Coordinated Management of Meaning Theory And How It Improves Effective Communication - Research Paper Example

The Coordinated Management of Meaning Theory al Affiliations (Word Count: 3539). The Coordinated Management of Meaning Theory Introduction The process of communication, whether written, spoken, non-verbal or visual, is done to ensure that certain information has reached an audience (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). However, for mass communication, it is essential that the message is conveyed in such a way that the intended meaning reaches the audience. It is through the mass media that important issues affecting a particular country or region are addressed; hence there is the need to pass information in a way that will be effectively interpreted (Yamaguchi, 2005). Therefore, this creates criticism to the known definition of communication which elaborates communication as a process used to pass information from a source to a recipient. This is according to the transmission model of communication which involves a source producing the information that is passed through a channel until it reaches the recipient (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). However, interpretation of the piece of information by the recipient should also be taken into consideration. Communication is done in different ways, some of which are interpreted totally differently by different groups of receivers (Grover, 2005). Therefore, this calls for a change in what is termed as communication in the sense which only considers the outcome. This is because when the receivers interpret the message differently, its outcome will be different in each of them, and most are the times when these outcomes match with the intended meaning (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). Effective communication will only be achieved when the whole process involves the all the participants, including the receivers. This includes accommodating feedback from all the participants of the process that is important in knowing whether the message was encoded as intended or otherwise (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). The purpose of this paper is to analyze and evaluate the Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) theory and show how it improves effective communication. The Coordinated Management of Meaning Theory Barnett Pearce and Vernon Cronen came up with the CMM theory after discovering that the transmission communication model did not take into account the social reality of the messages (Yamaguchi, 2005).This was during the mid-1970s when the duo discovered that the pattern used for communication and its effect on message interpretation were considered vital. What was important was only the message and the receivers interpretation. With such a feeling about communication, the emphasis was only placed on the message and what each receiver interpreted it to be (Grover, 2005). Therefore, it was expected that the message would end up having vast meanings, most of which were not the intended ones. Effective communication needs to appear accomplished when the intended meaning of the message is the same one that has been encoded by the receivers. It is for this reason that Pearce and Vernon questioned the then definition of communication which only involved the transfer of ideas. However, they appreciated the new improvement in the description which involved the feedback part since it was now defined as a process in which messages are created and interpreted by receivers who give a response about the same (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). However, Cronen and Pearce advocate that in describing communication, the whole process of the message reaching the receiver should be included. According to them, other descriptions seem to be evading the whole process and only concentrating on the message and the receivers interpretation. By so doing, they evaluate the communication process and examine the effect it creates towards message interpretation by the receiver (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). To understand the theory better, various tools of gauging the effects of communication have been provided since the communication process is a complicated one. Through them, one can is advised on how he/she can change the way they communicate so that the whole process is involved (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). The CMM theory tries to make the process of communication as a tool for establishing social ties within the society. Social ties such as relationships, communities and organizations are created through a gradual process of communication (Jung-Konstanty, 2013). Since they do not occur as a mystery or a certain discovery, it is important that effective communication is done to improve the social life. Our social life is made up different people who have varied the ability to interpret ideas and their surroundings. Such a community that has common surroundings can use this theory to come up with real social facts about the environment (Grover, 2005). The process analyzing a story or a reported text in such a way that the meaning is obtaining is obtained is also illustrated in the CMM theory. Even after getting the interpretation for the text, a receiver should get to know how real the message would be according to the meaning. Correct interpretation defines the world one lives in, and this will resultantly influence their social life. Two or more people within a given setting will only create social interaction through effective interpersonal communication (Yamaguchi, 2005). Therefore, the two must get involved in the communication process whereby both of them get to know each others interpretation of the topic at hand. This further makes them understand what they have in common and this further leads into social ties such as organization for the achievement of a common goal. Therefore, what matters more during a communication forum is the way it is done