Communicating Effectively with Project Team Members

Communicating Effectively with Project Team Members 

Communication modalities are occasionally used to transfer messages from one party to the other. This blog looks at how three different communication modalities were used to transfer a message between parties. The message was about one member of a project team requesting an overdue report from another member to meet the project deadline. The effect of this message was analyzed across three modalities: written text, audio, and video.

 

The Modalities

When managing a project, problems may arise, including how you engage stakeholders to communicate something as critical as completing assigned duties and meeting deadlines. The authors, Aakhus & Bzdak (2015), emphasize that communication design practice impacts problem-solving and engaging team members in a social environment. The role of the communication modality is crucial, as it is expected to be selected to transform the right message. From the perspective of other authors, video and audiotapes enhance communicator-related information so that communicator characteristics exert a disproportionate effect on persuasion when messages are broadcast more than the written modality (Chaiken et al., 1983). One of the key considerations in selecting the modality is to use a humane approach that will promote collaboration in a positive social setting. As the modality changed between a written message to telephone and face-to-face, the humane approach increased with that sense of intimacy even though the same message was transmitted. During the phone call, the tone of voice also transmitted personal feelings in the message, and the face-to-face added the value of good gestures. A sense of interaction was invited in a social environment impacted by the tone of voice and friendly face. Communicators must transmit messages using appropriate modalities after assessing the situation; it must promote engagement between project stakeholders.

 

Perception of the message

The factor that influenced how the message was perceived was the role of the team members, which created a sense of value. Aakhus et al. (2015) explain that as messages are transferred, team members' roles being included in the message promote interaction into preferred forms of communication where people generate knowledge, action, and commitment to address the exigencies of their circumstances” (p.4). The messages emphasized the importance of the team members contributing to the process; this makes the team members feel valued and will promote engagement. These are attributes that project team members must assume; they enhance the perception of the message.

 

Conveying the true meaning of the message

The form of communication that best conveyed the true meaning and intent of the message was face-to-face interaction. The face-to-face message was personal and created a social environment that was welcomed between parties. Wang, Chellali & Cao (2013) explains how communication is enhanced in face-to-face situations where facial expressions and body language are usually combined with verbalization to ensure information is correctly transmitted and understood by the partner. They also shared the use of haptic communication that promotes a stronger sense of human-human interaction where feelings of closeness or intimacy with another person are expressed. When relaying the message to the other party, the actor's facial expression, body language, and tone of voice were welcoming, friendly, courteous, and professional. With this personality, there would be little resistance, and the human-human interaction would be acceptable and inviting. We must consider personalities and expressions to improve the communication of the message.

 

Implications of effective communication between project team members

The essence of effective communication is to ensure that mutual understanding between parties is achieved. Wang et al. (2013) promote the use of haptic communication that enhances mutual understanding between partners when they perform collaborative tasks when other communication channels cannot be used efficiently. Project team members must be selective of the modality that will best transfer the message between parties. In closing, communication modalities must be effectively selected and used to transfer messages with good meaning; the communicator's underlying characteristics are essential to how messages are communicated, and these must be taken into consideration to promote a collaborative work environment.

 

Reference

Aakhus, M., & Bzdak, M. (2015). Stakeholder engagement as communication design practice. Journal  of Public Affairs, 15(2), 188-200. DOI: 10.1002/pa.1569.

Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1983). Communication modality as a determinant of persuasion: The role of communicator salience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.241

 Wang, J., Chellali, A., & Cao, C. G. L. (2013). A Study of Communication Modalities in a Virtual Collaborative Task. 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), 2013 IEEE International Conference On, 542–546. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2013.98