+of+Eiffel19.jpg)
Pick one concept from the assigned reading that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.
In my opinion, the one concept I find most interesting is the “Power to Influence.” I have worked in the corporate world for the past 11 years as well as for a Vice-President. During which time I have seen mostly men play the game of “Power to Influence” their bosses. By this I mean, they are constantly asking me to schedule a meeting with the VP. My response to them is I will check with the VP and schedule a meeting accordingly. If the VP allows me to schedule a meeting with them, I have seen these men come in to the VP’s office and simply just brag about all their accomplishments and try to get the VP’s buy-in for what they would like to move forward in their career development.
According to John French and Bertram Raven analysis, “Sources can achieve power in five ways: by occupying an important position in society, by offering material rewards in exchange for compliance, by threatening to punish disobedience, by gaining access to scarce information, and by exhibiting personal characteristics that others admire” (pg. 261). In my example, these gentlemen gained power by gaining access to scarce information which they exposed to the VP, thinking what they shared were valuable information.
17 February 2009
16 February 2009
W5_P2
Consider a well-known speaker, for example, the current President of the Unites States. What is this speaker’s strongest characteristic as a speaker? Is it credibility, attractiveness, power, or all three? In what ways could the speaker build ethos in these areas?
For me, the most well-known speaker is Zig Ziglar. His strongest characteristics as a speaker are his credibility, his attractiveness and his power of influencing and motivating people. In regards to his credibility, he is one of the most sought after motivational speaker at any conference. In addition, he is very charismatic as I for one was very attracted to his personality and his humbleness. Finally, he is very powerful in motivating people to believe his tactics are believable and attainable.
For example, I went to see one of his motivational conferences here in San Jose. I was in awe of how he related to his audience so quickly by his humor. Since he is a professional motivation speaker, he captured my attention by his charisma and his power to influence anyone.
According to Herbert Kelmann, audiences are influenced by sources in three ways: through internalization, identification, or compliance. This is exactly what happened to me when I saw Zig Ziglar. By the time I left his seminar, I was on cloud nine believing I could BE, DO, and HAVE anything I set my mind to accomplish.
For me, the most well-known speaker is Zig Ziglar. His strongest characteristics as a speaker are his credibility, his attractiveness and his power of influencing and motivating people. In regards to his credibility, he is one of the most sought after motivational speaker at any conference. In addition, he is very charismatic as I for one was very attracted to his personality and his humbleness. Finally, he is very powerful in motivating people to believe his tactics are believable and attainable.
For example, I went to see one of his motivational conferences here in San Jose. I was in awe of how he related to his audience so quickly by his humor. Since he is a professional motivation speaker, he captured my attention by his charisma and his power to influence anyone.
According to Herbert Kelmann, audiences are influenced by sources in three ways: through internalization, identification, or compliance. This is exactly what happened to me when I saw Zig Ziglar. By the time I left his seminar, I was on cloud nine believing I could BE, DO, and HAVE anything I set my mind to accomplish.
15 February 2009
W5_P1
Have you ever been influenced by a speaker? Think of the best speaker you’ve ever heard? What was it about that speaker that made his or her communication memorable? Think of the worst speaker you’ve ever heard. What do you remember about his or her message?
Sarah Trenholm argues, “The study of rhetoric, the art of designing public messages that can change the way in which audiences think and feel about public issues…communication in which a single speaker addresses an audience to inform, persuade, or entertain” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 249).
I think we can all say we have been influenced by a speaker at least once. I think one of the best speakers I have heard, is my girlfriend Tiffany (not her real name). She has her MBA, owns her own business, has published a book and is on to writing another book. What makes Tiffany a great speaker is she is very soft spoken, she is brilliant with her choice of words, and she is excellent in articulating what she would like her audiences to retain. A great example is when Tiffany and I were co-chairs for our church’s Women’s Retreat. On the first night, when Tiffany delivered the opening portion of the agenda; I said, to myself, “I wish I could be as calm, cool and collected in front of about 75 women.” She informed the women of the agenda using very clear words describing the events that would take place throughout the weekend; and she encouraged everyone to take part in some of the special treats that we had planned especially for them.
In contrast, the worst speaker I have ever heard was my 7th grade Science teacher. When he spoke, every other word was “ah,” In fact, one day I counted over a hundred “ahs,” in his lecture. Needless, to say, the class was so boring, students would fall asleep in his class and he would not even say anything. I don’t think he even realized they were asleep in his class. Nevertheless, as part of my membership with my Toastmasters club, one of the first areas that we all work on is the “ah” counter. A person in charge for that meeting keeps a record of how many “ah” each person uses. In order to minimize the use of “ah,” we are told, to stop and pause before we speak. This trick has helped me with becoming very aware of using another word instead of “ah.”
