Friday, March 16, 2012

Misinterpretations

Misinterpretations
Ever play the game of telephone around a campfire when you were young and by the time the message was received at the other end of the line it was nothing like the original message?  I believe the modern version of this game is email.  Emails may have the same wording as voicemails and even in person meetings; however emails cannot show emotion and can easily be misconstrued.  When communicating via email it is important to review how the email is worded before sending – if possible have a colleague or friend read the email prior to sending. 
In this week’s assignment we are to review and interpret “The Art of Effective Communication” (Laurette Education, n.d.).  There are 4 tabs on this site: 1.) Start 2.) Email 3.) Voicemail 4.) Face-to-Face and the email tab seems to be sarcastic.  When I read the email message I interpreted it as the person sending the email was annoyed with the person receiving the email because what was requested was still not completed. When reviewing the voicemail tab it was clear that the sentiment was not at all what the email had implied.  This tells me that voicemail is a better form of communication (at least for this example) than email.  Perhaps a combination of the two could be done; however you then run the risk that the receiver will read the email before listening to the voicemail.  If this is the case then the receiver may not listen to the voicemail with the same open mind they might have if they did not read the email first.  With the advances in technology it is entirely possible to read an email prior to listening to a voicemail. Lastly is the Face-to-Face communication which of course is probably the most effective form of communication.  In this exercise it was clear that the person was not trying to be sarcastic about the situation but they did need and want movement on the issue at hand.  The sender of the message was trying to communicate the message in a positive light also making sure the receiver knew that what was being requested was a priority to the sender.
My suggestions to anyone working with a team would be to try and communicate in person as much as possible – this could include video conferencing.  When we communicate in person (visually) everyone in the group can see the facial expressions, hear the tone in the voice, and see the body language.  Since a large part of our communication is non-verbal it is important to see the other person when communicating to obtain the total picture.  I am aware that in-person communication is not always possible.  The second best form of communication is the phone call which may end up in a voicemail.  I personally do not believe in leaving long detailed messages on voicemail because many people get “tongue tied” on the phone especially when the machine comes on.  My thought is to leave a quick message requesting a call back.  This could lead to “phone tag” and if this goes on too long then a message may need to be left but by that time the person on the phone has relaxed enough to leave a decent message.  The last type of communication should be email and hopefully you can use email as just a follow up to a conversation which had taken place earlier.  Again if you must use email, type the message, leave it for some time, come back and re-read the message and only send after feeling confident with the message.  Review the message for unintended emotions or the lack of emotion when an emotion is needed.  The important thing to look for is that the message cannot be misconstrued.  This is a difficult feat to master because each person is an individual which means each person reading the message could have a different understanding of the message than the other people.  That is what makes the world interesting.
Reference
Laurette Education (n.d.) “The Art of Effective Communication”. Extracted from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/2dett4d/Walden/EDUC/6145/03/mm/aoc/index.html

Saturday, March 10, 2012

Project Near Disaster

Project Near Disaster
Many years ago I was working as a programmer/analyst for a prestigious company when there was a decision by upper management to expand the business into Canada.  The Canadian office would be housed in Mississauga, ON which is not too far from Buffalo, NY.  At the time I was working as the programmer and network system analyst.  As part of my duties I would: 1.) make sure the network structures for the offices were in place and 2.) maintain the computer systems.  When the decision was made to open the new office and because of the successful work I had done in the past I was put in charge of the office setup.  At the time I did not know what a project manager was and heck the role probably did not exist.  I had been part of setting up offices in the past so I was comfortable with knowing what is needed to organize the project.
My project plan was well defined and considered every item that would be necessary to setup the office (or so I thought).  I was still young and did not understand all the rules of business between the United States and Canada.  I was unaware that paperwork needed to be filed in order to work in Canada when you are not a resident of Canada even if the office was part of an American company.  I tried to cross the border and when asked my purpose for going to Canada I told them I was going setup our new office in Mississauga.  This answer delayed my entrance into Canada and thus my delay the start of the project.  I was not the only person with this issue.  There were other people being sent from our main office in the United States to the new office in Canada to help with the setup.  The proper paperwork had not been completed and filed with Canada so each person attempting to enter into Canada to work on this project had difficulty.  
The project that was planned initially worked well once we could get all the workers to the site.  The only issue with the project was a delay in the start time so it pushed back the start date for the office opening.  Due to the delay of the personnel the office, wiring was not complete when the hardware arrived at the office.  This was not a problem because we were doing all our own installation, the deliveries were just that, deliveries.  Nothing that was delivered needed expertise other than us to complete a proper setup.  Other than the project being pushed by three weeks all steps of the plan worked. 
The take away with this project was to plan the logistics for the staff that is required to be on site.  There were no issues when working within our own office; it was only the interaction between the two countries that needs to be organized well in advance of the project start date.  As I stated at the beginning of this post, this event was many years ago and completing the paperwork requirements for the workers temporarily working in Canada did not take too much time.  In today’s world the time frame for completing the paperwork to travel between the countries would be a longer and more involved process.  It is vital that any organization working with other countries start the inquiry into what is needed at least six months prior to the start date – probably more like a year.  It was a lesson learned and luckily it did not take too long to resolve and not impact the project too drastically.