I. Introduction
In military context, unity of command is a very familiar term. It is the core effort of most of educational and training programs of high ranking officers in the US Army and national defense organizations all over the globe. The term is more than a military slogan, it is a basic military philosophy which contains the understanding that coordination is the key to harnessing power and strength from available military resources. The term is often used internally in various corps and military organizations. The application is therefore, limited to the coordination of resources within that particular organization.
However, in this paper, we are discussing the role of the philosophy in joint operations, a condition which require implementation of the unity of command philosophy over the boundaries of a single organization.
II. Unity of Command and Joint Operations
II.1. Unity of Command
As mentioned, Unity of Command is the basic philosophy that guides military organizations in its operations. It is referring to a condition where a subordinate should have one and only one superior. In a wholesome perspective, this means the military hierarchy tree should be shaped in such a way that leaves only one in absolute command. Within the concept, all available sources are supposed to be fighting for a common goal.
To provide an illustration that will depicts the importance of unity of command in military operations, we will use an example of a dozen men trying to move a giant concrete block. If all these men are to do the efforts separately, for instance, some are using rope and wedges, some are using grease to try to slide the concrete block and some other merely trying to push the block away, the result is an immovable concrete block and a dozen of exhausted men. In other words, without a unity of command, military resources can be depleted without generating much of a result (Mckeaney, 1994).
On the other hand, if one man are chosen to lead the removal process, and the strengths and energy of a dozen men are coordinated using a single strategy, for instance, using rope and wedges, then the work will actually accomplish something and the energy of the men will be used more effectively (Lawrence, 1995).
In theory, the leadership of a single person simplifies the situation because then there will be much more limited and focused objectives and there will be only a single perspective on how to manage available resource to achieve those objectives. History has proven that unity of command is the philosophy that usually gets the job done in military realms (Lawrence, 1995).
II.2. Joint Operations
Joint operation is also a familiar term in the military context. In simple terms, it means two or more military organizations working in specific operations in order to reach common objectives. In the 20th century, joint and multinational operations have displayed their important role in military undertakings. It displays how the full spectrum of special operations (so), air, land, sea and space capabilities are used to generate mission accomplishment in various fields (Mckeaney, 1994).
Furthermore, it has been recognized that the concept of joint operations is now well supported by greater capabilities of communication and coordination, and therefore, advances in military achievements are more dependent upon commanding abilities of the military leader and how he integrate various components of the military resources under his command (Mckeaney, 1994).
In its practice, joint operation has been seen as a military art. It encompasses translating strategy into operational design which accommodates the employment of all military components. The main goal of joint operation is to integrate all military capabilities into a single and unified whole. Joint operations philosophy guides the development, organization and execution of strategies in military campaigns, battles and major operations. It includes the principles of war like objective, offensive, economy of forces, unity of command, etc. In this paper, we are discussing the role of unity of command in joint operations (Mckeaney, 1994).
III. Unity of Command in Previous Battles
Unity of command is an old concept which has been utilized for decades. In the battle of Leyte Gulf, the role of the philosophy was Paramount in ensuring victory of the Allied Forces against the Imperial Army of Japan. The Battle was considered a good example of the implementation of a unified military effort to achieve clear and focused objectives.
The battle of Leyte Gulf was considered the largest naval battle in history. The battle occurred in the Pacific ocean in the World War II. The battle was an effort to further weakened the Japanese imperial forces. The invasion by the allied forces was particularly aimed to cut off Japan from her colonies in Southeast Asia. This attack was considered crucial because it will cut away the crucial oil supplies for the Imperial Japanese Navy. In the end, the battle was won by the allied forces despite Japanese attempt using all their remaining forces to repel the attack (Cutler, 2001).
The battle was actually consist of four interrelated battles, they are the battle of the Shibuyan Sea, the Battle of Suriago Strait, The Battle of Cape engano and the Battle of Samar. The allied forces, dominated by American carriers and destroyers placed themselves surround the Philippine waters. The battle started when Japanese center forces were spotted entering the Palawan Passage. Well coordinated and structured, the attack to these forces sunk two cruisers and crippling a third and leaving the Center Forces in chaos for quite some time. However, the Japanese are determined to went forward to the Leyte Gulf. In the Battle of the Sibuyan Sea, the allied forces dispatched aircraft attacks and sink some of Japanese carriers (Field, 1947).
