Communications Improvement Strategy the Most

Communications Improvement Strategy

The most important aspect of communications is the underlying value of the ideas and concepts they transmit. Nevertheless, the process of communication often determines how those ideas and concepts are received. A flawless message is of little value to the extent it is presented in such a way as to diminish its persuasiveness. Ideally, communications strategies should increase rather than decrease interest in the message and should be adaptable enough to incorporate change, particularly where any recognizable pattern arises in connection with the breakdown of communications. Where breakdowns in communications are attributable to communications methods and practice, an improvement action plan is necessary to increase the effectiveness of future communications.

Description of the Problem:

I have identified two specific communications patterns that sometimes compromise the effectiveness of my interpersonal and professional communications.

First, I have repeatedly caught myself focused so much on composing my thoughts to make my next point that it interferes with active listening on my part, one of the most important components of the communications process (Beebe, Beebe, & Redmond, 2008;

Locker, 2005). As a result, my subsequent response often fails to engage the listener because it does not provide any direct confirmation that acknowledges that I understand the listener's argument or specific concerns (Blair, 2003). This sometimes triggers a pattern of two parties' merely talking at each other or lobbying their ideas instead of establishing a dynamic exchange of ideas and perspectives through the communications process.

Second, I have a habit of presenting ideas and arguments through analogies before any indication that the individual understands the logic of analogies. Even worse,

sometimes I lead with the illustrative premise, (possibly to increase the impact of the argument), instead of introducing the premise through language such as: "That would be no different from & #8230; ." As a result, listeners who are already inclined to misunderstand the logical relevance of analogies in general are even more likely to argue against the premise or to conclude (erroneously) that I am either supporting the illustrative premise or suggesting a direct comparison between the subject matter of the analogy and the original issue under discussion.

Action Plan:

The appropriate action plan to increase the effectiveness of my communications strategy would emphasize the need to increase active listening. In that regard, it would also include the concept of allowing one's response in an exchange to conform more closely to the proverbial wavelength of the other party. For example, the first response to an argument based on emotions (ethos), should address that perspective before presenting an argument based on a different perspective, such as strict logic (logos).

Therefore, my action plan for addressing this problem is to avoid thinking about composing my next point in a discussion during the time that the other party is making a counterargument on the issue. Instead of formulating a subsequent point that is mainly as a follow-up to my previous point, I will make the effort to listen more intently to the counterargument and validate the other party's perspective by asking a neutral question for clarification of the counterargument first. My natural impulse is to attack or disprove the counterargument in my first response to the exchange. My action plan will require that I delay my response for at least one more exchange and that my first substantive point will be directed by the specific point of the other party instead of by my previous point, necessarily.

To address the second communication problem that I identified, my action plan

requires me to implement two specific changes in the actual arguments that I employ.

Analogies are often very effective in responding to arguments, but they may not always be the most appropriate first choice with every audience. Some individuals typically confuse an analogy with a comparison; therefore my action plan requires me to use a different tactical approach for my first point and, more generally, to make an attempt to gauge the likely ability of the other party to understand analogies in principle before relying on them. More specifically, my action plan also requires me to explicitly introduce any analogies as analogies to reduce any chance that the listener will misconstrue them as direct comparisons or misunderstand my position.