Analysis of Personal Communication Style in Organizational Setting

This essay provides a reflection on personal communication styles and conflict resolution methods within a modern, Weberian organizational context. It explores the importance of effective communication in bureaucratic structures and the potential problems arising from miscommunication. The author discusses their preference for an informal communication style with a touch of formality, balancing assertiveness and passivity. The essay also delves into preferred conflict management styles, including accommodating, collaborating, and competing, while avoiding compromising or avoiding conflict altogether. The impact of these approaches in the workplace is examined, highlighting both the positive reception of proactive problem-solving and the negative reactions from colleagues feeling threatened by increased recognition. The essay concludes by emphasizing the author's efforts to foster a culture of challenge acceptance within their workplace.

Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
Organizational Communication
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
In a modern, Weberian, style of organization, characterized by a high degree of
bureaucratization, arranged in a hierarchical order for administrative convenience, the factor of
communication is extremely important for the proper functioning. On the occasion of a
miscommunication between the members of the organization, there can be problems arising in
the internal as well as the external functioning. The only antidote to the inconveniences arising in
the organization, even those which are a result of miscommunication, are nothing but effective
and clear communication. In this particular essay, a reflection on the personal communication
styles, and the methods employed in resolving conflict shall be presented, having a theoretical
basis to it.
In an organization, there are basically two styles of communication, the formal style, and
the informal style. Those two style can assume the forms of being aggressive, assertive or
passive (Katherine, 2015). Formal style or the official style of communication is the most generic
form of communication which prevails in an organization between the members initially. That is
so because it is deemed necessary to maintain the impersonalized decorum of the workplace, as
far as the verbal communication is concerned. However, it is not to be assumed that there is no
scope for personalization in the mode of communication, as over the passage of time, when the
members usually get to know each other well, it becomes easier to add that touch of
personalization to the communication, and the formal mode of communication is rendered just as
a matter of maintaining the official protocol. Personally, I prefer to communicate in a rather
informal mode, with a slight hint of formal touch, since I believe that once I am a part of an
organization, the members become my near ones within the space by default. The personal touch
would be rather convincing, and the formal touch would strike a balance between the formality
and informality in the perfect way. The form of communication which I prefer to maintain, is

2ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
that of an admixture of assertiveness and passivity. In an office space, the spirit of democracy
has to be maintained, hence aggressiveness cannot be expressed, as it would be tantamount to
unruly behaviour and a reason behind demotivating the group members who observe passivity.
Being too assertive can also be equivalent to being aggressive, hence the touch of passivity is
required to ensure that the tonality does not seem too authoritative.
Out of the five generic styles of conflict management, my personal preference is in
favour of Accommodating with the situations, Collaborating for fulfilling a specific purpose, and
Competing for the achievement of a particular goal (Katherine, 2015). Certain conflict situations
demand that we as members try to be considerate by accommodating with the inconveniences
which are inadvertent in nature, and requires a more humane and emotional approach than a
rational one. Finding the suitable solutions for a conflictuous situation might not be possible for
one person always, hence it is wiser to collaborate with others who can provide the necessary
solution by looking into the issue from another angle which could have been missed out by me.
When no other option is left, apart from confronting a tense situation, then I would prefer
competing and trying to solve the conflict, as a last resort. On the other hand I refrain from both
Avoiding and Compromising with a situation of conflict (Katherine, 2015). Escaping from a
problem without taking adequate steps to combat it shall not solve the problem, rather neglecting
it shall cause the problem to gather momentum and shall become difficult to deal with later.
Having provided an account of the personal choice of conflict management style with a
justification behind it, the discussion shall now be devoted to the effect it has generated in my
workplace. My attitude of accepting challenges and not shying away from the problems that
come my way has been highly appreciated. My approach in providing solution to the problems
has helped me create a sense of inspiration at my workplace which has enabled even others to

3ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
give up on their reticence and take up challenges instead of shying away from it. However, for
the same reason I have also incurred the hatred and animosity of some of my team mates who
have started feeling threatened about the fact that I am becoming too popular with the
management and being preferred by them more over the others. The general culture in my
workplace was that of leaving the challenging situations to itself without working towards
eradicating it. On the contrary, I had tried to bring about a change in the situation by my
enterprise, and had also got like-minded people who were previously hesitant.

4ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION
References
Katherine, M. (2015). Organizational communication: Approaches and processes.