The Japanese forces were trying to trick the allied forces by signing a retreat and then turned again to make their way through the San Bernadino Strait. The sudden movement was well confronted by the allied forces in the Battle of Samar. In the battle of Suriago strait, more Japanese cruisers and carriers were sunk and Japanese commanders killed. Again, the Japanese signed a retreat. However, Japanese empire’s determination to enter the Leyte Gulf was still strong. Ozawa, a Japanese commander, led a number of Japanese ships and approaching from the north. This attack was also well anticipated by the allied forces. The air attack by the allied forces sunk four Japanese carriers and Ozawa fled to Japan (Field, 1947).
The fleet that was pretending to sound a retreat was spotted in Samar hours after the Battle of Cape Engano. Despite having most of the fleet pursuing Ozawa in his escape, the Allied forces were not unaware of the need to anticipate such an attack from the Japanese fleet. In the Battle of Samar, nine American destroyer and several groups of air attacks made a fierce assault to the appearing Japanese forces in effort to make them believe that the entire allied forces are ready and waiting for their arrival. Discouraged, the last of the Japanese fleet retreat under the belief that they are intercepted by a complete set of prepared American feet (Cutler, 2001).
In the aftermath, the battle of Leyte Gulf secured the US Army from attacks from sea and successfully cutting the supply lines of Japanese colonies in South East Asia. The Battle of Leyte was fought by the air and sea campaign with one of the best coordination in the history world war II. Communication between fleets in different sides of the ocean was made continuously, despite problems exist in the last art of Battle in Samar. Strategy analysts stated that the Japanese was strucked backward by a wall of military forces, which causes them to retreat without realizing that their anticipation of the umber of US fleet was overestimated. The battle displayed how strategic leadership generates the optimization of available resources in fighting enemies, and even helps responding to unexpected turns faster (Cutler, 2001).
IV. Unity of Command in Various Military Organizations
IV.1. Marine
In the marine perspective, the unity of command is the core and critical philosophy of all their operations. Marines no more than others that orchestrating land, sea and air operations in joint warfare is a demanding and difficult job. In the marine perspective, it is always believed that things will be easier managed if all the men know who is in charge. It is stated that in the Marine forces achieving the unity of command is a hard and evolutionary process. In the first years of the marine, dual commanders managed military arms. Nevertheless, the Guadacanal operations along with other operations revealed that an overarching command structure is required (Linn, 1996).
In the Marines, the arrangement is: the marine amphibious corps is presided over the ground, air and logistic units. Nevertheless, this arrangement was not perfect for the marines and the marine forces were still adjusting their structures. One of the main issues in integrating arms operations is overcome conceptual differences. Combining different components means combining strategies in tactical levels. Integrating these functions means creating a set of procedure of cooperation between ground, naval and air arms. Again, conceptual differences are hampering the growth of the cooperation. Today, the Marine uses advances technology and an improved command structure that ensure unity of command. This is achieved by acknowledging several principles, the first and foremost, one person must be in charge. Second, in terms of joint operations, procedures are the building blocks of the cooperation and they must not be violated. Third, accounting the diverse nature of each joint operation, flexibility is a critical virtue (Linn, 1996).
IV.2. Special Operations
In special operations, the unity of command concept has its own unique role. Special operations are operations performed in hostile, denied and politically sensitive environments. These operations generally have strong necessities of low visibility and covert capabilities. Special operations are operations conducted in support of the theater campaigns. It is in complementary and not in competition with conventional operations. Overall, the success of special operations depends on individual and small unit capabilities rather than a large group of units. Nevertheless, their success is crucial for the conventional operations conducted in their successions. Most of the special operations are conducted as a joint operation rather than a stand alone project (Doctrine, 2003).
Despite their covert and individual accomplishments, deconfliction and coordination with conventional operations are critical for special operations. Special operations must become one and integrated with conventional operations. In efforts of achieving that integration, special operations generally maintain effective liaison with all component of the joint military force. The joint characteristic of special operations is in need of specific support arrangements in order to sustain the independent and remote operations. In spite of its independency, special operations must be able to exploit all available resources from the national support systems, including emerging new technologies and space assets (Doctrine, 2003).
