Communicating Effectively

Interpretation of each modality:

Email

The message sounds urgent.  Jane is emphasizing her need for the report and even mentions that she may miss her own deadline if she doesn’t get the report from Mark. It seems more on the informal side and somewhat desperate. Mark reading the message may interpret it as Jane would blame Mark for missing her deadline.

Voicemail

The message sounds friendlier by voicemail. It still sounds like Jane is in an urgent situation but is more just looking for help from Mark to complete her deadline.

Face-to-Face

This one seems more relaxed then urgent. While she still really needs the report she seems understanding that he is busy.  I don’t think he would misinterpret anything she is saying face-to-face. Of the three methods, I think face-to-face is the friendliest and least likely to cause offense.

Personally, I think email being the least personal of the three methods could also be open to the most misinterpretation by the reader. I think this activity shows how personal and friendly face-to-face interactions can be. In addition, you can also get to know your co-workers better this way and gain a better understanding of how they communicate. In my office most individuals work remotely so it is harder to speak face-to-face, but in my case I think I may start to choose phone calls and voicemails in certain situations versus just email.

Learning from a Project "Post-mortem"

In a previous class at Walden, I was working with classmates to create a training program using the ADDIE model. There were five of us and through the use of email and instant message decided to go with creating a training program for teachers in the Chicago Public Schools to teach them effective peer mediation with their students. We were hoping this would help reduce the amount of violence in the schools.

There were several things that fell apart during this project. First of all, none of us could agree on the direction of the training program. Then, further along in the project we felt this was too broad and not sure if training was really the answer. We didn’t want to start over but half the group wanted to revise the project while the other half just wanted to continue.

I wouldn’t say the project was a failure but it was not a complete success either. A main contributing factor is we could not agree on what we wanted the outcome to be. Also, we each had team assignments and one was designated the project manager. However, I suppose none of us left it to the project manager to make all the decisions.

If we were to follow the Project Management process, we should have agreed to let the Project Manager organize and control the project. Organizing allows the Project Manager to define the individuals working on the project roles and responsibilities (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008). In doing so, each of us would have understood our role at the beginning of the project (and would maybe have accepted our job in the project versus each trying to control everything).

Controlling the project would have been another importance piece of the process. Controlling would reconfirm the individual’s expected performance (which is only somewhat applicable in my situation), addressing problems encountered, and sharing information with interested people (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer, 2008).

I think overall we really learned from it. We had to learn how to come to a common agreement to complete the project and to understand that each of us have a specific role we had to follow. We couldn’t all do the same job because then we would just continue competing!

Resources

Portny, S. E., Kramer, B. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., & Sutton, M. M. (2008). Defining Project Management Today. Project management (pp. 6-24). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.