Prateek Mba

Defining Human Communication The most common definition of human communication is the verbal and non-verbal interaction between humans in hopes of being able to convey meaning or messages. These often include the words that we speak, gestures we make and our facial expressions. However, the definition of human communication goes beyond the things we do with our bodies. Our actions and acts of self-expression are also part of our communication. Communication is a difficult thing to define. Theodore Clevenger tells us that “the continuing problem in defining communication for scholarly or scientific purposes stems from the fact that the verb ‘to communicate’ is well established in the common lexicon and therefore is not easily captured for scientific use” (Clevenger, 1991, p. 351). Contrary to Clevenger’s thoughts, Frank Dance (1970) outlines three elements used to distinguish communication. The first dimension is level of observation. The second distinction is intentionality. Some definitions include only purposeful message sending and receiving; others do not impose this limitation. The third of Dance’s (1970) distinctions is normative judgment. Some definitions include a statement of success or accuracy; other definitions do not contain such implicit judgments. (Dance, 1970, p. 201210). One popular model that attempts to define communication is the ShannonWeaver model. It presents communication as a linear event. The model states that communication always involves six elements. These elements are the message, the source, the encoder, the channel, the decoder, and the receiver (Woods & Hollnagel, 2005, p. 12). Verbal communication is the sending and receiving of messages, typically between individuals or groups, to convey meaning and understanding. This includes our language usage, phrases, words or sounds. Non-verbal communication conveys the other part of our message using hand gestures, body language and facial expressions. Communication is the sending of messages from a sender to a receiver in a particular channel or medium. These channels can be air waves, pages of a book, newspapers, visible language such as American Sign Language or more recently developed channels such as computer screens. In our world today, which is highly technologically oriented, people have begun to communicate in new ways. These ways include, but are not limited to, telephones, cellular telephones, electronic mail, video conferencing, instant messaging or text messaging. As these new adaptations of technology

appear and become more popular, senders and receivers both are required to learn how to interpret messages over new mediums and learn to use these technologies. Unfortunately, it is possible for these new technologies to negatively affect human communication. While technology often provides faster and more efficient transmission, it often can be the cause for misinterpretation by the receiver, or can result in the losing of a message in the failed delivery of electronic mail. However, the channels of communication can extend beyond these standard or traditional written or oral communications. Communication can include expressions of self such as the bumper stickers that we affix to our cars expressing our political beliefs, body piercings and tattoos, or works of graffiti on the wall of a building. Each of the above convey a certain way that someone feels and that feeling is received by people or groups, perhaps no one specifically, much in the same way that someone who reads a book or newspaper story receives a message. Human communication is any relay of message from sender to receiver. An important part of understanding human communication is acknowledging that it includes communications that are received or decoded correctly as well as messages that are not, due to a language barrier or a simple misunderstanding between sender and receiver. Sometimes during communication, especially during a heated argument, words or actions are misunderstood and being able to work through those is a large part of being an effective communicator. Similarly, communication also includes messages that are inadvertently sent by something we say or do, or something that we don’t say or do when the other party feels that we should have reacted differently. Ultimately, our communication with others determines our relationships with them; whether it is a friendship, a parent or other family member, relationship with your boss, or a casual acquaintance with whom you may never communicate again. The definition or perspective of human communication will vary for each person, which is partially why it is so difficult to define accurately. It is almost a second nature for humans to be able to receive the oral messages from their fellow humans as well as being able to decode the non-verbal gestures. In conclusion, human communication is a necessary part of day-to-day life. It is comprised of many complex aspects that most people are not even aware of and many obstacles that must be overcome. The definition of human communication will continue to evolve as long as technology continues to evolve, but it will still be necessary to understand the elements that compose communication in order to understand communication as a

whole.

THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS- The communication process consists of a message being sent and received. The message may be verbal or non-verbal. The same basic principles apply whether humans, animals, other forms of life, or combinations of these are involved. Your challenge, as an instructor, is to not merely communicate with your students--but to communicate effectively. Effective communication involves a message being sent and received. Added to this however, is the element of feedback to ensure that the message sent was received exactly as intended. This concept may be illustrated using the three-step communications model (fig. 5-1). Figure 5-1.—Threestep communication process. Sending The Message There are four elements involved in sending a message. First, as the instructor (sender), you formulate the message you intend to communicate. Next, you consider possible barriers that may affect the message. This includes your experience, the terms you will use, and even your feeling toward the subject or the students. External barriers such as noise must also be considered. Third, you encode the message; that is, you put the message into the words you want to use. Last, you clearly communicate (send) the message. Receiving The Message There are also four elements involved in receiving a message. The students (receivers) will first hear and/or see the message you sent. Second, the message is affected by external barriers, if any, and the students’ own internal barriers. Possible internal barriers may include the students experience level, their understanding of the terms used, their attitude toward the material, or the way they feel about you. Third, your students decode the message through the use of mental images. For instance, when you say the word circus, the receiver does not “see” the letters that form the word. Instead, a mental image of some sort appears.

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS AND TECHNIQUES- There are many skills and techniques you must master to bean effective communicator and instructor. Many of these skills you already possess, all that is required is that you use them to their best advantage. Others, you need to learn and practice. LISTENING Listening is one of our most important communication skills. It is an active process of hearing and understanding that demands concentration and attention. Both you and your students have responsibilities in the communication process. You must ensure that the learning environment is free of distractions that might interfere with the students’ ability to listen. Be alert to the non-verbal behaviors of your students. Facial expressions reveal much of what is happening in the mind of a student. A quizzical look indicates some misunderstanding has occurred or a question needs to be addressed. A student leaning slightly forward and maintaining good eye contact with you is probably interested and sincere about learning. An affirmative head nod indicates approval, agreement, or understanding. Conversely, eye contact out the window or someplace other than the front of the room may indicate boredom or lack of interest. Fidgeting in the chair or a slouched posture may also bean indication of something other than effective listening. Raised hands and relevant questions are sure signs that you are communicating effectively. Learn to determine if students are listening by the type of feedback they provide. Effective listening depends on motivation, and you are the prime motivator in your classroom. Students should arrive for instruction ready to learn. They should participate and ask questions as they arise. Students must understand that they have responsibility for their own learning. This requires active listening on their part.

Model of Communication

There are many factors which influence the communication process, all of which impact each other in a variety of ways. This model shows how the most important factors function in what would be a snapshot of a static instance of communication. Click on a part of the model for specific information.

Sender - The sender is the speaker. A sender starts with an impulse he or she wishes to express and then must encode that idea into symbols (words) and signs (facial expressions, tone of voice, etc).

Message - The message is the symbols and signs which are actually transmitted. All messages are carried by a channel (such as face-toface, over the phone, email, etc).

Receiver - The receiver is the listener. The receiver must decode the symbols and signs of the message sent through the channel. Decoding involves working through one's own perceptual filters to arrive at thoughts which approximate the sender's original intent.

Feedback - Feedback is the signs the receivers projects while the sender is sending a message. Feedback allows the sender to know how his or her message is being received.

Environment - Environment is the physical, social and emotional context the communication takes place in. Environments can place expectation and contraints on communication.

The following are the main objectives of business communication: Conveying the right message: The main object of communication is to convey the right message to the right person, i.e., to the person for whom it is meant. The message conveyed should be well understood and accepted by the receiver in the right perspective. In other words, it should carry the same meaning which has been conveyed so that it may be translated into action effectively.

Coordination of effort: Communication is an effective tool for coordinating the activities of different persons engaged in running a business. Coordination without communication is a remote possibility. The individuals or groups come to know what others are doing and what is expected from them only through communication.

Good industrial relations: Communication develops good industrial relations as it conveys the feelings, ideas, opinions, and viewpoints of one party to the other party. The two parties - the management and the subordinates, come closer through communication. They understand each other and dispel any misunderstanding. Thus, it promotes cooperation and good industrial relations. Development of managerial skills: Communication helps managers to understand human behavior at work. Communication of facts, ideas, opinions, information, feelings, etc., add value to the knowledge of managers about various happenings, in the organization and behavior of people. Thus, communication is a process of learning

Business Communication:- communication used to promote a product, service, or organization; relay information within the business; or deal with legal and similar issues. It is also a means of relying between a supply chain, for example the consumer and manufacturer. Business Communication is known simply as "Communications." It encompasses a variety of topics, including Marketing, Branding, Customer relations, Consumer behaviour, Advertising, Public relations, Corporate communication, Community engagement, Research & Measurement, Reputation management, Interpersonal communication, Employee engagement, Online communication, and Event management. It is closely related to the fields of professional communication and technical communication.

In business, the term communications encompasses various channels of communication, including the Internet, Print (Publications), Radio, Television, Ambient media, Outdoor, and Word of mouth. Business Communication can also refer to internal communication. A communications director will typically manage internal communication and craft messages sent to employees. It is vital that internal communications are managed properly because a poorly crafted or managed message could foster distrust or hostility from employees.[1] Business Communication is a common topic included in the curricula of Masters of Business Administration (MBA) programs of many universities. AS well, many community colleges and universities offer degrees in Communications. There are several methods of business communication, including: •

Web-based communication - for better and improved communication, anytime anywhere ...

