This week we were required to view the delivery of a message in three different ways: written, audio, and face-to-face verbal communication. Each of these types of communication play an important role in any project and it is imperative for project managers to understand that interpretation of team members may vary across these different modalities. For purposes of interpretation, we will discuss each of these three in turn and then discuss what these teach about effective communication for project managers.
Written message (email): Email is quite obviously ubiquitous in nature but can sometimes present problems because it is difficult for readers to pick up non-verbal signals relating to the message (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). As a result, email communication can come off a bit cold as in this case. When reading the email, my interpretation was one of panicked urgency. Again, because I am left without a reference point for tone or expression, I can only interpret the message based on the words. In this case, the writer uses language that implies an urgency on her part which therefore implies an urgency on my part: "really need," "ETA," "soon." These words imply immediacy and my interpretation is that the person's assumption is that I will drop everything I'm doing to get her the needed information. This manner of communication is also quite formal (or should be) and as Dr. Stolovitch (n.d.) states in one of this week's videos, formal communication may or may not fit well within the culture of the company or cause problems with communication of individuals.
Voicemail message: In this instance, I was able to hear the tone of voice of the person on the other end of the line and, while I still heard the urgency in her voice, I did not feel that the message was as panicked as it was in the email. As Greer (2010) points out, attitude is a collection of feelings that are brought to a situation or relationship. This is difficult to discern when reading an email, however, when listening to someone speak on the phone, it is far easier to determine their attitude about the situation because you can hear their tone. As I mentioned, the tone in the phone call was still urgent, but my overall interpretation was that I didn't have to drop everything I was doing in order to get this completed.
Face-to-Face Message: When "discussing" the issue with the colleague face-to-face, there was an even better understanding on my part of the urgency of the situation. Quite obviously, face-to-face discussion allows you to see non-verbal cues from the message deliverer that you miss in email or even voicemail. Seeing the person's face and overall demeanor in person can assist greatly in de-coding the message they are sending, in this case, the level of urgency surrounding the completion of the report. As with the voicemail message, I did feel as if there was urgency getting my report completed to help my colleague, but hearing her voice and seeing her in person gave me the impression that she was not as panicked as I suspected from the email message, rather she was simply sharing her deadline and hoping I could help. Because of the face-to-face interaction and the demeanor of my colleague during that interaction, I felt more motivated to help her as soon as possible than I did with the email or voicemail messages.
So what can we learn from all of this as project managers? Namely that we need to consider the means of communication, not just the message to be effective. While email is a useful and formal method of communicating, it may not always fit best with the culture of the company or with the communication structure of the individual (Stolovitch, n.d.). Voicemail can be helpful and useful but again it does not allow the person you are communicating with to pick up on non-verbal cues (Portny, et al., 2008). Face-to-face communication may in many cases be the best way to communicate with an individual or team, especially if there is some problem or issue that needs addressing, as in the case we viewed. As a program manager, your attitude about and approach to addressing problems and other issues sets the entire tone for the team (Greer, 2010) so in many cases this would be the best way to send a message and ensure that it was received properly. Effective communication for project managers depends on the selection of the means of communication just as much, if not more than the message that needs to be communicated.
References
Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects! Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.
Laureate Education (Producer). (n.d.). Project manager concerns: Communication strategies and organizational culture. [Video file]. Retrieved from: https://class.waldenu.edu
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.
Hello! David,
ReplyDeleteI thought the same, sometimes emails can come across too aggressive (tensional or intentionally), even though you can’t hear the tone, but if the person typing the message uses uppercase letters or words, then the tone of the message can have a different meaning. Like you mention urgency, implies immediacy by the way the person states the message. The message can be written differently, better tone and respectfully. Hearing the voice gives you a different vibe or sense of the individual, where he/she is coming. Aside from just hearing, face-to-face gives the expression of the person if it’s urgent or not. The difference between hearing and reading is that F2F interaction, you can reply back, instantly. Communication can make or break a project!
Juan.