Other characteristic of the special operation is its sensitivity toward timely and detailed intelligence. This also requires cooperation with other national support systems. Most special operations require much higher level of detailed intelligence support than needed in conventional operations. Threats of enemy counterintelligence must also be anticipated using global, secure and jointly interoperable command and control efforts. The officer in charge must maintain connection with all available sources of information, therefore, flexibility is also paramount in times of operations (Doctrine, 2003).
IV.3. Joint Land Operations in the U.S
Joint land operations often have major roles in conflict resolutions throughout the military industry. In the United States, the management of these operations are generally held by the joint force commander (JFC) who acts as the highest commander in the hierarchy. Meanwhile, the JFC is controlling other operations that be performed in coordination with the land-based operations. The organization of the joint land operation is based on the vision and mission stated by the JFC with considerations of the enemy, terrain, weather, troops and available support systems. Therefore, unity of efforts is a key consideration. Joint land operations require a centralized planning system, but also a decentralized execution because of its diverse units. In the process, JFC conduct its operations through joint task forces, functional components, service components, etc (‘Command and Control’, 2004).
In managing the joint land operations, the JFC establishes delegates appropriate command relationships, establishes subordinate commands and delivers coordinating instructions for the component commanders. In coordinating such a complex operations, simplicity and clarity are crucial. Therefore, in managing the joint land operations the presence of JFC as a single commander is critical. With the existing structure, the JFC has the ability to enhance synchronization of operations. This structure is applicable between US ground components and multinational components as well (‘Command and Control’, 2004).
IV.4. Joint Air Operations
The unity of command is also apparent in the command arrangements of US joint air operations. In order to display how unity of command s applied in the joint US air operations I will use the joint air operations of Desert Shield/ Desert Storm. The highest ranking officials were the people in the National Command Authorities in Washington (Winnefeld, 1993).
Nevertheless, in order to integrate operations between different air units and forces, the JFACC was the joining forces that enable coordination among the vast military resources. The JFACC functions as a centralizing tool for planning and decision making which enables a higher degree of coordination of joint air operations compare to Vietnam. The joining forces of the JFACC was powerful enough to generate quick responses whenever a service component requires tanker support, air defense suppression, the destruction of certain target, etc (Winnefeld, 1993).
Becoming a force that joins various components of air based military units, flexibility of structure and operational system was a great virtue of the JFACC. In many dimensions, the JFACC must be flexible enough to accommodate the special needs of the service units it serves (Winnefeld, 1993).
V. Unity of Command and Technology
The role of technology and advanced information system is also critical in establishing unity of command. In all of the military organizations and endeavors elaborated above, technology plays a critical role in generating coordination and the unity of command. There are various programs that are designed to provide military organizations with the best coordinating capabilities (Bernstein, 1998). For example, the Defense Information Systems Agency is providing services for integrating joint coalition and a combined command and control systems for combat support system. Provider of this technology is aware of the critical importance of an integrated service and agency-developed data sources.
DISA has the capability of supporting planning, mobilization, deployment and execution of the deployed forces. It provides the infrastructure that integrates various agencies in its military efforts. DISA uses a Global Command and Control System which enables joint planning and execution, collaboration and decision support capabilities and global access to available data for joint force commanders. The quality of the supports system provided by DISA has been proven in many combat situations. For example, in Bosnia, in support of the Operations Enduring Freedom, DISA significantly improved situational awareness, application of coordination between combined force elements and integration of intelligence in planning as well as operating decision making processes. DISA has been utilized in ground as well as air operations. It is already conditioned to match existing standards, doctrines, procedures and tactics (‘Joint Command and Control’, 2007).
VI. Conclusions
Unity of command is one of many doctrines of joint operations. Nevertheless, its existence is the most critical in ensuring the proper management of join operations. In military operations, there are no strategies or agencies that do not involve the unity of command philosophy in their operations. This displayed by the elaborations of this paper. Land, Air, Naval and Special Operations are all designed with the unity of command as their basic philosophy. Like the special operations and the air missions, some objectives might look individual and remote, but their success is critical for the conventional operations that will be done in their successions. Different agencies however, have different ways of practicing the unity of command concept within their military structure.
Bibliography
Bernstein, Alvin H. Libicki, Martin C. 1998. “High-Tech: The Future of War? A Debate,” Commentary, vol. 105
‘Command and Control for Joint Land Operations’. 2004. Retrieved June 11, 2007 from www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3_31.pdf
Cutler. Thomas. 2001. ‘The Battle of Leyte Gulf. Annapolis Maryland. United States: Naval Institute Press’.
