Case: Pam Gale and Chuck Carlada

CASE: PAM GALE AND CHUCK CARLADA

Different Models of Communication

One way communication is shown in the case when Pam’s head office was setting the new policy. They seldom discussed the plan or even the inputs with their local offices. This may have caused the issues raised by Pam and Chuck. There was a great possibility that the head office was not able to discuss the effects of this policy in particular to Pam’s organization.

The main issue that Pam and Chuck argued about is hiring back Bill Wilson. Pam refused or is not open to the idea because she was considering the policies and purpose of their organization. She sees that rehiring Bill Wilson will break the policy and rules of the company. She is also concerned about other departments seeing the rules are broken and eventual would be viral of also asking rule exceptions. Pam is aware of the group characteristics and expects how each manager/director would behave. The Communication-in-Context Model is showed in this situation, since communication, feedback and reactions are affected by the organization’s structure and culture.

Interaction Model also applies to this case, by using of channels and media. The information was sent thru the local personnel manager by the director of their local office. In this situation, there are 2 channels of communication, the local personnel manager and the director. It was not mentioned if it was oral or written how the information was handed down. It was clear that Chuck information about the rule/policy is verbal since Pam is assuming that Chuck has heard about it and even explained the rule to him to confirm.

Encoding and decoding process was done by several people in the case like the regional managers, personnel manager, directors, managers, Pam and Chuck.

Noise is also shown when Pam mentioned about the training program which was not part or relevant on the communication and problem that Chuck presented. We can see different feedbacks at the same time displays...