The Nature of Communications in Organizations

The Nature of Communication in Organizations illustrates the myths and misconceptions of commmunication, they laid out and explained this through examples in a work place. Although many of the myths overlaped in their definitions. Myth #2 discuses non-verbal communication as does myth #7 which explains silence as a communicator. Myth #1: meaning are in words, described the theory that meaning is found in people, not in words. Though we as comunication students should not forget that words and their meanings can be understood in different ways within the context of a dialoge. The content of a dialoge also determines the meanings of certain words,this can alter the understanding between two people.

As we all know communication contains the processes of verbal and nonverbal cues. This also incluldes the factor of gestures and their importance. A key statement which I found useful in effective communication, said that being sensitive to others veiws is key in communications skills. Myth #8: comunication is a natural ability, states that comunication is a learned ability. The author justifies the learning experience happends when a individual is educated and undergoes experiences. But how can we assume that everyone has access and the means to get educated and have experieces that will shape their communicatons skills. I do believe comunication is learned, but it is not a natural ability that we all do easily.

The components of communication which include a source, channel, reciever, message and noise within that model all work together to explain how a message is sent and received. This model is timeless in the effect that messages will always be sent and received in a simular form, from time to time. Establishing an understanding for how people correspond with one and another is knowledge that will always be put to use.

The Nature of Organizations

After reading chapter one of the text, it was apparent that authors Richmond and McCroskey truly had the idea of "survival" in mind when writing it. I wish I had the opprotunity to read this before getting hired at my current job.

The distinction between different organizations such as, profit based, nonprofit and not-for-profit is made very clear. Although the differences discused revolve around how money is made and retained by a company, we must not forget the differences in employer/employee relations as well as the undertone in the office. Though each office has its own characteristics they each do maintain that certain system which makes it a work place. I presently work at a psychatrists office on the East side and everything that was explained throughout the chapter I related to. There is a hierarchy of doctors, testers, social workers, and therapists, then come the support staff.

Which then brings me to the idea of "roles", are people always hired due to their qualifications or because they simply fit the role? When I began working at the practice I was merely a freshman "peon" filing charts, then I was instructed to help out with the billing department (it was too much for one person to handle, I was told), soon after learning the ropes, the "financial department" was fired and I was hired. It did not take a genious to see where the doctors were making company budget cuts. It was cheaper for them to hire a undergrad off the books as opposed to a degree holding buisness man. Aside from my age, this allowed my status to rise, I got my own office, and now the doctors know I am in charge of cutting them their checks. I did however notice after getting to know the practitioners better, that they all have ties to NYU medical school or are Jewish. Just prime examples of how the boss has organizational culture in mind. Understanding the ins and outs of a company is helpful, but as Melissa states, buisness etiquette is important, but communication skills are key anywhere you are.

Lyneve

Lyneve
Originally uploaded by Lyneve.

hello