Sarah Trenholm argues, “The study of rhetoric, the art of designing public messages that can change the way in which audiences think and feel about public issues…communication in which a single speaker addresses an audience to inform, persuade, or entertain” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 249).
I think we can all say we have been influenced by a speaker at least once. I think one of the best speakers I have heard, is my girlfriend Tiffany (not her real name). She has her MBA, owns her own business, has published a book and is on to writing another book. What makes Tiffany a great speaker is she is very soft spoken, she is brilliant with her choice of words, and she is excellent in articulating what she would like her audiences to retain. A great example is when Tiffany and I were co-chairs for our church’s Women’s Retreat. On the first night, when Tiffany delivered the opening portion of the agenda; I said, to myself, “I wish I could be as calm, cool and collected in front of about 75 women.” She informed the women of the agenda using very clear words describing the events that would take place throughout the weekend; and she encouraged everyone to take part in some of the special treats that we had planned especially for them.
In contrast, the worst speaker I have ever heard was my 7th grade Science teacher. When he spoke, every other word was “ah,” In fact, one day I counted over a hundred “ahs,” in his lecture. Needless, to say, the class was so boring, students would fall asleep in his class and he would not even say anything. I don’t think he even realized they were asleep in his class. Nevertheless, as part of my membership with my Toastmasters club, one of the first areas that we all work on is the “ah” counter. A person in charge for that meeting keeps a record of how many “ah” each person uses. In order to minimize the use of “ah,” we are told, to stop and pause before we speak. This trick has helped me with becoming very aware of using another word instead of “ah.”
10 February 2009
W4_P3
Pick one concept from the assigned reading that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.
The one concept I find fascinating and would like to discuss is the “Social Constructive Model.” Sarah Trenholm argues, “According to the social constructive model, communication is a process whereby people in groups, using the tools provided by their culture, create collective representations of reality. The model specifies four of these cultural tools: languages, or symbolic codes; the ways we’ve been taught to process information, or cognitive customs, the beliefs, attitudes, and values that make up our cultural tradition; and the sets of roles and rules that guide our actions…according to this perspective, we construct our world through communication” (Trenholm 2008 pg. 30).
I have worked in the Research & Development department for the past 10 years with my company. During which time, I have observed different teams working together to reach their aggressive milestones. Within each of these teams, I have observed the team members that are successful in all four cultural tools are the very teams that are successful in completing their goals before or on target. This is due to their ability to communicate in their own languages (verbal, nonverbal, etc.) that are understood by every member on the team. In addition, the team members believe, accept their team member’s cultural traditions and trust each others roles and abide by the rules. The teams that are successful in meeting their milestones are the ones that each member knows and understands their roles within this project and communicates their progress each step of the way. If there are issues along the way, the successful team works out their differences in a civil manner.
The one concept I find fascinating and would like to discuss is the “Social Constructive Model.” Sarah Trenholm argues, “According to the social constructive model, communication is a process whereby people in groups, using the tools provided by their culture, create collective representations of reality. The model specifies four of these cultural tools: languages, or symbolic codes; the ways we’ve been taught to process information, or cognitive customs, the beliefs, attitudes, and values that make up our cultural tradition; and the sets of roles and rules that guide our actions…according to this perspective, we construct our world through communication” (Trenholm 2008 pg. 30).
I have worked in the Research & Development department for the past 10 years with my company. During which time, I have observed different teams working together to reach their aggressive milestones. Within each of these teams, I have observed the team members that are successful in all four cultural tools are the very teams that are successful in completing their goals before or on target. This is due to their ability to communicate in their own languages (verbal, nonverbal, etc.) that are understood by every member on the team. In addition, the team members believe, accept their team member’s cultural traditions and trust each others roles and abide by the rules. The teams that are successful in meeting their milestones are the ones that each member knows and understands their roles within this project and communicates their progress each step of the way. If there are issues along the way, the successful team works out their differences in a civil manner.
09 February 2009
W4_P2
Consider the pragmatic perspective. Does it make sense to think of communication as patterned interaction? How is communication like a game? How is it different from a game?
According to Sarah Trenholm, “In a pragmatic model, communication is seen as a game of sequential, interlocking moves between interdependent partners. Each player responds to the partner’s moves in light of his or her own strategy and in anticipation of future action. Some moves are specific to this game, and others are common gambits or strategies. All moves make sense only in the context of the game. Outcomes, or payoffs, are a result of patterned “play” between partners” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 33).
