Visualization In Communication Of Business Strategies

Reflective Practice and Self-Assessment

Discuss about the Visualization In Communication Of Business Strategies.

The term reflective practice refers the group of actions through which a person can analyse his or her strength and weakness in both physical and psychological parameters. Through this measurement the person can improve his or her current efficiency for a particular task that will help to achieve the aims and objectives of that particular person (Sigmar, Hynes & Hill, 2012). The purpose of this self assessment is to express my experience during the self reflection practice to improve my ability for workplace communication.  It also allows me to monitor and improve my current flaws and lags that will help to gain the ability to perform contextually appropriate communicative behaviour.

In order to monitor my current abilities and weakness I had to go through a systematic diagnosis process. In this diagnosis system 5 diagnostic tools have been used to examine the individual aspects of my communicational behaviour as well as the potentiality to improve my ability of work base communication. According to my response through verbal, nonverbal and assertive participation several scorecard based reports have been generated. From these reports I can the conceptual model about my existing communication style along with the operational efficiencies and discrepancies. After focusing on two of my particular improvement potentials I will build the required improvement plan for me.

Communication competence emphasise the competence level of a person to engage in a successful communication through verbal, non-verbal, assertive participation. Self perceived Communication Competence refers individual perception of a person about his or her communication competence level (Crews & Stitt-Gohdes, 2012). In this measurement scale I had to score as per the provided option and my own perception on my ability to deal with those particular situations. The psychological interpretation regulates the communication perspective and capacity of any person. Here the score 0 refers the incompetent level, on the other hand the 100 refers the maximum competency. In this conducted analysis the number of the variable situations is 12. Observing the score card of Self perceived Communication Competence scale makes it clear that I am very active in friendly communication environment. On the other hand, talking to the strangers either in individual communication or group based communication makes me more uncomfortable to express my though and communicative materials. At the same time it is also observable that in case of friendly or official environment I am very less competent in communication with a large number of people. On the other hand, in spite of engaging in a communication with a stranger I perform better than the case of larger audience number. I have scored 60 for talking a group of stranger and scored 95 for talking with a particular friend. Therefore the major weak point of my ability of communication is greater number of audience and the familiarity of the audiences.

Communication Competence

The Nonverbal communication is the earliest communication system of mankind there an individual can express the feeling with specific facial expression and physical gesture. However the nonverbal Immediacy scale analyse only the facial expression of a person while having a conversation (Conrad & Newberry, 2012). It has been noticed that the Nonverbal Immediacy differ according to the person’s gender identification. It has been found that females have more nonverbal immediacy than male. On the contrary, it has been also theorised that this communicational difference is the result of social and cultural desires (Sharp & Brumberger, 2013). Through this analysis my facial expression and physical gesture base communication pattern have been examined with appropriate scoring system. This system analyses the nonverbal communicational pattern by measuring the frequency of using a particular gesture or expression while communicating with other. In this scale system 1 refers never, 2 refers rare, 3 refers occasional, 4 refers often and 5 refers very often use of a particular expression or body gesture. From the scorecard it has been found that, I scored 4 for using variety of vocal expression and body gesture and 1 for avoiding eye contacts. Henceforth, it have been identified that I always maintain eye contact during communication while using a dull monotonic voice. I use my arm occasionally while talking to other while maintaining short distance with the target audience. It has been also found that I tend to avoid the physical contact while engaging in a conversation while maintaining a relaxed and calm approach.

Personal Report of Intercultural Communication Apprehension or PRICA is a measurement scale of communicational efficiency in a cross-cultural environment. It helps to gauge my communicational efficiency while language and socio-cultural perspectives are the major barriers between me and my audiences (Kernbach, Eppler & Bresciani, 2015). PRICA diagnosis system has been conducted with 14 different questions about 14 different inter cultural consequences and communicational environments. Engaging in individual or a group communication can become very complex and dynamic to execute where the participants are  from different culture, social and psychological backgrounds that their way of showing expression and perceive external communicational information (Keyton et al., 2013). This scaling system is very similar to Likert scale where scoring 1 refers to strongly disagree and scoring 5 refers to strongly agree.  It has been found that I have scored 4 in the situation of communicating with people from another culture. I have scored 2 for feeling uncomfortable or nervous while communicating with a people from different culture. Therefore from the above analysis it is clear that I can communicate with any person from other cultural background comfortably. At the same time,  in this case I have also shown weak communication label when I had to talk with a group of  audiences from another culture.  on the other hand,  when I have to talk with a person individually,  I felt more comfortable and flexible to communicate with him or her   through  verbal as well as non verbal communication. While communicating with a person from another culture I have also shown adequate confidence level as well.

