The Importance of Communication Filters

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
The Definition and Essence of the Concept
Forms of Communication Filters
Causes of Communication Filters
Ways to Eliminate Barriers
Communication Filters in the Organisation
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Perception of information is associated with communicative barriers: logical, stylistic, semantic, linguistic, and phonetic. Moreover, an essential place in the difficulties of communication belongs to the psychological barrier. Its causes can be both explainable (antipathy, dislike) and inexplicable. These sources of interference and concerns in touch can occur in business and interpersonal transmission. Interlocutors or listeners may interpret the same message differently, depending on their level of competence and previous experience, which leads to variations in the processes of encoding and decoding information. It is a remarkably significant factor: it undermines commonality in communication, and it tends to break down. Effective communication is possible when the interlocutors share a common field of experience; otherwise, it becomes impossible or distorted. Communicators encode a message based on their vision, and recipients decode it solely founded on their experience. Comprehending the essence of communication filters and learning to eliminate them can be decisive in mutual understanding and forming beneficial relationships between partners.

The Definition and Essence of the Concept

A communication filter is usually defined as anything that prevents and blocks effective communication. One of the most profound misconceptions is that people believe it is enough to express a thought for others to perceive it accurately. The underlying assumption behind this misconception is that the message communicated will reach its addressee without any change (Akhmetshin et al., 2017). It is often not the case: some people say one thing, while others hear and understand something else. This occurs because all messages are subjected to numerous noises and interferences that significantly reduce communication effectiveness.

When communicating with a foreign partner, the manager of a company is guided by attitudes and beliefs that have been shaped in them by the national and professional culture. In the course of joint activities, differences in the approaches of the parties to work organization and decision-making are often found. The result can be a misunderstanding, sometimes leading to conflict. Due to the increasing importance of international cooperation for companies, the cross-cultural training of management personnel is becoming more critical. Top managers of leading multinational companies are required not only to make strategic decisions on a global scale but also likewise to link these decisions with the specifics of the national and ethnic development of the regions (Akhmetshin et al., 2017). It requires working at the level of various professional groups (managers, officials, engineers), taking into account their norms and practices, value orientations, and communication style.

Various levels of competence of specialists can create an entirely different situation in a particular area of activity. As a result, people develop diverse values, needs, attitudes, and expectations, often leading to unintentional distortion of the information they receive. A mismatch between encoding and decoding is the most common barrier to effective communication (Evans & Suklun, 2017). Moreover, selective listening is likewise a filter that impedes communication. This selective human perception blocks new information, especially if it contradicts existing judgments. A message that contradicts an individual’s pre-existing perceptions is either ignored or distorted to be consistent with their perceptions.

In coding a message, the sender of information, in addition to national and professional, is greatly influenced by the organizational culture of the company where one works. This concept traditionally refers to collectively shared values, attitudes, principles, the established style and procedure of decision-making, authority, the measure of responsibility, and the role of managers of different ranks (Bel et al., 2018). An organization’s culture is reflected in its external attributes and invisible evaluations of right and improper behavior. Thus, filters are significant barriers to agreements and should be considered when guiding and shaping leadership strategies. For communication to be rational, it is essential to distinguish the types of filters that exist and to comprehend ways to prevent them.

Forms of Communication Filters

Communication can be defined as the transmission of information and its understanding through common symbols – words. Unfortunately, the exact words mean different things to distinct people, and communication can often break down, especially regarding summaries, technical terms, or phrases. The stylistic barrier arises when the exemplary form of communication does not match its content (Kyurova, 2017). For example, instead of the intended dialogue, there was a monologue. The stylistic obstacle can also arise when the addressee transmits information in a language the addressee does not understand.

The logical barrier occurs when partners do not find a common language. That is, each person sees the world, the situation, and the problem being discussed, from their point of view, which may not coincide with the partner’s position. Besides, the exact words on this or that situation can have a completely different meaning, which is always individual and personal: it is born in the mind of the one who speaks but is not necessarily apparent to the one who listens. Moreover, the thought itself is generated by the different needs of the individual (Kyurova, 2017). It is why there is a motive behind every idea, which is the primary instance in the generation of speech. Difficulties arise from inadequate comprehension of information. The major problem inherent in the lack of understanding is associated with the peculiarities of the recipient’s thinking.

Furthermore, the concept of benefits is close and meaningful to people involved in the organization of paid services, but they do not say much to teachers. In fact, for them, these words may even carry a negative meaning. Consequently, because the comments do not mean the same things to different speakers and listeners, they may not understand each other, even though they speak the same language. This filter is called the semantic filter, and it is the one that becomes the most frequent cause of problems in communication (Neamtu & Bejinaru, 2019). It is almost impossible to consider the totality of factors distorting the message as they are entirely diverse. Therefore, there are a variety of attempts to systematize communication barriers.