rather than what is being talked about (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). Since Pearce and Cronen are interested in communication that builds the social aspect of life, they propose that should be made enjoyable so that social links are established. This is well done by the way the mood of the process is displayed hence the mood of a conversation matters during the establishment of social links. People are affiliated towards each other through communication if the mood is also lively and if their views are also listened to (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). When the mood is lively, the conversation is likely to take a longer period of each party enjoying it, and this leads to the friendship that grows into bigger social structures. When interacting with new people in our lives, the patterns of communication should be those depicting love, attention and willingness to listen to the other party (Snyder & Shwom, 2011). The way someone treats a new person in his/her life has a great impact on the type of relationship that will be formed between the two (Jung-Konstanty, 2013). Therefore, whatever we manufacture during the communication process leads to the product obtained which the type of relationship built. Sometimes people meet on the streets or at their places of work as new members but the way they interact with the first day they meet determines how they will be relating to the period they will be together (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). For instance, when one tells a colleague at work to do some task but with an angered mood, this creates a very hateful mood. According to the transmission theory, the message would have reached the receiver but the impact of the pattern of communication would have a negative social impact (Grover, 2005). The receiver of such a message would consider the sender as a very rough character who should be avoided as much as possible. Such characters are avoided so that one does not get a good day spoilt and also some people are not comfortable with being shouted at. In the end, such people would never have a fruitful conversation on social grounds, a condition that was brought about by a wrong pattern of communication (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). Despite the fact that a certain message reaches a receiver, it is important to use the right patterns that include the use of appropriate body language and correct choice of words. Maintenance of good social codes also ensures that the receiver of the message listens to you and values what you say (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). CMM as an Interpretive Theory CMM is an interpretive theory because it deals with effects of communication and social life and how members of a given social group interpret different situations within their environment. The socio-cultural tradition of people within a given society is achieved by the way they interact with people within the setting. People within your social space are the ones who determine who you are by the way they understand you from the way you communicate and behave (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). Since our character is determined by people who interact with us, we ought to behave well when it comes to communication and character. Additionally, this theory has also taught people to interact well with others since they would also like a good reputation from those they interact with. This theory also involves direct experience whereby the interpretation of a situation has been experienced by the person giving the account of it (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). The individual cannot give an understanding of a scenario or character that he/she has not experienced because it is a form of reacting to a situation that you must have experimental knowledge about. Therefore, this makes the theory an accurate way of proving a certain character since it is based on reality as perceived and reported by the individual. The individual will only give the understanding of the social world according to how the experience faired on (Grover, 2005). Because understanding the communication process may be complicated, CMM gives three tools that can be used to get the reality from our social life. We live in the world whereby we are judged by the people we interact with through what we do or how we behave. This is possible because our actions are analyzed in such a way that they produce a certain pattern that resembles a certain character, hence the coordination tool. The actions that build our character and social status may not be related in any way, but rather they mingle and come up with a character that defines us (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). It is through coordination that people relate various actions and behaviors and come up with a word to describe ones behavior hence this greatly affects the social status. Our lives are also considered to have some meaning through the stories we tell during free interaction with people around us. Interaction with people involves sharing stories so that we can know what the other people think about the same (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). However, getting the meaning of the story can tell lot about who you are through the coherent tool. This can be done by establishing the difference between the story told, and the story lived through different ways that are explained in the theory. The listener of the story will, therefore, be engaged in deeper research to interpret the story by going through all the seven types of stories mentioned in the theory (Goh, Sher & Low, 2005). The mystery is also used as a tool to explain the communication process in CMM so that people are reminded that the world we live is not only affected by facts but also by who we are (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). We should not live by facts but live according to our character that will define us in