Nonverbal Communication and Immediacy

The word “talkaholic” reefers the ability to communicate freely with another person while engaging more with verbally rather than non-verbal communication. In more simple words a Talkaholic person uses to engage in verbal communication more frequently than an average person. As per various conducted researches on this communication and practice, it has been found that a talkaholic person is more likely to get evaluated by others (Cornelissen & Cornelissen, 2017). In this measurement, the Likert scale has been also used where 1 refers strongly disagree and 5 refers strongly agree. In this analysis 16 questions have been set to examine my communication pattern and the frequency of my formal communication. I scored 4 for keeping quiet when I have the advantage to talk.  on the other hand,  I spoke to for being a very low compulsive talker. From this analysis it has been cleared that I am not ideal talkaholic or talkative person.  I prefer keep quiet more than expressing my feelings in front of others. Apart from that, a very less amount of people have said that I talk more than I should.

Tolerance of disagreement is a measurement procedure that can calculate the ability of a person to tolerate the argument or the disagreement from another person true face to face communication. This psychological feature also reflects the amount of patience a person has while engaging in an argumentative conversation (Doorley & Garcia, 2015).  In this type of situation a person either tries to express his or her perception or wants to leave the situation at any circumstance. Through this measurement system, my level up tolerance at the situation of argument a disagreement has been analysed with the help of likert scale with 5 divisions. From the resultant scorecard, it is clear that I tend to avoid any situation that can cause an unexpected argument a disagreement. I have scored 5 in admitting that I have more fun when I use to be involved any discussion with a lot of disagreement. on the other hand I scored 1 Twilight meeting that I don’t like to be in a situation where people are in disagreement.  Therefore, according to tolerance for disagreement scale I do not like to engage any argumentative communication or any situation with lot of disagreement.  This phenomenon shows that I have very least amount of tolerance for disagreement.

From the above analysis, it can be clearly observed that there are two types of communicational issues that directly regulate my communicational tendencies and regulatory behaviours. One of the major weak points of my communication is in greater number of audience my communicational efficiency gets hindered. At the same time I can easily engage in individual communication with my friends. Apart from that I have very low level of tolerance for disagreement when I use to engage in a argumentative communication. I usually like to avoid that kind of situation, which can cause disagreement or argument.

Personal Report of Intercultural Communication Apprehension

Recently, I had to manage and lead a team of 5 members for a arranging a meeting for professional decision making. During leading and communicating with my fellow team members I have noticed that I was able to convey my opinion in one on one communication rather than the group discussion. When I used to involve in an individual communication the peers can clearly interpret my verbal and non verbal expression. On the other hand, when I had to lead the team in a conference the purpose of my speech was often failed because of misinterpretation of my statements.   In another situation, I had involved in a debate based activity on a particular topic. When I had to convey my opinion freely I did not experience uncomfortable. However, whenever other participants was counterattacking on some of my specific statement I completely kept quite in spite of having enough point to prove those participants wrong.

Speaking to an audience can be fun and exciting. However, lack of preparation or not clearly defining the presentation’s goals and its audience can make even the best-intended presentation a complete disaster. The theory of communication competence emphasise the ability of engaging with a large number people through verbal and non verbal communication with minimum amount of communicational flows (Wright et al., 2013). In another words, Communication competence emphasise the competence level of a person to engage in a successful communication through verbal, non verbal, assertive participation. Self perceived Communication Competence refers individual perception of a person about his or her communication competence level (Cahn, 2013). The more communicational competence a person has, the more freely and flawlessly he or she can express his or her feeling through verbal and nonverbal communication. The psychological interpretation regulates the communication perspective and capacity of any person. More that 36.5% adult are feeling insecure in a situation where they have to communicate with a large number of people together (Penbek, Yurdakul & Cerit, 2012).  

Currently, expected techniques for foreign dialect direction have emphasised the significance of routine with regards to dialect structures, elocution, and vocabulary with the objective of delivering native speakers. Be that as it may, centre around the making of native speakers may really be customizing numerous understudies for disappointment (Johansson, Miller & Hamrin, 2014). Such practices verifiably expect understudies to disengage from their own particular culture and acknowledge the way that the power in any connection has a place with a local speaker. Coordinating such a point of view into one’s character can restrain development toward intercultural open competence, not just in light of the fact that the student needs square with chance to carry individual foundation into the discussion, yet in addition on the grounds that such a dynamic downgrades, to the point that foundation. The Culture standard incorporates three imperative parts (Mehrabian, 2017). Two of the three, practices and items, assist us with identifying, portray, talk about, and dissect the third segment, viewpoints of a culture. Capability in every one of the three territories is essential for improvement of social affectability and intercultural competence, and in this way, by suggestion and expansion.

