Find Somebody Else Case
Read the "Find Somebody Else" Case, then answer the following questions below:
4.1. What principles of supportive communication and supportive listening are violated in this case? At the time the conversation took place between Ron who is a somewhat new general manager of the machine tooling group at Parker Manufacturing, and Mike who is a plant manager who reported and communicated to Ron, Ron had indeed violated some principles of supportive communication and supportive listening in this case that were congruence. from the moment the meeting began, You could tell Mike was on the defensive. Furthermore,the conversation was indeed neither descriptive and non-evaluative because from the moment the meeting began, Mike started the conversation …show more content…
If you were to change this interaction to make it more productive, what would you change? If it was me I would begin the conversation as humble and a normal conversation as possible, in order to lessen the stress. So, in this way the main parts of the conversation can be made more supportive. I believe Ron should have began in a more humble and supple manner to inform Mike about the details and agenda of the meeting. I would also change the way I direct the problem and focus on a solution, and provide other alternatives to the problems that were discussed in the conversation instead of being very judgmental and faultfinding. For instance, rather than saying that I think you are too chummy with some of your female personnel, I would start by saying is that I feel there is always diverse ways to interact with same and opposite gender co-workers, this includes any such behaviors towards female co-workers as well. Moreover, I feel that Ron ought to have utilized the problem oriented method instead of being person-oriented. But, on the other hand, Mike ought to have provided right reasoning or logic to Ron for his practices, instead of using the aggressive fighting tone. (Whetten & Cameron, 2010). I would also make an effort to stay in touch with Mike, this includes meetings, telephone calls to motivate and encourage him by telling him “today I seen something good in his work, and I can tell you improved greatly” or just drop a casual call to him to have a conversation with him …show more content…
Categorize each of the statements by naming the rule of supportive communication that is either illustrated or violated. For these statements below I will name the rule of supportive communication that I feel is either illustrated or violated.
In the paragraph where Ron says “Mike, I have scheduled this meeting with you because I have been reviewing performance data, and I wanted to give you some feedback. I know we haven’t discussed face-to-face before, but I think it is time we review how you’re doing. I am afraid that some of the things I have to say are not very favorable.”(Whetten and Cameron, 2011 pages 266-267 from the text).
This statement is problem-oriented, not person-oriented,so it is
4.1. What principles of supportive communication and supportive listening are violated in this case? At the time the conversation took place between Ron who is a somewhat new general manager of the machine tooling group at Parker Manufacturing, and Mike who is a plant manager who reported and communicated to Ron, Ron had indeed violated some principles of supportive communication and supportive listening in this case that were congruence. from the moment the meeting began, You could tell Mike was on the defensive. Furthermore,the conversation was indeed neither descriptive and non-evaluative because from the moment the meeting began, Mike started the conversation …show more content…
If you were to change this interaction to make it more productive, what would you change? If it was me I would begin the conversation as humble and a normal conversation as possible, in order to lessen the stress. So, in this way the main parts of the conversation can be made more supportive. I believe Ron should have began in a more humble and supple manner to inform Mike about the details and agenda of the meeting. I would also change the way I direct the problem and focus on a solution, and provide other alternatives to the problems that were discussed in the conversation instead of being very judgmental and faultfinding. For instance, rather than saying that I think you are too chummy with some of your female personnel, I would start by saying is that I feel there is always diverse ways to interact with same and opposite gender co-workers, this includes any such behaviors towards female co-workers as well. Moreover, I feel that Ron ought to have utilized the problem oriented method instead of being person-oriented. But, on the other hand, Mike ought to have provided right reasoning or logic to Ron for his practices, instead of using the aggressive fighting tone. (Whetten & Cameron, 2010). I would also make an effort to stay in touch with Mike, this includes meetings, telephone calls to motivate and encourage him by telling him “today I seen something good in his work, and I can tell you improved greatly” or just drop a casual call to him to have a conversation with him …show more content…
Categorize each of the statements by naming the rule of supportive communication that is either illustrated or violated. For these statements below I will name the rule of supportive communication that I feel is either illustrated or violated.
In the paragraph where Ron says “Mike, I have scheduled this meeting with you because I have been reviewing performance data, and I wanted to give you some feedback. I know we haven’t discussed face-to-face before, but I think it is time we review how you’re doing. I am afraid that some of the things I have to say are not very favorable.”(Whetten and Cameron, 2011 pages 266-267 from the text).
This statement is problem-oriented, not person-oriented,so it is