Openess

In chapter 9 the author writes about open communication. This style of communication is in a relationship where you "perceive the other interactant as a willing and receptive listener and refrain from responses that might be perceived as providing negative relational or disconfirming feedback (287)." This type of communication includes both verbal and nomverbal communication. When using this type of communication it allows the people to communicate without feeling as though assumptiojns have already been made.

One study showed the positive affects of this style of communication on employee supervisor relationship. Things that might represent this relationship were things like supervisor enjoyed talking to employees, supervisor thought communication was important, and supervisors persuade instewad of demand.

I can see this style of communication in my own workplace. Very rarely does my boss tell me what to do. He asks if I have done something. i think this allows for me to say yes I already have done x or no I have not and thanks for the reminder. Also my boss talks about his family and his own experiences in the job so I feel like I know him as a person as well as my boss.

Situational Leadership

According to the text, situational leadership is the idea that "appropriate leadership emerges from behavior that is responsive to varied situations (278)." This allows for leaders to emerge from the group process. This would also allow for people who want to tell others what to do to come forward to lead. I think this is often problematic because the person may not be the most capable but is someone who wants to use the opportunity to get noticed by their boss or likes to be in an authority position.

Within group environments there are positives and negatives to having situational leadership. One of the positives is that the person who want to take on leadership responsibility can. Another reason this could be positive is that other group members may have a hard time if they are forced to choose a leader rather than have one that seems to be good at it and voluntarily becomes leader. The negative side of situational leadership could include having someone who has an agenda other than that of the group's. The person also may not have the characteristics necessary to lead an effective team. Another reason the text cites as a drawback to situational leadership is that this type of leader may not have the ability to inspire a team.

Working INterculturally

It is important in business and in fact in many fields to have different perspectives. Many people feel that it is enough to be "tolerant". Tolerance does not create an effective team. Individuals must trust and understand one another to be effective. This may be achieved various ways ,but cultural concepts of communication may vary so greatly that it is only with a concerted effort that teams will work together well.

Our text describes 4 ways to work well intercultural. The first way is to build relationships. This allows people to build trust and learn by experience about a person's culture and how that effects their communication. Second is exchanging information. There must be active involvement in solving issues at hand as well as the comfort and freedom to ask relevant questions. Third there are different methods of persuasion. Many countries don't view persuasion as Americans do. For example some may persuade through stories will here we often persuade by presenting facts, stats, or expiriental knowledge to lead to what we might consider an obvious conclusion. 4th business like deals differ. For example signing a contract may mean very different things in other cultures than it does here. Also saying things in a way that is definitive rather than suggestive may be offensive to those of a different cultural background so it is important to know a little about the culture you're working with.

Workplace Democracy

Deetz's presents the idea of democracy in the workplace in the text. This places emphasis on what our text calls "multiple stakeholder model" in which organizations take into account many different groups thoughts on how they perform their business, not just the stakeholders. In this model there 4 essential ways by which this may be achieved. First all members in an organization must think like an owner (234). This would put all employees in a position where all employees are part of decisions and accountable for their work. Second management and actually work must be reintegrated (234). This points out that paying some people to watch over other who are actually doing work is ineffective and not financially sound. Third only important information should be distributed. This emphasizes how people must have information on the real effects of their work ,not only omn their customer but also on society, the enviroment, and other nations. Fourth the workplace should be more bottom up. This would allow all members of the organization to negotiate and make decisions rather than allowing decisions to be in the hands of a few individuals.

Deetz's idea sounds great but may be impractical. This idea would be a huge shift for most organizations. I think in functioning the idea would work well but the transtition from how things currently are to a system where everyone had input and felt invested might be too much of a shock. Also I thin there are a lot of people who want structure. It can be easier at times to have a structurw in place and go into work knowign that you just have to carry out your tasks. It really depends on the current work culture and personalities of individuals within whether this method could really work in a given organization.

Multipe Identities

Many people feel that they are negotiating between different elements of their identity. In the workplace these elements may be features of the norm or something that is different. In circumstances where self identity varies from the norm it may be hard to negotiate.

