Organizational Communication

Training Packet

I will be reflecting on my team’s final training program plan that we completed in Organizational Communication.  To complete this plan successfully, we incorporated skills learned from the course and research we did about our specific training topic: effective listening.  In this reflection, I will explain specific knowledge we learned through research and class concepts that we used to compose this plan, show how knowledge and theories were used in the plan through specific examples, explain how this plan used good program design and elaborate on what our team could have done in order to make this plan better.

Problems with listening arise when organizations take the mechanistic or classical approach to organizational communication.  Organizations with the mechanistic approached are highly focused on the task and getting results.  Examples of these systems are militaries and police forces.  Our group wanted to focus on organizations that wanted to improve in two specific areas: improve listening between upper management and employees, and improve listening between employees and customers.  To do this, we knew that we would have to recognize concepts of different types of organizational communication.  As a part of our questionnaire that we would send to our trainees, we would ask questions that would let us know what type of organizational style their organization had.  The types that we tried to identify were mechanistic (classical), H.R. models and system approach.  The mechanistic is the one we were most concerned about because they are more likely have poor listening skills.  The H.R. model is a type of organizational communication that focuses on the relationship between management and employees.  We knew they knew how to communicate well with each other, but we wanted to enhance their ability to be active listeners that listens from the bottom up, not just the top down.  The systems approach blends the two models.  We also knew that we could help these types of trainees because the systems are likely to have negative energy that can effect listening.  Therefore, using our knowledge of the types of organizations our trainees could be in, we set out to build a training program that would be suitable for all of them.

First, our group researched the topic of effective listening.  Our primary source was the article Communicating in Business and Professional Settings.  This article explained the four components of the listening process, sensing, attending, understanding and remembering, and the difficulties that come with each one.  We gathered knowledge about the listening process through this article and incorporated each part into our training.  For example, all of our modules in the training program are specifically geared toward a part in the listening process. The listening process includes four stages: sensing, attending, understanding and remembering.  We wanted each of our trainees to understand the knowledge of how the listening process takes place.  We also went in order with the listening process, starting with sensing. Sensing is receiving stimuli through all five senses.  Our modules included different ways that people can listen to messages that we may not realize; sight, sound, taste and even how someone feels.  Then the process goes to attending, which allows you to choose and recognize which sense to use.  After that, the trainees learned understanding, which how to interpret the messages received through different senses.  Then the last step of the listening process is remembering.  Knowing each part of the listening process is only the first part to our training topic.  The second part is dealing with problems that arise with each part.  The article talked about how each listening process had its own set of challenges that any person faces in a work setting.   We included each problem with listening in our program modules so that trainees will be able to recognize what those problems are.

We wanted to be able to equip them with the knowledge to solve those problems when they occur in the real world.  One module is “problems with remembering.”  In this module we explained why people don’t remember certain things and tips on note taking and paraphrasing that will help trainees remember in the work place.  Another module took trainees through different messages that people may not realize they are getting.  This was intended for trainees to realize how to use the attending stage to figure out how to receive the message in the first place.  One example is body language.  This is sometimes hard to realize a message is occurring because not everyone pays attention to someone else’s body language.  Our program was designed to help our trainees realize their surroundings and pick up on different queues to better receive messages.

For each of our modules, we made sure that each one had components of a good program design.  One component of a good program is if it uses all three styles of learning: Visual, auditory and kinesics.  Our modules had these three components in each of them.  For example, in the sensing module, we started by playing the game Pictionary.  This served as both visual and kinesthetic learning.  Groups physically drew out the message they were trying to portray while others had to look at what the message was, forcing them to learn through those two methods.  We also had lecture that explained what was to be learned through Pictionary so that auditory learners could understand our goals for the game.  A good program is also engaging.  These activities, along with questions that we asked were designed to engaged the audience with the material.  A good training program also has set objectives for each module.  Our program had several overall objectives, in the modules, those objectives were stated again as they related to the topic of the module.         

Overall, I see our training program as an overall success that would be sustainable over a two day period and would cover several different parts of listening that would be beneficial to trainees.  Our program is not perfect however, and there are a few things that we could do better.  First would be our objectives.  The objectives were good objectives, but our team could have done a better job at explaining why these objectives were chosen for each module and how the games and lectures would achieve those objectives.  Our team also could have been more in depth with our descriptions and questions that we asked the trainees.  A more in depth description of what each part of the listening process would have helped the trainees realize the importance of our program.  All-in-all, our program used knowledge of listening and quality program design to create a program that was interactive and complete.

