Communication Interpretations

As a component of my EDUC 6145 course from Walden University, in which I am presently enrolled as I pursue a masters degree in Instructional Design and Technology, we are exploring the impact of different forms of communication.  This week, we were asked to evaluate the same message delivered in a variety of mediums.  First off, we were asked to evaluate a message in which the sender was asking for the recipient to send critical feedback that was necessary for the sender to complete their report.

email:

Via email, the message seemed rather desperate.  The tone of the email also seemed a little helpless.  It was, however, very direct and to the point, making it’s message abundantly clear.

Voicemail:

The same message was then delivered via voicemail.  Through this medium, the message certainly had a more personal, and less desperate tone.  The urgency was indeed still present, but without the desperation.

Face-to-Face:

Finally, the same message was delivered via a face-to-face conversation.  This medium certainly had the most natural feel, but also created a unique motivation as I watched it that the email and voicemail certainly did not.  I felt more connected to the individual, and sensed the importance on a personal level.

Clearly, the underlying message of this activity is quite evident.  That is, that face-to-face communication has a certain, quantifiable power that digital mediums simply fail to capitalize on.  There is a more natural, personal connection created between sender and recipient.  In terms of usage, I think that email and voicemail serve a very broad, and general purpose in terms of communication.  However, when there are high stakes involved in assuring that a message is not just sent, but felt by the recipient, face-to-face communication is king!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *