Non-Language and a Language Process - Personal Statement Example

Interpersonal Communication More a Non-Language Than a Language Process First-Hand Experience Chen has strong nationalistic fervor and wanted to complete his studies in his native China, but the family business that he would inherit and run by himself someday is going global. English is the language of business globalization and he knew that he needed to be adept at this language to be able to handle his future job well. So he was forced to take his MBA in UK, determined to keep his native culture and tradition unspoiled by foreign influences while trying to master the English language and the principles of international business management. This made Chen a sort of pariah at school, often subjected to ridicule as he did such things as taking off his shoes when entering a room or squatting on the floor even when there are chairs around. No one has exactly told Chen to his face that he was odd, but the snickering behind his back did not escape unnoticed and this made him very insecure and hostile of his surroundings. Chen and I are classmates at one of the courses he is taking and my heart goes out to him every time I see him between classes, alone and looking miserable in a corner but showing no inclination to give himself a social life on campus. Eventually, I decided to talk some sense into him, intending to persuade him that his education in globalization will not be complete if he continued keeping his distance from other people. In the process, I expected a gain a new friend. I saw the opportunity to open the conversation with Chen when I caught his eye one day as he looked up from the book he was reading on a bench at the school playground. This is more or less how I started the conversation: “All of the school notice that you keep to yourself all the time. We wish to make friends with you to make your stay in this school worthwhile; don’t you want us to be your friends, too? From the school records, I understand that you’re studying here because of a long-term goal to make good in international business. That kind of business pursuit requires that you be good at dealing with all kinds of people, you know.” After some hesitation, Chen bowed and responded: “All of you seem to be nice people, but I didn’t come here to socialize, sorry. And we Chinese deal with people our own way.” He ended the conversation then and there, indicating that I failed to communicate my intended message to him. The way the conversation turned out, I made a new enemy instead of gaining a friend. In retrospect, I realize that my choice of language and approach was at fault since I sounded like reproaching him for being aloof and ignorant of the human aspects of global business. I should have first massaged his ego, which had been evidently hurt by others who have jeered at his native habits and mannerisms behind his back. In short, I should have first earned his trust and confidence before making any attempt at an interpersonal communication. In short, I failed to show empathy, which the literature on communication processes says is vital in interpersonal communication. Characteristics of Communication There are many theoretical definitions of communication but the simplest way of grasping its full meaning is by examining how it is played out in everyday human interaction. Communication takes place when there are two related information-producing processes, and the output from one process becomes the functional inverse of the output of the other process (Losee, 1999). In short, it is an exchange of information, which Losee (1999) terms “complementary informative process.” Not all information being transmitted from one person to another represents communication, however. Thus, a book does not communicate with its reader since there is no inverse process involved. Motley (1990) ascribes four specific attributes to communication: 1) it involves information transfer, 2) the processing takes place in communication systems, 3) both sender and receiver of the information are actively involved in a communication system, and 4) the quality of this communication varies, its outcome often unpredictable. The third characteristic explains why reading a book is not exactly a communication process, there being no active involvement of both sender and receiver in the information transfer. As for the fourth characteristic regarding the quality of communication, it varies because the communication techniques used may be perfect or imperfect. For human communication to be high in quality or effective, it must take into account not only the choice of language but also the movement of vocal cords, the reception of sound and its translation into neural signals, syntactic and phonological processing (Hauser, 1996). Even facial expressions and gestures influence the quality and outcome of communication (How-to Books). As for the communication message, the literature gives it three components: Content – the essence of what one person desires to communicate to another. Context – the way the communicator presents the content of his message to his audience. Treatment – how communication is arranged and conducted by the