By Monica Dystant, ContributorHAVE YOU ever tried to communicate in a group of persons who talk incessantly, leaving no room for listening or anyone else's message? And if ever there was a pause in that scene, it would appear to be only for a breath of refuelling to go at it again?
You watch the speakers' eagerness to express themselves during an apparent acceptance of chaos. You change gear to a phenomenological neutral position and quietly observe the essence of things. Any message transmitted is drowned in the egomania of group members; and what is most amazing; it appears that to everyone else, the situation is normal. Every effort to speak in this yen to communicate, seems an orchestrated attempt to cue the start of a musical round, except that the product is not a symphony: it is noise.
REALITY CHECK
Reality check? You shift mentally in reverse and observe. It is not the language nor lingua. You have shared socio-cultural similarities and have had previous intelligent interactions. So you
comfortably exclude hearing defect as the problem. Your keen interest in sociological inquiry
compelled you to a park position as you slide
in your seat and watched the dance of a
communication barrier.
Was there an exchange/sharing of information? Perhaps not. How did anyone benefit from the energy? Can you relate to that picture? Various groups of individuals engage daily in this drama ad nauseum. Stepping back one sees confusion.
Through various genres of communication we make daily attempts to share our ideas, thoughts, feelings and knowledge with one another. We engage in face-to-face and telephone interactions, ad infinitum, as we try to effectively communicate our messages. And so often, we miserably fail in our attempts during
the process.
Barriers to communication have been identified. Listening, perceptual biases and intellectual deficit are common to ineffective communication. Each scenario which follows identifies cases of ineffective communication:
SCENARIO 1
Here is the example of a call to a small finance company.
Caller: Hello. How can I obtain a loan from your company?
Agent: From two-10,000 we use furniture; from 10 up to 50,000 we use car title.
Caller: What if there is a lien on the car title?
Agent: No, we can't use it. But we can use a guarantor. He would have to come in with the car, someone will assess it etc., etc., etc.
Caller: So it is not the guarantor that you will be using, it is his/her car title?
Agent: Yes, Miss.
SCENARIO 2
Call for an appointment.
Caller: Hello. May I speak with Dr.(name)?
Secretary (substitute): They make their own appointments. You would have to call back to speak with her.
Caller: I don't understand. Why do you say "they" and
then "her"?
Secretary: You weren't listening. If you were listening you would hear me say, "There are four doctors and Dr.(name) is not here right now".
Caller: But I didn't ask about the others. I was
specific.
Secretary: Call back at approximately two
o'clock. She should be back at that time.
DO YOU THINK THIS WAS EFFECTIVE
COMMUNICATION?
Barriers to effective communication: Listening:
Listening, contend the experts, requires attention, reception and perception. Poor listening habits make communication ineffective.
It is a hard-to-do activity for many and seems to have cultural relativity. Poor listening skills have been observed in all social classes in this society. Everyone, even when engaged in pleasurable interactions, seems eager to send rather than to receive
messages.
It appears the eagerness contributes to poor listening and interrupts the message of another sender. One observes the dynamics of competing volumes in voice intonation, competing speed in talking or simply
"tuning out" the other from one's psyche until s/he is dominated into silence.
PERCEPTUAL BIASES
Ineffective communication is sometimes due to perception of self. The listening dilemma may be a question of ego: it is about who sets the agenda. A sender may feel that his or her message is more important than that of the other. This leads to messages competing for political status in the communication process.
For example, person A tries to share a point and may do so from an intellectual position of expert power. Person B believes his point is more credible as s/he speaks from a position of work/field
experience. Their perceptual biases, therefore, challenged their competence to listen.
Perceptual biases can cause stereotyping of individuals. Simplified and often inaccurate beliefs affect
encoding and decoding of a message. Individuals' personalities, values,
attitudes, moods, experiences and knowledge form their perceptions that affect the way they communicate.
YOUR ATTIRE SPEAKS
Non-verbal communication of one's attire sends a message as well. It often makes a statement about the sender's self-awareness, cultural consciousness and responsiveness. For example, a 25-year-old new female employee and supervisor, dressed appropriately for her office in a professional
contemporary work attire, joins a department with females of age cohort 40-60 years in a traditional work culture. She is likely to become the target for false attribution; to be maligned, vilified and may face
resistance from other employees.
She would have communicated a difference in the level of consciousness to her surroundings. More so, if there are differences of value systems and degrees of exposure. The message she intended may not have been the one
perceived. Therefore, the perceptual biases of other employees would have imposed barriers to her attempt in the communication process.
JOB INTERVIEW
One may experience similar barriers in a job interview where panelist(s) may be more preoccupied in sending than receiving messages and their perceptions of the
messages may not have been the
sender's reality.
The question of who sets the agenda and the interplay of perceptual biases are dominant variables in this situation. One may perceive a message different from that which was intended by a sender because of psychological constructs.
The psychological process interferes with listening. Anxiety reduces the power to listen. A nervous interviewee may hear one thing but listens
to another. The individual's train
of thoughts may be one of the
barriers experienced by an interviewee/interviewer. S/he starts to
listen but during the symbolic interactions, a speaker may say something to trigger a memory of a pressing business/ personal engagement or a previously negative interview. S/he becomes anxious; mind wanders and s/he loses focus in the interview.
The evaluation process may be adversely affected as a result. Both sender and receiver have a shared responsibility in the communication process.
Well, you have stayed with me this far,
was communication effective?
