Application and Analysis Essay
Communication problems
Communication is a very important tool in the day to day experiences of a human being. Almost all the events that take place are coordinated by communication, whether visual or audio. As such, the involved parties need to ensure that proper communication is achieved. One of the problems that may arise from the communication problems is that conflicts may arise. Poor communication is almost likely to lead to misunderstandings, hence causing a major conflict or even making it worse than it was expected. The beginning of a conflict, on the other hand, creates more communication problems as the parties that are involved in these conflicts find it a difficult task to frequently communicate with each other (Cobley, 2006). The communication during these times of conflicts is always less accurate and less open as compared to when the relationship was not strained. As such, most conflicts that may arise in the life of a human being are always brought about by the problems related to communication. Essentially, two parties are always involved in the communication process, the first one being the speaker and the other one being the listener. However, in some other circumstances, three parties may be involved. This is mostly so when the message being communicated is transmitted by a carrier, or a third party person. As such, the three parties qualify to be the sources of conflict as far as communication is concerned. This is because the message may end up being distorted at any stage during the communication. Apparently, the speaker or the initiator may not be so precise on their delivery. This has the effect of sending unclear message to the listener or the receiver of the message. Delivery of the intended message is a very tricky thing for most people since as much as they may know what they intend to say, how they put it may bring many difficulties to them. On the other end, the person to whom the message was intended may fail to listen carefully. The main reason to this is that the listeners, in most cases may assume that whatever the speaker is going to say is familiar to them. As such, they may end up collecting the wrong message that the speaker did not intend to pass. As such, the poor communications and reception of the wrong messages lead to several problems that are associated with communication. As a matter of fact, when the parties get into a conflict, the communications become even more strained and the relationship becomes complicated. As such, communication between two parties should be taken importantly if problems and conflicts are to be avoided.
The coordinated management of meaning theory can be credited to Pearce and Cronen, who developed the theory in the year 1980. The key tenet of the theory is as regards to two parties to any communication (Griffin, 2009). According to them, the two parties that are socially interacting have the responsibility of constructing the meaning of their conversations that they engage one another in. As such, the understanding of what one party communicates depends on several issues such as the context of the communication and the circumstances giving rise to the communication in question. As such, each party to the communication is always comprised of an interpersonal system that is responsible in explaining the actions and the reactions that they may undertake. This is what makes both parties to the communication essential, since the conflicts may arise from either party to the communication. The communication angle therefore consists of viewing the communication as a two-sided process. In one point, the party to the communication ought to coordinate their actions with the others, and on the other hand, transform these communications and make relevant or essential meanings from the communications that has taken place. Three processes therefore become basic in the communication cycle: coordination, mystery and coherence. The social realities that are brought about by communications and conversations are therefore explained and clarified by these processes.
Coordinated management theory is essential for solving conflicts that may have developed as a result of some repetitive conversations. Theses repetitive patterns may be the catalyst to the increased conflicts in the lives of couples. For instance, it plays a very crucial role in the context of arguing couples. In a relationship, the source of the conflict may be due to some misbehavior from one party. For instance, the husband may seem to be rude when communicating to the wife. On the other hand, the wife may interpret this in a negative manner and make wrong judgments. However, if the coordinated management theory is applied and all its processes followed, the couples may find it necessary to engage in an understandable argument. This shows the importance of the theory in solving conflicts.
According to the coordinated management of meaning theory, communication is undertaken as a perfomative and constitutive process. As such, communication is always seen as a means of making objects and the objects of the social world. The perspective of communication is shifted from focusing from the theory to the praxis. The other theories that are related to this theory include the speech act theory and the symbolic interaction and systems theory. The theory is to the effect that the persons that are involved in a conversation try as much as possible to construct their own social realities. As such, this theory of communication becomes a very essential tool in the day to day live of a human being. The people that are involved in a conversation situation therefore are mostly interested in understanding what is taking place. They then thereafter apply the rules of communication to figure the things out and try to understand the communication in the best manner possible. This is then followed by them acting depending on what they have understood and then later employing the necessary rules to decide the most appropriate action possible to be taken (Griffin, 2009).
