The Exchange of Ideas and Facts, Essay Example

Communication is a process concerning the exchange of ideas and facts. One important thing to note about the definition is that communication is a process. It is a process for several reasons, first we communicate with people and not to people. To understand the difference, it is worthwhile noting the various components of communication. They include the sender, receiver, message, a communication channel, communication environment and noise (anything that hampers communication). When we say that communication is a process, we essentially imply that it does not occur linearly but circularly. For instance, take the example of  a conversation that took place between the three professional in the cockpit of flight 801. The situation involved sending message and receiving the message.  In other words, the sender transmits the information through a channel (encode) and the receiver decode or interprets the meaning of the message. The receiver then has to provide feedback to ensure that the message has been received and understood. One assumption that many people make is that messages are easily created and interpreted. However, this is not the case. In real situation, many factors influence the ability and intent to encode and decode a message. This means that depending on the environment or the context different style of communication can be effective or devastating. Sometimes the flow of the message is interrupted by a noise. Noise affects the ability to communicate. Unclear jargon, or vocabulary  that may cause a misunderstanding and confusion are also noises.  For communication to be effective, those barriers have to be eliminated.

In the case of Korean Flight 801 that crashed in 1997, it is clear that the conversation between the three professional was not effective.  Keeping in mind of the Korean high PDI, there was a clear power difference between the first officer and the engineer and the captain that prevented them from embarrassing the captain after he made a mistake. Both the first official and flight engineer were not straightforward. They spoke in jargon. The assumption behind using jargons is that both sides are paying attention and can easily decode the meaning. In this case, the captain’s ability to decode the message could have been affected by the fatigue.

We can thus conclude that the three professional in the cockpit were inside a cultural framework that dictated their behavior. This behavior hampered effective communication and ultimately led to the crash.

Recently more multinational are mandating all their employees to only speak English in the workplace.  This is important in a situation where business necessitate are justified by an English-only rule. Such situation may include during emergencies where workers are required to speak a common language to promote safety. In addition, promoting a common language at the workplace is essential to building and maintaining successful relationships among the employees. However, mandating non-native to speak English has its share problems. One danger is that it may hinder effective communication. As we all know, there are numerous complexity that are associated with learning a new language. For instance, in order to express correctly in a new language one need to not only learn the language but also the new culture. Again, a non-native may alter the meaning of the message due to a different accent. Study has shown that the person who learns a second language, they tend to speak the acquired language in the same manner as native language. The voice projection, rhythm annotations of their native language is carried to the second language. When this is spoken, it causes a number distortion in pronunciations that may mean differently. Some non-native may have difficulties in pronouncing some English word correctively. These in turn affect their ability to communicate effectively. Their message may not be correctly understood. To overcome this, it is important for an organization to emphasize the need for effective listening. Effective listening involves giving the speaker full attention and avoiding distraction and pay attention to other non-oral clues.

Another danger of mandating non-native to speak English is that they may not understand why they have to speak a second language-English, while they can easily communicate using their native language. They may feel that it is disloyal to their native culture to learn English language and culture be forced to speak it. This misconception may lead to misunderstanding and eventually communication failure. To overcome this, the manager should clearly explain the goal of what they are doing, what they ought to achieve and how they can improve their skills.

The key is how a team operates in a complex situation. Teams that perform well are those with low PDI cultures. This is because under this condition all member of the team provides appropriate input into a decision. In today’s world delivering a system in large corporation calls for integration of dozen of activities to deliver. This requires multiple experts to comprehend.  In contrast, where authoritarian leaders, who impose huge difference to team members, drives a project, it is hard to express. With time, poor performance will set in. In the end, stronger team members and experts felt less motivated, and eventually leave to look for employment elsewhere. Low PDI provides employees with opportunities such as recognition, responsibility, and opportunity for advancement that according to two-factor theory of motivation improve their productivity.