•

ε− µ α ι λ σ , which provide an instantaneous medium of written communication worldwide;

•

Ρεπ ο ρ τ σ department;

•

Πρ ε σ ε ν τ α τ ι ο ν σ - very popular method of communication in all types of organizations, usually involving audiovisual material, like copies of reports, or material prepared in Microsoft PowerPoint or Adobe Flash;

•

τελ ε π η ο ν ε δ speech;

- important in documenting the activities of any

meetings, which allow for long distance

• forum boards, which allow people to instantly post information at a centralized location; and •

φα χ ε τ ο φ α χ ε meetings, which are personal and should be succeeded by a written followup.

Organizations •

Founded in 1936 the Association of Business Communication (ABC)

[1], originally called the Association of College Teachers of Business Writing, is “an international organization committed to fostering excellence in business communication scholarship, research, education, and practice.” •

The IEEE Professional Communication Society (PCS) [2] is dedicated to understanding and promoting effective communication in engineering, scientific, and other environments, including business environments. PCS's academic journal, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication [3], is one of the premier journals in professional communication. The journal’s readers are engineers,writers, information designers, managers, and others working as scholars, educators, and practitioners who share an interest in the effective communication of technical and business information.

Seven Essential Principles of Effective CommunicationIn some call centers, you can feel the energy as soon as you walk in the door. It takes many forms: pride of workmanship, enthusiasm, a feeling of community, commitment and the willingness to make the "extra effort." The call center "clicks." Everybody knows what the mission is; everybody is pulling in the same direction. While there are a myriad of factors that go into creating this sort of environment, effective communication always plays a central role. Communication creates meaning and direction for people. Organizations of all types depend on the existence of what Warren Bennis, noted leadership expert, calls "shared meanings and interpretations of reality," which facilitate coordinated action. When good communication is lacking, the symptoms are predictable: conflicting objectives, unclear values, misunderstandings, lack of coordination, confusion, low morale and people doing the bare minimum required. Although cultures and communication styles vary, there are predictable and notable principles that I've noticed are consistently present among highvalue call centers. Among the most important are: • Commit to keeping people in the know • Cultivate a Supporting Culture

• Establish appropriate communication tools • Develop formal and informal channels of communication • Ensure that structure and policies support communication • Listen actively and regularly • Don't overdo it Let's look at each, in turn.

Commit to keeping people in the know. Leaders of high-performance organizations are predisposed to keeping their people in the know. They actively share both good news and bad. This minimizes the rumor mill, which hinders effective, accurate communication. It also contributes to an environment of trust. It sounds simple, but just making a commitment is the first step. I had a manager tell me recently that she decided to make great communication a top priority — and that it's working wonders for productivity and clarity in the organization. Peter Senge, who popularized the notion of the learning organization in his popular book, The Fifth Discipline, described a place "where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together." Shared information is the fundamental ingredient in organizational learning — and learning both contributes to and is dependent on effective communication. Consistently communicate progress on projects and objectives. Hazy objectives and vaguely defined tasks will destroy productivity and morale. The objectives of teams and individuals — as well as the call center itself — should be as concrete as possible. Projects should have clearly defined milestones, with beginning and ending points. For projects or long-term objectives, tools such as Gantt charts and flow charts can be useful for identifying resources required, showing the interrelated nature of individual tasks and tracking progress. They give focus to the mission of the workgroup and can help address questions such as: Where are we? How far have we come? What's next? They should be updated and distributed as often as something substantial changes in the ongoing direction and plans.

Cultivate a Supporting Culture. Culture — the inveterate principles or values of the organization — tends to guide behavior and can either support and further, or, as some have learned the hard way, ruin effective communication. Unfortunately, there's no guaranteed formula for creating a supporting culture. But many call center managers agree that shaping the culture of the organization is a primary leadership responsibility. They do not believe that culture should be left to chance. As a result, they spend an inordinate amount of time understanding the organization and the people who are part of it. One of the most distinguishable aspects of a positive culture is that the vision and mission are well known and understood. Why does the call center exist? What is it working to achieve? What's in it for customers and for the organization? What's in it for employees? Take steps to build employee commitment to the vision. This should include soliciting input from employees as the vision is being developed, publishing the vision widely, and — yep, using it to guide tactical, day-to-day decisions.

Establish appropriate communication tools. A prerequisite to an environment in which communication thrives is that individuals and teams have compatible and capable communications technologies. The usual channels apply — telephone, voice mail, e-mail, intranet, instant messaging, and collaboration and conferencing tools offer enormous potential if they are available and compatible across the organization. Further — and this is so simple but so effective — create directories (on-line, print, perhaps both) of contact information for your call center and cross-functional teams. This provides necessary information, and it creates symbolism that reinforces communication and camaraderie. The usual cautions apply — e.g., e-mail is popular communication tool, but it does not eliminate the need for face-to-face communication, especially for sensitive subjects, performance reviews or bad news. An in-person meeting, or a telephone or video conference, will allow the kind of immediate interaction that can prevent a problem from becoming even more serious and emotionally charged.

Develop formal and informal channels of communication. Effective leaders cultivate both formal and informal channels of communication. The communication formats can include newsletters,

meetings, visual displays, e-mail, voicemail, posters, intranets and informal "hallway meetings." But the mission and values being communicated remain consistent. As Bennis puts it, "leadership...is based on predictability. The truth is that we trust people who are predictable, whose positions are known and who keep at it; leaders who are trusted make themselves known, make their positions clear." One of the common formal means of communication between front-line workers and management is employee satisfaction surveys. The best call centers track results and monitor trends to ensure continuous improvement. Survey results are communicated back to employees, and teams are often formed to address specific problems that are identified in the surveys. The progress towards resolving the problem is then tracked and communicated.

Ensure that structure and policies support communication. The organization's structure defines the alignment of roles and responsibilities for business units, departments and individuals. In general, flatter, more collaborative organizations help foster an environment in which trust and communication flourish. Policies and procedures can also impact trust and communication. For example, monitoring and coaching programs that truly contribute to the growth and well being of individuals and the organization help to build trust and encourage communication. Leading call centers have also cultivated a systematic, collaborative approach to call center workload planning. This process generally includes forecasting, staffing, scheduling, budgeting and related activities. Systematic planning contributes to effective communication in several ways. It creates a body of information that wouldn't otherwise be available, e.g., here's our call load pattern and, therefore, why the schedules are structured as they are. It also forces people to look into the future and see their work in the context of a larger framework. Perhaps most important, formal planning requires communication about values, on issues such as resource allocations, budgeting and workload priorities.

Listen actively and regularly. Listening encourages communication. When leaders listen to those around them, they give others the opportunity to contribute ideas, which creates a sense of ownership. Further, listening encourages diverse perspectives, enables individuals to grow and creates community within the organization. Active listening enables a culture that brings out the best in people.

Listening also benefits leadership directly. There is a common myth that great leaders create compelling visions from an inner source that others don't have. But many studies on the subjects of leadership and strategy have shown the visions of some of history's greatest leaders often came from others. The leaders may have selected the best vision to focus on, shaped it and communicated it to others in a compelling way, but they rarely originated the vision.

Don't overdo it. Experienced leaders are aware of an interesting paradox: too much communicating inhibits effective communication. There is an optimal level of communication beyond which more communication becomes counterproductive. Too many meetings, memos, conferences, email messages and on-the-fly discussions may be symptoms of weaknesses in plans and processes. I sometimes go sailing with racing crews in my hometown of Annapolis, Maryland. I'm not proficient at sailing yet, and need instruction but I've noticed with a certain amount of awe that the most effective crews communicate among themselves with head nods, hand signals, and one or two word instructions. Among less experienced crews, the yelling back and forth is much more prevalent. With better tools, more focused training and appropriate levels of empowerment, the need for excessive real-time communicating can be avoided — because the communication is built into individual understanding and established processes. And a test of all this — can you go on vacation without checking in (at least regularly)? That's a sign that you've probably built an organization that's working. (And you need that vacation!)

Conclusion Effective communication is inseparable from effective leadership — leaders are only as effective as their ability to communicate. Effective communication results in a shared understanding of what's most important. When people are aligned behind a set of compelling values, enthusiasm, commitment and significant productivity tend to follow.

Effective communication skill ensures your ideas reaches audience without loosing its quality. This skill has to be nurtured for better results.

Effective communication helps a person to be more productive and solve issues with ease. It is the key for success whatever your profession is. Verbal or written communication, when it is done in the right way can do wonders for your profession or business. Effective communication skills help you to convey your ideas more clearly to your audience. The first part of becoming an effective communicator is turning your ideas into words. This is a process, which needs to be improved as far as any budding writer, or public speaker is concerned. Turning your ideas into words without loosing the actual purpose is very tricky. It calls for preparation, effort and thinking in different view points. A good writer should be an effective communicator also. Otherwise he is going to be confusing his readers without transmitting his ideas clearly and effectively. An effective communicator can make an idea fast acceptable by others. Read more in Marketing and Advertising « Corruption Within the Free Press What is True Marketing? Selling Ideas or Selling Products » Understanding your audience first is another vital point you must consider before starting communication process. If you know a person’s temperament, you can tune your communication to make it more appealing to that person. This is very important as far as any business negotiations are concerned. The better you tune your communications according to your counterpart’s temperament, the chances of winning the deal is higher. Creativity is another factor that makes your communication effective. A creative communicator can use words and images to transmit his ideas. Creative communication is used to produce advertising materials, where a great degree of space management is involved. A creative communicator makes use of modern technology to make his communication effective. Using multimedia software helps a creative communicator to communicate his ideas effectively.

the three most important basic principles of effective communication are: Always listen when someone is talking.