speaker, which supports the content and content of the message. Non-Verbal Communication The literature postulates that as much as 76 percent of the message we give to another person during conversations is conveyed by non-verbal or para-verbal communication (Van Acker, 1997). Van Acker believes that the tone, volume, rhythm or cadence of voice is critical, even the blending and pacing of the conversation. In fact, 90 percent of the meaning people derive from communication comes from non-verbal cues that the other person gives (Foundation Coalition). Because of these non-language cues, like body gestures and vocal intonations, the message that a person intends to convey often acquires another meaning when it is communicated. What happens is that when the signal is mixed, the receiver is forced to choose between verbal and non-verbal aspects of the message. In most cases, the receiver chooses the non-verbal aspects and this creates tension and distrust because the receiver senses that the communicator is hiding something or being less than candid (Ibid). All in all, the non-verbal cues in communication are used for purposes of repetition, contradiction, substitution, complementing and accenting. They can be visual (facial expressions and gestures), tactile (touching to emphasize meaning), vocal (voice tones that imply doubt, anger, etc.) and may involve the use of time, space and image. Use of time in communication has to do with one’s perception of his own power and status in relation to others, such that in a scheduled meeting with his employer, he needs to be there on time. On the subject of space, people tend to become uncomfortable when their communicators stand so close to them they seem to violate their own space. Psychologists assign three private spaces for people: the 2-4 feet “intimate zone” reserved for family and friends, the 4-12 feet “social zone” for business transactions, and the 12-feet “public zone” for lectures and such. As for the use of images, people use clothing and personal appearance, among other images, to communicate their values and expectations to others. Non-verbal cues are an integral part of communication, such that the non-verbal part actually means more than the verbal part of the message (Kline, 1999). These cues include the ability to listen not only to what the other person is saying but also to what he is not saying (Van Acker, 1997). In other words, use of silence is one way of making communication effective. A teacher communicating with a wayward student, for example, will find it more useful if he does not fill every moment of the conversation with words. This allows the student to reflect on his transgressions, and his discomfort with silence enables the teacher to put the situation in its proper perspective. It would also help open a meaningful dialogue if the teacher shares a relevant story from his own past, putting himself in the same situation (Ibid). Theories and Models Language expectancy theory is the use of strategies to improve compliance or make a communication message achieve its purpose. These strategies are designed to elicit an attitude or behavioral change in the other person. If the message of communication involves safety and prevention, for example, use of high-intensity language may be a good strategy (Burgoon & Burgoon, 2001). Other theories in communication include agenda setting, priming and framing. Agenda setting refers to the importance of the issue or subject being taken up, such that the person who initiates the communication process decides what topic the other persons should focus their thoughts on and draws attention to that topic (Scheufele, 2001). As for priming, this tells us whether something is good or bad and whether that something has been communicated effectively or not. Media, for example, primes the audience about what a news program looks like, what the characteristics of a credible person are, etc. Priming derives from the cognitive psychological concept that refers to the enhancing effects of media by offering the audience a prior context to serve as basis for subsequent communication (Fairhurt & Sarr, 1996). Framing, for its part, is a quality of communication that leads others to accept one meaning over another. The concept of framing is closely related to agenda setting, the only difference being that framing expands the coverage of communication from just the particular topic to the larger issues that it implicate. This is based on the theory that media focuses attention on certain events then places them within a larger picture (Scheufele, 2001). Among the much-used frames in media which immediately evoke widely shared meanings and images include the war on illicit drugs, terrorism, and one’s battle with cancer. In the context of an organization, framing is an innate skill with profound effects on how organizational members understand and respond to the world in which they live. This skill is not often taught (Fairhurst & Sarr, 1996). Fairhurst & Sarr (1996) and Deetz, et al. (2000) attribute three elements to framing: language, thought and forethought. Language serves as reminder of information and acts that influence one’s way of viewing things. When language