Talkaholic Tendency

Since the presentation of the articulation “informative competence” by Hymes in 1972, programs for the educating and testing of English as a moment or foreign dialect have progressively been assessed in wording both of their capacity to advance open competence or of their affectability to an open perspective of dialect competence and performance (Martin & Nakayama, 2013). Unfortunately, in spite of this apparent pattern, there is no accord on the idea of the informative competence constructs, nor has adequate exact help been accommodated the different illustrative models proposed. Overheads ought to be obviously stamped and masterminded all together beforehand. Flip graphs ought to be set up ahead of time when conceivable. At the point when utilized amid the introduction to take notes, make print sufficiently expansive for all members to see (Heath & Bryant, 2013).

Tolerance for disagreement emphasise the capability of an individual to participate in communication without having an alternate feeling or perception from particular involvement of individual while involving less emotion and passionate mental state within it. People who have a solid tolerance for disagreement regularly strengthen a person’s privilege to express their own conception, irrespective of whether they firmly is unable to help contradicting them (Samovar et al., 2014). They may see a vivacious open deliberation as a optimistic situation instead of an upsetting or awful trial. Tolerance of disagreement is an estimation technique that can compute the capacity of a man to endure the contention or the disagreement from someone else genuine up close and personal communication (Bylund, Peterson & Cameron, 2012). This mental element likewise mirrors the measure of tolerance a man has while taking part in a contentious discussion. In this kind of circumstance a man either tries to express his or her recognition or needs to leave the circumstance at any situation. People may end up enthusiastic when stood up to with thoughts that contention with their perspective (Linvill, Mazer & Boatwright, 2016). Thusly, usually for individuals to look for safe spots for themselves and their youngsters from thoughts they think about disputable or off-base. For instance, private secondary schools, universities and colleges may offer a “politically right” condition far from thoughts that may possibly irritated somebody. On the other hand, schools might be related with a religion or have a solid political demeanour (Misra et al., 2014). People may likewise utilize advanced devices to escape thoughts with which they oppose this idea. For instance, the nature of the web enables individuals to create informal communities and media streams that line up with their perspective (Wright, Cullum & Grandjean, 2014).

Tolerance of Disagreement

In view of the possibility, that other cannot coordinate tolerance for disagreement, rather it reflects an identified quality to keep up with the people obliquely over the cosumed time and environment. An influencing examination was conducted to develop a accurate measurement of gauging tolerance for disagreement that would assist to empower the disputation with conceptualization while perceiving the capability to foresee pessimistic full of feeling cooperation with procedural or substantive disagreement (Hopmann, 2012). To survey singular tolerance levels for disagreement, a Likert-type scale was produced and directed to 384 instructors. At first, 35 proclamations were utilized, speaking to both approach and evasion of factious circumstances particular to relational and gather discourse settings. Things were worded both decidedly and contrarily. The subjects were solicited to demonstrate the degree from their concurrence with everything as it connected to them in their own communication settings (Men, 2014). Investigation of the information brought about a 20-thing scale that reflected face legitimacy and additionally adequately high unwavering quality reliable with the conceptualization of the one-dimensional idea of the tolerance for disagreement build. The discoveries recommend that, while singular tolerance levels of disagreement shifted, the effect of such levels on struggle circumstances requires experimental examination. The development of Tolerance for Disagreement was as of late formulated by Knutson, McCroskey, Knutson, and Hurt (Camaioni, 2017). In view of past work in the zone of compromise and administration, this develop was progressed to clarify why a few people are inclined to end up associated with strife circumstances while others are most certainly not.

Analysing and overcoming the potential mismatch can act as a  Disagreement for fundamental supposition of procedural execution. It emphasise the defilation of Conflict as a theorised consequences of contention in a organised implementation of an element with either low tolerance for disagreement among a particular or arbitrary members, or a low level of positive effect among less than three of the total member count. From this point of view, arguing can be seen in a negative light as prompting disappointment with a consistently evolving condition. However, disagreement can be seen as either positive unless the tolerance for disagreement is lowers than expected or positive influence is lower (Neuliep, 2017).

In order to overcome my current lack of communicational efficiency an effective action plan can help. It can be clearly observed that there are two types of communicational issues that directly regulate my communicational tendencies and regulatory behaviours. One of the major weak points of my communication is in greater number of audience my communicational efficiency is hindered. At the same time, I can easily engage in individual communication with my friends. Apart from that, I have very low level of tolerance for disagreement when I use to engage in an argumentative communication. The following action can help to improve my communicational efficiency.

Initially, undertaking specific short courses, to develop larger audiences based communicational efficiency can help develop the communicational competence level. There are many online and offline tutorial based courses with effective simulation based examination technique that can efficiently build up my basic skill of communicating in a larger group of audience comfortably and flawlessly.

