Organizational Assimilation Theory

I really liked the Organizational Assimilation Theory and the four stages within in. I think I liked it the most because the stages made sense to me as someone may move through an organization yet I still have questions about the different steps.

There are many expectations and ideas we have before starting with a company based on information we know, gather and hear about through current/past employees. In looking back at my previous positions, I am sure I contributed to this stage for others during the 'anticipatory socialization' stage by giving them information about the company as an employee.

My questions on this theory come in the last two stages. Can it be assumed that if someone doesn't make sense of the organization culture or agree with it, they won't be a good fit for that organization? How long would it take in the previous stages to come to that realization? I also question this when looking at my current company. The organizational culture of our corporate offices is very different than the office I work in. If I were in that office, I don't think I would get to the metamorphosis stage but I feel this is a good-fit company for me. Could this theory have a different spin when companies have multiple locations and different cultures?

I really like the concepts and ideas behind this chapter yet I am looking forward to our class discussion as I still have questions.

Tannen Article Comment

I shared this article with my mom last week and she made an interesting point that I don't think we talked about in class; just thought I would share it here:

It was a good article.  AND it does explain some behaviors I have noticed (read live with!).  What I was disappointed in the article was that the closure section only addressed the part of women 'learning' to do the public-speak".   There was not comparable section about men 'learning to "private-speak'.  That was a BIG missing part. Made me feel like it wasn't important - as if ; women should cross over but men needn't...

Over 30,000 Feet

I feel that all of the examples in the article challenge Politeness Theory. In each incident, there is one person who is just acting as they please. There is little regard for how one’s behavior might affect the outcome of the situation. The two examples that come to mind are #4 – the man complains about the airline, so the pilot says he cannot fly – and #3 – the man reacted to what he thought was going to inconvenience him when really he was being asked if he wanted an upgrade. 

I reread the three assumptions from our book for PT before writing this:

#1: PT assumes that all individuals are concerned with maintaining face

#2: PT assumes that human beings are rational and goal oriented, at least with respect to achieving face needs

#3: PT maintains that some behaviors are fundamentally face threatening

While the examples above stood out to me the most, I really feel all of them go against these assumptions.

I was with a friend today who is a flight attendant for Frontier and showed her this article. She said, unfortunately, nothing in there surprised her. She said that people seem to think over 30,000 ft they can get away with anything – both the employees and the passengers!

Lumbar Fusion

I may be still so excited about this experience I had last week that I am making it fit into my discussion but it really was the first thing that came to mind as I read the Uncertainty Reduction Theory this week. Last Thursday, I had the opportunity to watch a surgery - 2-level lumbar fusion - with a sales rep from my company. The surgeon was using some of our product and my rep was going to be there anyway. He asked if I wanted to go too to see the application of our products. I jumped at the chance! The healthcare industry is a new field for me and, while I don't want to be on the clinical side of care, I am intrigued by it.

With this new experience, though, came uncertainty. My sales rep has been in more surgeries than he can probably count in just the past six months and the process and procedure for it was second nature to him. It was all new to me. I defnitely experienced behavioral and cognitive uncertainty in the time leading up to actually being in the operating room as well as during the procedure. In looking at the eight axioms that explain the uncertainty reduction process, I also went through several of them. I was able to meet the surgeon prior to scrubbing in - he shook my hand and introduced himself with his first name (a rarity with doctors!). It put me at ease of what I was about to see him do and allowed me to feel comfortable asking more questions later. I did ask many questions as I was more comfortable with the situation and mostly asked the sales rep I was with. I generally wanted to know the answers and information but see that it could have been my way of reducing the uncertainty. I definitely used passive and active strategies of communication in this experience!

I still don't want to be on the clinical side of things in healthcare but I hope to watch another surgery very soon!

Stuck in the Airport

I write this from an airport where I have been sitting since 5am ET-one of those travel experiences, I guess. This is also my first mobile blog post-hope it all works out!

In reading about the politeness theory, especially the example of Josephine, I feel this theory is very indirect. I see the need to save face and I am sure I have done it before yet if I want to switch a shift with someone I am going to come out and ask. No one enjoys being in an embarrassing situation and I can see how this theory would look to address that. Although, it would seem one would need to 'save face' after the communication has occurred.

I really like the Social Exchange Theory. I feel like I have used this theory often and didn't realize it until now. Two examples come to mind-the first is with friendships and the other is dating relationships. With various life experiences, travels and activities I have done in my life, there are many people I have meet and friendships created. It has been rather recently that I am paying more attention to those relationships-looking at the rewards versus the costs. Previously, I felt I had to do everything to maintain and strengthen those relationships. Many times that would be one-sided and I would be discouraged or hurt by the efforts I put in with little in return. Now I look at these relationships more closely and put in the amount of time and effort that I am comfortable with. I don't take it so personally when my efforts are not reciprocate. On the other hand, in dating relationships, I try to 'make it work' almost ignoring the cost to me completely! I know I do this and try to understand it all the time. Using the SET, my prediction may be 'dissatisfied' (outcomes<cl), yet I continue. If that were the case in a friendship, I would look to make a change.

Attribution Theory and MDL

I found the case study on the attribution theory very interesting. The idea that humans are detectives resignation with me. I feel it is so much of our time in communication is trying to figure out the 'why' that leads to the outcomes. What does inspire our mannerisms, behavior and events?

In reading over the discussion questions, the second one asks about research methods that could be used to study the attribution theory. What comes to mind is the method of LEAN and Six Sigma. It is something I am studying extensivly for my career and within the healthcare industry. For a long time, this has been used in  manufacturing jobs but recently expanded to other areas and proven to be very effective. It is a very systematic approach to solving problems, specifically reducing waste and being more efficient. Similar to studying the attribution theory and what leads to our communication in various situations, this method looks at the process of a task and finds ways to streamline it. I feel I am a very logical person and like order, which is why I am attracted to this research method and why I feel so strongly that it can cross over to all industries.

While that is a very scientific approach to this theory, I still think there is a humanistic element as those events, behaviors and mannerisms can be, and most often are, personal to each person and to their situations as in the example of Rebecca.

The discussion on Message Design Logic was very interesting. The questions I took away from the bottom of page 38 when they talk about MDL being different from personality traits. While MDLs can change through a lifetime, is there a tendency to one over the others? Do personality traits determine that type of MDL for each individual or is it completely situational?

Perceptions and Realities

I found the Social Construction of Reality difficult to read and apply to my life. It felt more of a technical piece than the others. With that, though, I did relate to the various ways our own reality can be shaped based on what we know, what we are surrounded with, etc.

The discussion on perceptions was very interesting to me; I feel it is so important to recognize the factors that can shape and change ones perception of a situation. It can change the dynamics and understanding of a conversation drastically.

I was also interested in the discussion on visualization. When I was college swimmer, we would have to do that before big races. At the time, I thought it was silly - we all did! We would gather in a room and find as spot on the floor away from our teammates. My coach would describe the meet we were about to compete in and we would need to imagine being there. He would tell us to go through our biggest races - the one we had been training for the most - and think about every detail of how it would go. Sometimes I would do but not completely. I might not think about the temperature of the water in my visualization and when the race came that would throw me off. After studying this technique more since then, I can see how it can be a positive influence on perceptions in communications as well as ways of forming outcomes that you want.