is used, people’s thought is reflected in their interpretive framework as well that of others. Forethought then comes in for us to predict the framing opportunities. In other words, one must plan to be spontaneous. Among the popular framing techniques is the use of metaphor, stories, traditions, slogans, artifacts, contrast and spin. The use of metaphor, for example, which compares an idea or subject to something else, gives that idea a new meaning while in telling stories, the subject is framed by splicing it with anecdotes. Techniques of Transmission People have been communicating with each other since infancy, but the process of transmitting information from one individual to another is a very complex process such that miscommunication is an everyday occurrence. Social psychologists agree that 40 to 60 percent of the meaning in every message gets lost in transmission from sender to receiver. (Foundation Coalition) What happens is that in most situations, the actual message loses its way in transmission or the receiver heard a message different from the one intended. This is commonplace not only among people with cross-cultural backgrounds but also among people of the same culture. To get communication right, the literature suggests practical techniques of transmission that start with focusing the discussion on the information needed. Once that breakthrough is made, the communicator can then expand the discussion by asking open-ended questions or prompting the receiver for specifics by posing close-ended questions. For example, a member of your work team who had done well before now turns in delayed and ill-prepared reports. The communicator, instead of telling the subject right away that he has turned into a liability to the team, may complement him first for the excellent job he has done before and then ask why the change. Another tack is to ask the subject if he has any problem at home or at work that distracts his attention. Throughout the entire process, it is suggested that the communicator encourage dialogue through eye contact and body expressions, state his understanding of what the other is saying, and summarize the key points as the conversation goes along (Ibid). In school and business settings, empathy is vital in communication. Lack of this element is said to be holding down the success of most organizations, where people spend 75 percent of their time in interpersonal, intra-group, inter-group, organizational and external communication. What needs to be done in these situations is to initiate communication by getting into the wavelength of your business contact first. That done, his response will be positive and he will be at ease in communicating with you. On your part, this requires a good listening skill, which will enable you to pick up areas of common ground between you quickly. The sad thing is, good listeners are hard to come by since most people are far more interested in what they have to say, or what other people next to them at the business reception are saying. Poor listening ability damages the exchange (How-to Books). Bad listeners are identified by their penchant for making clever counter-arguments before the speaker is done with his piece. They like to interrupt the speaker unnecessarily and react emotionally to everything that has been said. Even when they keep to themselves, they show their poor listening ability by fidgeting in their seat or showing disinterest when the subject dull, such as yawning or tapping their feet on the floor. As for the good listeners, the literature sets their characteristics as follow: they listen attentively and keep a comfortable level of eye contact with the speaker assuming an open and relaxed but attentive pose; they face the speaker and respond to what he says with appropriate facial expressions, such as a nod or a smile; they show self-discipline and reserve saying their piece until after the speaker is done with his; they reflect and summarize, such that when it’s time to have their say they repeat a key word or phrase from the speaker to show that all the while they have listened and understood (Losee, 1999). The reason everyday communication is seldom perfect is the presence of “noise” that the literature says interferes with the communication process. This noise may come in the form of language or people’s different perceptions of words. There are just no two people who would attribute exactly the same shade and meaning to the same words (Foundation Coalition). Someone who has been in the temperate countries, for example, accomplishes nothing if he communicates his thrill and excitement at skiing and romping on the snow to another person who has stayed all his life in the tropics (Losee, 1999). The other forms of noise are: unreliable and inconsistent message, receiver distortion, power struggles, self-fulfilling assumptions, cultural differences, and interpersonal relations. Experience and Theory On my first-hand experience with Chen, I did not communicate my intended message to him because I failed to observe the non-verbal cues, which, according to the literature, actually play a more important role in the process than the language cues. The situation also involved