the world, hence demeaning the existing facts. There may be facts of how to live well in the society, and one may decide to apply them to the latter without caring how the behavior is depicted by others within the society (Snyder & Shwom, 2011). Therefore, this makes the world a mysterious place to live but whose mystery is unfolded by those who occupy it. Pearce and Cronen strongly hold to the fact that our lives are made less mysterious if we discover the CMM theory and apply it to our communication and interaction with others (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). CMM is under the socio-cultural tradition in Griffins map of traditions since it deals with language and its meaning to bring about social reality. Bringing about social reality is important because it creates a background from where the conversation will pick up next time as opposed to the objective reality that ends the communication once meaning is obtained (Epstein, Martin & Schneider, 2006). Social reality is established when participants of a given interaction ask themselves questions about what they are making, how they are making it and how their social worlds can be made better (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). When these questions are analyzed, it is understood that CMM is completely interpretive with the language being the most important element of communication. The use of correct language creates goo social worlds even when there is nothing of importance being discussed in the conversation (Grover, 2005). People who end up getting into a good relationship with each other started with the same motive during their preliminary communication patterns. Therefore, the social status that exists in ones social world was as a result of how they interacted at first and their motive i.e. whether they wanted to make the social ties better or worse. One action leads to the other, and the result is totally dependent on how the communication patterns were at the beginning (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). Such communications must be done in a dialogue manner whereby both parties are involved, and each of them is listened to (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). Portions of contributions and responses are equally shared during the interaction process. However, the disadvantage of the theory is that it takes each persons way of reasoning as the right way to describe the other person. Since people have different ways of interpreting ideas, it will be difficult to come up with a generalized description of a certain character since everybody will consider his/her way of reasoning to be the most valid one (Sabie & Androniceanu, 2012). Ontology, Epistemology and Axiology of CMM The concept of ontology examines what is being tested by a theorist and whether it is a real occurrence in nature hence manifesting the theorist as a realist social constructionist or a nominalist. CCM examines the process of communication and its effects towards social reality and uses language as a key element (Snyder & Shwom, 2011). The concept of self-identity is embraced in this theory whereby an individuals perception may be used to define the social relationship of another. For instance, if an individual considers you as a funny person from the way you behave, then that defines you. However, this is only true in the world or real people since some people would also want their views to be considered. Therefore, there would be no centralized way of defining character if each person has his/her way of doing it (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). This takes into account of the procedure taken by the theorist in analyzing the phenomena at hand. Pearce and Cronen came up with various tools that are used to analyze a character in a piece of communication. As discussed above, coordination, mystery, and coherence can lead one to come up with a social criteria (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). Participants in a communication are given criteria for getting to know the social reality of the partner and the environment they live in. For instance, it is possible to tell true stories by examining the seven letter acronym that eliminates stories whose information is not known, etc. On the other hand, Axiology deals with the values of the research hence they greatly affect the aims of the research by theorists. However, CMM is termed valueless since it does not make use of any values (Jung-Konstanty, 2013). Relevance of CMM Although a theory is never considered correct or wrong, its ability to elaborate the stated issue can be measured regarding whether it added or reduced value depending on the analysis (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). There are very many theories that give an account of how things should happen and most of them build on past information about the same idea. However, there are some criteria that can be used to grade how a certain theory has successfully contributed towards a given phenomenon. First of all, the theoretical scope should be a larger one such the theory can be used to impact meaning to a large group of population (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). Since CCM explains how effective communication should be done across the whole human population, it has a large scope hence an ideal theory. It does not specify the human population that can use the CCM tools to enhance social reality; rather it appeals to all humans at large to discover their social reality and increase social ties through effective communication. The appropriateness of a theory is also important, and it is achieved through the examination of the use of ontology, epistemology and axiology (Snyder & Shwom, 2011). CMM examines the process of effective communication which is very relevant in creating a social environment. Through communication, various uses of language are analyzed, and their effects on relationship noted. Therefore, the theory effectively shows how effective