‘Doctrine for Joint Special Operations. 2003. Retrieved June 11, 2007 from www.fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp3-05
Field, James A. 1947. The Japanese at Leyte Gulf: The Sho Operations. Princeton University Press.
‘Joint Command and Control’. 2007. DISA. Retrieved June 11, 2007 from http://www.disa.mil/main/about/jcc.html
Lawrence. K, Scott. 1995. ‘Joint C2 Through Unity of Command’. JFQ. Retrieved June 11, 2007. from www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/c26.pdf
Linn, Thomas C. 1996. ‘Joint Operations: The Marine Perspective’. JFQ. Retrieved June 11, 2007 from www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/0610.pdf
McKearney. Terry J. 1994. “Rethinking the Joint Task Force,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, vol. 120
Winnefeld. James A. 1993. ‘Unity of Control: Joint Air Operations’. JFQ. Retrieved June 11, 2007 from www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1993/jfq1201.pdf
Comm Seminar Freethinking And Secularism
The American people have long claimed to be free thinkers. A freethinker is someone who forms opinions and makes decisions based on independent reasoning, without being influenced by any authority or group, particularly those who oppose political leaders and religious dogma. Freethinking and secularism have always played an important role in American politics and culture. However, it can be argued that the American people may not truly be the free thinkers they claim to be since their thoughts are often influenced by religion and political divisions.
The issue of free thinking can be traced back to the history of the United States. For instance, during John F. Kennedy’s campaign in 1960, his Catholic faith became a topic of discussion. Some people feared that if he became president, he would be greatly influenced by the church and its leadership in Rome. To address this concern, Kennedy shifted his focus from his religious beliefs to promoting American values such as tolerance and fairness for all faiths and those with no faith at all.
The influence of religion on politics was also evident in the 2004 elections when candidates emphasized the importance of prayer and faith in their lives. This highlights how religion plays a significant role as followers tend to vote for someone who shares their beliefs with hopes that they will favor them in some way.
Religion has also impacted education movements aimed at Americanizing” Catholic immigrants arriving in urban areas during the 19th century. Additionally, it is believed that religion influenced women’s protests against political and civil degradation during this time period as they turned to the Bible for answers and support.
There was widespread surprise and consternation regarding the impact of religion on the 2004 presidential election results, but this should not have come as a shock given the intensity and closeness of the results. Analysts say that faith and religion have played a vital role in American elections since the United States became an independent state. Comparing the role of religion in past elections to that of 2004, analysts note that its effect has reduced. In earlier days, there used to be strong political differences among religious communities, but these have been replaced by political groups based on religion and faith.
The outcomes of American elections are affected by three different areas of religion: religious belonging, religious behavior, and religious believing. Religious belonging makes people vote for candidates who belong to their same religion based on support and togetherness as people of the same faith according to religious books such as the Bible. Religious behavior affects election outcomes because people believe that voting for a candidate who belongs to their same religious group will advocate for behaviors aligned with their own beliefs, making their religion stronger in America. Religious believing also affects election outcomes because Americans believe that voting for a person from a certain religious group will greatly influence others’ beliefs leading to candidates with more followers winning elections.
Each aspect discussed above affects how people vote and their opinions on political matters, ideology, and partisanship. A candidate’s moral values play an important role in major party coalitions while religious appeals made during presidential campaigns also significantly impact election outcomes (John, 2007). Statistics show that eight out of every ten Americans believe in God while evangelical Christians helped President George W. Bush win his second term into office due to his shared beliefs with them.
In 2008 elections much interest was put into economic issues leading both presidential candidates focusing less on social issues such as gay marriage or abortion which had previously divided Americans into two. Protestants have the majority followers in America with a percentage of 51.3 while Catholics represent 23.9% of the population. Evangelical Protestants formed a coalition that helped Bush win his second term in 2004 and although not as strong in 2008, they still supported Senator McCain especially after he chose Sarah Palin, a devout and conservative Christian, as his running mate.
Mainline Protestants were evenly divided between both candidates in the 2008 presidential elections as they were in 2000 and 2004. Barrack Obama had a significant support from black Protestants (96%) and Catholic Hispanics while McCain gained support from moderate Catholics. Jews showed skepticism but still supported Barrack Obama (John, 2008).