Make sure that it is a two way process. Affirm and acknowledge results.

LISTEN LISTEN and LISTEN The most frustrating thing about communication is when the person whom you are talking to is not listening to you. Before you even finish a sentence, he cuts you off. A lot of the misunderstanding and misinterpretion are caused by not listening to other party.

TWO WAY PROCESS Communication should always be a two way process. Make it safe for other to express his views. Effective communication means ideas are exchanging freely.

AFFIRM UNDERSTANDING OR RESULT Effective communication is about the RESULT you get. This is perhaps the most important thing in any communication. It means the person you are communicating to totally understands your point. And you also understand his point. So to ensure that your communication is effective, you must always confirm understanding. That’s the three most basic pronciples for an effective communication. It sounds simple but in practice, it is perhaps the hardest principles to follow, and has to be constantly worked at.

The Importance of Business Communication- Communication is essential for life in general but in business settings, it is critical. Communication is more than just a matter of speaking and hearing, especially within a business setting. Good communication, on the other hand, means that your message will be sent and that the people or organizations understand the message in its entirety. Further, they are much more likely to respond in a positive manner if the message was communicated effectively. A poorly communicated message will likely result in an unfavorable response. Today, most businesses are relying on the Internet as a way to communicate.

This can be especially trying when trying to communicate effectively as there is no body language to rely on and no spoken words. The reader can only then make assumptions based on your words. Electronic communication can be difficult and challenging but can also result in favorable outcome for all. Body language plays a large role in communication. If you are making person to person contact, you are then able to read non verbal body language and possibly rely on that for a clue as to the effectiveness of your message. Watch for disinterest, eye rolling, body slumping, lack of interest, looking in another direction, these are all non verbal body language and not a very good sign either. If you are delivering an oral presentation to a group, you can feed off of their non verbal body language and determine if you are captivating them or simply boring them. All you have to do is pay attention and if you communicate clearly and are organized, the result will likely be a favorable one. Cultural communication is another area where problems can arise in communicating. It is best when dealing with various ethnic groups or cultures to learn about them before you attempt communications. What one culture embraces, another finds offense to and this applies to both verbal and non verbal communications. Be proactive when approaching other cultures. Remember their learning styles, the religious beliefs, and their families are completely different. Do not rely on stereotypes and do not identify them based on their population. Differences are evident within all groups so avoid classifying them together as one. To be effective with cross cultural communications you have to be diverse and open to new ideas. Ineffective communication is a major obstacle in business. Management needs to encourage effective communication but can only effectively do so by example. To communicate in the best interest of the organization, all parties have to understand each other. You also need to get the attention of the person that you are attempting to communicate with. Define the barriers that hinder effective communication and work on them. Some of the barriers that can cause communication breakdowns are physical barriers resulting from people not getting to know each other, perceptual barriers because we all view things differently, emotional barriers which are based on fear and lack of trust, cultural barriers from a lack of understanding, language barriers, gender barriers, and interpersonal barriers which are based on your thoughts and your feelings.

Importance of written communication: Communication may be made through oral or written. In oral communication, listeners can make out what speakers is trying to say, but in written communication, text matter in the message is a reflection of your thinking. So, written communication or message should be clear, purposeful and concise with correct words, to avoid any misinterpretation of your message. Written communications provides a permanent record for future use and it also gives an opportunity to employees to put up their comments or suggestions in writing.

What is the importance of feedback in the communication process? Because you need "feed back" or another parties input for "communication" otherwise it's just considered "talking too". Also if you get feed back you can be assured that the other person was actively listening and that they understood what you said. Ex: If you are talking about childcare and the person response with tuna sandwich you know that they did not comprehend what you were saying

The Transmission Model of Communication Daniel Chandler •

Greek Translation

•

ϑα π α ν ε σ ε

•

Ιντ ρ ο δ υ χ τ ι ο ν

•

Λεϖ ε λ σ οφ προ β λ ε µ σ ιν τη ε ανα λ ψ σ ι σ οφ χοµ µ υ ν ι χ α τ ι ο ν

Τρα ν σ λ α τ ι ο ν

•

Αδϖα ν τ α γ ε σ οφ Ωεα ϖ ε ρ ∋ σ µο δ ε λ

•

Ωεα κ ν ε σ σ ε σ οφ τη ε τρα ν σ µ ι σ σ ι ο ν µοδ ε λ χοµ µ υ ν ι χ α τ ι ο ν

•

Με τ α π η ο ρ σ

•

Λιν ε α ρ ι τ ψ

•

Χο ν τ ε ν τ

•

Ινστ ρ υ µ ε ν τ α λ ι σ µ

•

Ρελα τ ι ο ν σ η ι π σ

•

Χο ν τ ε ξ τ

•

Τιµ ε

•

Με δ ι υ µ

•

Χο ν χ λ υ σ ι ο ν

•

Ρεφ ε ρ ε ν χ ε σ

αν δ

Σηα ν ν ο ν

αν δ

οφ

µεα ν ι ν γ

αν δ

πυρ π ο σ ε σ

Introduction Here I will outline and critique a particular, very well-known model of communication developed by Shannon and Weaver (1949), as the prototypical example of a transmissive model of communication: a model which reduces communication to a process of 'transmitting information'. The underlying metaphor of communication as transmission underlies 'commonsense' everyday usage but is in many ways misleading and repays critical attention. Shannon and Weaver's model is one which is, in John Fiske's words, 'widely accepted as one of the main seeds out of which Communication Studies has grown' (Fiske 1982: 6). Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver were not social scientists but engineers working for Bell Telephone Labs in the United

States. Their goal was to ensure the maximum efficiency of telephone cables and radio waves. They developed a model of communication which was intended to assist in developing a mathematical theory of communication. Shannon and Weaver's work proved valuable for communication engineers in dealing with such issues as the capacity of various communication channels in 'bits per second'. It contributed to computer science. It led to very useful work on redundancy in language. And in making 'information' 'measurable' it gave birth to the mathematical study of 'information theory'. However, these directions are not our concern here. The problem is that some commentators have claimed that Shannon and Weaver's model has a much wider application to human communication than a purely technical one.

C & W's original model consisted of five elements: An information source, which produces a message. A transmitter, which encodes the message into signals A channel, to which signals are adapted for transmission A receiver, which 'decodes' (reconstructs) the message from the signal. A destination, where the message arrives. A sixth element, noise is a dysfunctional factor: any interference with the message travelling along the channel (such as 'static' on the telephone or radio) which may lead to the signal received being different from that sent. For the telephone the channel is a wire, the signal is an electrical current in it, and the transmitter and receiver are the telephone handsets. Noise would include crackling from the wire. In conversation, my mouth is the transmitter, the signal is the sound waves, and your ear is the receiver. Noise would include any distraction you might experience as I speak. Although in Shannon and Weaver's model a speaker and a listener would strictly be the source and the destination rather than the transmitter and the receiver, in discussions of the model the participants are commonly

humanised as the sender and the receiver. My critical comments will refer less specifically to Shannon and Weaver's model than to the general transmission model which it reflects, where communication consists of a Sender passing a Message to a Receiver. So when I am discussing transmission models in general I too will refer to the participants as the Sender and the Receiver. Shannon and Weaver's transmission model is the best-known example of the 'informational' approach to communication. Although no serious communication theorist would still accept it, it has also been the most influential model of communication which has yet been developed, and it reflects a commonsense (if misleading) understanding of what communication is. Lasswell's verbal version of this model: 'Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect ?' was reflected in subsequent research in human communication which was closely allied to behaviouristic approaches.

Levels of problems in the analysis of communication Shannon and Weaver argued that there were three levels of problems of communication: •

A The technical problem: how accurately can the message be transmitted?

•

B The semantic problem: how precisely is the meaning 'conveyed'?

•

C The effectiveness problem: how effectively does the received meaning affect behaviour?

Shannon and Weaver somewhat naively assumed that sorting out Level A problems would lead to improvements at the other levels. Although the concept of 'noise' does make some allowance for the way in which messages may be 'distorted', this frames the issue in terms of incidental 'interference' with the sender's intentions rather than in terms of a central and purposive process of interpretation. The concept reflects Shannon and Weaver's concern with accuracy and efficiency.

Advantages of Shannon and Weaver's model Particular models are useful for some purposes and less useful for others. Like any process of mediation a model foregrounds some features and backgrounds others. The strengths of Shannon and Weaver's model are its • simplicity, • generality, and • quantifiability. Such advantages made this model attractive to several academic disciplines. It also drew serious academic attention to human communication and 'information theory', leading to further theory and research.

Weaknesses of the transmission model of communication The transmission model is not merely a gross over-simplification but a dangerously misleading misrepresentation of the nature of human communication. This is particularly important since it underlies the 'commonsense' understanding of what communication is. Whilst such usage may be adequate for many everyday purposes, in the context of the study of media and communication the concept needs critical reframing.