Causes of Communication Filters

People are not isolated individuals, but social beings, and as such are the bearers of certain social qualities. They are representatives of a particular nation, ethnicity, class, social group, religious denomination, professional community, demographic group. All this generates their socio-cultural differences due to their belonging to one or another linguistic, ethnic, cultural, professional and other community or a number of communities at the same time. First of all, social factors, due to the belonging of people to different groups or organizations, generate communication barriers (Tye-Williams et al., 2020). One of the main reasons for this is the phenomenon of “group (social) consciousness”, which is clearly manifested in cohesive groups (communities), especially in those where there is a strong authoritarian leader. Group (social) consciousness as an integral characteristic of any more or less organized or delineated community exists objectively independent of the consciousnesses of individual individuals (Tye-Williams et al., 2020). It has a coercive force in relation to them and forces a person to follow the norms, principles and rules of behavior of their group.

Thus, being formed in a certain social environment, a person is simultaneously formed in a certain cultural environment. Nations, classes, social, professional, religious and other groups tend to create their own, different from other cultures, their own sign systems (languages), thinking stereotypes and standards of behavior, which become evident when they encounter other cultures (Lahti & Valo, 2017). This mismatch generates cultural barriers to communication. The most obvious among them are linguistic and semantic barriers. They arise because of linguistic differences: people can communicate in different languages; they can speak the same language, but not understand each other because of differences in lexicons – rich in some and limited in others, because of mismatched thesauruses – linguistic semantic content of spoken words.

Obviously, communication is possible only if communicants have a common code (a system of signs to which language belongs). However, the generality of signs, in particular language, is not enough for adequate communication: even speakers of the same language often do not understand each other. It is also necessary to master the socio-cultural code of the community in whose language communication is carried out (Lahti & Valo, 2017). Those knowledge and ideas that are stored in its “cognitive base” – the body of knowledge and ideas common to all members of a given linguocultural community.

The problem of cultural barriers to communication is the issue of interpretation of the same text (message, information), understood as deciphering the meaning behind the obvious meaning, revealing deeper meanings contained in the literal meaning. Interpretation is a conscious or unconscious attempt to overcome the distance between the cultures of the communicants (Nordin & Jelani, 2019). Such attempts are not always successful, because they encounter cultural stereotypes that set rigid parameters of “right” or “wrong” interpretation of the text (message).

Ways to Eliminate Barriers

Knowing the types of communication barriers leads to finding the most reasonable ways to eliminate them. Overcoming the cognitive obstacle is associated with excluding factors that impede the transfer of information from one partner to another. It is obvious that to be correctly understood, one must speak clearly, intelligibly, and loudly enough. It is clear to everyone that fulfilling such conditions improves the permeability of information and optimizes communication. However, in addition to the above general provisions, some specific regularities of perception of another’s speech can be pointed out. Such frequencies were revealed in numerous experiments devoted to the comparative effectiveness in the communication of different physical characteristics of communication – the pace and speed of speech, the quality of diction, and pronunciation. In general, the results of such studies suggest that for each phonetic parameter, there are upper and lower limits of perception, determined by the psychophysiological capacities of the person (Nordin & Jelani, 2019). For speed of speech, finding such a rate (top boundary) at which perception is impossible at any listener’s efforts is possible.

The speaker’s address merges in one stream, and such speed (bottom limit) when gaps between words become oversized that it is impossible to connect them. Precisely the same limits can be specified for other parameters. However, communication rarely passes the limit; the possibility of understanding usually exists in principle (Nordin & Jelani, 2019). Speech rate depends on many variables: the degree of knowledge of the language; on the degree of familiarity with the content.

The semantic barrier is a consequence of the mismatch of people’s thesauruses. Since each person has a unique experience, one also has a special thesaurus. It is possible to overcome this barrier with a deep understanding of the thesaurus of the partner. In essence, there is nothing impossible because people constantly take into account the thesaurus of the communication partner, although they do it involuntarily. Numerous mistakes in communication are connected with the underestimation of the difference based on the presumption that everyone understands everything the same way. Meanwhile, the opposite is true, as everybody understands everything uniquely.

To overcome the stylistic barrier, it is necessary to properly structure the information conveyed, which will be easier to understand and better to remember. There are two basic methods of structuring info in communication: the frame rule and the chain rule. The essence of the first rule is that all information intended to be memorized in contact, whether a conversation, a lecture, a report, or even a spectacular appearance, should be enclosed in a frame, which sets the structure (Lauring & Klitmøller, 2017). The shelf in communication creates the beginning and the end of the conversation. The opening should state the goals, perspectives, and intended results of the touch, and the future should summarize, show hindsight, and note the degree to which the plans have been achieved. The need to use the frame rule is primarily justified by a simple psychological law of memory operation, discovered in the late 19th century. It was then that German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus established the so-called row factor: the beginning and the end of any information row, whatever it consists of, is retained in human memory better than the middle (Lauring & Klitmøller, 2017). It means that by observing the rule of the frame, the speaker can be sure that the structure itself will be remembered as the essential thing in it. A properly constructed frame allows information to be organized so that the structure corresponds to the listener’s attitudes and perceptions.

