Топик: Английске тексты
The list of opportunities for misunderstandly becomes immeasurably longer when meetings are involved. Managers addressing a group of staff mixed by seniority, age and sex have no tiptoe through a potential minefield of confusion. If the issues are ones of personnel management, for example, organisation, pay scales, working practices or whatever, they should take great care the words they use.
Imagine such a meeting. The manager says: "I think we could be more efficient if we combined order checking with computer logging so I've decided to transfer Stan and Susan to Michael's section. I've asked Mike to join the executive committee and he'll take responsibility for liaison with the factory...
By saying, "we could more efficient", does he really mean that it's a shambles at the moment? If so the staff presently involved may well find it less than gratifying. The manager's decision to transfer Stan and Susan sounds like a directive which doesn't involve any sort of consultation. This may or may not be true, but the opportunity for misunderstanding is there. Mike's joining the executive sounds like good news. The likely hood is that the staff are either unsure about what its powers are or who is on it anyway. What does liaison with the factory entail? Was someone already doing the gob who has been given the elbow? And soon and so forth.
Things often get worse when question are asked the questioner may use "insider" language which underlines his relationship with the manager. For example, "Isn't the same trouble we had with Frank Barnes? No one else has a clue who he was and the Manager has either to ask the questioner to explain what be means or pass on quickly leaving an air of mystery in his wake. Quest oners often use meetings to make implicit political points about the organisation
and their own position within it. Some use the opportunity to score points off the manager, if he allows it.
Whether the meeting is face to face or in a group .the manager has to bear three principles in mind:
• he should always be prepared to explain what he means if he has any reason to suspect that he's being misunderstood ;
• He should always be in control of the communications process when dealing with subordinates and determine the vocabulary to be used ;
• he should strive to make his own use of language as clear and
unequivocal as possible. Telephone calls. .These too can hold pitfalls because;
• you don't know what the other person is doing (or who he is with);
• you can't see his facial expression;
• it's very easy to mishear what he has said. There are few things worse than giving instructions on a conference phone. Not only is the voice disembodied, but the person receiving the call will suspect that is being overhead. This discourages open response and mumbled ascent is often the only reaction the caller receives. Obviously, a good deal of man management is conducted on the telephone. Here are some simple rules which is sound for a manager to follow :
• Be friendly-the recipient doesn't know if you're pleased or angry with him at his ease straight way;
• Be dear-explain the purpose of your call including your Instructions (if there are any) before asking for comment. This gives the recipient, time to assimilate the whole message end not waste time by disgracing.
• Confirm that the message is understood-this la essential because words become garbled very easily. "Offer them 15 per cent discount" can easily become "offer them 50 per cent discount".
33
• Listen carefully to the recipient's comments-ask for them to be repeated if you haven't wholly understood them.
• Close cheerfully-however miserable you say feel your instructions are more likely to be implemented it you are cheerful and encouraging...
Written communication
Communication in writing should have the advantage of clarity since the writer has the opportunity to marshal his facts, present the case and make a clear recommendation. Also several people can be communicated with simultaneously, particularly in this age of electronic mailboxes and the fax machine.
In the context of man management, however, there are pitfalls which should be avoided.
Instructions can often be given more clearly in writing then orally. Remember that the recipient lacks the opportunity to question the manager directly and it is very easy for a feeling of authoritarianism to creep in, "Give me an analysis of the Sales figures for May, broken down by product and customer type," may be unequivocal, but it can sound like a military order and the employee receiving the memorandum might be forgiven for assuming a crispness that was unintended. Small organisations use fewer internal memoranda to give instructions than large companies, and everyone probably benefits from the smaller amount of paperwork and the greater informality involved. It instructions are given at a meeting, it is always good practice to confirm the main points in writing afterwards, whatever the size of the organisation. Personnel Issues are also better dealt with orally with subsequent accurate confirmation in writing. Pay rises, promotions, changes in job specifications and the like, should not be communicated initially in writing, however good the news for the employee. Face-to-face meetings reinforce the relationship with the employee and should always be used.
Disciplinary matters are sometimes dealt with in writings because the
manager is reluctant to confront the employee. This practice is always wrong and will breed misunderstanding and resentment. It is even worse when the memorandum is copied to others not directly concerned with the employee's welfare. If, for example, someone another part of the organisation, complains about an employee's efficiency or behaviour it is tempting for the manager to kill two birds with one stone. A memo of apology copied to the employee may placate the complainant, but will, almost certainly infuriate the employee. If the manager needs to respond to the complaint in writing he must see the employee first and ideally show him the draft memorandum before sending if off. Notice boards offer a valuable means of keeping a team up to date will relevant personnel developments. The language used should, however, always be chosen with care. For example, a notice which simply says, "Joe Smith is leaving us after for years service," is doubtless factually correct, but offers endless scope for different interpretations. Did he fall or was he pushed? Are they glad to see the back of him or is he grieved over? The addition of the world "valuable" before "service" and phrase "and we wish him well in his future career" could resolve all doubt. Copies of memos and letters should only be sent to those who have a relevant interest in the matter in hand. Sending a copy of a memo to recipient's superior "for information" is usually flagrant politicking and should be discouraged. Ease of copy-making unfortunately encouraging widening the audience for memos well beyond the bounds of common sense. Since recipients often feel honour bound to keep the copies they receive, the real cost to the organisation can be enormous.
Letters written to employee should always conform to the style normally used by his manager. Thus if the employee is "John" to him letters addressing him as "Dear Mr. Smith", "Dear Smith", or "Dear Sir" should always be avoided. It is part of the good manager's task to make sure that all of the good manager's task to make sure that all communications with employee reinforce the organisations normal style, whether formal or informal...
Getting the beat out of communication. The key component in all communication is the trust and understanding which is built up through face-to face conversations. Telephone conversations are necessary but less effective, and written communications have many pitfalls for the unwary. The manager needs to use all three forms which skills which may not come naturally to him. Training in interviewing. Charring meetings, effective speaking and effective writing is readily available.; Even in the smallest organisations an investment in this branch of training is always soundly made.
BODY LANGUAGE
Imagine yourself in a sales meeting with a client. As the client tells you how pleased she is with your products and how she plans to recommend an even larger purchase this year than last ,you sense that something is wrong. Her voice is high-pitched and rapid and her eyes over yours focusing instead on the ballpoint pen she is nervously checking on the desk. About a week after the meeting, she sends you a note, telling you that the entire deal is off. You are disappointed but not surprised for you had understood the non-verbal messages she was sending at the meeting.