Metaphors Shannon and Weaver's highly mechanistic model of communication can be seen as being based on a transport metaphor. James Carey (1989: 15) notes that in the nineteenth century the movement of information was seen as basically the same as the transport of goods or people, both being described as 'communication'. Carey argues that 'it is a view of communication that derives from one of the most ancient of human dreams: the desire to increase the speed and effect of messages as they travel in space' (ibid.) Writing always had to be transported to the reader, so in written communication the transport of letters, books and newspapers supported the notion of the

transport of meaning from writer to readers. As Carey notes, 'The telegraph ended the identity but did not destroy the metaphor' (ibid.). Within the broad scope of transport I tend to see the model primarily as employing a postal metaphor. It is as if communication consists of a sender sending a packet of information to a receiver, whereas I would insist that communication is about meaning rather than information. One appalling consequence of the postal metaphor for communication is the current reference to 'delivering the curriculum' in schools, as a consequence of which teachers are treated as postal workers. But the influence of the transmission model is widespread in our daily speech when we talk of 'conveying meaning', 'getting the idea across', 'transferring information', and so on. We have to be very alert indeed to avoid falling into the clutches of such transmissive metaphors. Michael Reddy (1979) has noted our extensive use in English of 'the conduit metaphor' in describing communicative acts. In this metaphor, 'The speaker puts ideas (objects) into words (containers) and sends them (along a conduit) to a hearer who takes the idea/objects out of the word/containers' (Lakoff & Johnson 1980: 10). The assumptions the metaphor involves are that: • Language functions like a conduit, transferring thoughts bodily from one person to another; • in writing and speaking, people insert their thoughts or feelings into the words; • words accomplish the transfer by containing the thoughts or feelings and conveying them to others; • in listening or reading, people extract the thoughts and feelings once again from the words. (Reddy 1979: 290) As Reddy notes, if this view of language were correct, learning would be effortless and accurate. The problem with this view of language is that learning is seen as passive, with the learner simply 'taking in' information (Bowers 1988: 42). I prefer to suggest that there is no information in language, in books or in any medium per se. If language and books do 'contain' something, this is only words rather than information. Information and meaning arises only in the process of listeners, readers or viewers actively making sense of what they hear or see. Meaning is not 'extracted', but constructed.

In relation to mass communication rather than interpersonal communication, key metaphors associated with a transmission model are those of the hypodermic needle and of the bullet. In the context of mass communication such metaphors are now largely used only as the targets of criticism by researchers in the field.

Linearity The transmission model fixes and separates the roles of 'sender' and 'receiver'. But communication between two people involves simultaneous 'sending' and 'receiving' (not only talking, but also 'body language' and so on). In Shannon and Weaver's model the source is seen as the active decision-maker who determines the meaning of the message; the destination is the passive target. It is a linear, one-way model, ascribing a secondary role to the 'receiver', who is seen as absorbing information. However, communication is not a one-way street. Even when we are simply listening to the radio, reading a book or watching TV we are far more interpretively active than we normally realize. There was no provision in the original model for feedback (reaction from the receiver). Feedback enables speakers to adjust their performance to the needs and responses of their audience. A 'feedback loop' was added by later theorists, but the model remains linear.

Content and meaning In this model, even the nature of the content seems irrelevant, whereas the subject, or the way in which the participants feel about it, can shape the process of communication. Insofar as content has any place (typically framed as 'the message'), transmission models tend to equate content and meaning, whereas there may be varying degrees of divergence between the 'intended meaning' and the meanings generated by interpreters. According to Erik Meeuwissen (e-mail 26/2/98) Shannon himself was well aware of the fact that his theory did not address meaning. He offers these

supportive quotations from Shannon and Weaver: The fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one point either exactly or approximately a message selected at another point. Frequently the messages have meaning; that is they refer to or are correlated according to some system with certain physical or conceptual entities. These semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering problem (Shannon 1948). The word information, in this theory, is used in a special sense that must not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular, information must not be confused with meaning. In fact, two messages, one of which is heavily loaded with meaning and the other of which is pure nonsense, can be exactly equivalent, from the present viewpoint, as regards information. It is this, undoubtedly, that Shannon means when he says that 'the semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering aspects. (Weaver 1949) Weaver also noted that the theory ...has so penetratingly cleared the air that one is now, perhaps for the first time, ready for a real theory of meaning. An engineering communication theory is just like a very proper and discreet girl accepting your telegram. She pays no attention to the meaning whether it be sad, or joyous, or embarrassing. But she must be prepared to deal with all that come to her desk (Weaver 1949). However, the important point here is that meaning-making is not central in transmission models. It is widely assumed that meaning is contained in the 'message' rather than in its interpretation. But there is no single, fixed meaning in any message. We bring varying attitudes, expectations and understandings to communicative situations. Even if the receiver sees or hears exactly the same message which the sender sent, the sense which the receiver makes of it may be quite different from the sender's intention. The same 'message' may represent multiple meanings. The word 'message' is a sort of microcosm of the whole postal metaphor, so I'm not happy with even using that label. Transmission models treat decoding as a mirror image of encoding, allowing no room for the receiver's interpretative frames of reference. Where the message is recorded in some form 'senders' may well have little idea of who the 'receivers' may be (particularly, of course, in relation to mass

communication). The receiver need not simply accept, but may alternatively ignore or oppose a message. We don't all necessarily have to accept messages which suggest that a particular political programme is good for us.

Instrumentalism The transmission model is an instrumental model in that it treats communication as a means to a predetermined end. Perhaps this is the way in which some people experience communication. However, not all communication is intentional: people unintentionally communicate a great deal about their attitudes simply through body language. And, although this idea will sound daft to those who've never experienced it, when some of us write something, we sometimes find out what we want to say only after we've finished writing about it. Some critics argue that this model is geared towards improving a communicator's ability to manipulate a receiver. Carey notes that 'the centre of this idea of communication is the transmission of signals or messages over distance for the purposes of control... of distance and people' (Carey 1989: 15). In an instrumental framework the process involved is intended to be 'transparent' to the participants (nothing is intended to distract from the sender's communicative goal). Such a conception is as fundamental to the rhetoric of science as it is alien to that of art. 'Perfectly transparent communication' is impossible.

Context Nor is there any mention in the transmission model of the importance of context: situational, social, institutional, political, cultural, historical. Meaning cannot be independent of such contexts. Whilst recorded texts (such as letters in relation to interpersonal communication and newspapers, films, radio and television programmes in relation to mass communication) allow texts to be physically separated from their contexts of production, this is not to say that meaning can be 'context-free'. Whilst it is true that meaning is not wholly 'determined' by contexts of 'production' or 'reception' (texts do

not mean simply what either their producers or their interpreters choose for them to mean), meanings may nevertheless be radically inflected by particular contexts of 'writing' and 'reading' in space and time. The 'same' text can be interpreted quite differently within different contexts. Social contexts have a key influence on what are perceived as appropriate forms, styles and contents. Regarding situational context, it makes a lot of difference if the sender is an opinionated taxi-driver who drives aggressively, and the receiver is a passenger in the back seat whose primary concern is to arrive at the destination in one piece.

Relationships and purposes In the transmission model the participants are treated as isolated individuals. Contemporary communication theorists treat communication as a shared social system. We are all social beings, and our communicative acts cannot be said to represent the expression of purely individual thoughts and feelings. Such thoughts and feelings are socio-culturally patterned. Even what we call 'our' language isn't our own: we are born into it; we can't change the rules. Words have connotations which we don't choose for them. An emphasis on creative individuality is itself a culturally-shaped myth which had a historically 'modern' origin in Western Europe. Transmission models of communication reduce human communication to the transmission of messages, whereas, as the linguists tell us, there is more to communication than this. They refer, for instance, to phatic communication, which is a way of maintaining relationships. In Britain, talking about the weather is far more a matter of phatic communication than of 'transmitting information'. No allowance is made in the transmission model for differing purposes. The same TV images of a football match would have very different meanings for the fans of opposing sides. In models such as Shannon and Weaver's no allowance is made for relationships between people as communicators (e.g. differences in power). We frame what is said differently according to the roles in which we communicate. If a friend asks you later what you thought of this lecture you are likely to answer in a somewhat different way from the way you might

answer the same question from the undergraduate course director in his office. The interview is a very good example of the unequal power relationship in a communicative situation. People in society do not all have the same social roles or the same rights. And not all meanings are accorded equal value. It makes a difference whether the participants are of the same social class, gender, broad age group or profession. We need only think of whose meanings prevail in the doctor's surgery. And, more broadly, we all know that certain voices 'carry more authority' than others, and that in some contexts, 'children are to be seen and not heard'. The dominant directionality involved in communication cannot be fixed in a model but must be related to the situational distribution of power.

Time Furthermore, Shannon and Weaver's model makes no allowance for dynamic change over time. People don't remain frozen in the same roles and relationships, with the same purposes. Even within the course of a single conversation, such relationships may continuously shift. Also, adopting a more 'historical' perspective, however stable the text may seem to be, the ways in which a recorded text may be interpreted depends also on circumstances at that time of its interpretation.