Media Production

Citizen’s Arrest

Citizen’s Arrest Screenplay

For this reflection, I will be reflecting on how I applied my knowledge of communication skills to the movie I created for Convergent Media.  This movie showed how I used my knowledge in how to create a quality movie.  Throughout the class, we talked about how to put a sequence of small clips together to tell a story.

Most scenes start with an establishing shot then move to a closer shot of the actual people or objects in the scene.  In a conversation, the camera doesn’t cross over the imaginary line that I 180 degrees from the first lace the camera was.  I used both of these qualities throughout my movie.  For example in the poker night scene, my establishing shot was a close up of the poker chips.  I then moved to show both of the characters that were having conversation.  In the café scene where Jack asks Megan out, I start with an establishing shot through the window to show both of them talking.  I then move inside to show Jacks line and quickly across the table to show Megan’s line.  I kept the camera in the same place and did not cross the 180 degree line.  If I did cross that line, the audience would be confused because the perspective would be completely different.  The continuity between Jack and Megan’s line would be broken up.  By staying on the same side of the table and angling the camera the same way for both shots, the shots flowed together to complete the conversation.

Most movies follow a story arc or a variation of a story arc.  The tradition story arc goes like this: establish routine, inciting incident, everything changes, obstacle to overcome, rise in tension, midpoint, everything changes, another obstacle, climax and dénouement.  My story structure follows very close to the story arc.  Since the movie is only twelve minutes long, I decided to add a flashback to establish a routine.  While this is not a routine, it establishes the main character and puts the story in motion.  My inciting incident is when Jack and Megan meet and Megan gets bullied.  This incident inspires Jack to change to become more confident.  Then comes Jack’s first obstacle, becoming confident enough to talk to Megan.  The tension rises through the montage of Jack and Megan going on several dates and then rises to the midpoint when Jack asks Megan to date him.  Then the story changes to focus on Jacks adventures as a C.A.O.  As Jack and his friend discuss his adventures, another obstacle is introduced, Jack writing up his own friends making them feel threatened.  This obstacle is a little more subtle but is relevant when Sam says “Uhoh, sheriff Flanny is out to get us.”  This implies that Sam is slightly threatened by Jacks power.  That leads to the next stop on the story arc, the climax.  The climax of my movie is when Alex cuts Jack’s C.A.O. card.  The tension building up to the climax is shown through music and the confusion that Jacks friends have when he says what they are doing is illegal.  The tension rises even more when they get frustrated for Jack taking his power too far.  The end, or dénouement, is where the plot lines come together and conflict is resolved and explained.  My ending is with Megan helping Jack realize that his confidence was really inside him all along. Also I connected the beginning and end together by letting the last scene explain what actually happened in the first scene.  This explained any confusion and resolved the conflict that Jack had with his friends.  When Jack opens his hood and sees the note put there by his friends, he realizes what he did was over the top, just like the joke they played on him.  So in a way, it is how his friends get even with him after writing them up for a silly law.

Group Communication

Jury Deliberation

For this application of knowledge reflection, I chose a small group jury deliberation project that I did for a small group course.  In Communication and Public Relations fields, there are many times where a group environment will be the main environment for the work place.  Knowing small group roles, skills and tendencies will teach me knowledge that will be helpful in the field.  This jury deliberation required our group to know how successfully and efficiently sort through facts and work through the decision making process.  Our group also needed to know what group climate was and how to have positive group climate.  Individually, it required us to know our roles in a small group and the characteristics we possess when we are in a group.

