and equality in your life and relationships (8th edn), Atascadero, CA: Impact. 43. Remland, M. (2000) Nonverbal communication in everyday life, Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 44. Richmond, V. and McCroskey, J. (2000) Nonverbal behaviour in interpersonal relations (4th edn), Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Read More