Medium Finally, the model is indifferent to the nature of the medium. And yet whether you speak directly to, write to, or phone a lover, for instance, can have major implications for the meaning of your communication. There are widespread social conventions about the use of one medium rather than another for specific purposes. People also differ in their personal attitudes to the use of particular media (e.g. word processed Christmas circulars from friends!). Furthermore, each medium has technological features which make it easier to use for some purposes than for others. Some media lend themselves to direct feedback more than others. The medium can affect both the form and

the content of a message. The medium is therefore not simply 'neutral ' in the process of communication.

Conclusion In short, the transmissive model is of little direct value to social science research into human communication, and its endurance in popular discussion is a real liability. Its reductive influence has implications not only for the commonsense understanding of communication in general, but also for specific forms of communication such as speaking and listening, writing and reading, watching television and so on. In education, it represents a similarly transmissive model of teaching and learning. And in perception in general, it reflects the naive 'realist' notion that meanings exist in the world awaiting only decoding by the passive spectator. In all these contexts, such a model underestimates the creativity of the act of interpretation. Alternatives to transmissive models of communication are normally described as constructivist: such perspectives acknowledge that meanings are actively constructed by both initiators and interpreters rather than simply 'transmitted'. However, you will find no single, widely-accepted constructivist model of communication in a form like that of Shannon and Weaver's block diagram. This is partly because those who approach communication from the constructivist perspective often reject the very idea of attempting to produce a formal model of communication. Where such models are offered, they stress the centrality of the act of making meaning and the importance of the socio-cultural context.

Communication Models

Contents What is a Model?

The Advantages of Models Limitations of Models

Classical Communication Models Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric Aristotle’s model of proof Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation Early Linear Models The Shannon-Weaver Mathematical Model, 1949 Berlo’s S-M-C-R, 1960 Schramm’s Interactive Model, 1954 Non-linear Models Dance’s Helical Spiral, 1967 Westley and MacLean’s Conceptual Model, 1957 Becker’s Mosaic Model, 1968 Multidimensional Models Ruesch and Bateson, Functional Model, 1951 Barnlund’s Transactional Model, 1970 Suggestions for Communication Models Systemic Model of Communication, 1972 Brown’s Holographic Model, 1987 A Fractal Model Suggested Readings Although adapted and updated, much of the information in this lecture is derived from C. David Mortensen, Communication: The Study of Human Communication (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1972), Chapter 2, “Communication Models.”

A. What is a Model? 1. Mortensen: “In the broadest sense, a model is a systematic representation of an object or event in idealized and abstract form. Models are somewhat arbitrary by their nature. The act of abstracting eliminates certain details to focus on essential factors. . . . The key to the usefulness of a model is the degree to which it conforms--in point-bypoint correspondence--to the underlying determinants of communicative behavior.” 2. “Communication models are merely pictures; they’re even distorting pictures, because they stop or freeze an essentially dynamic interactive or transactive process into a static picture.” 3. Models are metaphors. They allow us to see one thing in terms of another.

B. The Advantages of Models 1. They should allow us to ask questions. Mortensen: “A good model is useful, then, in providing both general perspective and particular vantage points from which to ask questions and to interpret the raw stuff of observation. The more complex the subject matter—the more amorphous and elusive the natural boundaries—the greater are the potential rewards of model building.”

2. They should clarify complexity. Models also clarify the structure of complex events. They do this, as Chapanis (1961) noted, by reducing complexity to simpler, more familiar terms. . . Thus, the aim of a model is not to ignore complexity or to explain it away, but rather to give it order and coherence.

3. They should lead us to new discoveries-most important, according to Mortensen. At another level models have heuristic value; that is, they provide new ways to conceive of hypothetical ideas and relationships. This may well be their most important function. With the aid of a good model, suddenly we are jarred from conventional modes of thought. . . . Ideally, any model, even when studied casually, should offer new insights and culminate in what can only be described as an “Aha!” experience.

C. Limitations of Models

1. Can lead to oversimplifications. “There is no denying that much of the work in designing communication models illustrates the oft-repeated charge that anything in human affairs which can be modeled is by definition too superficial to be given serious consideration.” Some, like Duhem’s (1954), believe there is no value in models at all: We can guard against the risks of oversimplification by recognizing the fundamental distinction between simplification and oversimplification. By definition, and of necessity, models simplify. So do all comparisons. As Kaplan (1964) noted, “Science always simplifies; its aim is not to reproduce the reality in all its complexity, but only to formulate what is essential for understanding, prediction, or control. That a model is simpler than the subject-matter being inquired into is as much a virtue as a fault, and is, in any case, inevitable [p. 280].” So the real question is what gets simplified. Insofar as a model ignores crucial variables and recurrent relationships, it is open to the charge of oversimplification. If the essential attributes or particulars of the event are included, the model is to be credited with the virtue of parsimony, which insists-where everything is equal-that the simplest of two interpretations is superior. Simplification, after all, is inherent in the act of abstracting. For example, an ordinary orange has a vast number of potential attributes; it is necessary to consider only a few when one decides to eat an orange, but many more must be taken into account when one wants to capture the essence of an orange in a prize-winning photograph. abstracting. For example, an ordinary orange has a vast number of potential attributes; it is necessary to consider only a few when one decides to eat an orange, but many more must be taken into account when one wants to capture the essence of an orange in a prize-winning photograph.

Models can miss important points of comparison. Chapanis (1961), “A model can tolerate a considerable amount of slop [p. 118].”

2. Can lead of a confusion of the model between the behavior it portrays Mortensen: “Critics also charge that models are readily confused with reality. The problem typically begins with an initial exploration of some unknown territory. . . .Then the model begins to function as a substitute for the event: in short, the map is taken literally. And what is worse, another form of ambiguity is substituted for the uncertainty the map was designed to minimize. What has happened is a sophisticated version of the general semanticist’s admonition that “the map is not the territory.” Spain is not pink because it appears that way on the map, and Minnesota is not up because it is located near the top of a United States map. “The proper antidote lies in acquiring skill in the art of map reading.”

3. Premature Closure The model designer may escape the risks of oversimplification and map reading and still fall prey to dangers inherent in abstraction. To press for closure is to strive for a sense of completion in a system. Kaplan (1964):

The danger is that the model limits our awareness of unexplored possibilities of conceptualization. We tinker with the model when we might be better occupied with the subject-matter itself. In many areas of human behavior, our knowledge is on the level of folk wisdom ... incorporating it in a model does not automatically give such knowledge scientific status. The majority of our ideas is usually a matter of slow growth, which cannot be forced.... Closure is premature if it lays down the lines for our thinking to follow when we do not know enough to say even whether one direction or another is the more promising. Building a model, in short, may crystallize our thoughts at a stage when they are better left in solution, to allow new compounds to precipitate [p. 279].

One can reduce the hazards only by recognizing that physical reality can be represented in any number of ways.

D. Classical Communication Models 1. Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric. Ehninger, Gronbeck and Monroe: One of the earliest definitions of communication came from the Greek philosopher-teacher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). a. “Rhetoric” is “the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion” (Rhetoric 1335b). b. Aristotle’s speaker-centered model received perhaps its fullest development in the hands of Roman educator Quintilian (ca. 35-95 A.D.), whose Institutio Oratoria was filled with advice on the full training of a “good” speaker-statesman.

2. Aristotle’s model of proof. Kinnevay also sees a model of communication in Aristotle’s description of proof: a. Logos, inheres in the content or the message itself b. Pathos, inheres in the audience c. Ethos, inheres in the speaker

3. Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation. Lloyd Bitzer developed described the “Rhetorical Situation,” which, while not a model, identifies some of the classical components of a communication situation (“The Rhetorical Situation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1 (Winter, 1968):1-15.). Bitzer defines the “rhetorical situation” as “a complex of persons, events, objects, and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain human decision or action so as to bring about significant modification of the exigence.” See more of Bitzer's approach here.

E. Early Linear Models 1. The Shannon-Weaver Mathematical Model, 1949 a. Background i. Claude Shannon, an engineer for the Bell Telephone Company, designed the most influential of all early communication models. His goal was to formulate a theory to guide the efforts of engineers in finding the most efficient way of transmitting electrical signals from one location to another (Shannon and Weaver, 1949). Later Shannon introduced a mechanism in the receiver which corrected for differences between the transmitted and received signal; this monitoring or correcting mechanism was the forerunner of the now widely used concept of feedback (information which a communicator gains from others in response to his own verbal behavior).

b. Strengths i. This model, or a variation on it, is the most common communication model used in low-level communication texts. ii. Significant development. “Within a decade a host of other disciplines—many in the behavioral sciences—adapted it to countless interpersonal situations, often distorting it or making exaggerated claims for its use.” iii. “Taken as an approximation of the process of human communication.” iv. Significant heuristic value. 1.) With only slight changes in terminology, a number of nonmathematical schemas have elaborated on the major theme. For example, Harold Lasswell (1948) conceived of analyzing the mass media in five stages: “Who?” “Says what?” “In which channel?” “To whom?” “With what effect?” In apparent elaboration on Lasswell and/or Shannon and Weaver, George Gerbner (1956) extended the components to include the notions of perception, reactions to a situation, and message context.

