Following the course assignment on participant observation, I went to a restaurant in Redondo Beach on March 7, 2016. My choice of the restaurant was informed by the fact that it is a budget restaurant coupled with the fact that it is just 20 minutes’ drive from town. Besides financial implications, I wanted to test a method for ascertaining social composition of audiences. Therefore, a restaurant seemed perfect for my case study as it offers a conducive environment from where an observer can comfortably study the manner in which hotel staff treat clients based on their assessment of clients’ social composition. Additionally, no authorizations are required hence the subjects of the study would carry on with their businesses unaware that they were being studied. As a result, biases occasioned by alteration of behavior by subjects in question are minimized yielding accurate results in spite of the method being ethically controversial.
For the purpose of the assignment, I chose to observe how the waiters in the restaurant addressed and attended to the customers based on direct observation analysis of their social composition by the said waiters. An assumption is made that customers are to the waiters and other restaurant staff, the audience as are church congregants to a priest or as are Muslim followers to a sheikh. Besides, assessment of social demographics of customers by restaurant staff whether consciously or sub consciously is instrumental in their service delivery.
Social composition of audiences vary a great deal as a function of their age, gender, cultural background, educational and economic backgrounds among other social dynamics. A particular audience at a given point in time may portray a number of similarities regarding some or most of the social indicators mentioned above or difference in the same. A particular gathering may be predominantly composed of young children on one hand where as it may comprise predominantly aged people on the other hand. Additionally, it may be characterized by a high degree of homogeneity with respect to gender or economic backgrounds. Conversely, it may be characterized by a manifestation of cocktail of all the said social indicators to the point that it is practically not possible to categorize them based on social indicators. Such audiences are said to be heterogeneous.
There are several approaches to conducting analysis of social composition of audiences. They generally include direct observation, inference, data sampling and analysis, personal interviews, scientific surveys and contact persons approach. My choice of direct observation approach was inspired by its simplicity and effectiveness. More so, its cost implications proved favorable.
Prior to the exercise, I had always underestimated the usefulness of direct observation as a technique for conducting audience analysis people watching being one of my hobbies notwithstanding. However, I now appreciate that direct observation is instrumental in conducting audience analysis more so, in ascertaining the social composition of audiences.
Direct observation technique entails deduction of audiences’ demographic attributes through immediate perception. One can perceive through such senses as seeing, hearing, touching, tasting and smelling. Such demographics comprise social indices including but not limited to sex, age, gender, marital status, occupation, economic status, educational background, culture, religion, race, nationality, language, sexual orientation and ethnicity. There is a general consensus among researchers that direct observation is the simplest yet one of the most effective methods of audience analysis. This is informed by the fact that the audience knowledge obtained through such means is first hand hence it attracts more veracity as opposed to information obtained through secondary means such as secondary data analysis.
Several inferences on social aspects of an audience can be deduced from direct observation of the audience in question. For instance, one can make safe presumptions regarding economic status of their audience simply by observing their non-verbal aspect of communication such as appearance and clothing on one hand and verbal communication on the other hand with respect to the choice of words.
If a public speaker for instance does not understand the social composition of their audience, they would not know how to address them as whether in public purviews or private settings. Therefore, understanding their social composition will aid you in making informed choices regarding how to address them. This truth is not only limited to aforementioned settings. It is also true to coffee shops and hotel settings. Waiters though not directly involved in public speaking, more often carry out analysis of their varied audiences through direct observation approach.
One intriguing observation that I was able to make has to do with the manner in which one of the waiters presented the bills to two distinct couples that were having dinner. In the first instance, the waiter presented a single bill to the gentleman. In the other instance, two separate bills were presented, each, to the lady and the gentleman respectively. This observation was intriguing in the sense that I do not recall observing the waiter asking both couples what arrangements they had for footing their bills and whether they were to be joint or separate.
However, having keenly observed the distinguishing attributes that juxtaposed the two couples, I understood the wisdom behind the waiter’s actions. The couple in the first instance appeared to be in their late thirties so it is possible that the waiter may have concluded that they were married. Therefore, the decision to bill them jointly was inspired by the fact that they were married and being so, the dinner was to be paid by one of them. Nevertheless, I could not understand what informed the waiter’s choice to present the bill to the gentleman as opposed to the lady. Maybe it had to do with the fact that the culture to which the couple belongs, a man is predisposed to foot dinner bills. How he made this educated guess is perhaps beyond the scope of my knowledge and experience.
With regard to the second instance, the couple appeared to be younger. Particularly, they seemed to be in their early twenties. The mad had skinny jeans on and the leady was dressed in attire that is more common among college students. Moreover, the man was carrying a backpack and the lady had a sling bag. It is a common practice among college students for a couple to individually pay for their respective bills such as dinner and bus fare. As a result, the waiter may have acted based on this assumption.
Moments before I left, a different waiter presented a joint bill to a couple who were finishing up their meal. He presented the bill to the gentleman but it was cleared by the lady instead. The awkwardness of the situation could be visibly noted from the facial expression of the gentleman. On a careful observation, I noted that the lady in question appeared relatively older than the gentle man. Moreover, she had what appeared to be a wedding ring on her ring finger whereas the gentleman had no ring on. An inference to the effect that two were not married despite the fact that they seemed to be having a cozy conversation. Therefore, it could not have escaped a waiter with an eye for detail that it was most probably the lady who had sponsored the dinner as opposed to the gentleman. If anything, the gentleman in question was wearing cheap Asian “cologne” while the said lady’s outfit seemed classy and expensive evidenced by meticulously matched “Gucci” shoes and handbag. Clearly, the waiter in this case misread the demographic indices that would have aided him in analyzing the social composition of his audience.
Furthermore, a customer at the table adjacent to mine ordered tea. The waitress smiled and went to fetch the tea without seeking further clarification. A few minutes later a different customer walked in and order tea. However, this time round the same waitress sought to find out whether the customer wanted white tea or black tea. It was strange how she made an educated guess in the first instance as to what kind of tea the customer wanted. I concluded that maybe the former customer was a frequent customer at the restaurant and that the waitress had mastered her tea preference. This assumption however, does not negate the influence analysis of social composition of respective customers by direct observation on the waitress’ behavior.
In conclusion, direct observation method of analyzing social composition of audiences has proved to be a useful tool in aiding public speakers in understanding the social intricacies of their audiences. Additionally, it is instrumental in hospitality industry as it is indispensable to the industry personnel in discharging their duties. This report however, cautions against adoption of the approach in furtherance of acts that may potentially amount to negative forms of discriminatory treatment among the audiences in question. Instead, it should be used to aid provision of tailored services to various audiences based on their specific needs as portrayed by their respective social demographic indices as discussed and illustrated above.
References
Bodary, D., Sprague, J., & Stuart, D. (2016). The Speaker's Handbook. London: Cengage Learning.
Candela Open Sources. (n.d.). Audience Analysis: Approaches to Audience Analysis. Retrieved March 7, 2016, from Candela Open Courses: https://courses.candelalearning.com/publicspeaking1xmaster/chapter/chapter-5-approaches-to-audience-analysis/
Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2015). Public Speaking: The Evolving Art. Stanford: Cengage Learning.
Little, W. (2014). Introduction to Sociology – 1st Canadian Edition. London: CC.
Peterson's. (2010). Peterson's Official Guide to Mastering the DSST Exam. Lawrenceville, New Jersey: Peterson's.