Our group demonstrated the five step process in decision making for each person involved in the crime we were deliberating on.  The first step in the process is to identify and clarify the decision that needs to be made.  The very first thing we did as a group was read the trial as whole before looking at each individual suspect.  Then we read each question that needed to be answered for each subject so we knew exactly what we were supposed to decide on.  By reading these questions first, we clarified the decision at hand without going into the specifics of the case.  After clarifying the decision, our group moved on to the second step of decision making which is identifying possible options.  Our group did this step by going through each of the five suspects individually and looking at the possible sentences we could give them and whether or not we should try them as a juvenile or an adult.  Our group was provided with a list of sentences we could choose from for each suspect.  Before giving sentences we needed to understand exactly what each one was.  This helped give our group a base knowledge of our options so that we could easily go through each suspect and see if their crimes fit into one of the sentences.  The next step was to gather and process information.  The information that we need on this case was given to us beforehand so our group needed to process all the information that we had.  We did this by looking at each suspect and talking the scenario that happened.  The scenario was about five boys got into an argument and one boy ended up being murdered.  The information we had was background on each boy, background on the place where the crime took place, the witness’s testimony and other testimonies that were given in the trial.  For each boy, we talked through what happened from their point of view using all the information we were given.  We connected dots to help us sort through information.  For example, one boy said that all five boys were at the scene of the crime while another boy said there were only two.  Our information said that the boy claiming that all five men were at the scene was known for lying and had a bad record while the other boy was trusted and had a clean record.  Therefore we decided through the information given to believe the trusted boy.  One thing we did do that is important in the decision making process is that we did not jump into making a decision, which is the fourth step, while still processing the information.  We processed all of the information for each boy before giving each boy a sentence.  After processing all the information we then gave what we believed to be the most appropriate sentence to each suspect.  We did this by listening to what everyone subjected to sentence be and narrowed the decision down to two or three possible sentences.  Then our group presented arguments for or against each sentence in order to find the appropriate on.  We did this for each suspect.  We then completed the last step of decision making, evaluating the decision, by comparing what our verdict was to our first clarification of what decision has to be made.  Our group looked at what we decided the options were and made sure our verdict coincided with our options we laid out in the second step.  This allowed us to fully evaluate our decision and avoid confusion or contradictions.

Our group was able to make a confident decision due to our relatively positive climate.  The best qualities of a positive small group climate that our group had were equality and spontaneity.  First, we viewed everyone and every opinion as equal to others.  From my opinion that Micah killed Jimmy to Bryant’s idea that Mike accidently killed his best friend, all were viewed as equal and something worth discussing.  Also, I showed equality when I shot down my own assumption that Micah killed Jimmy due to not enough substantial evidence.  When I considered Bryant’s opinion I noted that it was not consistent with the evidence.  In the same way, my idea was not in agreement with the evidence and I was willing to exclude my opinion in the same why I did for Bryant’s.  Spontaneity also was crucial to keep a positive climate in our group.  While being organized is important, our group was spontaneous by switching topics every so often to keep conversation going.  Whenever our group came to road block that stopped us from progressing in discussion, a group member would switch to a different part of the case or ask something not related to the case at all to relieve some tension.  This helped us come back to the topic later with a different perspective.  With this new perspective, our climate was positive and we didn’t have a negative attitude toward the topic.  This allowed us to come to a better decision.

Knowing individual roles within a group is important when making a group decision.  Roles can help the group or distract the group.  There are three categories for group roles, task, maintenance and self-centered, and in each category there are several roles.  Throughout the jury deliberation, I noticed that I didn’t stick to one particular role.  As I watched myself I noticed I moved through all three categories, task, maintenance and self-centered, of small group roles.  At the beginning of the deliberation, I seemed to be the primary initiator.  To start discussion, I stated “let’s go off of the sheet,” implying that we should start with the first question that was given to us at the end of the packet and address each boy individually in the order that was in the packet.  In doing this, our group was able to keep organization throughout the deliberation.  When we were deciding on if each boy should be tried as an adult or a juvenile, I was the person that would introduce each person and start the discussion about that person.  Overall, my role as an initiator helped our group stay on task.  Another role that I found myself playing was opinion giver.  I wouldn’t classify this role as my primary role through the deliberation but a few times I gave my opinion as to what I thought was happening during the time of the murder or a different view of who might of killed Jimmy.  Specifically, at the beginning of deliberating what each boy should be charged with I stated “to me I think Micah was the one that committed the biggest crime.”  This statement was my opinion and I generated this opinion through the fact that Jason has covered up for Micah in the past and my gut told me that Micah did it.  Although my opinion didn’t affect the outcome of the verdict, it did cause the group to think more thoroughly about what happened and who we are going to believe. Without my opinion, we might have not come to the conclusion that we did and ultimately could have believed more of Mike’s testimony.

One role that I anticipated myself being, and wanted to be in, was an encourager.  There are plenty of times when I don’t want to hear myself anymore and let other people’s opinions come to the table.  With that, comes my willingness to accept and analyze that person’s opinion.  One opinion that was really clever was Bryant’s theory of Mike killing Jimmy on accident. Bryant said “I think Mike might have taken the knife from Jason because he stole that gun from the cop.”  At first I didn’t know what to think of this theory, but the more Bryant explained himself the more I liked his theory.  I did enjoy his theory and thought that it might be true but I pointed out that “also was never mentioned and is a complete assumption.”  While later, I stated “I like the theory, but I just don’t know if we can go off assumptions” signifying that I encourage his theory but ultimately it’s a little too farfetched.  Another example of my encouraging role was towards the end, the majority of the group preferred that Jason not serve life in prison, but Katie was hesitant on that decision.  I could see that she was still uncomfortable but said that she was okay with just 25 years of prison, therefore I stated “but make your case, come on let’s hear it.”  After that, we compromised to sentence Jason to 25 years to life in prison.