communication leads to the social establishment and social reality. The coordination, coherence and mystery tools of analysis are also well used to bring out the intended meaning of communication and how some meanings that are depicted form communication appear as a mystery when compared to some facts (Yamaguchi, 2005). The heuristic value of this theory is also found in its shortcoming whereby each has a right to say what he/she feels about a particular character. This can create a loophole for some further future research that will try to address the problem associated with the theory, in an attempt to react to or support it. The issue of different perceptions posed by different people can also be assessed in future researches (Budescu, Por & Broomell, 2012). Such perceptions may be brought about when people behave differently depending on the type of people they interact with. There are other external factors that also affect the communication process such as mood swings that have not been accounted for in the theory hence creating chances for further research. However, the theory appears to be valid because it talks about what any individual in a communication forum would feel during the process (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). It is true that one would not be happy if he/she is shouted at just to complete a simple task. The result of such a communication forum is that the receiver will have a negative perception of your character and might even hate you (Grover, 2005). The parsimony principle entails that a theory explains the given phenomenon in the simplest way possible so that a difference, when compared to previous ones, is noted. The CMM theory gives a better explanation of what effective communication should be and not what the communication scholars give (Snyder & Shwom, 2011). According to their definition, Pearce and Cronen give further directions that effective communication only occurs after the whole process of communication is done well; and not only when the message is sent and received by the receiver (Uusi-Rauva & Nurkka, 2010). Through this modification, it was possible to tell that some patterns of communication establish social links while others do not. CMM theory also fulfilled openness by partly accepting the transmission theory and using it as a basis to improve it (Cronen & Pearce, 1982). The definition by communication scholars that took into account the response of the receiver was also acknowledged in the theory. Conclusion All living creatures are thought to communicate so that their needs may be known, in the case of a newborn baby. Communication is important because it leads to the formation of relationships and other social links that have been established on earth. Various theories have been used for communication including the structural and functional, interactionist, interpretive and cognitive and behavioral theories. Whichever theory is chosen for any particular communication process; the core aim is expected to be the flow of information from the sender through a certain channel or medium of communication to the receiver. For the communication to be complete, the receiver needs to give some form of response to confirm that information from the sender was received and understood. Communication may have different meanings depending on the theory since they are formed from the way information is interpreted by the receiver. However, the Coordinated Management of Meaning theory has been discussed analytically in this paper, and its relevance stated according to the qualifications of good theory. Critical analysis of CMM covered aspects of its ontology, epistemology, and axiology in addition to an interpretation postmortem of the entire theory in terms of its application to communication settings. Therefore, I recommend that it should be applied in all forms of communication so that social ties are established hence this allows smooth movement of information from a sender to receiver. This is the only important reason for communication in an actual sense; to be able to pass information from the sender through the medium of communication to the receiver and then to send a response back to the sender after some message interpretation by the receiver. References Budescu, D. V., Por, H., & Broomell, S. B. (2012). Effective Communication of Uncertainty in the IPCC Reports. Climatic Change, 113(2), 181-200. Cronen, V., & Pearce, W. B. (1982). The Coordinated Management of Meaning: A Theory of Communication. In F. E. X. Dance (Ed.). Human Communication Theory, 61-89. New York: Harper & Row. Epstein, L., Martin, A. D., & Schneider, M. M. (2006). On The Effective Communication of the Results of Empirical Studies, Part I*. Vanderbilt Law Review, 59(6), 0_12, 1811-1871. Goh, C. H., Sher, W., & Low, S. P. (2005). Factors Affecting Effective Communication between Building Clients and Maintenance Contractors. Corporate Communications, 10(3), 240-251. Grover, Susan M, Phd,M.S., R.N. (2005). Shaping Effective Communication Skills and Therapeutic Relationships at Work: The Foundation of Collaboration. AAOHN Journal, 53(4), 177-182. Jung-Konstanty, S. (2013). The Theories and the Principles of Organizational Communication at Public Schools. Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici.Nauki Humanistyczno-Spoleczne.Zarzadzanie, 40, 265-277. Sabie, O., & Androniceanu, A. (2012). Persuasive Communication At The Academic Level And How To Make It More Effective. Administratie Si Management Public, (18), 26-52. Snyder, L. G., & Shwom, B. (2011). Teaching Effective Communication Skills with ACE: Analyzing, Composing, & Evaluating. Journal of Applied Research for Business Instruction, 9(3), 1-5. Uusi-Rauva, C., & Nurkka, J. (2010). Effective Internal Environment-Related Communication. Corporate Communications, 15(3), 299-314. Yamaguchi, I. (2005). Effective Interpersonal Communication in Japanese Companies under Performance-Based Personnel Practices. Corporate Communications, 10(2), 139-155. Read More