Response Cydney

Please see questiion below and respond to Cydney response below

Are you more comfortable using rich communication media (face-to-face) or leaner media (email or even text)?

In regards to communication, my preference on type of communication depends on the situation. Overall, my success rates have been higher with the ‘rich’ communication via the face-to-face method. the email or texting means of communication are undoubtedly convenient especially if you are unable to find out where the people you want to communicate are or if you are unable to visit them at the particular time of concern. If it is regarding subjects where I just need approval or edits, or have a relatively simplistic question, then using the ‘leaner’ media is just fine. However, when I use those same methods I also can end up with more questions than answers, people who do not get back to you, confusions on the tone behind the messages to detect whether the person on the other end is upset or has other concerns that they are not expressing, as well as misunderstanding information on my part entirely. However, whenever I am able to speak to people face-to-face I am able to get better understanding of the social cues people instinctually give off in conversation to help steer the direction of how I should progress.

For the stages of change, the type of communication is variable as well as it is reliant on how in depth the communication needs to be for adequate results of what we want. For the planning stage for example, if we are taking the 5 stage model presented by Reardon and Reardon in the text, then the communication in that stage would be a mix of the rich and leaner method of communication. Most of the work could be done with the rich format, as talking things out in person will likely be more efficient. However, a lot of the communication also must be through the leaner methods as people individual work on and facilitate the change processes. However in areas like the launching or maintaining phases the communication might be more on the leaner side than the richer since things should be going relatively smoothly and people only need to communicate in the instance of something going wrong. On the other hand, for the analyzing component it would be more important to have the communication in the rich format since people need to talk out the aspects which need to be solved quickly and need to be discussed in depth, (Palmer, 2021, pg. 117).

Personally, I have had more success with the rich means of communication, as face to face I feel like I have better understanding of the people and the context of what is being discussed. While I do find texting to be more convenient, as communication can be quite fast and helpful when considering distances, but for efficiency the richer methods of communication is my preferred choice. However, in some situations the leaner communication options are also adequate because they allow for long distance and involved communication with many people who are unable to meet up at any given period of time. It is also helpful when you are giving people time to figure things out or look into things themselves before they attempt to answer. Overall, they both have their own purposes for when I would need to use them.

References:

Palmer, I. (2021). Managing Organizational Change: A Multiple Perspectives Approach (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education (US).

Last Completed Projects