many “noises” that interfered with the communication process, particularly cultural differences, receiver distortion, self-fulfilling assumptions and perception of power. There is the cultural gap between us, which makes the non-verbal cues different. In some countries, for example, an American gesture for A-OK would be viewed as obscene. Because of the previous taunting received by Chen for his unique habits, this could have eroded his self-esteem and turned him hostile towards all the people in school. Of course, Chen’s perception of power may have been influenced by the fact that he comes from a developing country while he is forced to interact with people in a highly developed nation, which exudes power. For these reasons, I should have presented my message to Chen in a friendlier context that would put him at ease and rectify his wrong concept of power. Allowed to do it all over again, I would have used friendly gestures and facial expressions, touched him appropriately to emphasize this friendly intention, and avoided a tone of voice that sounded like a reprimand. As I recall, I could have come too close to Chen to seem like I intruded into his “intimate zone” when I, a stranger, picked up a conversation with him. The best approach would have been to stay within his “social zone” while I made my pitch. Given another chance, I will also consider my personal appearance and choice of clothing in accordance with the theory on the use of image to encourage a two-way conversation (Foundation Coalition). This theory suggests that power clothing or grooming may intimidate someone who has a low perception of his own power and worth. The best strategy to use in communicating with someone like Chen would have been to dress modestly like him the way most Chinese do. Another suggested technique in the literature that I neglected to use was that of opening a meaningful dialogue by sharing a relevant story from my own experience that puts myself in the same situation (Van Acker, 1997). For example, I may have taken a part-time student job for the first time in my life and on my first few days at work I felt self-conscious and intimidated by experienced fellow workers who knew what they were doing and seemed aloof. Telling Chen at the outset the story on how I eventually gained my self-confidence and got along well with my co-workers would have gained his attention and reduced his hostility. That would happen because I would have shown him some empathy and understanding to make him receptive to a conversation about himself. Then once he opened up, I would focus the conversation on the information I need and ask close-ended questions to egg him to say more and open-ended questions to expand the discussion. As this conversation goes along, I need to be a good listener not only to what he is saying but also to what he is not saying. This means that he might be communicating something not through words but through body language and facial expressions. As noted in How-to Books, a good listener has the speaker’s full attention, assumes a relaxed but alert pose and responds to what the speaker says with a nod or smile. He never interrupts while the speaker is talking and shows afterwards that he understood what the speaker was saying. An inability on my part to listen and respond to these wordless messages would damage the exchange, the literature says. Bibliography: Burgoon, J. & Burgoon, M. 2001. “Expectancy Theories.” In W.P. Robinson & H. Giles (eds.) The New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, 2nd ed., Sussex, UK: Wiley. Deetz, S., Tracy, S. & Simpson, J. 2000. “Leading Organizations Through Transition.” London, Thousand Oaks: Sage. Foundation Coalition. “The Importance of Effective Communication.” Webpage design (online) at: http://www. foundationcoalition/org/publications/brochures/communication.pdf Hauser, M. 1996. “The Evolution of Communication.” MIT Press, Cambridge MA. How-to Books. “Improving Communication Skills.” Webpage design (online) at: http://www. howtobooks.co.uk/business/networking/communication-skills.asp Fairhurst, G. & Sarr, R. 1996. “The Art of Framing.” San Francisco: Josey Bass. Johnson, D., Johnson, R. & Holubec, E. 1966. “Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the Classroom.” Revised edition, Edina MN: Interaction Book Co. Kline, N. 1999. “Listening to Ignite the Human Mind.” London: Ward Lock. Losee, R. 1999. “Communication Defined as Complementary Informative Process.” School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Sept. 28, 1999, 1-15. Motley, M. 1969. “On Whether One can(not) Communicate: An Examination Via Traditional Communication Postulates.” Western Journal of Speech Communication 54, Winter 1990, 1020. Scheufele, D. 2001. “Agenda-Setting, Priming and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication.” Communication Abstract 24 (1). Semetko, H. & Valkenburg, P. 2000. “Framing European Politic: A Content Analysis of Press and Television News.” Journal of Communication 50, 93-109. Van Acker, V. 1997. “Skills Related to Effective Interpersonal Communication.” From Challenging Behaviors: Making Our Schools Safe Again, May 1, 1997; University of Illinois, Chicago. Read More