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.


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.


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.


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Your email address will not be published.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 *