Often times a norm is the white heterosexual male, as our text notes. This norm allows for little deviation. Often times people do not match up to at least one of those criteria of what is "normal". For me it is being female. In my current job I do not feel particularly different than the norm because a majority of the employees are female. In the job I hope to have in the future as a social worker there will be a majority of females. Though the social work field has more women in it, it reflects larger society in that more males still hold supervisory and management type positions. For me I consider this a disadvantage ,but one I am not sure how to change.

There are also other groups marginalized because they do not fit the mold. Often times people of color are discriminated against and again we see few people of color in positions of power. Our president is so astounding to Americans for this reason. Not only do people of color have a problem in the workplace ,but also in getting hired in the first place. For instance one MIT study conducted showed that names identified by a team of researchers as"African American" got fewer interviews than "white" names with the same qualifications. This goes to show that it isn't just within the organization ,but embedded in society.

Gender differences

Gender differences are the socialized behaviors we develop throughout life and that are reinforced in social, family, and work life. Often times these differences lead to miscommunication and strife. It's not that one communication style is inherently bad ,but that when one does not understand the other's approach the interpretation may not correlate to the message that the sender intended.

According to Tannen in our text women look at communication with people as equals and communication being weblike. Women also look at communication in terms of being supportive. Men look at communication as hierarchical and therefore communicate in ways that show their knowledge and are more direct and assertive. Either of these approaches has its stengths and weaknesses but a shared weakness is that if you are unaware they both can become inneffective.

If a woman feels a man is talking about his own knowledge and skills too much she might assume he is egotistical. Conversely a man who sees a woman behave as though they are equals and is more supportive may thing that she is too passive. In either situation perceptions of the person are shaped by the way in which they communicate.

This may not be a problem for some, but without the understandign of the other gender's tendency it may cause skewed communication. When we attach to much meaning to the delivery of a message and not enough meaning on the content it can sometimes lead to miscoommunication and even stress surrounding the issue.

Concertive control

Concertive power is power based on values of the group. Unlike many other forms of power concertive requires shared values that create rules that the group follows. This allows for less supervision because all members are invested in the values and rules so they all have some part in enforcing them. According to our text this type of power may even be less forgiving than others. I would imagine this is because there is more agreement on what behaviors and types of communication are appropriate.

According to our text this robs the "elite" in the organization of their status by subjecting them to the same rules and values as their employees. This creates a problem between those running the orginization and those employed by it. Since they are all under the same rules there is less power for the "elite" when they actually need to have it in order to organize and direct their employees.

Resistance

According to our text ,resistance is "distancing and defending themselves from organizational power" (185). This would include actions such as striking and boycutting. These types of actions aim at disrupting company functions while sending a message.

Stiking is an action in which employees stop working and thus inhibit business. Often times such action is taken to improve working conditions, pay, or because employees do not agree with organization policies. In some cases striking can be extremely positive and end in a compromise. At other times organizational power wins over the individuals and the company hires new employees. Although strikes are usually thought of as a method to get higher pay they can also be for issues like better economic or humanitarian policies. Women for instances might strike for improvement in sexual harassment policy within their company.

Boycotting is a form of resistance that can include the public. This resistance is enacted by refusal to buy products or services created by an organization. Again the reasons may differ. For example many people stopped buying Nike products after hearing of their outsourcing for cheap labor. Another example would be women boycotting American Apparel because of its objetifying and ambigous portrayals of women in their ads.

These actions are often noticable only when the resisting party is large or when members of the resistance have influential ties.

Tightness of fit

In some jobs it is imperative that members of the work force be able to work together and adhere to strict norms. In organizations such as this there are often people who crave the structure that this type of workplace culture provides them. One such organization is the police force.

While I myself have not worked for a police force my boyfriend has and is also in the interview process for another one currently. This type of organization adheres to strict procedures often for safety ,but also to prevent things like law suits, bad publicity, or community backlash. The police go through extensive background checks, psychological, physical, and interview process to determine if they meet requirements deemed necessary to fit the police work culture. One of the requirements is no felony convictions. This is so that police can use the necessary cultural artifacts to do their job. The gun in police culture is symbolic of a mechanism of defense. Other things police officers must understand to fit the culture is the hierarchy within the police force. There must be a respect for those with more knowledge who are better equipped to make judgement calls.

This work culture is exemplified not only in the hiring process but also after. There is a police academy that instills in officers the values of their particulat organization. This is then followed by a probationary period where officers can be moire easily terminated if they do not fit the expected actions.