Gender is a factor that has affected free thinkers in American polls. Many people discriminate against candidates based on their gender. Most Americans focus on the gender of a candidate for party identification and congressional voting. At the aggregate level, gender issues are considered to be the most powerful force in shaping party identification. There have been efforts to explain the increased gender gap in American political persuasion, but context and setting greatly influence people’s decision to participate.
A study suggested that the presence of women mostly changes the nature of political discourse, leading to alienation from politics by women. In 1992, more women were persuaded to vote in a certain direction due to an increase of women candidates. The psychological engagement of women in politics was also increased by having more female candidates than previous elections (Fulton, 2007).
Although gender plays an important role in influencing American polls, many believe that if women were given equal funding for political campaigns as men there would be more female participation in politics than currently seen. Compared to earlier times, there has been an increase of female participation in politics though most Americans prefer a male president (Susan and Richard, 2006).
Income is another important factor that influences the way Americans think. The choice of a candidate in America is often affected by the fact that people will vote for someone whose policies aim to increase their own economic welfare and benefits. In most cases, a person’s economic status in America is related to their education, income, occupation, and family background. People who are in similar socioeconomic statuses are likely to vote on one side because they have similar preferences regarding public facilities and neighborhood environments. This group of people also tends to share similar values, opinions, and expectations regarding government welfare and economic issues. On the other hand, people with different economic conditions are likely to vote differently or have contrasting opinions on government policies relating to socioeconomic issues such as unemployment and taxes (Lisa 2009).
Race is an issue that prevents Americans from being considered free-thinking individuals. In the 2004 presidential election, President Bush won the popular vote by 3.5 million, but had a nationwide margin of 14 million among white voters while John Kerry had a margin of 11 million among non-white voters. These margins remain unexplained and may be due to racism. Republicans have used racial fears to create a strong white majority, mainly from the south, over the past forty years.
Racial issues were also evident in previous presidential campaigns. In 1968, Richard Nixon promised to be tough on crime which portrayed blacks as criminals and immoral to whites. In 1980, Ronald Reagan used the phrase state rights” which reminded people of when states had more freedom including freedom for racial discrimination.
Unless all Americans are willing to address race issues, the racial gap will continue to widen (Tony, 2006). Recently in the 2008 campaigns McCain referred to Joe -the boss of a small company in Ohio- as someone who would suffer because of taxes that Barrack Obama was planning on introducing. However, Joe represents blue-collar white males who wouldn’t vote for Obama because of his skin color rather than his policies.
America does not openly address race issues during campaigns but it is still present in people’s minds and most Americans do not vote freely but favor candidates based on their skin color instead. The Democratic Party nominating Barack Obama as their presidential candidate seemed like progress towards ending racial discrimination; however this was not seen during campaigns where McCain publicly announced his fear that if Obama won then Blacks may take over America and added that he believed Obama and his wife were anti-white.
This clearly shows how Americans are influenced by race when they vote for candidates (Tony, 2006). A recent poll carried out by Washington post-ABC news shows that out of 10, 3 Americans admit to being racially biased. However, this is seen as inaccurate because most Americans will not admit to having hang-ups about racial matters.
Age is a significant factor that greatly affects the so-called free thinker in American polls. It determines the information an individual gains regarding a certain election exercise. Older people tend to believe everything they hear on the media, which might make them vote in a particular direction. Additionally, older people perceive young candidates as not fully matured and end up voting for an older candidate instead.
Furthermore, most aged people seek religion for consolation and psychological support. This means that their religious leaders highly influence their decision-making when it comes to polls.
In conclusion, it is clear that the American people are not as free-thinking as they claim to be in polls. This is evident in their tendency to be biased in certain directions. Religion plays a significant role in shaping our thoughts, as many of us tend to believe what our religious leaders tell us. Gender also affects our thinking, as people of different genders tend to think and influence each other’s thoughts within their group. Similarly, people within the same income bracket often share similar ways of thinking. Race is another important factor that influences the way Americans think; for example, a white American may perceive a black American as dangerous. Finally, age plays a crucial role in shaping our thoughts and reasoning abilities at different stages of life.
Word count.
2,118 words.
Reference List
Fulton, Sarah (2007) presented a paper titled Lifting the Veil: Revealing the Hidden Influence of Gender on Congressional Election Outcomes” at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, held at Hyatt Regency Chicago and Sheraton Chicago Hotel and Towers in Chicago, IL on August 30th, 2007. The paper is available online at http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p211222_index.html and was retrieved on June 26th, 2009 at 12:18. The paper spans pages 6-8.
