I have always been a strong advocate for face-2-face communication as being the most effective form of sharing information and getting your idea across. After reviewing the three formats (email, voicemail and face-2-face) of communication for the same information it only reinforced my views on communication.
With a face-2-face transfer you not only hear what is being requested but you get a visual of what is being asked. The individual that is asking has the opportunity to add body language and voice inflection to emphasize the importance of the request. Face-2-face communication allows for:
1. The intended audience to ask questions to clarify the content, meaning, and implication of the request
2. Enable project managers to verify that their audiences received and interpreted their message in the way intended
3. Enable project managers to pick up nonverbal signals that suggest an audience’s reaction to the message
4. Support interactive discussion and brainstorming about the message (Potny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2007, p. 358)
To reinforce what was asked face-2-face, I do believe a written follow up or even a short meeting, is important. It stresses the importance of your request and expectations.
With an email correspondence the tendency is to read the subject line and if it not a topic that needs to be addressed at that moment we tend to not read it and put it off for later. This particular email was pretty straight forward but it had not strength behind the message. It seemed as though the Jane was not emphasizing how important timing really was to her.
The same goes for voicemails. Jane failed to give Mark a specific deadline. In doing so she devalues the importance of Mark completing the report in a timely fashion. If you see who the voicemail is coming from and we are preoccupied we also tend to put the voicemail off for a later time. All too often forgetting to go back to the email or voicemail.
“Project managers are responsible for a variety of communication activities during the life of a project. Whatever form communications take, however, project managers should plan and prepare so their messages are received and correctly interpreted by project audiences.” (Potny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2007, p. 367)
Reference
Potny, S. E., Mantel, S. j., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2007). Project Management planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hi Lissbeth...these are some great tips for face to face communication. In my own posting, I make reference to how important body language is when communicating with others face to face. I personally am a very animated person and I tend to make facial expressions. I have to aware of this myself when I am speaking in a professional manner so I do not ever give others the wrong impression. The website I used is found at http://www.wikihow.com/Communicate-With-Body-Language
ReplyDeleteEric
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Liz,
ReplyDeleteLike you, I am a strong advocate of face to face communication. Personally, I feel there is no better way to receive an entire message, have the ability to clarify and ask questions than in face to face Hi communication. Dr. Stolovish mentions in his video that 93% of communication comes from a source other than what is spoken. Facial expression, tone of voice, etc. add additional details to what is being said. On the other hand, there are two reasons why I am not convinced that the face to face scenario was the most effective in this case. First, it was displayed as a one way conversation. The person explained her problem without providing the other person with the ability to provide feedback. A friendlier introduction and trying to ascertain the current status of the other person prior to jumping into the request, I feel would have put the person in a more cooperative position. The second reason is related to the fact that conversations need to be documented as explained in our textbook. Particularly in this case where the requester is at risk of not fulfilling her own obligation if the information is received late, she needs to have information recorded in writing. I felt that the most effective way of communication given the circumstances was the e-mail.
Jorge
Liz,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your assessment of face-to-face communication as being the most effective form of sharing ideas and delivering the information clearly and concise. With this example, I disagree with Jane being able to communicate the information to Dan with confidence by speaking with him face-to-face.
The nonverbal cues that I found are the unspoken arms over her chest, or braced on the divider, which signals lack of confidence or uncertainty in her abilities.
As you mentioned, face-to-face communication allows for
1. The intended audience to ask questions to clarify the content, meaning, and implication of the request
2. Enable project managers to verify that their audiences received and interpreted their message in the way intended
3. Enable project managers to pick up nonverbal signals that suggest an audience’s reaction to the message
4. Support interactive discussion and brainstorming about the message (Potny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2007).
In our example, we did not hear Dan’s response. I think if this communication had been delivered in a more neutral environment, with other team members present Jane might have been more comfortable addressing Dan and requesting the information. From your three bullet points, the face-to-face meeting most likely achieved numbers two, and three. This is based on not having information on Dan’s response to Jane, thus we are unable to analyze the remaining bullets and draw conclusions.
In regards to deadlines, this was not addressed in any of the messages, however, the voice mail provides documentation as to the time of call, and information conveyed to Dan. Our resources state, “project managers should plan and prepare so their messages are received and correctly interpreted by project audiences.” (Potny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2007).
Constance
Reference
Potny, S. E., Mantel, S. j., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2007).
Project Management planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hi Liz,
ReplyDeleteLike you, I have always preferred face-to-face dialogue to all other types of communication. Particularly if the message anticipates immediate action or is a complicated one to relay, speaking to the person facilitates understanding. Further, emails and voicemails are often easily overlooked and we often do not know if or when the person received the message.
But, in the exercise this week, I found the face-to-face example a bit wanting. There was no dialogue/conversation, it was a one sided soliloquy that did not work for me. Ironically, for this simple and direct request, my preferred method was the email. This surprised me!
In an on-line periodical I tend to read from time to time called “Fast Company”, Baratunder Thurston (2012) describes how we are becoming more comfortable with asynchronous types of communication, such as email and voicemail. He goes on to say, “In a textual relationship, both parties can feel as if they are in control. Both can avoid the messiness of live interaction” (2012). The messiness of interaction? After this week’s exercise, I understood what he meant.
Ultimately he concludes that it is most valuable to take the time to listen and pay attention to each other. The by-product of this “inefficient” exchange is mutual respect.
I wonder if our children will also feel this way.
Reference:
Thurston, B. (2012). Social media may be efficient, don’t forget good old fashioned conversation. Fast Company. Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.com/3000866/social-media-may-be-efficient-dont-forget-good-old-face-face-conversation.
Hi Lissbeth,
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with your statement, "To reinforce what was asked face-2-face, I do believe a written follow up or even a short meeting, is important. It stresses the importance of your request and expectations." As Dr. Harold Stolovitch underscores in this week's video resources (Laureate Education, Inc., n.d.), it is a good idea to follow up voice-mail messages and face-to-face conversations with written documentation. It helps to clarify what has been discussed and define expectations for future actions.
References
Laureate Education, Inc.(n.d.). Communicating with stakeholders. [Video]. Retrieved on January 24, 2013, through the Walden University student portal at www.waldenu.edu/
Hi Liz,
ReplyDeleteI am the same way with face to face communication. Sometimes when a person write something as they did, it was hard to read and understand it but they came to them face to face the communication was easy to understand. It was also hard to get a clear understanding by tone of the voice. To me it was like they wasn't sure if they meant business or was kind of nervous to tell the person what they wanted. So, with that being said I can get a clear understanding be face to face communication.