Communication Styles Coursework Example

COMMUNICATION STYLES AND RESPONNSES
Name
Institution
Instructor
Date
People communicate and respond every day not knowing there are styles of doing so. The styles have cost and benefit, and thus one must be careful when answering. The three main techniques of communication include assertive, nonassertive and aggressive (O’Connor et al., 2001). In assertive conversation, the person is precise when communicating and makes his or her own independent choices. A nonassertive person allows others to make decisions on his or her behalf. An aggressive person forces his or her own decisions disregarding other people. I shall examine the responses, cost, and benefits from six scenarios.
Scenario A
In this scenario, the supervisor is using aggressive communication through raising the voice. Nonassertive communication will be kneeling down and begging the supervisor for forgiveness. An aggressive response will entail answering rudely, for instance, say to the boss one thousand times (O’Connor et al., 2001). An assertive response will involve responding to the supervisor by saying I am sorry and show readiness to do the right thing. By being nonassertive, most people may under look me and bypass me during decision making. The benefit is that he may leave me if I do not confront him back. An aggressive response will create bad blood with the seniors, and even firing me later. The benefit is that the supervisor will move away and allow me to do the work at my pace. By being assertive, I will have admitted my silly mistake but still, allow me to proceed with the work which is a benefit.

Scenario B
My colleague exhibits aggressive communication and behaviors through late coming and interruptions. My aggressive response will be to chase him out and shout back telling him to keep off his weird behavior (O’Connor et al., 2001). Using an assertive response, I will advise him to keep calm so that he can get from where we are. A nonassertive reaction will involve playing humble and submitting to whatever the colleague demands. Aggressiveness may come with a cost where disagreement and maybe confrontation may occur. The benefit is that it will eliminate unnecessary disturbance during meetings. The assertive response may not convince him to stop the behavior which is a cost. Its advantage is that temporarily, I will have solved the issue. A nonassertive reaction will motivate the colleague to continue with the bad manners. The benefit is that there will be no confrontation.
Scenario C
The chair expresses nonassertive communication behavior. My nonassertive response is to keep quiet and not to give my output (O’Connor et al., 2001). Aggressively, I will interject and ask why was called in the meeting if my input was not needed. To be assertive, I would calmly excuse myself and ask if I could contribute. The cost of being nonassertive is that my contribution shall not be taken into consideration. The benefit is that I may not be blamed in the future if anything that was passed goes wrong. By being aggressive, I may be excluded from future meetings by the chair which is a cost. The benefit is that my output will count at the end of the day. The price of being assertive is that my opinion may not count since I was left out deliberately at the start. I will benefit by being contented with the answer.
Scenario D
The principal uses aggressive communication going by the tone. In his nonassertive response, Mohammed will agree with the principal and stop his entire plan. Aggressive Mohammed will disagree and tell the principal to keep off since the program will proceed with his input or not. In his positive response, Mohammed will make the principal believe in the program and embrace it. The cost of a nonassertive reaction is that Mohammed’s project will halt from that time. He will benefit the principal may give him an alternative program. Aggressiveness may make his work harder by being in bad terms with the people he would be working with (O’Connor et al., 2001). It’s beneficial since he will have to try the project and see its progress. If assertive, the principal may fail to embrace the plan and end up not doing it. He may get the reasons for the principal’s objection and make the required changes.
Scenario E
The supervisor, in this case, is assertive because she stands her ground. Nonassertive response by Audrey will involve stopping all the plans of attending the rally with immediate effect. The aggressive response will include defying the supervisor in the face and telling her she must go. Her assertive response will be avoiding a confrontation but go on with the plans as she had prepared. By stopping the plans, Audrey will have failed in doing what had planned to do for long. She will benefit by avoiding collisions with the supervisor. Her aggressive response may cost her job and help her by doing what she wants (O’Connor et al., 2001). Her assertive response also may strain the relationship with supervisors, but she will benefit by doing the right thing according to her
Scenario F
Bill uses aggressive communication going by how he confronts Hiroko. Hiroko will not answer bill but will minimize on working hours as a nonassertive response. Her aggressive response will involve telling Bill that he is the one who is lazy and a fool. Hiroko will be even more dedicated to her work. An assertive response will entail telling Bill that they are employed to help the people, and that’s what she is just doing. The nonassertive response will not assist in changing Bills attitude which is a cost. The benefit is that the two will remain on good terms as colleagues. When responding aggressively, the two may have a strained colleague relationship. However, it will be beneficial when Bill discovers he is on the wrong (O’Connor et al., 2001). An assertive response may take a long time to get in Bills head, but Bill may finally start gain dedication like Hiroko which amounts to a benefit.
All these responses are useful in our daily interaction. It is always important to know how to respond to particular scenarios. The reason is that different situations demand different answers. It is good to know that every response has a cost incurred and a benefit accrued. The two forms the guiding principal before responding.
References
O’Connor, D. B., Archer, J., & Wu, F. W. (2001). Measuring aggression: Self‐reports, partner reports, and responses to provoking scenarios. Aggressive Behavior, 27(2), 79-101.