Communication in Organizations for Acquaintance- myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theCommunication in Organizations for Acquaintance and Family. Answer: The communication process applies to every kind of relationship in our everyday life. It might be in a friendship, a relationship, an acquaintance, a family, a couple, and other different scenarios. Though the communication process may seem simple, the truth might turn out to be a lot more different. This essay delves into a communication event that can help us understand the whole process while at the time basing our discussion on the theories brought forward to explain the process. My friend and I were out shopping to one of a famous mall in the town and found ourselves by this salesman and his client. I put down some pickups from their conversation to try and relate to our class on communication and the underlying theories. The communication action language during the event describes the ideas and concepts of the transactional communication model. The communication event captured also conceptualizes the social penetration theory. The transactional type of communication model was typical during the whole bargaining and the salesman bargaining. The handshake at the initial meeting between customers was recorded for hepatics. Proxemics was also observed when the two maintained distance between themselves. However, information was not always sent or received successfully along the channels because of significant levels of another unbearable promo music that was noisy a few feet away from the location we were. According to Andiola, Bedard and Westermann 2018, such a situation makes it difficult to have a shared meaning between the two, everyone coming up with a new opinion on why their pricing was to be settled for. For instance, the salesman would be heard trying to tell his strong points on why the price matched the product at stake, but the customer would disrupt the message with semantic and external. Their argument would attract a third employee who on our next realization was the supervisor who engaged the customer decoded their bargaining correctly and through his facial expression of smiling which meant he had everything under control and send appropriate feedback to customer hence reaching a common agreement. This scenario happens a lot in shops with no price tags on items (Korn and Heekeren 2016). Most shops have top level management that is supposed to help clients and the salespeople to give each a listening ear other and drown unnecessary noises. Such top level interventions are not always as successful as they are expected to be because as observed they all had difficulty with self-disclosure. Both parties and especially the client were seen masking, withholding, not displaying, and not describing their main reasons with the new entrant, the supervisor. The customer and the salesman were getting to know each other when the supervisor intervened. Paralanguage was documented when the supervisor joined the two and silence ensued due to the fact that neither party was willing to go first in stating their take. My thinking, the trio was still in the process of the sharing of personal perspectives and biographical information. Weiner (2018) generated a structure theoretically that has grown into a significant research standard of social psychology based on the pioneer psychology theory of attribution Crook (2018). Crook deliberated on what he termed as nave psychology. According to Crooks opinion, individuals were perceived as newbie scientists, delving into other peoples behavior and coming up with a conclusion. The theory on attribution was noted when the supervisor got concerned about the individuals bargaining, interpreted the event and the way this relates to their mode of thinking and behavior when he decides to approach the two. According to Pekrun and Harsh (2016) theory on attribution fundamentally assumes the reasons why individuals decide to take certain paths. Also, the salesperson in trying to comprehend reason behind the supervisor did what he did may have led him to attribute one or multiple causes to that of the supervisors behavior? As Crook stated that individual makes two attributions. First, the intimate attribution, where suppose an individual due to something about that person acts in a certain manner such as bearing or temperament. Secondly an outer attribution, presumption that people are acting in a given manner because of something about the situation they are in. Peoples emotional and motivational drive their attributions to a notable extent. Things like putting blame on others while fending off self-serving attributions criticisms. Moreover, individuals in the quest to shield those termed as onslaught will make attributions. The interpersonal communication between the client and the salesman did not bring out attribution error (Maymon, Hall, Goetz, Chiarella and Rahimi, 2018). Injustice in an unfair world will be pointed out. People will go on even to blame casualties for their consequence as they seek to keep themselves away from feelings of grieving similar predicament. Most people set down uncertainty to others hence taking individuality as versatile. I could not relate any event happening to refer to the conceptual model Preferred Methods Different structures have been exercised in attribution measurement and categorization. Open-ended methods include the person studying the structures categorizing replies by word of mouth of shareholders to general or open questions. The score methods derived demand l0o from players for their success or the contrary on a given scales for various rudiments (Graham 2018). Extent and Utilization Theory on attribution has been applied in demonstrating the variance in motivation between high and low achievers particularly in workplace setting like in the shop setting explained here(Harvey and Madison 2014). As per the theory, high achievers will approach tasks related to succeeding instead of avoiding them, because they base their trust in the fact that achievement relates to trust on high effort as displayed by the salesperson that could not let go the customer (Graham and Taylor, 2016). Failure is considered to be affected by a poor exam and is not their responsibility. As such, omission is negligible concerning morale, though achievement develops self regard and determination. Contrary to that, underachievers dodge tasks that are success oriented since they incline to assume achievement is connected to external elements. For this reason, it isn't taken as prosperity by dismal achievers after winning for lack of responsibility thus belief remains the same (Lyndon and Mc Cammon, 2016). Importance of nonverbal communication was also observed in the discussion captured as my case study. Nonverbal connection acts as a significant determinant of meaning in interpersonal context together with real emotions and feelings can only be displayed through nonverbal means. For best accuracy of gauging feelings and emotions verbal and nonverbal one's modes of communication between the two could be observed like the salesperson who is seen wondering how the client could not understand why the price was fixed as it was (Maymon, 2018). All types of nonverbal communication like kinesis which entails discussion through body motion or behavior was observed like during disagreements the customer, and even the salesperson could drop their shoulders. The paralinguistic conversation that involves the use of gestures, signals or voice tones to communicates was overfilled on some occasions like nodding to signal a yes or disagreement on a statement. In conclusion, almost all our everyday conversations be they during arguments, discussions, speech presentations, covers and has an underlying framework as discussed in the topics from our class. References Andiola, L., Bedard, J.C. and Westermann, K., 2018. It's Not My Fault! Insights into Subordinate Auditors Attributions and Emotions Following Audit Review. Graham, S. and Taylor, A.Z., 2016. Attribution theory and motivation in school.Handbook of motivation at school, pp.11-33. Harvey, P., Madison, K., Martinko, M., Crook, T.R. and Crook, T.A., 2014. Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: The road traveled and the path ahead.The Academy of Management Perspectives,28(2), pp.128-146. Harvey, P., Martinko, M.J. and Borkowski, N., 2017. Justifying deviant behavior: The role of attributions and moral emotions.Journal of business ethics,141(4), pp.779-795. Kessler, S.R., Mahoney, K.T., Randolph-Seng, B., Martinko, M.J. and Spector, P.E., 2017. The Effects of Attribution Style and Stakeholder Role on Blame for the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill.Business Society, p.0007650317717495. Korn, C.W., Rosenblau, G., Buritica, J.M.R. and Heekeren, H.R., 2016. Performance feedback processing is positively biased as predicted by attribution theory.PloS one,11(2), p.e0148581. Lyndon, A.E., Crowe, A., Wuensch, K.L., McCammon, S.L. and Davis, K.B., 2016. College students stigmatization of people with mental illness: familiarity, implicit person theory, and attribution.Journal of mental health, pp.1-5. Maymon, R., Hall, N.C., Goetz, T., Chiarella, A. and Rahimi, S., 2018. Technology, attributions, and emotions in post-secondary education: An application of Weiners attribution theory to academic computing problems.PloS one,13(3), p.e0193443.