In this week’s multimedia program “The
Art of Effective Communication”, we were exposed to the same message in three
formats: written, verbal, and face-to-face (or video). After reviewing each one I took notes on the
message, the content, the delivery, and what I interpreted as the meaning of
the message. First, I would say the
email was the least effective form of communication. I understood that Jane needed a report from
Mark and that she needed it right away, but her reference to the “data” she would
accept as an interim piece of information was unclear. She did not effectively convey what data she
needed and was rather wordy in her email.
The voicemail was effective, especially
when compared to the email. The
inflection in Jane’s voice helped drive the point home that she really needed
the report and her work was suffering as a result of not receiving it by
now. Again, the definition of “data” is
unclear, but this was a much more successful communication than the email.
Finally, in the video Jane conveyed the
same message to Mark, only this time it was supposed to be a face-to-face
conversation. While I appreciate this is meant as a learning tool, I didn’t really buy the fact that Jane would
talk like this to Mark and was instead expecting a conversation between the
two. This artificiality made it hard for
me to truly judge the quality of the message, and in fact I would say the
voicemail was still the most effective of the three. However, in general I believe face-to-face is almost always the best communication method.
What this tells me is we should always
“choose the best communication approach” (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer,
Sutton, & Kramer, (2008). pg 357) when talking to colleagues. If the message (or question) is succinct, then
an email may do. But the old adage that nothing
can take the place of a verbal conversation still holds true. We should reserve email for correspondence
that is simplistic in nature and that isn’t on a timeline. Voicemails are better, but only when the
person cannot be contacted. Finally,
face-to-face is always best (even though I didn’t care for our video example) as
a two-way conversation should solve most issues and allow both parties to
continue their work without any further delays.
References:
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M.,
Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project
management: Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling Projects. Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
I agree that face to face is they way to go. Particularly in this instance where urgency on Jane's part conveyed to Mark to get the report emailed to her.
ReplyDeleteWhen would you use email over a face to face conversation?
- Pam
Thanks for reading my blog Pam. I would use email over face to face for instances of short, to the point conversations. For instance, as a reminder of a meeting, for a quick question, to set up a meeting to discuss this issue, and things of that nature. Email in this case was very confusing. But that is also dependent on the communicator; you need to be able to get your point across without taking too much of the reader's time. Her's was a barrage of run-on sentences and turned out to be more confusing than anything else.
ReplyDeleteHope I answered your question -
Terry
Hi Terry,
ReplyDeleteGreat post! I have a question for you... Do you think the IDs put this spin on the F2F vignette (presenting Jane as less than professional) on purpose so we would think more critically about verbal/non-verbal cues?
The only thing I might add is that email communication can be really beneficial for setting up, following up, and documenting F2F meetings. I find I rely heavily on email communication for reviewing attachments before/after F2F meetings and often refer back to a point made in a meeting that has been documented. This comes in handy when I am citing a policy or procedure that has been adopted by the department and need to courteously remind someone about the SOP (or change in SOP).
Again, excellent post.
-Jenn
Jenn,
DeleteThey may very well have created the F2F with that in mind to kind of "overdramatize" that portion to make a point. I obviously had a hard time getting past that to truly analyze the communication itself. As for your comment on the email setting up and complimenting F2F conversations, that is exactly how I (and I would imagine most people) use email. It should be a complimentary form of communication, not a primary one IMHO.
Terry
I had a similar issue recently. I had a project I was trying to "sell" to a client. We kept texting/emailing back and forth. I feel that nothing got accomplished until I called the client so we can verbally discuss things. Maybe is certain regards there is a progression of importance like you say. Maybe Jane emails him as a reminder close to the deadline, then she calls him when she realizes he is past due, and finally she approaches him in person once the problem becomes hers.
ReplyDeleteTim,
ReplyDeleteGood point. I think in today's world we tend to put very little time into checking our email, simply because of the sheer volume. I don't know about you, but I'll skim each of the 100's of emails I get at work each week for important information and quickly delete it if it seems frivolous. Unfortunately with this method, something really important could get overlooked. That is exactly why following up F2F is so important - and its a very good point you made. There's just no substitute for good old fashioned conversations.
Terry
Hi Terry,
ReplyDeleteI loved your post. You made your thoughts very simple and clear to understand. I totally agree that face to face is the way to go. Great post.
Pam F.
Thanks Pam!
DeleteTerry