A Transactional Communication Analysis- Can Managers Really — страница 2

  • Просмотров 186
  • Скачиваний 9
  • Размер файла 15
    Кб

use little material from the prior presentation noted in the integral sphere. It is likely that someone in the group will comment that the earlier presentation shows contrary information. Third, the purpose is no longer to sell a program, but to obtain the buy-in and agreement of a more focused group. The presentation and environment must stimulate communication, feedback and resolution. The previous presentation is of little benefit to this new one, as one-way communication was the purpose and focus. The pre-planning for the strategic sphere, and thought within the integral, serves as input that leads to the success, or failure, of the transaction. For success, one must look for the keys in gaining understanding and agreement. In this case, the transaction must first show how

little the effect is upon manager workload. It must show the means and method to train personnel while work continues at a normal pace. In addition, in the end, it must include the value and benefits of shifting from today?s work to that of tomorrow- in terms of the manager?s needs. The success of the transaction is the results from the tactical sphere. The Tactical Sphere The tactical sphere involves the interaction in the meeting through my presentation and feedback from the managers. The mid-level managers must interpret the slides and my spoken words in this sphere. I, in turn, must interpret their words, answer questions and maintain focus towards the goal. I must create the proper atmosphere: open and honest, friendly, yet formal. The challenge here is to build mutual

understanding in steps that lead to agreement as a whole. To this end, I must listen actively and use their feedback as the means to that end. I can then replace my words with theirs, which allows them to better understand my message and I to confirm their understanding. In this way, I gain their support and each becomes my messenger to another. In this case, mutual understanding is the success in leading to agreement. I am no longer the bearer of the message- the tables are turned. Through the words of the group, understanding begins to form. Their concern of an increase in manager workload lessens; they now see this is part of the usual employee evaluation process. Their concern in losing employees from direct work to training lessens; the work will continue by using overtime

or making other personnel available in time of need. Understanding is complete through their words and their agreement forms. A new issue arises, how will the training labor be paid- direct or indirect? The managers do not object to using some direct funding for training, but are sure that is not enough. Unknown to them, but known to me, is that some overhead funds are set to be available to support employee labor for program. Rather than make such information known now, this issue becomes an action item for another time. The goal of this meeting, to gain understanding and agreement by the managers, is complete. How one pays for the program is not an issue for now. The resolution of the new issue can confirm the understanding and agreement of the old. The moral here is that upon

achieving the goal, fight the new need on another day. Conclusion The transactional model enables one to not only perform, but also understand and prepare, for dynamic communications. It includes the rhetorical model, but expands one?s vision to that of others when seeking resolution or mutual agreement among others. Both models are a part of this transaction and show the need for systems thought. The results of any message, though, are never complete until another interprets it as intended. Feedback is necessary to confirm receipt of the message, in this case understanding and agreement by a group. In this transaction, the feedback is not only agreement from the meeting, but by what continues thereafter. The feedback of success here appears evident by the lingering conversations

after the meeting. The manager?s chats are positive and supportive of the program. It is an optimistic view, with no negative criticism or wrongful interpretations thus far. In this case, it appears resolution is a complete success. This is not always the case. Time and the future shall tell- if managers really can agree.