Informal Channels vs Formal

We learn about the different modes of organizational communication, and their usefulness in chapter 8. One of the things that stood out for me was the variation between formal and informal channels of communication. I was interested mostly because I have been doing some research about formal versus informal communication with organizations as it pertains to identifying competencies. The text says, “Both forms of communication are essential to the life of the organization.” (p. 218) However, what I have found is that while both obviously take place, and they each have different types of information base through them, informal communication tends to be more popular amongst those at lower levels. Also, it is interesting how much legitimacy informal information carries. Often we find these rumors to be truer than not, even though the classic “water cooler” conversations can be deemed gossip. So, I would agree that both informal and formal channels are essential to the operation of any organization.

Importance of Mediums

I very much agree with Marshall LcLuhan’s idea that the “the medium is the message.” We see this sort of thing all the time where I work. People are turned off, or begin to ignore the message if the way it is communicated isn’t well received. In this the medium is crucial to the success of the message. I think that the new generation learns is very much that of the mosaic logic. I heard an article recently about the constant perceived need for students in high school and college to be connected. The article went on to explain the student’s inability to be alone. Without TV, smart phones, Facebook, or the internet they won’t know how to communicate with people. In this way be see their need, potential as a result of growing up on TV, their need for information quicker and quicker. I fond myself stuck partially in that world, but even more afraid of being past up by it.

Cyber Buddies!

I have yet to create a new friend from cyberspace. I have, however, maintained a few friendships with the help of social networking sites such as Facebook. I think this has come easier to me because I already place value on these people, and really that value comes in the form of time. The rest of my life is fairly full, and the idea of trying to find new friendships via the web sounds tiring. I never really understood the point of establishing whom you are in written terms mainly because I always seem to have a harder time expressing myself in written in comparison to in person conversation. I think I just enjoy watching people so much that it seems like half the fun of getting to know someone and hanging out with them would be immediately, and needlessly, eliminated. I think it made sense when this was the only way to gather or share information from a great distance, but we can share so much more these days with modern technology.

Choosing a Leader

As I read chapter seven I found myself drawn to the idea of leader emergency. In the text we hear about Fisher’s idea of leader emergence in terms of participant elimination. Does this really seem right? Haven’t you ever been in a situation where you simply never wanted to even speak let alone be the leader of a group? However, I suppose that at the onset of any discussion all participants could be considered in equal contention for the noteworthy honor of leader. Fisher goes on to tells us that he believes all initial conversation is a bid for the spot, and natural attrition begins to set in. Eventually people drop out in order to take on other roles, and finally one person, potentially with the help of his/her group, take the lead. Then the tough task of leading the group towards accomplishment sets in. Hopefully the group chose the right person.

Romantic Cues

When I look at people in terms of romantic partners I have to say that the things that strike me as attractive have changed. This may seem obvious to some, but for me my desires have changed with time, life stages, and intellectual aptitude. I can completely see how proximity plays a pivotal role in influencing romantic partner possibilities. I don’t want to try to date someone I’ll rarely see. As for preinteraction cues I look for someone who cares about their physical appearance, but doesn’t hold it in such high importance that it consumes them. Once we begin the interaction phase I want someone who will challenge me without trying to dominate every situation. I also look for someone who is well rounded in their ability to hold a conversation, views of the world, and friendships. Cognitive cues are by far the most important. I look for someone that has a passion for life, values family, and understands commitment.

Partners

I cannot imagine that a long-term relationship could survive in any sort of healthy manner if partners only held to a rigid complementarity, competitive symmetry, or submissive symmetry pattern. If I had to guess I would say that the worst of the three styles would be the competitive symmetry mainly because there would always be this desire to dominate the other. A agree that some form of competition can drive people to push beyond preconceived ideas, however, at what point would you slow down enough to appreciate life around you.
I would also guess that the submissive symmetry would be the most damaging to one’s self-esteem mainly because you would no longer have a sense of personal identity. Without some form of personal identity than a person is no longer a person, but a mechanical robot. I believe that we all need to stand up and ask/fight for what we want because it is rare that anyone else will do it for you.

Panel Discussions

The panel discussion can be a very valuable tool for when trying to better understand and share information about a certain topic. The idea is simple in concept, but the execution can vary widely based on the moderator, the panelists, and the audience. The text says, “The key to moderating or participating in a panel is to be well informed, to listen carefully to others, and to make sure the discussion is coherent.” (p. 205) One of the best panel discussions I have had the opportunity to listen to was about sustainable fishing practices. The moderator was an environmental law professor who was well spoken, and well informed about the subject. The panelists varied to include a member of the Monterey Bay Aquarium fish watch, a culinary instructor, a representative of the Alaska fishermen’s group, and a writer who had just finished a book all about sustainable fishing practices around the world. The discussion was so informative that I can easily say everyone walked away more informed than when they had walked in, and they enjoyed it.