The coordinated management of meaning has been generally accepted by many practitioners as compared to the other theories. This is due to many reasons. First and foremost, the communication perspective is always taken to confer something akin to communication literacy. Due to its effective two-way nature, a party’s ability reading and inscribing the communication process is of a very great importance. The practitioners are also mostly guided by the coordinated management of meaning theory in helping their clients understand the necessary communication patterns. Only by improving the communication patterns, the practitioners belief, can the social worlds be improved.
The coordinated management of meaning theory is useful in many situations. As such, many people have argued, it is not just a single theory on communication. This makes it a collection of the basic ideas on how people should behave and interact during their communications. It is during the conversations that each individual or party to the conversation develops the social realities that are relevant to the process. As such, the rules are always applied by the communicators when they need to understand whatever that is taking place during the interaction. This means that the rules to be applied need not be similar. Different individuals apply different rules in order to understand different situations. A better pattern of communication can only be achieved by employing better rules to the interaction process. This theory is credited with helping persons to the conversations establish proper meanings (Pearce et al, 2012).
The coordinated management of meaning theory essentially helps in ensuring that the communication that occurs between people is understood. To achieve this, it entails several processes which may include coherence, mystery and coordination. Differently and in different ways, these processes make it possible for people to understand each other during the conversations and in ensuring that whatever is discussed is understood to a large extent.
Coherence
According to this coordinated management of meaning theory, there is a strong relationship between the content and what is said during the communication. In any language, content plays a very big role as it is the building block of the languages. Although the content is essential in any communication or conversation, it is not conclusive in itself. As such therefore, the meaning of the communication can only be established by several processes. The coordinated management of meaning theory is facilitated by several instruments that make the communication coherent. Among these are the actions that the speaker may engage themselves in during the conversations, commonly referred to as the speech acts (Pearce et al, 2012). These speech acts are very essential in ensuring one gets to properly know about what is being communicated, and they may include the insults that one is subjected to during the conversations, the promises that may be made, the assertions and the threats that one may receive.
The founders of this theory argue that a single story told by a single person may be interpreted differently by different types of people. This is all due to the coherence component. The reasons to the different interpretations may include the episode under which the story was being told, the self concept that the parties had developed before the story was told, the relationship that existed between the two parties among many more other factors. Coherence, therefore, as the developers of this theory argued, plays a very important role n ensuring that the conversation that takes place between different individuals is understood. All the elements that have been discussed above are very essential in helping different persons to understand what takes place during the conversations by relating the conversations to what happens during the process. Each interaction that one engages themselves in applies different rules.
Coordination
In any single conversation, the concept of coordination is very essential in as much a way coherence is. Different people behave differently when faced with a situation which could be similar. However, what matters is the fact that the differences that exist between the different people make it possible for people to have their unique set of rules that govern how they behave. As such, the qualities that the parties to a conversation want the other member to see are always influenced by these unique rules that the individuals have developed. However, even though different people behave differently depending on the unique set of rules they rely on, it is possible for their coordination to coincide with that of others. This is because these actions are guided by the regulative rules that a person may decide to adopt. Human beings have different morals, beliefs and ideas that are related to the notions as to whether something is good or the same thing is bad. However, it is not necessary that because people have different morals, their outcomes will not be the same. Mutual outcomes are realizable (Cobley, 2006).
Mystery
The concept of mystery is also an essential process that takes place in a conversation as far as the coordinated management of meaning is concerned. This process may also be interpreted to mean the stories that are still unexpressed. Anything that is unexplainable in any conversation or communication lies under this process and may refer to the feelings that a person may develop during the conversation. The proponents of this theory argue that although these feelings may not be expressed, they may directly contribute to the way in which the parties to the conversations interact. As such, different people may interpret the same message differently depending on the feelings they develop, according to the coordinated management of meaning theory. The coordinated management of meaning theory therefore argues that the interpretation of the conversation during any communication can only be effected through a participatory view. However, the outside participants are also able to recognize the construction of reality.
Critiques of the theory
As much as this theory has been supported by many practitioners, it has managed to draw a number of critiques. This is done through employing the humanistic standards that are used to evaluate the theories. This theory emphasizes on the communication being viewed from the participant point of view. As such, communication is allowed to create a new meaning. This means that it will be serving another function that is different from transmitting the relevant information (Pearce et al, 2012).