Secondly, Along this some professional communication development course undertaking advanced post-graduate communication courses at CQU can build up the fundamental structure of my communicational efficiency for both professional and personal interaction. Most of the time these courses are often linked with the self reflection and learning cycle of communicational improvement that can enhance the ability to grasp the conceptual interpretation (Moon, 2013).

In third action plan, along with this part time and full time training and development courses regular reading plan to acquire conceptual knowledge including specific communication texts and self-help books can improve my ability to implement the learned techniques and concepts in regular practices. It will also help me to keep my knowledge updated while revises my previously learned communication strategies and techniques.

Fourthly, Maintaining of personal journals reflecting on communication interactions is a widely known activity that can effectively build up my communication ability with the help of regular self reflection and evaluation cycle.

The following Timeline will help to build up my efficient and desired communicational efficiency that will enhance my potentiality to be a successful business communicator or professional communicator.

References:

Bylund, C. L., Peterson, E. B., & Cameron, K. A. (2012). A practitioner’s guide to interpersonal communication theory: An overview and exploration of selected theories. Patient Education and Counseling, 87(3), 261-267.

Cahn, D. D. (Ed.). (2013). Intimates in conflict: A communication perspective. Routledge.

Camaioni, L. (2017). The development of intentional communication: A re-analysis. In New perspectives in early communicative development (pp. 82-96). Routledge.

Conrad, D., & Newberry, R. (2012). Identification and instruction of important business communication skills for graduate business education. Journal of Education for Business, 87(2), 112-120.

Cornelissen, J., & Cornelissen, J. P. (2017). Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice. Sage.

Crews, T. B., & Stitt-Gohdes, W. L. (2012). Incorporating Facebook and Twitter in a service-learning project in a business communication course. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(1), 76-79.

Doorley, J., & Garcia, H. F. (2015). Reputation management: The key to successful public relations and corporate communication. Routledge.

Heath, R. L., & Bryant, J. (2013). Human communication theory and research: Concepts, contexts, and challenges. Routledge.

Hopmann, D. N. (2012). The consequences of political disagreement in interpersonal communication: New insights from a comparative perspective. European Journal of Political Research, 51(2), 265-287.

Johansson, C., D. Miller, V., & Hamrin, S. (2014). Conceptualizing communicative leadership: A framework for analysing and developing leaders’ communication competence. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 19(2), 147-165.

Kernbach, S., Eppler, M. J., & Bresciani, S. (2015). The use of visualization in the communication of business strategies: An experimental evaluation. International Journal of Business Communication, 52(2), 164-187.

Keyton, J., Caputo, J. M., Ford, E. A., Fu, R., Leibowitz, S. A., Liu, T., … & Wu, C. (2013). Investigating verbal workplace communication behaviors. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 50(2), 152-169.

Linvill, D. L., Mazer, J. P., & Boatwright, B. C. (2016). Need for cognition as a mediating variable between aggressive communication traits and tolerance for disagreement. Communication Research Reports, 33(4), 363-369.

Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2013). Intercultural communication in contexts. New York: NY: McGraw-Hill.

Mehrabian, A. (2017). Nonverbal communication. Routledge.

Men, L. R. (2014). Strategic internal communication: Transformational leadership, communication channels, and employee satisfaction. management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), 264-284.

Misra, S., Krishna, P. V., Saritha, V., Agarwal, H., & Ahuja, A. (2014). Learning automata-based multi-constrained fault-tolerance approach for effective energy management in smart grid communication network. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 44, 212-219.

Moon, J. A. (2013). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. Routledge.

Neuliep, J. W. (2017). Intercultural communication: A contextual approach. Sage Publications.

Penbek, ?., Yurdakul ?ahin, D., & Cerit, A. G. (2012). Intercultural communication competence: A study about the intercultural sensitivity of university students based on their education and international experiences. International Journal of Logistics Systems and management, 11(2), 232-252.

Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., McDaniel, E. R., & Roy, C. S. (2014). Intercultural communication: A reader. Cengage Learning.

Sharp, M. R., & Brumberger, E. R. (2013). Business communication curricula today: Revisiting the top 50 undergraduate business schools. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(1), 5-27.

Sigmar, L. S., Hynes, G. E., & Hill, K. L. (2012). Strategies for teaching social and emotional intelligence in business communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(3), 301-317.

Wright, J., Cullum, J., & Grandjean, P. (2014). The Cognitive Mechanisms of Intolerance. Oxford studies in experimental philosophy, 1.

Wright, K. B., Rosenberg, J., Egbert, N., Ploeger, N. A., Bernard, D. R., & King, S. (2013). Communication competence, social support, and depression among college students: a model of facebook and face-to-face support network influence. Journal of Health Communication, 18(1), 41-57.

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order