Introduction
Three words define me as an individual, and they are decisive, authoritative, and goal oriented. My personal inventory takes me back to my childhood experience, whereby I always pursued power. I have always wondered why I am a goal-oriented individual focused on results. However, the responsive versus assertive graph has revealed my social identity. With a score of 18 in responsiveness and 35 on assertiveness, I am officially a control specialist, also known as a driver personality (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). Drivers have a strong will, are independent, strict, and goal-oriented. These traits reveal my true self, which is something I have sought to define for ages. This paper explains how personality traits affect communication and strategies to enhance communication across cultures, generations, and genders.
Ways to Enhance Communication Effectiveness
Drivers are dominant personalities who take pride in successful outcomes. As mentioned, they are pushy and severe in everything they do (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). This trait limits them from effectively communicating because their recipients may feel obliged than instructed. During my conversations, I have witnessed this occurrence because, at the end of our discussion, someone feels like I have judged them or pushed them far enough that sometimes the conversation has to end untimely. Communication alternatives that I find easy to apply are non-verbal and written communication. Within these mediums, I can display my intentions without sounding harsh or overly controlling.
The personal inventory and personality graph have made me understand how to communicate effectively with people with different personality traits (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). The rules mentioned in the communication guide are essential because they focus on enhancing the verbal aspect of communication. One of the rules I have learned is communicating with individuals with contrasting personality traits such as amiable, expressive, and analytical (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). Amiable people are patient and active listeners because they grasp each word and are inoffensive in their speech. To ensure that we balance during communication, I have to be assertive and focus on the recipient’s feelings. Also, I have to slow down on my speech to ensure that the individual is listening. If the individual is an expressive person, I have to allow jokes and fun, be warm, and support the other person’s contribution (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). These communication tactics will enable my expressive recipient to feel comfortable with the conversation by creating an equitable space for expression.
When conversing with an analytic person, active listening and talking straight are essential. The reason is that it eradicates misinterpretation of words so that the conversation does not become an argument. Also, minimizing non-verbal communication is critical because analytic individuals are less responsive and assertive, limiting them from interpreting such communication (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). Also, gathering factual data to present during a conversation is vital because analytic individuals are apprehensive, making it difficult to convince them to engage in a conversation easily actively. Lastly, communicating with a driver should be work, focused, avoid power struggles and focus on important details (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). The simple trick to adherence to the guidelines is to understand the recipient’s trait and apply the corresponding rules accordingly.
How Social Style Affects Cultural Competence
Cultural competence is a vital skill for speakers because it promotes diversity. The leader’s social style can limit or enhance how they relate with people with contrasting beliefs, cultural practices, or religions in an organization (Beebe & Mottet, 2016). As an individual, my trait has significantly hindered me from understanding the cultural differences of people in my team. For example, I once led a team to complete a research project assigned to us. We all agreed to meet and discuss the details of the project in-depth before officially submitting it as a draft.
We met at noon and agreed, and we had two hours to present our findings and discuss the project. Amongst us were two Muslims, and when the time came for us to discuss, it only took an hour before they excused themselves for their afternoon prayers. I felt disgraced and powerless, and I left the meeting and never returned because I was furious. Looking back at my actions, I would say that the timing was wrong because we had not considered our teammates who had to devote their prayers at a specified time. They failed to raise this issue probably because I was too controlling in making the group’s decision. If had known their personality trait, I would probably have changed how I interacted with them to allow everyone suggests the best timing for our discussion. Before discovering trait identification and ways to communicate effectively, I had ignored all the requirements and strategies to get acquainted with the need for cultural competence.
Generational and Gender Considerations to Improve Communication
Communication between generations can be a daunting task if not done appropriately. The traditional forms of communication were more contact-based, unlike the contemporary setting. For instance, the baby boomer generation appreciates a firm handshake than a simple hello when conversing (Tenenboim-Weinblatt & Baden, 2021). During communication, it is crucial that the speaker sounds friendly, is actively listening, and is concerned about the recipient’s wellbeing. Face-to-face meetings and telephone calls are more acceptable among this population. As a leader, I intend to apply this concept when dealing with older people because it is more efficient, proper, and respectable. However, millennials and generation Z prefer digital communication mediums (Tenenboim-Weinblatt & Baden, 2021). This factor indicates that verbal and written communication is what is preferable among these people. I can confirm this rationale because I prefer virtual meetings and email texting to face-to-face meetings or calls. When communicating with this population, the integral rule is to keep things straight to the point, be cautious, and observe time.
According to Tench et al. (2017), an effective team leader must understand the theory of gendered communication. This logic means that they should be aware that men tend to apply the report style of communication, which means that their words are factual, data-oriented, and aim to bring solutions. On the other hand, women use the rapport style of communication whereby they are narrators and strive to maintain a good relationship with their recipients (Tench et al., 2017). Men also apply minor non-verbal cues such as gestures and paralanguage. Therefore, when talking to men or boys, the speaker should have their facts right and maintain eye contact because this encourages efficient communication. For women, encouraging off-topic conversation is essential because it promotes engagement. Understanding facial expressions and gestures may also initiate better communication with this gender.
Conclusion
Personality trait plays an integral role on the type of a communicator an individual becomes. Understanding the social style, age group, and gender of the recipient enhances communication. Therefore, variables that develop efficient communication include cultural competence and understanding of the gendered theory and generation. Appreciating diversity is key to strengthening effective communication because it ensures that words or action does not offend the recipient.
References
Beebe, S. A., & Mottet, T. P. (2016). Adapting to Differences. In S.A. Beebe & T.P Mottet (Eds.), Business and professional communication: Principles and skills for leadership (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Tench, R., Topić, M., & Moreno, A. (2017). Male and female communication, leadership styles, and the position of women in public relations. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 8(2-3), 231-248.
Tenenboim-Weinblatt, K., & Baden, C. (2021). Gendered communication styles in the news: An algorithmic comparative study of conflict coverage. Communication Research, 48(2), 233-256.