In one sense, I believe communication is like a game of patterned interaction. I love the game of backgammon. When I first learned the game, I was told the four and six points were the first areas to setup to secure your position in winning the game. In the same way, I think communication is a like a game. When you first meet someone at a party, you have to establish the foundation whether you want to speak with him or her. In your mind, you may go through your criteria of whether s/he is worth having a conversation. If so, the exchange of ideas goes back and forth. Like in tennis you rally back and forth until someone may say something that is not appropriate or just says the wrong thing. Then, either one of one of you will move on to someone else at the party.
In contrast, communication is different from a game when a student attends a class and the professor gives a lecture for an hour. In this case, the student is on the receiving end. S/he may be able to ask questions at the end of the lecture or through the teacher’s aide.
According to Sarah Trenholm, “In a pragmatic model, communication is seen as a game of sequential, interlocking moves between interdependent partners. Each player responds to the partner’s moves in light of his or her own strategy and in anticipation of future action. Some moves are specific to this game, and others are common gambits or strategies. All moves make sense only in the context of the game. Outcomes, or payoffs, are a result of patterned “play” between partners” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 33).
In one sense, I believe communication is like a game of patterned interaction. I love the game of backgammon. When I first learned the game, I was told the four and six points were the first areas to setup to secure your position in winning the game. In the same way, I think communication is a like a game. When you first meet someone at a party, you have to establish the foundation whether you want to speak with him or her. In your mind, you may go through your criteria of whether s/he is worth having a conversation. If so, the exchange of ideas goes back and forth. Like in tennis you rally back and forth until someone may say something that is not appropriate or just says the wrong thing. Then, either one of one of you will move on to someone else at the party.
In contrast, communication is different from a game when a student attends a class and the professor gives a lecture for an hour. In this case, the student is on the receiving end. S/he may be able to ask questions at the end of the lecture or through the teacher’s aide.
08 February 2009
Week 4_P1
Consider the social constructionist perspective. How do we “build worlds” through communication? Think of some ideas we talk about in our culture that may not exist in other cultures. How do these concepts contribute to our happiness or success (or the lack of these) in our culture?
Sarah Trenholm argues, “According to the social constructionist model, communication is a process whereby people in groups, using tools provided by their culture, create collective representations of reality. The model specifies four of these cultural tools: languages, or symbolic codes; the ways we’ve been taught to process information, or cognitive customs; the beliefs, attitudes, and the values that make up our cultural traditions; and the sets of roles and rules that guide our actions. These tools shape the ways we experience and talk about our worlds” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 30).
A great example about symbolic codes and cultural traditions is during my travel to Paris. At the end of my day and as I traveled back from the Metro stop to my hotel room; I stopped at a produce market on the Rue du Cler (open market). One day, I wanted to get some Bing Cherries. I noticed they were all boxed and weighing about two to three pounds. Now, I only wanted a handful, so I began to pick them one by one into a plastic bag. The owner began yelling in French to me. He then began showing me how to do it his way and then threw the little scooper at me. He then continued talking in French to his customer and watching me with is other eye. It was obvious, our symbolic codes or our lack of the knowledge of each others languages hindered our communication. It is also obvious; our cultural traditions including our beliefs, attitudes and our values were different. In this incident, Monsieur and I did not build worlds.
Sarah Trenholm argues, “According to the social constructionist model, communication is a process whereby people in groups, using tools provided by their culture, create collective representations of reality. The model specifies four of these cultural tools: languages, or symbolic codes; the ways we’ve been taught to process information, or cognitive customs; the beliefs, attitudes, and the values that make up our cultural traditions; and the sets of roles and rules that guide our actions. These tools shape the ways we experience and talk about our worlds” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 30).
A great example about symbolic codes and cultural traditions is during my travel to Paris. At the end of my day and as I traveled back from the Metro stop to my hotel room; I stopped at a produce market on the Rue du Cler (open market). One day, I wanted to get some Bing Cherries. I noticed they were all boxed and weighing about two to three pounds. Now, I only wanted a handful, so I began to pick them one by one into a plastic bag. The owner began yelling in French to me. He then began showing me how to do it his way and then threw the little scooper at me. He then continued talking in French to his customer and watching me with is other eye. It was obvious, our symbolic codes or our lack of the knowledge of each others languages hindered our communication. It is also obvious; our cultural traditions including our beliefs, attitudes and our values were different. In this incident, Monsieur and I did not build worlds.