v. The concepts of this model became staples in communication research 1.) Entropy-the measure of uncertainty in a system. “Uncertainty or entropy increases in exact proportion to the number of messages from which the source has to choose. In the simple matter of flipping a coin, entropy is low because the destination knows the probability of a coin’s turning up either heads or tails. In the case of a two-headed coin, there can be neither any freedom of choice nor any reduction in uncertainty so long as the destination knows exactly what the outcome must be. In other words, the value of a specific bit of information depends on the probability that it will occur. In general, the informative value of an item in a message decreases in exact proportion to the likelihood of its occurrence.” 2.) Redundancy-the degree to which information is not unique in the system. “Those items in a message that add no new information are redundant. Perfect redundancy is equal to total repetition and is found in pure form only in machines. In human beings, the very act of repetition changes, in some minute way, the meaning or the message and the larger social significance of the event. Zero redundancy creates sheer unpredictability, for there is no way of knowing what items in a sequence will come next. As a rule, no message can reach maximum efficiency unless it contains a balance between the unexpected and the predictable, between what the receiver must have underscored to acquire understanding and what can be deleted as extraneous.” 3.) Noise-the measure of information not related to the message. “Any additional signal that interferes with the reception of information is noise. In electrical apparatus noise comes only from within the system, whereas in human activity it may occur quite apart from the act of transmission and reception. Interference may result, for example, from background noise in the immediate surroundings, from noisy channels (a crackling microphone), from the organization and semantic aspects of the message (syntactical and semantical noise), or from psychological interference with encoding and decoding. Noise need not be considered a detriment unless it produces a significant interference with the reception of the message. Even when the disturbance is substantial, the strength of the signal or the rate of redundancy may be increased to restore efficiency.”

4.) Channel Capacity-the measure of the maximum amount of information a channel can carry. “The battle against uncertainty depends upon the number of alternative possibilities the message eliminates. Suppose you wanted to know where a given checker was located on a checkerboard. If you start by asking if it is located in the first black square at the extreme left of the second row from the top and find the answer to be no, sixty-three possibilities remain-a high level of uncertainty. On the other hand, if you first ask whether it falls on any square at the top half of the board, the alternative will be reduced by half regardless of the answer. By following the first strategy it could be necessary to ask up to sixty-three questions (inefficient indeed!); but by consistently halving the remaining possibilities, you will obtain the right answer in no more than six tries.”

vi. Provided an influential yet counter-intuitive definition of communication. From Littlejohn, Stephen W. Theories of Human Communication. Second Ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1983, p 116. Information is a measure of uncertainty, or entropy, in a situation. The greater the uncertainty, the more the information. When a situation is completely predictable, no information is present. Most people associate information with certainty or knowledge; consequently, this definition from information theory can be confusing. As used by the information theorist, the concept does not refer to a message, facts, or meaning. It is a concept bound only to the quantification of stimuli or signals in a situation. On closer examination, this idea of information is not as distant from common sense as it first appears. We have said that information is the amount of uncertainty in the situation. Another way of thinking of it is to consider information as the number of messages required to completely reduce the uncertainty in the situation. For example, your friend is about to flip a coin. Will it land heads up or tails up? You are uncertain, you cannot predict. This uncertainty, which results from the entropy in the situation, will be eliminated by seeing the result of the flip. Now let’s suppose that you have received a tip that your friend’s coin is two headed. The flip is “fixed.” There is no uncertainty and therefore no information. In other words, you could not receive any message that would make you predict any better than you already have. In short, a situation with which you are completely familiar has no information for you [emphasis added].

vii. See Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1949). For a number of excellent brief secondary sources, see the bibliography. Two sources were particularly helpful in the preparation of this chapter: Allan R. Broadhurst and Donald K. Darnell, “An Introduction to Cybernetics and Information Theory,” Quarterly Journal of Speech 51 (1965): 442-53; Klaus Krippendorf, “Information Theory,” in Communication and Behavior, ed. G. Hanneman and W. McEwen (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1975), 351-89.

c. Weaknesses i. Not analogous to much of human communication. 1.) “Only a fraction of the information conveyed in interpersonal encounters can be taken as remotely corresponding to the teletype action of statistically rare or redundant signals.” 2.) “Though Shannon’s technical concept of information is fascinating in many respects, it ranks among the least important ways of conceiving of what we recognize as “information.” “

ii. Only formal—does not account for content 1.) Mortensen: “Shannon and Weaver were concerned only with technical problems associated with the selection and arrangement of discrete units of information—in short, with purely formal matters, not content. Hence, their model does not apply to semantic or pragmatic dimensions of language. “ 2.) Theodore Roszak provides a thoughtful critique of Shannon’s model in The Cult of Information. Roszak notes the unique way in which Shannon defined information:

Once, when he was explaining his work to a group of prominent scientists who challenged his eccentric definition, he replied, “I think perhaps the word ‘information’ is causing more trouble . . . than it is worth, except that it is difficult to find another word that is anywhere near right. It should be kept solidly in mind that [information] is only a measure of the difficulty in transmitting the sequences produced by some information source” [emphasis added]

3.) As Roszak points out, Shannon’s model has no mechanism for distinguishing important ideas from pure non-sense:

In much the same way, in its new technical sense, information has come to denote whatever can be coded for transmission through a channel that connects a source with a receiver, regardless of semantic content. For Shannon’s purposes, all the following are “information”: E = mc2 Jesus saves. Thou shalt not kill. I think, therefore I am. Phillies 8, Dodgers 5 ‘Twas brillig and the slithy roves did gyre and gimble in the wabe. And indeed, these are no more or less meaningful than any string of haphazard bits (x! 9#44jGH?566MRK) I might be willing to pay to have telexed across the continent. As the mathematician Warren Weaver once put it, explaining “the strange way in which, in this theory, the word ‘information’ is used .... It is surprising but true that, from the present viewpoint, two messages, one heavily loaded with meaning and the other pure nonsense, can be equivalent as regards information” [emphasis added].

iii. Static and Linear 1.) Mortensen: “Finally, the most serious shortcoming of the Shannon-Weaver communication system is that it is relatively static and linear. It conceives of a linear and literal transmission of information from one location to another. The notion of linearity leads to misleading ideas when transferred to human conduct; some of the problems can best be underscored by studying several alternative models of communication.”

2. Berlo’s S-M-C-R, 1960 a. Background i. Ehninger, Gronbeck and Monroe: “The simplest and most influential message-centered model of our time came from David Berlo (Simplified from David K. Berlo, The Process of Communication (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1960)):” ii. Essentially an adaptation of the Shannon-Weaver model.

b. Significant after World War II because: i. The idea of “source” was flexible enough to include oral, written, electronic, or any other kind of “symbolic” generator-of-messages. ii. “Message” was made the central element, stressing the transmission of ideas. iii. The model recognized that receivers were important to communication, for they were the targets. iv. The notions of “encoding” and “decoding” emphasized the problems we all have (psycholinguistically) in translating our own thoughts into words or other symbols and in deciphering the words or symbols of others into terms we ourselves can understand.

c. Weaknesses: i. Tends to stress the manipulation of the message—the encoding and decoding processes ii. it implies that human communication is like machine communication, like signal-sending in telephone, television, computer, and radar systems. iii. It even seems to stress that most problems in human communication can be solved by technical accuracy-by choosing the “right” symbols, preventing interference, and sending efficient messages. iv. But even with the “right” symbols, people misunderstand each other. “Problems in “meaning” or “meaningfulness” often aren’t a matter of comprehension, but of reaction, of agreement, of shared concepts, beliefs, attitudes, values. To put the com- back into communication, we need a meaningcentered theory of communication.”

3. Schramm’s Interactive Model, 1954 a. Background Wilbur Schramm (1954) was one of the first to alter the mathematical model of Shannon and Weaver. He conceived of decoding and encoding as activities maintained simultaneously by sender and receiver; he also made provisions for a two-way interchange of messages. Notice also the inclusion of an “interpreter” as an abstract representation of the problem of meaning. (From Wilbur Schramm, “How Communication Works,” in The Process and Effects of Communication, ed. Wilbur Schramm (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1954), pp. 3-26):

b. Strengths i. Schramm provided the additional notion of a “field of experience,” or the psychological frame of reference; this refers to the type of orientation or attitudes which interactants maintain toward each other. ii. Included Feedback 1.) Communication is reciprocal, two-way, even though the feedback may be delayed.

a.) Some of these methods of communication are very direct, as when you talk in direct response to someone. b.) Others are only moderately direct; you might squirm when a speaker drones on and on, wrinkle your nose and scratch your head when a message is too abstract, or shift your body position when you think it’s your turn to talk. c.) Still other kinds of feedback are completely indirect. 2.) For example,

a.) politicians discover if they’re getting their message across by the number of votes cast on the first Tuesday in November; b.) commercial sponsors examine sales figures to gauge their communicative effectiveness in ads; c.) teachers measure their abilities to get the material across in a particular course by seeing how many students sign up for it the next term.

iii. Included Context 1.) A message may have different meanings, depending upon the specific context or setting. 2.) Shouting “Fire!” on a rifle range produces one set of reactions-reactions quite different from those produced in a crowded theater.

iv. Included Culture 1.) A message may have different meanings associated with it depending upon the culture or society. Communication systems, thus, operate within the confines of cultural rules and expectations to which we all have been educated.

v. Other model designers abstracted the dualistic aspects of communication as a series of “loops,” (Mysak, 1970), “speech cycles” (Johnson, 1953), “co-orientation” (Newcomb, 1953), and overlapping “psychological fields” (Fearing, 1953).

c. Weaknesses i. Schramm’s model, while less linear, still accounts for only bilateral communication between two parties. The complex, multiple levels of communication between several sources is beyond this model.