Workplace Culture

According to the text, in the1970's there was an increase in global economic competition. Because of this the U.S. compared there management style to other more successful nations' styles of management. One nation that did particularly well in motivating employees was Japan.

Japanese culture is often more collectivist compared to the U.S. which tends to focus on individual achievement. Because of this tactic Japan was a leader in the global economy. Ouchi was one man who tried to emphasize community in the workplace as part of the workplace culture. This was an attempt to move toward the more succesful Japanese model.

Some elements that kept the Japanese model at the top were individual efforts with close informal contacts, research and development of of new products and services, and clever competitive tactics and strategies. While these workplace elements were mentioned a few elements of the Japanese culture at large were not mentioned. For example many Asian countries employees tend to have lifetime employment compared to the U.S. This type of employment also fosters a more cohesive workplacve because the people you work with will remain relatively the same over the course of your career. This also allows relationships to form because there is less movement of employees in and out of the workplace. This begs the question "How do we change workplace culture?" I would answer this in saying that workplace culture is unique in each organization but often reflects the culture of the locality from which the employees and clientel are drawn.

Loose Coupling

Loose connections within an organization may seem to be less organized. Can loose connections serve a strategic purpose. At first glance I might say that not being connected as a company does not serve the organization's best interest. Such a lack of connection may disperse goal orientation. Can an organization benefit from this though? I would say yes ,but only to an extent. I do not agree with an organization being so compartmentalized that the head does not know what the arm does ,so to speak. While I feel that being well informed about what different departments are working towards I think it that decision making can be a much quicker process when departments have the freedom to act independently in some regards. Although I do think that the departments that are most closely related research and collect information from other surrounding departments I do not think that those surrounding departments need be part of the end decision. For instance if one department is responsible for wheel design on a car that department should consult with those who designed the axle as well as those designing the tire to create a finished product that works well together.

A division can also allow for less impact. An organization that is connected at all levels and across all departments may be more impacted by outside forces. An organization that is more loosely connected will take the impact in one area rather than the affect being absorbed by all departments.

On some levels organizations must be connected because it is communciation that creates an organization. Goal orientation must be shared in all areas. Although common culture and goals among an organization should be shared I don't believe this is necessarily true in all things. Reasonable considerations taken into account, department's decision making should be independent.

Learning Organization

I see work as a learning opportunity. While I value the education I get from attending school, I feel that the real world lessons remain with me longer and are more vivid than those I learn from a textbook or a lecture. Peter Senge's learning organization highlights the learning benefit of organizations.

This approach looks at organizational achievement and individual achievement as inseparable. Similar to systems theory this view addresses the necessity of all parts/employees working together to make a more complete whole/organization. I agree with this view. I think that when your own goals are aligned with those of the organization you work for it is much easier to feel inspired and put the most effort possible into your work.

In this ideal members are said to share a commitment to learn and self reflect. Such an ideal , I think, is often achieved through a work culture. I work at a swim school and I see my boss instilling this attitude in trainees. The work culture we subscribe to is composed of a set of beliefs and values that allows us to share a commitment to provide the best lessons.

Senge also assumes that we all have mental models that shape and limit individual interpretations and actions. Within my experience I have seen this at work. As teachers have worked for the swim school longer I see that there mental models have changed. The teachers view many things similarly. For example after working for sometimes we can easily identify what pieces make a good swimmer.

A shared vision is an element of learning organization that Senge identifies. In may businesses/organizations this vision is identify through a mission statement. A phrase might sum of the companies goal. Many companies include things like providing great service as part of their statement. Where I work the statement is "a little progress everyday". This statement is the basis of much of our practice. All the things we do focus on that end. While we recognize that no child will learn to swim within one lesson we oush for some improvement each day. In training we are taught to challenge students, encourage them, and talk to parents about their child's daily progress. This allows us to work towards the goal and keep it in mind constantly since we have to be accountable to the parent by reporting on the student's progress.

Team learning is something I have found infinitely valuable in my own work experience. Communication among employees in any setting allows for the best result. This makes team members accountable to one another. We can bounce ideas off one another and get opninions. It is important to have a standard on how to deal with certain situations in the workplace and discussion between coworkers is an important piece of the consensus.

Human Relations

Chapter 3 discussed how human relations came to be. After classical management style and scientific management style failed to produce positive outcomes in organizational communication a shift occurred. The shift that occurred moved towards an approach which emphasized that all individuals had needs and that by meeting these inherent needs organizational communication and work would be more efficient. Unlike the previous methods, this method focused on what was best for people rather than what would be most cost effective. Classical and scientific management style leaders would be surprised to see that by increasing communication and positive feelings between employees and management that employees did perform better.

Follet thought that by using coactive rather than coercive power, employees would perform better. Follet realized that coercive power created tension ,while coactive allowed employees to work towards a common goal set by management. Similar to Follet, Barnard thought that management should work towards communicating in ways that encouraged workers to identify with the organization. Barnard also realized the power of informal contacts within an organization and the value they have for organization effectiveness.

I could really relate to the human relations type of communication. As an employee it is extremely to not only feel trusted, but to have the freedom to offer suggestions and express any problems I encounter in the workplace. In my job as a swim teacher I have the security in my job to speak to my boss if I need time off or if I have an issue and need a suggestion about how to deal with a student. I feel that it is much more effective to have open communication. This type of communication allows me to draw on the knowledge base of those that have worked longer than I have or those that have a different approach than mine to teaching. I completely understand how Follet and Barnard arrived at the conclusion that human relations approach not only makes people feel better but is also more effective. When communication is more open employees can work from their own knowledge base as well as of those around them.

All Talk is...

According to Eisenburg, Goodall, and Trethewey, partial, partisan, and problematic (63, 64). In saying this the authors imply that no one theory is the end all, be all to communication. Communication is a complex issue with countless variables at play. Any one theory or research may only account for a few of these intertwined issues. Culture, race, class, power, nonverbal communication, and many other variables effect the communication that takes place ,and therefore the theories which explain that communication. The authors also noted that often those coming up with the theories are white, middle-class, men. This plays into the partiality to which they referred.

Partiality, as defined by the text, only tells a part of the story. Theories that do this do not take into account the entire history of communication. For example what preceded the Industrial Revolution that made such hierarchical work such a shift? If we look into the fact that many people previously grew their own crops and lived outside cities prior to the Industrial Revolution we might see a more complete picture.

Partisan communication is communication in which we tell the what we favor. In this type of communication one may communicate to serve their own best interest. For example white males may create theories that are fair to them and accurately describe their condition but neglect to address the issues in communication faced by people of color, women, and other subjugated groups of people. As the text puts it, all thought is partisan. Since all thought is partisan it is also important to view it as such. No one theory explains organizational communication entirely. No theory is all inclusive for all perspectives. It is with a discerning mind that we must approach theories that explain communication.

Communication is problematic. Because theories are made by people who have finite knowledge the theories are only based on that knowledge base. Such theories will not provide definite answers on how to approach communication. These theories provide but a snapshot of what organizational communication is to one person in one context that has been studied.

Theories as viewed ,as seen by our text, are merely starting points for understanding. These theories are supposed to be used more as tools to develop our own questions than as the answer to everything that is organizational communication. Communication is not finite, its not, unchanging, and it most certanly is not the same for every person. All these exceptions and circumstances are important to keep in mind while learning as well as experiencing organizational communication.

Work Story

I have a pretty limited work story. I have ,as much as is possible, tried to limit working when I am in school. My first job was in the summer between my sophomore and junior year of high school. I was a lifeguard at the school I attended for the summer sports camps. I was so excited because I made $9.50 an hour. I worked at that job for two summers. I also had smaller jobs like babysitting and tutoring which I did for family friends or neighbors. I then began my current job during the Spring semester of my freshman year in college. The job I have now is teaching swimming lessons. I had to train 20-30 hours for the job ,but I've found it well worth it. This has been the best work experience so far. I wanted a job that would put me out of my comfort zone. Normally I had been a pretty shy person but my job requires that I be talking constantly, giving instruction, and reporting back to parents on their child's daily progress. One other work experience I have had was as a volunteer at Boys and Girls club. There I helped kids with homework or just hung out and played games with them.
My experience made me feel like I would like to work with kids in my career. I have decided to work in child welfare, more specifically, I would really like to work , as a social worker, in adoptions and foster care. Lastly I think that there is no classroom equivalent to getting into a real workplace and learning how to deal with people and organize your time and still work to the best of your ability.