In one of my classes, I have a team working together for a project assigned every week. Each member has to finish one's assigned work before the day, which we appoint, prior to the due date of project to combine all works into one finalized document. Cody who takes care of editing and rearranging all members' works is our group leader. Most of time, I had completed all my work so that Cody only needed to rearrange my work with others' to make a final copy. But, last project, I was struggling in understanding the concept of the project and getting information I needed for my work. On the appointed day, I sent my work partially uncompleted to Cody through an email with saying that "I do not fully confident of my work. I left some parts of my work with blank. If you think that there is more information I need to put, just tell me. I need your feedback." By the due date of project, however, Cody did not reply my email. It turned out that he covered the parts I could not completed and submitted. I asked him the reason after the project had been submitted. He told me that he thought I was asking him to do my work.
In this situation, I felt that what I meant to deliver to him and what he perceived were absolutely different. I encoded that I need your opinion and advice. But, it seemed that Cody decoded my message as I wanted him to fill my uncompleted work. The different perspectives caused this miscommunication. Then, it brings me up a question. What made him interpret different from what I intended to mean? As I pictured the details in the situation, I noticed that the time I sent the email to him, and the channel I used would have influenced him in decoding meaning of the message.
In terms of time proximity, he might consider that there was not enough time to give feedback to me and get modified work from me because the day our team agreed to finish and send their work to Cody was Wednesday and the due date of project was Thursday. He might perceive the lack of...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document