ethical communication skills

ethical communication skills

This is a case of the lady jane, who worked for a position of estimates. She was more interested in higher salary and appraisal than the current work that she was supposed to do. Jane was working at the customer department, assisting in the creation of bids for the customers. She never knew whether she was an average performer or in case she was a top performer since whenever there was an appraisal meeting called by her supervisor called martin, jane was never given any feedback about her performance level. The issues that were not addressed to her were her performance, her progress, and what was expected of her. So she did not worry since she knew that after her two years of experience, she would get a new position as her fellow friends had. Little did she know about the expectations of martin. She wanted to hold higher positions like her fellow estimates, but she was not ready to work up the ranks.

Jane waited for the two years to elapse to have an appraisal without considering that the most important thing is work and its only once performance that can raise a person over the ranks. Jane thought that in the company rising over the rank was a formality which was dictated by the time little did she know that her supervisors were more concerned about the output. She was an underperformer when working at bid estimation.  In addition, she had a problem with her communication skills, this failure to have ethical communication skill impacts negatively on relationships at workplaces and interdepartmental relations.

Meaning centred approach: Jane did not embrace the meaning-centred approach; she did not bother to ask martin first the reason why she was not selected for the post that was previously advertised. She instead confronted martin, and the supervisor was even surprised. She later decided to file case against martin without enquiring about the reason why the outcome of the interview was not in her favour. This was not a right approach she could have given her supervisor since it was informal communication.

Martin, the supervisor, was not able to communicate with his junior Jane about the information of her performance even in the meetings that they had. She kept unaware of her performance until the day of the interview. Martin did not embrace the functional approach, lack of this approach cause extream discordance in the working environment and gives poor outcomes in a work environment.

Jane decided to communicate with her friends about his supervisor; this brings about the issue of feminism in the work environment. Jane was not supposed to consult her friends about her supervisor. She was supposed to politely asked the supervisor about the next move, which can be appropriate for her career development. This brought about a poor image of her supervisor among her workmates.

Jane did not know that she was considered none performer by her supervisor since her performance was not communicated to her. Jane knew that promotion to the next level of sales representative was a nom. After being given meeting expectation appraisal, she automatically knew she would be taken directly to the next level with ease. Seeing her two friends being promoted to the next level after two years, she expected herself to be promoted automatically.

Martin was supposed to give information concerning performance to jane in every stages of her work.  This could have assisted jane in knowing her progress so that in case she was average, she could have put in more effort to reach the required levels. For this, martin could have been an excellent supervisor to jane. By ensuring good communication of feedback, Martin should have explained to jane her performance and advised her on the better means and ways in which she could have improved.

Marin is now expected to give Jane some little more time to show her performance while pinpointing to her the wrong points that she could correct. This is because Jane need to prove herself and martin need to give useful review of the employee’s performance as a supervisor of which he did not do. Martin should now explain to jane on better ways in which she will improve her performance in the future.

Jane is not approaching the problem correctly; she is despising martin and considers martin a potential hindrance towards her success.  Jane should have used embraced Meaning centred approach where she could have asked the supervisor about the possible reasons why she was not interviewed and why she was considered average performer son that the right information could be availed to her. From this, she could have an informed opinion about her situation.

In case I was the human resource, I could have informed jane that she should prove to the company and her supervisor that she can do it as sale representative and prove her performance in the designated department through ensuring good bids after that we will approve her application to be in the next level.