Our group successfully went through all five steps of the decision making process to come up with what we saw as the best decision.  I used my knowledge of group roles to help group climate and decision making.  Roles are important in the group and I demonstrated what I knew my natural characteristics were.

Journalism

Tyrell Ceremony

The artifact that I have chosen to reflect on is a sport story for MC-TV.  This story is coverage of the memorial ceremony held by MC Softball team for their assistant coach Jeff Tyrell.  Through taking several TV workshops, I have learned several skills to make a good story.  Knowing what I learned about what makes a good story in the world of broadcast journalism, I was able to plan out how I wanted the story to go.  Before starting any story, a journalist has to think about the flow of the story.  I wanted to start the story by giving the audience the background information of who the coach was.  How did he get his nickname?  What made him so good?  I wanted to answer those questions first.  Then, I wanted to show how the softball team was going to honor him by dedicating the season to him.  I did this through interviews with players and coaches.  Then, the last thing I wanted to do was to show the coach’s legacy that he left on the game.  I did this with an interview with his son and he explained what he thought his father’s legacy was.

To make this particular story, I focused on the interview shots and made sure I did two that I learned during each interview: allow for look space and have an interactive background.  For all four of my interviews, including the stand-up at the beginning and end of the piece, there was what we call “look space.”  Look space is the amount of space given to wherever the interviewer is located.  This is important to make the interview look like a natural conversation between the subject and interviewer.  This creates a relaxed atmosphere in the story rather than having the subject look directly into the camera, which creates tension and more forceful atmosphere. For example, in the interview with Jeff Tyrell’s son, he was placed on the left side of the screen because I was on the right side of the camera.  The space in between the subject and the right side of the screen is larger than the space between him and the left side of the screen.  In an interview shot, I learned that an interactive background or exciting background is more pleasing to the viewer.  For my interviews, I made sure to have the softball field with players warming up behind the subject.  I also learned that B-roll is important when shooting a news story.  B-roll is video that better describes the event while the anchor explains what is being seen.  The B-roll needs to be smooth flowing with the script.  When I talked about “tears and sorrow” I showed video of player crying and when I talked about Coach Tyrell’s son, I showed pictures of him talking.  Another skill that I had knowledge of and used in my story was that B-roll needs to be centered on one specific thing rather than a wide shot of a variety of things.  B-roll is supposed to control how the viewer looks at the story.  By giving the viewer only one or two things to look at, they can get a better idea of what is going on.  The main purpose of my story was to show how the softball team honored their assistant coach who recently passed away.  In order for the viewer to see that purpose in my story, each B-roll shot had one or two things from the ceremony.  I used mainly close-up and medium range shots that captured a sign, the bracelets the softball team was selling, a picture of coach Tyrell and a group of three or four people listening to the speeches.  Each shot focused on one specific part of the ceremony rather than getting one wide shot of the whole field.  This allowed the viewer to get a closer look at what happened during the ceremony.

Stories always have to have two important things when considered to be put into a local newscast: timeliness and newsworthiness.  Timeliness is how sensitive is the topic in concept of time.  When did this happen? Is it important right now?  My story is timely because the celebration happened during the softball season.  Coach Tyrell’s death happened far earlier, but the story was not about his death, but rather the celebration of his life by the team that he coached.  News worthiness is how important the story is to the audience.  Since my audience is the Monmouth College campus, included faculty and students, this story carries a lot of news worthiness for two reasons.  The first is that is affects the softball team which is important to many students and faculty.  The second is that many students and faculty had a relationship with coach Tyrell.  They would want to know how the softball team is dealing with his death and honoring him during the season.

One thing that was always said during class was not to tell that the event happened but to tell what happened at the event.  This is important when writing a script.  I kept this in mind when writing the script for this piece because I told more about Coach Tyrell and his life and how he impacted Monmouth college, rather than writing about the softball team holding a memorial.  Everyone knows that the softball team held a memorial; my job is to tell them what they missed.  For example, I took stories that the head coach told in his speech and I used that to create a list of what coach Tyrell did and how that impacted Monmouth college softball players.  One story Coach Goddard told the crowd was about spending a lot of nights in the same hotel room as coach Tyrell.  He learned a lot of new things about him during this time and I shared a few of those in the script to give more information about coach Tyrell.  I did that by using all the knowledge that I had learned and applied it to my news story.