MINDS OVER MATTER

Effective group communication is important especially in a large family. I will use my maternal family members to illustrate how group communication, or lack of it, can affect each member of this big family.

In January, my grandmother, who has now passed on already, was admitted to the Singapore General Hospital (SGH) for cancer relapse. As she was in the terminal stage of stomach cancer, she could not eat. Since then, her condition worsened. In April, my mother and her elder brothers suggested bringing grandma to a nursing home. They thought it was a good idea since there would be nurses to take good care of grandma. They also decided that the medical fees at the nursing home (which is no small sum) should be shared equally among the siblings. My mother and her elder brothers assume that each of them will pass the message to other siblings, and they assume that other siblings knew about this decision.

Finally, my grandma was brought to a nursing home in Ang Mo Kio. As it turned out, on that day, several siblings and other relatives thought grandma was still in SGH and went to visit her there, only to find out later that grandma had already moved to a nursing home. They later find out it was my mother’s and her elder brothers’ decision to do so. These siblings were quite unhappy about it, saying that their advice had not been sought and they were not even told by anyone that grandma was sent to the nursing home. Some relatives who live around Tiong Bahru area, used to visit grandma everyday at the SGH, said that it would be so inconvenient for them to visit grandma at Ang Mo Kio everyday. Others made it a big fuss out of it and blamed the elder siblings for deciding and acting on their own. So, unhappiness continued to fester in the family.

From the above example, I learn that miscommunication can have serious and long-lasting repercussions. Miscommunication between two people is bad enough; miscommunication within a group is much worse—the effects are more damaging. Ever since the above incident happened, the younger siblings had not been on good terms with the older siblings.

In making complex decisions, especially where sensitive issues like money are involved, it is even more important that everyone’s opinion is being sought. Even if it is just one person whose opinion is not being sought, it could spell trouble. This person may think he does not belong to the group. He may hide his unhappiness and move on, but somewhere along the way, he may sound his unhappiness and that will affect the harmony of the group.

In group communication, we never assume that the other people know what we are thinking or we assume what others are thinking. We should always ask questions to check understanding. Whereas you may blame people for not telling you what is happening, people may blame you for not asking. For effective group communication, everyone in the group should also help to keep one another in the know of any changes.

Everyone has their own way of doing things, it is therefore necessary to seek everyone’s opinion before a group comes to an agreement. Sometimes, compromises and sacrifices must be made by some group members, but if they have agreed upon the decision right from the start, they would know what they are expecting. They are thus not likely to hold any grudges since they have a stake in the decision-making process.

In a group, we always like to appoint a leader; however we should not rely too much on our leader to make decisions. It would be unfair for the leader if it turns out that he has made a wrong decision and he has to bear the burden all by himself. Everyone in the group should respect one another’s opinion. Feeling respected, each and everyone in the group will be more willing to contribute in that particular group. What else do you think we can do to avoid pitfalls in group communication?

Ms Understood

The other day I read an article in a magazine about communication between man and woman. Interpersonal communication is complex, especially between the genders.

The article started off like this-- “In her book The Female Brain, American neuropsychiatrist Louanne Brizendine has confirmed that--women are far better communicators than men, in fact, almost three times better, judging on the number of words used. Woman account for some 20,000 words in a day, while man go through a mere 7000.”

This is interesting fact indeed. From the given statistics above, we can say that women have more words at their disposal; it is therefore understandable that they are capable of conversing with far more nuance and subtlety than men. However, I feel that this does not necessarily mean that women get misunderstood less. In real life, men and women alike are often misunderstood because they are usually too lazy to express themselves clearly.

In interpersonal communication, often the words you say are not necessarily those that people hear. This is because communication is not just about words said and words heard. Often, emotions such as insecurities and egoism come in between, resulting in words being “lost in translation”. This in turn will lead to all kinds of dangerous relationship connotations. Women being the more emotional of the two genders tend to interpret information more emotionally, and they may be more likely to misunderstand people and be misunderstood too.

Men and women communicate in very different ways, thus inevitably leading to miscommunication. For example, if a lady says “I hate my boss.”
The man may hear it as “tell me how to fix the situation.”
When women complain, most of the time, what they want is for people to validate her feelings of frustrations, to empathise with her and just to be her audience. However, men, out of good intentions, like to give advices which women find irritating. So a better way to say what she actually mean would be –“I had a really bad day at work and I want to tell you how I am feeling.”

Meaning is attached to language by humans. Ambiguity and multi-interpretations often arise when a person uses emotionally-charged words and not mentioning the subject matter specifically and directly. A simple sentence such as “I HATE my boss” can convey different meanings and be understood differently. Listeners may interpret that your boss is really annoying or that you are just a bitter and petty person. Is it that your boss is always annoying or that you find him annoying just this once?