F. Non-linear Models 1. Dance’s Helical Spiral, 1967 a. Background i. Depicts communication as a dynamic process. Mortensen: “The helix represents the way communication evolves in an individual from his birth to the existing moment.” ii. Dance: “At any and all times, the helix gives geometrical testimony to the concept that communication while moving forward is at the same moment coming back upon itself and being affected by its past behavior, for the coming curve of the helix is fundamentally affected by the curve from which it emerges. Yet, even though slowly, the helix can gradually free itself from its lower-level distortions. The communication process, like the helix, is constantly moving forward and yet is always to some degree dependent upon the past, which informs the present and the future. The helical communication model offers a flexible communication process” [p. 296].

b. Strengths i. Mortensen: “As a heuristic device, the helix is interesting not so much for what it says as for what it permits to be said. Hence, it exemplifies a point made earlier: It is important to approach models in a spirit of speculation and intellectual play.” ii. Chapanis (1961) called “sophisticated play:” The helix implies that communication is continuous, unrepeatable, additive, and accumulative; that is, each phase of activity depends upon present forces at work as they are defined by all that has occurred before. All experience contributes to the shape of the unfolding moment; there is no break in the action, no fixed beginning, no pure redundancy, no closure. All communicative experience is the product of learned, nonrepeatable events which are defined in ways the organism develops to be self-consistent and socially meaningful. In short, the helix underscores the integrated aspects of all human communication as an evolving process that is always turned inward in ways that permit learning, growth, and discovery.

c. Weaknesses i. May not be a model at all: too few variables.

Mortensen: “If judged against conventional scientific standards, the helix does not fare well as a model. Indeed, some would claim that it does not meet the requirements of a model at all. More specifically, it is not a systematic or formalized mode of representation. Neither does it formalize relationships or isolate key variables. It describes in the abstract but does not explicitly explain or make particular hypotheses testable.”

ii. Generates Questions, but leaves much unaswered. Mortensen: “For example, does not the helix imply a false degree of continuity from one communicative situation to another? Do we necessarily perceive all encounters as actually occurring in an undifferentiated, unbroken sequence of events? Does an unbroken line not conflict with the human experience of discontinuity, intermittent periods, false starts, and so forth? Is all communication a matter of growth, upward and onward, in an ever-broadening range of encounters? If the helix represents continuous learning and growth, how can the same form also account for deterioration and decay? What about the forces of entropy, inertia, decay, and pathology? And does not the unbroken line of a helix tacitly ignore the qualitative distinctions that inevitably characterize different communicative events? Also, what about movements which we define as utterly wasted, forced, or contrived? Along similar lines, how can the idea of continuous, unbroken growth include events we consider meaningless, artificial, or unproductive? Countless other questions could be raised. And that is the point. The model brings problems of abstraction into the open. “rtificial, or unproductive? Countless other questions could be raised. And that is the point. The model brings problems of abstraction into the open. “

What is communication? What is communication? It's an interesting exercise to ask members of a group to write, in a short paragraph, their meanings for the term. Two things become apparent: most individuals have difficulty writing out their actual meaning for the term communication, and there is a great variation in meanings. We can look up the origin of the word. Communication comes from the Latin communis, "common." When we communicate, we are trying to establish a "commonness" with someone. That is, we are trying to share information, an idea or an attitude. Looking further, you can find this type of definition: "Communications is the mechanism through which human relations exist and develop." This broad definition, found in a book written by a sociologist, takes in about everything. In contrast, some people limit their definitions of communication rather narrowly, saying "communication is the process whereby one person tells another something through the written or spoken word." This definition, from a book written by a journalist, seems reasonable for those in that field. Some definitions fall in between these two extremes. Carl Hovland, a well-known psychologist of a few years ago, said communication is "the process by which an individual (the communicator) transmits stimuli (usually verbal symbols) to modify the behavior of the other individuals (communicates)." This definition describes what many extension workers hope to achieve. You'll be trying to change behavior. Some object to this definition. Their objections center on the phrase "modify the behavior." They say there are numerous occasions when they communicate, in their family and social lives for example, with no intention of attempting to modify behavior. But, we most likely do modify others' behavior even though that may not be our intention. We could find many other definitions of communication. However, "meanings are in

people and not words" and it's not likely that we could get a group of any size to agree exactly on one meaning. Besides, an exact definition of the word isn't necessary. My goal is to illustrate that it's difficult for many to formulate their own definition and that there is a wide range in meanings.

The communication process To communicate effectively, we need to be familiar with the factors involved in the communication process. If we are aware of them, these factors will help us plan, analyze situations, solve problems, and in general do better in our work no matter what our job might be. This leads to a discussion of the communication process. Let's look at it part by part as viewed by several communication theorists. Communication is a concern to many people. So a lot of thought, work and discussion has gone into different communication situations. Today, such people as psychologists, educators, medical doctors, sociologists, engineers and journalists represent only a few of the professional groups whose members have developed ways of looking at and talking about the communication process in their specialized fields. Several theorists have discussed the communication process in ways that have important implications for those involved in informal education programs such as extension work. Each of the "models" that we review has a point of vital interest. Communication models come in a variety of forms, ranging from catchy summations to diagrams to mathematical formulas. One model of the communication process reviewed is also one of the oldest.

Aristotle's model Aristotle, writing 300 years before the birth of Christ, provided an explanation of oral communication that is still worthy of attention. He called the study of communication "rhetoric" and spoke of three elements within the process. He provided us with this insight: Rhetoric falls into three divisions, determined by the three classes of listeners to speeches. For of the three elements in speech-making — speaker, subject, and person addressed — it is the last one, the hearer, that determines the speech's end and object.1 Here, Aristotle speaks of a communication process composed of a speaker, a message and a listener. Note, he points out that the person at the end of the communication process holds the key to whether or not communication takes place. Our failure to recognize what Aristotle grasped thousands of years ago is a primary cause, if not the primary one, for communication failure. We fail to recognize the importance of the audience at the end of the communication chain. We tend to be more concerned about ourselves as the communications source, about our

message, and even the channel we are going to use. Too often, the listener, viewer, reader fails to get any consideration at all. Aristotle's words underscore the long interest in communication. They also indicate that man has had a good grasp of what is involved in communication for a long while. So we might even wonder: If we know so much about the communication process, and if we've known it for so long, why do we still have communications problems? It's unlikely we will ever achieve perfect communication. The best we can hope for is to provide improved communication. Hopefully, we'll be more aware of the process and work harder to minimize problems with communications.

Lasswell's model Harold Lasswell, a political scientist, developed a much quoted formulation of the main elements of communication: "Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect."2 This summation of the communications process has been widely quoted since the 1940s. The point in Lasswell's comment is that there must be an "effect" if communication takes place. If we have communicated, we've "motivated" or produced an effect. It's also interesting to note that Lasswell's version of the communication process mentions four parts — who, what, channel, whom. Three of the four parallel parts mentioned by Aristotle — speaker (who), subject (what), person addressed (whom). Only channel has been added. Most modern-day theorists discuss the four parts of the communication process, but use different terms to designate them.

The Shannon and Weaver model

Figure 2 Schramm's model. Wilbur Schramm, a well-known communications theorist, developed a straightforward communications model (Figure 2) in his book The Process and Effects of Mass Communications4. In Schramm's model he notes, as did Aristotle, that communication always requires three elements — the source, the message and the destination. Ideally, the source encodes a

message and transmits it to its destination via some channel, where the message is received and decoded. However, taking the sociological aspects involved in communication into consideration, Schramm points out that for understanding to take place between the source and the destination, they must have something in common. If the source's and destination's fields of experience overlap, communication can take place If there is no overlap, or only a small area in common, communication is difficult. if not impossible. For many years cooperative extension service agents developed considerable skill in communicating with the large American middle class. That success is understandable. A large number of extension workers came from this middle class, and there was a large overlap between the extension communicator and the middle-class audience. However, in the 1960s, a period of growing social awareness, many extension workers were challenged — even mandated — to work with a "disadvantaged" audience. Many of the middle-class extension workers found it difficult to communicate with a disadvantaged audience. In many cases, there was only a small overlap in the fields of experience of the source and the disadvantaged receiver. Extension met this communications challenge to a degree by employing individuals from the target disadvantaged audience, training them, and in turn allowing them to provide the important communications linkage. Those employees are given such titles as leader aides, nutrition assistants, paraprofessionals and other like names.

The Rileys' model FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=The Riley's model"

Figure 3 The Riley's model, John W. and Matilda White Riley, a husband and wife team of sociologists, point out the importance of the sociological view in communication in another way. The two sociologists say such a view would fit together the many messages and individual reactions to them within an integrated social structure and process. The Rileys developed a model (Figure 3) to illustrate these sociological implications in communication.5

The model indicates the communicator (C) emerges as part of a larger pattern, sending messages in accordance with the expectations and actions of other persons and groups within the same social structure. This also is true of the receiver (R) in the communications process. In addition, both the communicator and receiver are part of an overall social system. Within such an all-embracing system, the communication process is seen as a part of a larger social process, both affecting it and being in turn affected by it. The model clearly illustrates that communication is a two-way proposition. The important point the Rileys' model makes for us is that we send messages as members of certain primary groups and that our receivers receive our messages as members of primary groups. As you likely can visualize, group references may be a positive reinforcement of our messages; at other times they may create a negative force.