03 February 2009
Week 3_P3
The one concept I found useful or interesting in Chapter one, is the “Five Canons of Rhetoric.” According to Sarah Trenholm, “Cicero was considered to be Rome’s finest orator…By the time his works were published, the study of rhetoric had stabilized into five major topic areas, the famous canons of rhetoric...the canon divided communication into five parts: invention, style, arrangement, memory, and delivery” (Trenholm 2008, pg. 6). I believe if one can master these five basic principles when preparing a speech, one will not only be successful in life, but s/he will also be able to persuade their audience in whatever s/he may be proposing in all facets of their life (i.e. personal or business).
01 February 2009
Week 3_P2
The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good. I agree with this statement. The reason for that is a person will not be able to influence anyone if you do not have integrity. An example of this is during the recent Presidential campaign. A Republican who works with me said, “How could he vote for John McCain with a running mate like Sarah Palin?” I asked what he meant by that statement. He went on to say, “If something happened to John McCain, then, Sarah Palin would be next in command.” He further mentioned, “How could someone who just came out of nowhere have the experience and integrity of what the American people need right now?” Since he perceived Sarah Palin as a candidate who did not have the moral good he was looking for in a Republican team, I wonder if he voted Republican.”
What, if any, is the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication? Cicero believed, “One of the three styles of speaking was ‘the plain style’ which built ethos by convincing the audience of the speaker’s good character, good sense, and trustworthiness; it was logical, clear, and restrained” [Trenholm 2008, pg. 7]. I believe the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication is that all are interrelated. Without one part of the tri-pod, you will not receive the powerful outcome from your speech. By this I mean if you do not have integrity, then your audience will not respect/trust whatever you have to say. For example, I have no respect for ex-President Nixon who was impeached due to his involvement with the Watergate scandal. If I see clips of him speaking I wonder what part of it was true…I simply flip the channel.
What, if any, is the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication? Cicero believed, “One of the three styles of speaking was ‘the plain style’ which built ethos by convincing the audience of the speaker’s good character, good sense, and trustworthiness; it was logical, clear, and restrained” [Trenholm 2008, pg. 7]. I believe the connection between goodness, truth, and public communication is that all are interrelated. Without one part of the tri-pod, you will not receive the powerful outcome from your speech. By this I mean if you do not have integrity, then your audience will not respect/trust whatever you have to say. For example, I have no respect for ex-President Nixon who was impeached due to his involvement with the Watergate scandal. If I see clips of him speaking I wonder what part of it was true…I simply flip the channel.
Week 3_Post 1
One of my all time favorite speaker whom I admire is my ex-boss, Joe (not his real name). I worked with him as his Executive Assistant for four years. During which time I came to admire the way he communicated with all levels of the organization. He definitely is one of the most powerful speakers I know.
According to Sarah Trenholm, “Aristotle believed that a speaker could sway an audience in three ways: through personal character, or ethos; through the ability to arouse emotions, or pathos; and through the wording and logic of the message, or logos” (Trenholm 2008, p. 4).
Additionally, Joe definitely uses ethos, pathos and logos in all presentations. Whenever, Joe, the Divisional Vice-President of R&D was asked to speak at a meeting, he would always inquire about his audience. He then customized his presentations to meet the caliber of his audience. In addition, he knew exactly how to capture his audience with his choice of words as well as his interjection of some kind of humor whenever he felt compelled.
On another note, I believe my personal qualities that allow me to persuade my audience is the use of pathos and logos. I used to belong to a Toastmasters Club. I once gave a speech about my trip on a cruise to Alaska. I won the “Best Speaker” award that day for my use of excellent descriptive words, humor and organization of my speech.
Finally, I think Aristotle’s classification scheme works even in our world today.
According to Sarah Trenholm, “Aristotle believed that a speaker could sway an audience in three ways: through personal character, or ethos; through the ability to arouse emotions, or pathos; and through the wording and logic of the message, or logos” (Trenholm 2008, p. 4).
Additionally, Joe definitely uses ethos, pathos and logos in all presentations. Whenever, Joe, the Divisional Vice-President of R&D was asked to speak at a meeting, he would always inquire about his audience. He then customized his presentations to meet the caliber of his audience. In addition, he knew exactly how to capture his audience with his choice of words as well as his interjection of some kind of humor whenever he felt compelled.
On another note, I believe my personal qualities that allow me to persuade my audience is the use of pathos and logos. I used to belong to a Toastmasters Club. I once gave a speech about my trip on a cruise to Alaska. I won the “Best Speaker” award that day for my use of excellent descriptive words, humor and organization of my speech.
Finally, I think Aristotle’s classification scheme works even in our world today.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