From the above example, we learn that for effective communication, we must always focus on actual event and people. We must also try to be as objective as possible.

A case of trying too hard?

Chinese action star Jet Li—also the founder of One Foundation( a charity fund)was asked to share his purpose of starting this foundation in Singapore. His sharing took place during the Forbes Global CEO Conference, an international gathering of top corporate executives here. He spoke in Chinese but had intentionally interjected many English words in his speech. A few of my friends and I who had watched this news report on television found it quite disturbing. Jet Li had always given us a very suave and professional image, but through this news report, his impeccable image is somewhat tainted.

Maybe Jet Li was trying to add some punch to his speech by doing this. However, this ‘style’ of speech made audience very distracted. He was using English words very randomly in his Chinese speech. Audience therefore needs to keep deciphering what he meant, and it disrupted the continuation of thoughts in audience’s mind. Audience ended up focusing more on his weird way of speech rather than the content of his speech. I believe most people cannot accept his ‘style’ of speech here, since it is very tiring for the audience to piece the information as a whole when the speaker speaks in such a manner. The speaker therefore did not really get his message across to the audience, leading to some gaps in communication and understanding.


However we cannot totally blame Jet Li. I think the reason he chose to speak in this way is due to social factors as well as media pressure as well. Since he was speaking to a Singaporean crowd, he therefore thought he needs to use some English words in his speech in order to connect better with the audience. However he had overdone it. While the meaning of some words may be better expressed in English, he used far too many unnecessary exchanges between English and Chinese, making his speech sound very unnatural and made people feel uncomfortable.

I think in this case, some may see it as just an attempt of Jet Li to bring himself closer to the crowd, however others may interpret it that he was trying too hard to impress the audience. Jet Li thought it was essential to show a bilingual side of him to the Singaporean crowd. I think Jet Li had gauged the expectations of the Singaporean crowd wrongly. Jet Li is capable of giving his speech in pure mandarin as seen from a few of his previous interviews. I think he can impress people even more by just using his power in Chinese and show the beauty of the language through his sophistication in thoughts.

From the above, we know that speech is a very influential part of communication. The perception we have of a person is often influenced by his speech. Through a person’s choice of words, we can picture what the person is like, and thus develop a liking or abhorrence for that person. Language reflects its user. People who had seen Jet Li for the first time through this interview may have some misunderstanding and think he is pretentious. For some who had seen him before, their perception of him may be changed. While others may see this as just an isolated case and choose not to be bothered whatsoever and continue to revere him.

Headline: Vogue Magazine courts controversy with skewed vision of India’s poor

In this news report, two photos are shown, one showing an old man modeling a Burberry umbrella that costs US$200 and another a child from a poor family wearing a US$100 Fendi Bib. They were part of a 16-page spread in Vogue India. Vogue’s India August Edition presented the 16-page vision of supple handbags and status-symbol items modeled not by celebrities but by average Indian people. This is the new India—as how Vogue sees it.

Admittedly, through this advertisement, Vogue is able to capture our attention as the message that is being brought across by these pictures is powerful.

Vogue magazine is about realizing the “power of fashion” and the shoot was saying that “fashion is no longer a rich man’s privilege”. It also suggests about Vogue’s bold foray into the Indian Market. Vogue’s way of advertising needs to be applauded for its originality and attempts to break new grounds.

However, some people find this advertisement distorted beyond reality. Personally, I also find this way of advertising distasteful despite its innovation.

Vogue India’s edition uses a great deal of contrast (showing poor people sporting expensive goods) and it stops short of using big stars like in any other fashion advertisements. This in a way is using the shock element as we all presume poor people cannot afford fashion at all. Our presumption is justified though.

Why would a poor man who cannot even have a good meal want a branded bag? Most people in the well-developed countries also do not live in the lap of luxury to easily splurge on luxury items, not to mention the poor people of India.

Vogue magazine seeks to persuade us to break away from our stereotypes that only the rich can afford branded products. However, I see their attempt as unsuccessful as Vogue is ignoring the social context in which it is advertising the goods. The target audience is wrong and thus the purpose is not served.

Vogue magazine has distorted and misrepresented the real needs of the Indian community. Although India has a fast-growing wealthy class, nearly half the population is struggling for survival. Vogue’s approach in this case is insensitive, impractical and not prudent at all. What the ‘poor people’ in the photo shoot need is a bowl of rice rather than an expensive bag.

Vogue India sparks criticism in India itself, as people see Vogue’s approach as attempting to exert power over those who consume this fashion. If people were to buy into Vogue Magazine’s Idea in this case, it would really be the acceptance of fashion uncritically. I understand Vogue Magazine’s attempt as encouraging mammonism and influencing us to believe that fashion is a way of life.