Essentially, when one is examining the communication interactions, the coordinated management of meaning becomes very essential as it bases most of its key arguments on the communication process.
How the theory helps to overcome the problems
The above argued theory is very crucial in dealing with the communication problems that had been argued earlier in the paper in a number of ways. The purposes of conversations are to enable a person to receive the intended message that was meant to be passed. Through the extortions that may be brought about by the third parties or the poor communication processes, the communications may lead to the problems stated above which may lead to conflicts.
The coordinated management of meaning theory is the most practical theory in solving the day to day conflicts that may be brought by the communication problems. The knowledge that is articulated and developed through the internalization of this process is very essential in the day to day activities of a human being to ensure that they relate well with the other members of the society. As such, the theory has been used to describe the situations that may arise in different relationships and in solving them.
As already argued above, conflicts are started due to poor communication skills. The conflicts may arise from any of the parties to the communication, which may include the speaker, the listener or the transmitter. Whenever a conflict arises, it becomes difficult for the parties to calm down and solve the issues. This is because the communication between them during this time is mostly restrained. Therefore, it becomes very difficult to contain the situation. However, through employing the coordinated management of meaning theory, solving such problems becomes a very easy task.
According to the first process in the coordinated management of meaning theory, explanations have been given on how different people get the meaning of the conversation. Getting the right meaning is a very important step as it means that the intended message of the conversation has been delivered and problems may not arise. Different people take different expectations to the conversations that they engage in. In as much as the conversations are unique and each party is expected to adjust to the new experiences, sometimes it becomes very difficult for an individual to lower their expectations from the conversations (Griffin, 2009). As such, they become the source of the conflict. To avoid this problem, it is advisable that before engaging in any conversation, the parties thereto should not raise their expectations too high to the extent that they may not adjust. In attempting to make sense of whatever that is taking place during our conversations, the interpretation of behavior also plays a very key role. One should therefore not engage in a conversation before accepting the fact that they may be required to re adjust their expectations in order to ensure that peace prevails.
This theory has also discussed the different factors that may influence the way in which an individual may end up interpreting the message passed during the conversations. Through fully understanding how the concepts such as relationship, episode, culture and the self-concept work, one will be in a better position against making irrational decisions that may lead to conflicts. The specific rules that are essential for any conversation to take place are also maintained and the relationship between the parties to the communication is defined. Through this, the chances of a conflict arising are always minimized.
Coordination, as the second process of this theory cannot be underrated. Through this, people get to know that different individuals have a unique set of rules that is responsible in determining how one behaves in different circumstances. We thereby get to access the qualities of the other parties to a conversation. As such, one is in a better position to make informed judgments during the conversations. This is an important process as far as preventing the creation of conflicts in the members to the conversation is concerned.
Another way through which this theory plays an essential role in preventing conflicts is through the proper understanding of the concept of mystery (Griffin, 2009). We get to learn that the people having the conversation may have unexpressed feelings which may define the way they may behave when they are in a conversation. Through this, it becomes necessary to understand how one should treat the others whenever they are engaging themselves and appreciates the fact that different people to a conversation may have different opinions, which may not be necessarily be the same.
In conclusion, communication is a process that should be used to solve conflicts. However, when the parties to the communication fail to understand each other, this may lead to a number of problems leading to conflicts. The coordinated management of meaning theory plays a great role in intervening to these problems and solving the conflicts. For instances, if one appreciates all the processes that have been argued above, they will be in a better position to make informed decisions. Through this way, the conflicts will be minimized. Through appreciating this theory, people should therefore be in a better position to avoid the conflicts that may be brought about by the communication problems. Coherence, coordination and mystery are all essential elements in a communication and if they are applied in the real life situations, they will play a big part in ensuring that people understand each other and that there will be less conflicts. This is what makes the coordinated management of meaning theory an important theory when it comes to communication matters.
References
Cobley, P. (2006). Communication theories. London: Routledge.
Griffin, E. A. (2009). A first look at communication theory. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Pearce, W. B., In Littlejohn, S. W., & In McNamee, S. (2012). The coordinated management of meaning: A festschrift in honor of W. Barnett Pearce.
