Discussion and Responses to discussion

2. Avoiding important conversations

Conversations are a very important part of the effective communication. You cannot always take help of an email or a letter to communicate. It is important to have a face-to-face conversation with the person because only then, you will be able to deliver the message in an effective way and the person receiving can interpret in the right way.

3. Reacting to responding

These are the two very important terms in the field of communication. There is a very thin line of difference separating these two but it is important to understand the difference. When a person delivers an information, it is important to contemplate it and respond to it in a rational way and not reacting in anger or excitement.

Disasters caused by miscommunication

1. Unmet expectations

Each company or the team is formed to meet a goal. If the goal is not met, there is not profit and the motive of the company or the team is not served. Due to miscommunication between the team members, this can be a possible outcome.

2. Stress

If two of the teammates are having an argument or indifferences about something, then, it will lead to stress in the team.

3. The diverted focus of the team

If there is a problem of miscommunication between two members, the whole team will be focussed on resolving the conflict and not focussing on the goal.

B. Failures and solutions of miscommunication

1. Lack of Preparation

Preparing what you have to say is very important before you present it to the person who is going to listen. If you are unprepared or underprepared, it might not deliver the message effectively.

The solution is that you can take help of various tools such as documentation, presentations, models, etc. to make sure that your message is delivered correctly and precisely. Prepare what you have to say beforehand and speak confidently (Medford-Davis & Kapur, 2014).

2. Choosing a wrong tool

Many people tend to avoid awkward communication by sending an email or sending a letter to the concerned person. This has a high possibility misinterpretation which will lead to indifference.

The solution is that you have to gauge the seriousness of the information and the urgency of delivery and choose the tool accordingly. Even if it is an awkward conversation but requires face-to-face talk, it is recommended that you do it.

Part 2: Decision making

A. Symptoms of Groupthink and its shortcomings

1. Ignoring the danger

When a group is thinking about how to go about a project or about the investment in the financial market, they tend to ignore the danger that they might face in the later stages. This is because the views are positive and unless there is a skeptical mind in the team, the danger is taken for granted. This can lead to a lot of disasters because the measure that has to be taken in case of emergency as unaccounted for. This will lead to the downfall and ultimate failure of the project.

2. Rationalization

While a group thinking session is going on, the majority of the minds are thinking in an optimistic way. There can be a few cynical minds which might think of possible dangers and pose a warning statement in front of the group. But, because the majority of the group is thinking positively, the warning statement is eliminated. So, in future, when the same problem comes up, the team will be unaware of what measures are to be taken because they were never discussed (Henningsen, Henningsen, Eden & Cruz, 2006).

3. Self-censorship

This is a very common outcome or the symptom of groupthink. Members have different thoughts and opinions but are not very confident to put the ideas forward. The filter the ideas themselves and think that they are unimportant and will not be considered by the group but in future, they might prove to be useful. Such type of miscommunication can lead to unforeseen circumstances. If the idea would have been discussed, the team would have known what to do in case of a problem or how the execution would have been better.

B. Group decision-makers are always the best decision makers. This is because if the group is given a project to work on, there will not be a unique input but there will be many inputs because all the members will have different thought processes. This will help in making the decision by exploring all the kinds of possibilities and then executing the plan.

In case of emergency, the decision maker should be given a chance (Patalano & LeClair, 2011). This is because, during all the chaos, if a number of inputs, it will delay the time of execution. Whereas, if one member is given the authority to take the decision, it will be quicker and more precise than the group decision.

Cole, T., & Fellows, K. (2008). Risk Communication Failure: A Case Study of New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. Southern Communication Journal, 73(3), 211-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940802219702

Henningsen, D., Henningsen, M., Eden, J., & Cruz, M. (2006). Examining the Symptoms of Groupthink and Retrospective Sensemaking. Small Group Research, 37(1), 36-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496405281772

Medford-Davis, L., & Kapur, G. (2014). Preparing for effective communications during disasters: lessons from a World Health Organization quality improvement project. International Journal Of Emergency Medicine, 7(1), 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1865-1380-7-15

Patalano, A., & LeClair, Z. (2011). The influence of group decision making on indecisiveness-related decisional confidence. Judgment And Decision Making, 6(1), 163-175.

6