John Clifford Green’s book, The Faith Factor: How Religion Influences American Elections,” was published in 2007. The edition is illustrated and annotated, and it was published by the Greenwood Publishing Group in Santa Barbara. The book contains 108-117 pages.
According to John Green, religion is playing a lesser role in US elections than it has in the past. This information was reported by Washington (AFP) on October 12, 2008 and is available online at the following URL: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hJox4Qsb42fdfFek9omP90xs5HEQ. The article was retrieved on June 26, 2009 at 11:52 and is located on page one.
Lisa Bells discusses the race and gender issues that were present in the 2008 US presidential election. The article can be found on Helium periodicals at the following URL: http://www.helium.com/items/869631-us-elections-2008-race-and-gender-issues-in-the-presidential-election. It was retrieved on June 26, 2009, at 12:52 and spans from pages one to two.
Susan J. Carroll and Richard Logan’s book Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics” (2006) is an illustrated edition published by Cambridge University Press in the UK. It spans 128-132 pages.
Tony Favro (2008) wrote an article for City Mayors about the true colors of US elections. According to him, it’s not red and blue but black and white that matter. The article is available online at http://www.citymayors.com/politics/usa_elections_race.html and was retrieved on June 26th, 2009 at 10:23.
Effective Communication: Leveling, Listening And Validating
The term communication encompasses a wide range of skills, including public speaking, debating, discussing, listening, counseling, mediating, negotiating, teaching and marketing (Caputo, Palosaari & Pickering 2003). There are various public speaking venues that fall under the category of Speech. However, for the purpose of this essay, I will focus on effective communication in the areas of leveling, listening and validating.
Leveling means ensuring that all parties involved in the communication process are on the same page and have access to all necessary information for effective communication. It involves sharing all relevant information to benefit everyone involved in the conversation. Information is power, and how it is delivered determines its impact. When there’s an uneven flow of information, one party holds more power over the conversation. To achieve equal power, we need a level playing field.
This does not imply that one party has less information or lower quality information than the other. Instead, it means that both parties share information equally.
In a recent survey conducted by the University of Pittsburgh’s Katz Business School, communication skills were cited as the single most important decisive factor in choosing managers. Recruiters from companies with more than 50,000 employees participated in the survey. The results showed that communication skills, including written and oral presentations, as well as an ability to work with others, are the main factors contributing to job success (source: www.mindtools.com).
Mindtools.com has expended a great deal of energy into creating an electronically formatted book that covers the importance of effective communication. Communication can be disrupted simply due to the stages it passes through to complete its intended use. The sender sends a message through a designated channel before it reaches the receiver. A number of things can hinder the receiver’s ability to comprehend the message. If the message is received without hindrance, then feedback is the next logical step in the process. The receiver sends information back to the sender in an effort to keep the process flowing smoothly.
Without a level field of communication as a foundation to build upon, communication will be lost in translation. This is why listening is so important; not only must receivers hear messages, but they also need to comprehend them, which can only be accomplished through active listening.
The skill of listening involves both parties carefully hearing the message. Individuals learn social behaviors by observing someone else perform them first, practicing and refining them until they can be used to achieve positive outcomes (www.schizophrenia.org).
To be an effective communicator, the skill of listening is imperative. One of the largest inhibitors for students is often a mental block. While listening, a student may suddenly decide that they don’t understand what is being said. At this point, many students just tune out or get caught up in an internal dialogue trying to translate a specific word. Some students convince themselves that they are not able to understand spoken English well and create problems for themselves (Beare, The Challenge of Teaching Listening Skills).
The tools in a communication repertoire are all without merit if listening skills are low. The skill level of listening is directly correlated to the success of university students. According to clinical psychologist Larry Alan Nadig, there are three basic listening modes: competitive, passive, and active. Competitive listening is pretending to listen only for the purpose of interjecting and interrupting the sender’s message. Passive listening involves interest in the message but with no response. Active listening involves interaction once the message is received (Three Basic Listening Modes).
It is interesting to learn that ineffective communication is the most common barrier in the breakdown of marriages and families. The familiarity of surroundings, including people, can cause a subconscious barrier that slows down or even stops communication growth. Listening is the best tactic for helping others cope with daily life. Sometimes people are just looking for a sympathetic ear and do not intend for the receiver to respond. Effective listening enables the receiver to understand an important skill in the communication process. This action validates the message without even saying a word.