People’s logic is different, meaning that when constructing exposure is essential to consider the partner’s favorite reason. Overcoming the logical barrier is associated with the knowledge of the effectiveness of different arguments and methods of argumentation. There are two basic ways of constructing an idea: ascending and descending. Ascending argumentation is completing a sequence of statements in which their strength increases from the beginning to the end of the message. In descending argumentation, by contrast, the strength of arguments decreases toward the end of the message (Lauring & Klitmøller, 2017). It is necessary to emphasize that the concept of “strength of argument” is subjective, determined by the personal significance of arguments for a given person or group of people, which once again confirms the role of apparent misunderstanding – in this case, logical.

Considering the characteristics of the listener clarifies the general provisions by many corrections. If the listener is not interested in the topic of the message, the speaker’s goal is to arouse the listener’s attention. The most vital argument should be presented at the beginning. For highly interested people with a high level of education, an upward argumentation system is most effective, whereas, for people with no interest in what is being talked about and a low level of education, a downward argumentation system is most effective (Lauring & Klitmøller, 2017). Thus, how an argument is best constructed is directly related to how different people perceive logic.

Thus, to be understood by the interlocutor, it is necessary to consider the partner’s logic. For this purpose, it is essential to imagine approximately the positions, as well as individual and socio-role features, because the acceptability or unacceptability of this or that logic for the partner depends mainly on the initial orientation of the partner. Understanding the partner, and adequate representation of their point of view, purposes, and individual features is the primary condition for overcoming all barriers without exception. The more the speaker considers the listener’s features, the more successful communication will be.

Communication Filters in the Organisation

By thinking deeply about communications at the individual and the organization level, one must learn how to reduce the frequency of ineffective communications. Influential leaders are those who are effective communicators. They represent the essence of the communication process, have well-developed oral and written communication skills, and understand how the environment affects the exchange of information (Ahmed et al., 2017). Communication is accomplished by ideas, facts, opinions, feelings or perceptions, and attitudes from one person to another, verbally or otherwise, to get the desired response. When considering the communication process, it must be borne in mind that in human communication, it is not only how information is transmitted that is important, but also how it is formed, refined, and developed.

Effective communication requires specific skills and abilities from each party. It should be seen not only as sending and receiving information, the mutual informing of the two individuals, each of whom is an active subject, involves the establishment of joint activity. Filters encourage the strategic leader to foster a culture of openness and transparency (Ahmed et al., 2017). Information filtering can occur unintentionally, including less competent employees’ inability to comprehend the received messages and report them without distortions. Sometimes, the fear of speaking out creates excessive filtering, resulting in flawed intra-organizational information exchange endeavors. Perception varies widely, and every leader must constantly improve and refine the communication channels in their oration to ensure that information is communicated and transformed correctly.

Conclusion

Implementing communications is a connecting process necessary for any critical managerial action. Various filters can arise in the course of transmission. These interferences and obstacles distort the original meaning of the message and prevent a constructive and competent dialogue.There are a few significant barriers – semantic, logical, and stylistic. They all have specifics that influence the way of eliminating the filter. Effective communication can be called the one in which the impact of barriers is reduced to a minimum. Overcoming communicative obstacles is carried out in various ways, such as using the most understandable to the interlocutor vocabulary, avoiding complicated or professional terminology, and formulating messages as clear and straightforward as possible. All filters in communication inevitably lead to ineffective management of the organization and interfere with the manager’s work if measures to remove them are not considered in time.

References

Ahmed, S., Lee, S., Shommu, N., Rumana, N., & Turin, T. (2017). Experiences of communication barriers between physicians and immigrant patients: A systematic review and thematic synthesis. Patient Experience Journal, 4(1), 122-140.

Akhmetshin, E. M., Makulov, S. I., Talysheva, I. A., Fedorova, S. Y., & Gubarkov, S. (2017). Overcoming of intercultural barriers in the educational environment. Man in India, 97(15), 281-288.

Bel, R., Smirnov, V., & Wait, A. (2018). Managing change: Communication, managerial style and change in organizations.Economic Modelling, 69, 1-12. Web.

Evans, A., & Suklun, H. (2017). Workplace diversity and intercultural communication: A phenomenological study.Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), 1408943. Web.

Kyurova, A. (2017). Communication as a managerial tool for the processes in organizations. Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 61-69.

Lahti, M., & Valo, M. (2017). Intercultural workplace communication. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.

Lauring, J., & Klitmøller, A. (2017). Inclusive language use in multicultural business organizations: The effect on creativity and performance.International Journal of Business Communication, 54(3), 306-324. Web.

Neamțu, D. M., & Bejinaru, R. (2019). Ethical leadership perspectives in organizations. The USV annals of economics and public administration, 18(2), 79-88.

Nordin, N. S., & Jelani, F. (2019). Communication Issues at the Workplace.International Journal of Modern Languages And Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 7-18. Web.

Tye-Williams, S., Carbo, J., D’Cruz, P., Hollis, L. P., Keashly, L., Mattice, C., & Tracy, S. J. (2020). Exploring workplace bullying from diverse perspectives: A Journal of Applied Communication Research forum.Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(6), 637-653. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!