Research Brief Paper Literature & Language Essay Paper

Miscommunication: Hindering a Harmony in the Workplace
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Miscommunication in a Workplace
Introduction
Communication appears undervalued, yet it is a precarious practice that can determine the course of any organization. Communication is the heartbeat of the workplace in the 21 century; both workers and employers have to navigate the intricate diversity in culture, age and gender, amidst emerging communication technologies such as formal and informal platforms. Miscommunication can lead to conflict, war, disharmony, and reputational damage, but desired performance can be attained if workplaces embrace practical communication skills. One phenomenon that can be disastrous in workplaces is miscommunication. So, what is miscommunication? Miscommunication is a failure to communicate effectively and adequately. Mustajoki (2012), in qualitative a meta-analysis study, defined miscommunication as a circumstance in which the recipient understands the message differently from what the speaker intended it. Stubbe (2010), in his qualitative analytic study, opines that adverse outcomes are expected for teams, groups, or organizations as a whole when communication is either problematic or ineffective. Effective communication is crucial because it allows positivity and productivity to flourish in the workplace. Efficacious communication should the target of everyone in an organization that is from the top CEO of a blue chip company to a janitor. Human resource personnel and staff must adopt effective communication strategies that are aligned to organizational objectives. Desirable communication practices are primed to bolster a healthy working environment in any organization; violation of effective communication practices can throw things off balance.
Cultural Diversity
Cultural diversity is a concern that people have to live within contemporary workplaces. The cultural variation in values, practice, and backgrounds, has been to contribute to miscommunication in workplaces. Jenifer and Raman, (2015) in qualitative meta-analysis study, singled out five concepts that act as a barrier to communication. These factors include misunderstanding, norms and roles, values and beliefs, stereotyping, and ethnocentrism. These variables are highly intricate and interconnected to each other; their interplay could easily lead to uncertainty in communication, and this can breed misunderstanding. Norms and rules are acceptable practices in a particular group. Jenifer and Raman (2015) observed that the group does expect others to follow those practices, but workers in a multicultural environment mostly fail to understand other group’s cultures. The authors posited that cultural differences lead to a variation in the set of values and beliefs; if these contrasts are not taken into account when communication in workplaces, the likelihood of miscommunication is high.
Stereotyping of people is a mistaken or partial judgment about people and issues. Jenifer and Raman (2015) argued that employees could make uninformed or unintelligent choices in a multicultural work environment. The authors observed that cultural stereotyping could lead to exaggerations and over generations of perceptions about people. Jenifer and Raman (2015) attribute workplace stereotyping to unexplained inherent fears and insufficient knowledge about specific groups of people or employees. Stereotyping often leads to conflicting opinions, which may elicit possible miscommunication. Ethnocentrism is a concept which relates to a preoccupation with its individual's culture and thinking that it is superior to other cultures. Jenifer and Raman (2015) observed that people, who feel that their culture is standard and surpasses other cultures, may cause communication problems in workplaces. The authors concluded amidst cultural difficulties, there is a need to nurture cross-cultural competence by developing a body of skills, knowledge, and attitudes. Cross-cultural competence is defined as the ability to participate in a set of activities the core of which happens to a common communication code.
Misunderstanding and Non-Understanding
Misunderstanding is a prevalent barrier to communication in a multicultural work environment. Pietikäinen (2018) examined 24 private communications amongst cross-cultural couples who spoke lingua franca English. The findings of this study showed that the couples employed a range of communication strategies that pre-empted misunderstanding and or breed shared understanding. Furthermore, in a bid to enhanced understanding, the lingua franca English couples resorted to extra-linguistic approaches such as the use of pointing, deixis, acting, drawing and onomatopoeia (Pietikäinen (2018). The cultural diversity that is characterized by differences in values and beliefs can lead to uncertainty, which may bring misunderstanding. Misunderstanding and non-understanding are different forms of miscommunications. Pietikäinen (2018) argues that misunderstanding is a type of understanding that is entirely or partially deviant from what the speaker intended to pass or communicate. Misunderstanding can come in the form of a frame, content, intention, and mode of utterances; these are underpinned by a mix of reasons that include mishearing and mispronunciation and ambiguity (Pietikäinen, 2018). There is a distinction between misunderstanding and non-understanding. In a misunderstanding, the recipient is not aware that his or her understanding does not match that of the speaker. It means the recipient is unable to get the speaker’s meaning. Pietikäinen (2018) findings in the non-understanding phenomenon show; that the recipient of the message is aware that his or her understanding or misunderstanding does not match that of the speaker. Thus, in misunderstanding, the recipient can act in line with false interpretation. In non-understanding, the recipient is aware that he or she has not understood the message precisely, and this acts as a springboard to seek clarification. Therefore, Non-understanding is better than misunderstanding. Incidences of misunderstanding and non-understanding are detrimental to work. The employees may interpret communication, thereby leading to conflict, strained work relationships, and failure to attain the fundamental objectives.
The problem with misunderstanding has not spared workplaces, for instance, healthcare. There have been communication breakdowns between healthcare staff, patients, and families. Miscommunication impacts negatively on personal interrelationships; this leads to poor patient health outcomes. A qualitative focus group study (Okougha & Tilki, 2010) was done to investigate the communication dynamics of overseas health staff; the participants involved Ghanaian and Filipino nurses, who totalled 13 and had worked in the United Kingdom for more than five years. The authors acknowledged that misunderstanding could be a source of a strained relationship between clinicians, patients, families, and colleagues. The authors observed that the overseas nurses recruited by London NHS Trust experienced challenges with interpretation of particular customs and conventions, for instance, the cultural attitudes towards death could be misinterpreted by both local and foreign nurses. The communication between international and domestic clinicians could likely lead to misunderstanding.
When I started, my mentor was an older person professionally and in age. I called her sister. Her response was, “don’t sister me”! I was shocked and said, “Oh, sister, it is difficult for me to call your name because where I come from, it is an insult to just call someone older than you by first name (Okougha and Tilki, 2010, pp.104).
Okougha and Tilki (2010) reflect how cultural variations can impart understanding. The authors noted that it is crucial to mentor and induct new international nurses on cultural diversity, sensitivity, and awareness. A Significant ethnocentricity could be a source of conflict, tension, and misunderstanding if cultural awareness and application, is not nurtured amongst recruits in workplaces. In workplaces, an employee who has misunderstood instruction will act in a way that does not conform to the speaker’s message; this leads to adverse impacts. A worker who has non-understood the message will seek clarification, and this will ensure that things are implemented in compliance with the speaker’s meanings.
Communication Breakdown
Communication breakdown is characterized by the inability to exchange information in a practical approach; this results in a lack of communication. Communication breakdown is part of miscommunication. Examples of workplace communication breakdowns can include two staff members doing similar duties without each other knowing and sending incomplete vital mail messages, just to mention a few. In a study, by Lockwood (2015) examines critical aspects of global virtual teams in a workplace environment. This study deployed multiple methodologies that include surveys, interviews, observation, and literature reviews. The author concluded that it is not only c...