Validation adds an emotional quality to communication. It involves relaying both verbal and nonverbal communication, and the feedback phase of communication is the most appropriate place for validation to occur.
Relationships will be better with more validation because it leads to less debating, fewer conflicts, and less disagreement. Validation also helps people feel free to communicate. In fact, if there is a communication breakdown or a wall between communication partners, it’s likely been built with the bricks of invalidation. Validation is the means of chipping away at the wall and opening the free flow of communication (Freedman, http://www.6seconds.org/news/2004226.html).
Mr. Freedman presents a compelling argument regarding how the receiver can offer effective feedback, thereby ensuring successful communication. Emotions can make or break any conversation – their absence may convey a lack of concern, while their overemphasis may come across as pretentiousness. Validation serves as a set of checks and balances in this process. Once the message is received, the receiver has the option to respond in various ways. Since it’s impossible to be completely emotionless, validation becomes an essential component of effective communication.
Not showing any emotion is an emotion in itself. Stoicism is often considered to be the absence of emotion, but when it comes to communication, it can actually be a very effective negative emotion. Validation is a crucial part of both mathematics and science, as well as the communication process used to measure success. For instance, if a man walks into a room full of women, his facial expressions will validate what he’s thinking. This may or may not be immediately apparent to the women present. If the man is introverted, his validation will become evident as he retreats into a corner of the room away from them. Conversely, if he’s extroverted, his validation will clearly demonstrate his thoughts.
Validation Fundamentals: How to, What to, When to Validate is a book designed to cover validation in medical studies. William Gibson presents a life-cycle of validation in this book that includes a beginning, middle, and end. The process should develop systematically and progress along meaningful paths (Gibson, p 6). Although he speaks about a different profession, his idea applies to the communication process as well. Validation of information is inevitable and will always occur. Even not responding to a message validates it. Many authors have written on this subject before and have used the phrase you cannot not communicate.” This law applies universally; intelligent beings cannot avoid it. It’s like boasting that you are not prideful when bragging itself demonstrates pride.
At times, effective communication requires active listening followed by validation. These three aspects of communication are a good representation of the process as a whole. However, limiting oneself to these three would be detrimental. Communication is about sharing information with the purpose of learning and growing. It may not always take place in a classroom on a campus somewhere in the world, but wherever you are, communication is an essential part of daily activities. Therefore, it is important for everyone to practice and improve their communication skills.
References.
Caputo, John et al. (2003) wrote a book titled Effective Communication” published by Dramatic Lines Press in Twickenham, England.
Why Communication Skills are So Important
Communication is an essential aspect of our daily lives. It is the process of exchanging information, ideas, and thoughts between individuals or groups. Effective communication skills are crucial in both personal and professional relationships. They help us express ourselves clearly, understand others better, build trust and respect, resolve conflicts, and achieve our goals.
If you want to improve your communication skills, there are many resources available online. One helpful website is Mind Tools (http://www.mindtools.com/CommSkll/CommunicationIntro.htm), which provides tips on how to communicate effectively in various settings such as meetings, presentations, negotiations, and interviews.
Remember that good communication is a two-way street; it requires active listening as well as clear expression. By developing your communication skills, you can enhance your relationships with others and achieve greater success in all areas of life.
Effective Communication is a fact sheet series that provides valuable information on the topic. The source of this information is from schizophrenia.org.au and can be accessed through the following link: http://www.schizophrenia.org.au/pdfs/EffectiveCommunications.pdf. This resource was retrieved on April 13th, 2007.
Beare, Kenneth (2007) discusses the challenge of teaching listening skills in English as a Second Language. The article can be retrieved from http://esl.about.com/cs/teachinglistening/a/a_tlisten.htm, accessed on 13 April 2007.
Nadig, Larry Alan (2006) discusses three basic listening modes in his article Tips on Effective Listening”. The article can be retrieved from http://www.drnadig.com/listening.htm, accessed on 13 April 2007.
Freedman, Josh. (n.d.). Emotional Validation.” Emotional Intelligence. Retrieved 13 April 2007 from http://eqi.org/valid.htm.
Gibson, William. (1998). Validation Fundamentals: How to Validate, What to Validate, and When to Validate. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.