Berlo's model The final communications model that we will consider is the SMCR model, developed by David K. Berlo, a communications theorist and consultant. In his book The Process of Communication,6 Berlo points out the importance of the psychological view in his communications model. The four parts of Berlo's SMCR model are — no surprises here — source, message, channel, receiver. The first part of this communication model is the source. All communication must come from some source. The source might be one person, a group of people, or a company, organization, or institution such as the University of Missouri. Several things determine how a source will operate in the communication process. They include the source's communication skills — abilities to think, write, draw, speak. They also include attitudes toward audience, the subject matter, yourself, or toward any other factor pertinent to the situation. Knowledge of the subject, the audience, the situation and other background also influences the way the source operates. So will social background, education, friends, salary, culture — all sometimes called the sociocultural context in which the source lives. Message has to do with the package to be sent by the source. The code or language must be chosen. In general, we think of code in terms of the natural languages — English, Spanish, German, Chinese and others. Sometimes we use other languages — music, art, gestures. In all cases, look at the code in terms of ease or difficulty for audience understanding. Within the message, select content and organize it to meet acceptable treatment for the given audience or specific channel. If the source makes a poor choice, the message will likely fail. Channel can be thought of as a sense — smelling, tasting, feeling, hearing, seeing. Sometimes it is preferable to think of the channel as the method over which the message will be transmitted: telegraph, newspaper, radio, letter, poster or other media.

Kind and number of channels to use may depend largely on purpose. In general, the more you can use and the more you tailor your message to the people "receiving" each channel, the more effective your message. Receiver becomes the final link in the communication process. The receiver is the person or persons who make up the audience of your message. All of the factors that determine how a source will operate apply to the receiver. Think of communication skills in terms of how well a receiver can hear, read, or use his or her other senses. Attitudes relate to how a receiver thinks of the source, of himself or herself, of the message, and so on. The receiver may have more or less knowledge than the source. Sociocultural context could be different in many ways from that of the source, but social background, education, friends, salary, culture would still be involved. Each will affect the receiver's understanding of the message. Messages sometimes fail to accomplish their purpose for many reasons. Frequently the source is unaware of receivers and how they view things. Certain channels may not be as effective under certain circumstances. Treatment of a message may not fit a certain channel. Or some receivers simply may not be aware of, interested in, or capable of using certain available messages.

Summary Here is a summary of the important thoughts illustrated by each model: Aristotle: The receiver holds the key to success. Lasswell: An effect must be achieved if communication takes place. Shannon and Weaver: Semantic noise can be a major communication barrier. Schramm: Overlapping experiences makes it easier to communicate successfully. The Rileys: Membership in primary groups affects how messages are sent and received. Berlo: Several important factors must be considered relating to source, message, channel, receiver. These are just a few of the many views of the communication process that have been developed. There are many other communication theorists — McLuhan, MacLean, Westley, Stephenson, Gerbner, Rothstein, Osgood, Johnson, Cherry and others. Those briefly described here are pertinent to many everyday communication situations. For an ending thought, let's return again to the idea that successful communication depends upon the receiver. As a communications source, we can spend a lot of time preparing messages and in selecting channels, but if the receiver doesn't get the message, we haven't communicated. It's as Aristotle said 300 years before the birth of Christ: "For of the three elements in speech-making — speaker, subject, and person addressed — it is the last one, the hearer, that determines the speech's end and object."

References W. Rhys Roberts, "Rhetorica," The Works of Aristotle, volume XI, editor, W. D. Ross (London: Oxford University Press, 1924) p. 1358. Harold D. Lasswell., "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society," The Communication of Ideas, editor, Lyman Bryson (New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1948) p. 37. Claude F. Shannon and Warren Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication, (Urbana, Ill.: The University of Illinois Press, 1964) p. 7. Wilbur Schramm, "How Communication Works," The Process and Effects of Mass Communication, editor, Wilbur Schramm (Urbana, Ill.: The University of Illinois Press, 1961) pp. 5-6. John W. Riley. Jr., and Matilda White Riley, "Mass Communication and the Social System." Sociology Today, Volume II, Robert K. Merton, Leonard Brown and Leonard D. Cottrell, Jr., editors. (New York: Harper and Row, 1965) pp. 537-578. David K. Berlo, The Process of Communication, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960). Material in this paper is drawn primarily from a chapter in the author's doctoral dissertation: Lee, Richard L. "The Flow of Information to Disadvantaged Farmers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa, 1967. However, the author has drawn from several sources. Contents also are used in an expanded oral presentation prepared primarily for extension workers and adapted for other groups.

CM109, reviewed October 1993

Business Definition for: Materials Management • an approach for planning, organizing, and controlling all those activities principally concerned with the flow of materials into an organization. The scope of materials management varies greatly from company to company and may include materials planning and control, production planning, purchasing, inventory control and stores, in-plant materials movement, and waste management.

Definition Planning and control of the functions supporting the complete cycle (flow) of materials, and the associated flow of information. These functions include (1) identification, (2) cataloging, (3) standardization, (4) need determination, (5) scheduling, (6) procurement, (7) inspection, (8) quality control, (9) packaging, (10) storage, (11) inventory control, (12) distribution, and (13) disposal. Also called materials planning.

Definition & Scope of Materials Management As you know , the fundamental objectives of the Materials Management function ,often called the famous 5 Rs of Materials Management, are acquisition of materials and services :

•

of the right quality

•

•

•

in the right quantity

•

at the right time

•

from the right source

•

at the right time

To buy at • the lowest price , consistent with desired quality and

•

From the management point of view , the key objectives of MM are : •

•

service •

To maintain a high inventory turnover , by reducing excess storage , carrying costs and inventory losses occurring due to deterioratio ns , obsolescen ce and pilferage

•

To maintain continuity of supply , preventing interruption of the flow of materials and services to users

•

To maintain the specified material quality level and a consistency of quality which permits efficient and effective operation

•

To develop reliable alternate sources of supply to promote a competitive atmosphere in performanc

e and pricing •

To minimize the overall cost of acquisition by improving the efficiency of operations and procedures

•

To hire, develop, motivate and train personnel and to provide a reservoir of talent

•

To develop and maintain good supplier relationship s in order to create a supplier attitude and desire furnish the organisatio n with new ideas , products, and better prices and service

•

To achieve a high degree of cooperation and coordinatio n with user department s

•

To maintain

good records and controls that provide an audit trail and ensure efficiency and honesty

•

To participate in Make or Buy decisions

Materials Management thus can be defined as that function of business that is responsible for the coordination of planning, sourcing, purchasing, moving, storing and controlling materials in an optimum manner so as to provide service to the customer, at a pre-decided level at a minimum cost. Learn Scope of a Materials Manager The broad Materials function has the following as identified and interlinked sub functions: Materials planning and control: Materials required for any operation are based on the sales forecasts and production plans. Planning and control is done for the materials taking

into account the materials not available for the operation and those in hand or in pipe line. This involves estimating the individual requirements of parts, preparing materials budget, forecasting the levels of inventories, scheduling the orders and monitoring the performance in relation to production and sales. Purchasing: Basically, the job of a materials manager is to provide , to the user departments right material at the right time in right quantity of right quality at right price from the right source.

To meet these objectives the activities undertaken include selection of sources of supply, finalisation of terms of purchase, placement of purchase orders, follow up, maintenance of relations with vendors, approval of payments to vendors, evaluating, rating and developing vendors.

Stores : Once the material is delivered , its physical control , preservation , minimisation of obsolescence and damage through timely disposal and efficient handling, maintenance of records, proper locations and stocking is done in Stores. Inventory control : One of the powerful ways of controlling the materials is through Inventory control. It covers aspects such as setting inventory levels, doing various analyses such as ABC , XYZ etc ,fixing economic order quantities (EOQ), setting safety stock levels, lead time analysis and reporting. Materials Management's scope is vast. Its sub functions include Materials planning and control, Purchasing, Stores and Inventory Management besides others. Materials management can thus also be defined as a joint action of various materials activities directed towards a common goal and that is to achieve an

integrated management approach to planning, acquiring, processing and distributing production materials from the raw material state to the finished product state.

•

Planning and control

•

Purchasin g

•

Value analysis and

•

Physical distributio n

•

In its process of managing , materials management has such sub fields as inventory management , value analysis, receiving, stores and management of obsolete , slow moving and non moving items. The various activities represent these four functions:

BUSINESS AND ITS ENVIRONMENT NATURE OF BUSINESS Business may be understood as the organized efforts of enterprise to supply consumers with goods and services for a profit. Businesses vary in size,

as measured by the number of employees or by sales volume. But, all businesses share the same purpose: to earn profits. The purpose of business goes beyond earning profit. There are: • It is an important institution in society. • Be it for the supply of goods and services • Creation of job opportunities • Offer of better quality of life • Contributing to the economic growth of the country. Hence, it is understood that the role of business is crucial. Society cannot do without business. It needs no emphasis that business needs society as much.