Title: ‘I didn’t say they would be sacked’Website: http://www.todayonline.com/articles/272745.asp
Straight after getting the 1st medal after 48 years for the Olympics game, there was a great commotion about Singapore Table Tennis Association (STTA). I guess everyone knows about this and I feel that this issue could have been resolved behind the doors among those involved. Personally, I feel that this issue was due to miscommunication between the people in charge and the public. Most people would give credits for winning a medal for Singapore to the coach and the players. Hence, it was the wrong timing for the chairman to announce the news.
In this situation, I feel that readers play an important role. People failed to interpret and evaluate correctly about the situation and immediately jumped into conclusion that STTA president was ready to sack some people after helping Singapore to achieve its goal. This is partly due to cognitive schemata where each of us has our personal constructs, prototypes, scripts and punctuation. We tend to associate the reasons behind certain situations based on the general perception. It depends greatly on how we interpret the cause and effects in a communication interaction. In this case, people have the perception that once someone has no more values, he or she will be kicked aside. Hence, we should learn to improve our interpretation and evaluation skills before assigning any conclusion to any situation.
From this incident, I have learnt that it is important for speakers to design their messages well so as the make listening easier. There should not be any ambiguity in their messages so as to avoid any miscommunication. Although it is important to capture the attention of people, it is equally important that the speaker is able to guide the audiences to interpret correctly. It is important for spokesman to recognise how complex perception is and how easy it is to get things wrong. For instance, in the above incident, I feel that the president had failed to understand that at the wrong timing, it would be easy for the public to get the wrong idea and ends up with the wrong intended message.
.
As for readers and listeners, we should learn how to judge information correctly. Being critical listeners, we should never jump to the conclusion. We have to demand for good evidence in order to evaluate the message and understand the exact meaning within it. Clarification is very important. Just as most people say, “When in doubt, ask.” As learned in communication, we should have mindful processing. By doing so, we are always thinking actively and creating new understanding. We have to be careful not to rely too much on person prototypes, personal constructs and scripts to judge individuals and situations. By using these cognitive schemata, we are more likely to conclude abruptly. For the STTA incident, miscommunication would not have resulted if the president had stated the reasons explicitly and if the public are open-minded enough to accept the true information.
.
In conclusion, I feel that communication is a two way process. Both the speaker and the listener have to be actively involved in order the send and receive the right message. We have the acknowledge that in most communication processes, cognitive schemata plays a part. Both parties must possess essential skills to eliminate the risk of miscommunication.
9 comments:
I sometimes feel that the very nature of prototypes, shematas and scripts actually promote misunderstanding.
This is because the 3 are simply put, shortcuts in the thinking process. They allow us to jump to conclusions, often leaving out important bits of information which could have been obtained with a little clarification.
I agree that it was a bad time to make the announcement. But since the contract expires on the 31st, he had to make the announcement without delaying any further. Overall, this goes to show how easy it is for a misunderstanding to occur.
in this scenario, it might just be a simple case of wrong place at the wrong time. a more opportune time could have been selected to 'sack' the employees.
however, with all the hype and activity going around their win, i wouldn't be surprised if this entire shenanigan was orchestrated by some higher powers.
Even though you say that readers play an important role in interpreting and evaluating the situation, I still think that the chairman ought to be largely responsible for making the announcement at the wrong time. That very announcement dampen the celebrating spirit that the nation was in.
Leaders should be cautious when making speeches, giving comments, and making announcements. This is because "with great powers comes great responsibilities". This may sound cheesy, but I really do think that it is a very true statement. Leaders are figures that the commoners/public look up to. Hence they should be aware of what consequences their words and actions may result in.
it's no doubt that readers' interpretation of any form of communicated message is important. but let's not forget abot the 'kairos', that is, the opportune and the setting of the delivery of the message.
in order for the message to pleasingly received by the readers, one cannot neglect the basics of communication, like he did.
I totally agree with u that, in its irony, a wrong move was made in announcing the investigation straight after a glorious victory.
Here, we can see a communication breakdown between the speaker and its readers/listeners. And the main problem began not from information that were mentioned, but those that were "left out". Along with the inappropriate timing it was mentioned, a minor misunderstanding worsened into a major dispute.
Classic example of how miscommunication can easily occur interpersonally.
Language are indeed very powerful. And it is a very strong tool for leaders. However, it is deadly as well. Miscommunication of this type of situation might lead to people thinking that the leaders are incompetent.
The incorrect timing and failure in delivering a clear and accurate information can really lead to a disaster.
I believe that both the speakers and readers are in the wrong. However, after much weighing up, i find that the readers are more at fault than the speaker itself.
Having declared the investigations, the speaker only mentioned that she will be reviewing to see if its table tennis committee is STILL sharing the big picture. In my opinion, readers often speculate that such comments basically means "hey,get ready to be fired".
It is difficult for anyone to tie up the loose ends for every comment/conversations they make, and this is when perception takes a bigger role.
In the whole, I feel that the main problem is not about the timing. It is more about how the readers interpret the situation. The negative perspective makes them think of the worst. And this is what happens most of the time.
Yes. We tend to assume a lot of things and only choose to look at the sailent information, neglecting those important ones.
I agree that one has to plan and deliver a message very carefully. The failure to do so has caused one too many misunderstandings in our society/world.
However, I also do realize that it is difficult to be a hundred percent clear of any loopholes. I myself have been a victim of misinterpretation of information, hence I do see the difficulty.
On the other hand, one cannot fully put the blame on the speaker. the listener also has to be aware of the circumstance in which the message was done. This would not only help to understand the message, but also prevent any misunderstandings.
Lastly, I agree that timing is also very important. For such a delicate issue, one has to be aware of the implications for having the announcement at such a time. Moreover, it was meant to be a time of celebration and joy, the public would definitely be upset.
To sum it all up, I feel that when making such an announcement, one has to be very careful of 3 things; the delivery, the possible interpretations and lastly, the timing.
Post a Comment