(Lecture, Technology and Teams: “Virtual or real communication”) Looking at how technology influences our lives is hard to even see, since it has become such an accepted daily occurrence to use cell phones, email, facebook, myspace, ipods, etc. Virtual meetings are becoming more commonplace in business. The lecture asks a great question about these interactions being “real” or not. I would say that they are, but because they lack direct human contact, they are missing out on many types of non-verbal communication. The difference should not be “real vs. virtual” as much as “in person vs. virtual.”
I attended a lecture recently in which the instructor pointed out that most of communication is non-verbal. I am sure that how much is non-verbal is up for debate, but his point was well-taken. How someone says something is almost more important than what he/she says. When IMing, the “how” (tone, gestures, sarcasm, etc) is hard to communicate and can be lost. I would guess that everyone reading this has had the unhappy experience of either being misunderstood or misunderstanding someone else during virtual communications! It is not fun and happens very easily.
Avaliação Parcial - Empreendedorismo
15 years ago
3 comments:
Hi MPA Student - I completely agree with your point about non-verbal communication. This is a critical component of interacting with others that can often be forgotten. I’ve seen seemingly countless occasions where e-mail messages have been misunderstood, and then have snowballed into a mass of confusion, emotion, and worst of all, diatribes. And many times, the sender never intended for the message to be negative, the message just wound up being misinterpreted by the recipient (goes to your point about “how” someone says something). I’ve found that a simple phone call, or better yet (if this is possible), talking with the person face-to-face can be an effective way to minimize the chances of this avalanche of emotional outbursts. Even today, if I know I’ll be sending an e-mail message that has even the slightest chance of controversy, I try to talk with people beforehand to help prevent any potential problems from arising.
I felt it necessary to comment on your post after reading it. I was instantly reminded of all the arguments I have had because of differing interpretations of something that had been written over instant messaging. How much of the senders "intent" gets lost in cyberspace? I have noticed that sarcasm often does not transfer over well; even to others with a dry sense of humor. Using instant messaging in a work environment can create greater opportunities for miscommunication even while it makes it easier to coordinate projects between staff. With all of the opportunities for miscommunication I think it becomes difficult to argue that online or cellular based communications are any less real than face to face. The consequences seem just as real.
The difference should not be “real vs. virtual” as much as “in person vs. virtual.”
I definitely agree with that - we have so many different kinds of communication now, that we can't only categorize in-person as "real."
You're also right about IMs. I've had my share of misunderstandings because of sarcasm or tone on the internet. Often a joke can be taken seriously, and some people even get mad if the other person doesn't reply right away, even though that person may be talking to 5 other people online.
Maybe the internet and IMs will help people try to choose their words more carefully so as to avoid these types of situations.
Post a Comment