Why are office romances such a bad Idea?!

Okay folks this being my last entry I'm gonna try and make this short and sweet ! :)

The American T.V soap "Greys Anatomy" is a classic example of office romance. It throws light on the 'managing organization communication' aspect of organization structures and also demonstrates the role "office romance" in day to day lives.

For a lot of people, dating in the workplace is a very important topic, indeed. While the logic is obvious -- people often spend more time at work than just about anywhere else, so where better to find a potential mate than in a professional setting? -- the dangers and risks are quite high too.

There's danger lurking in office romances, genuine risks to your career and credibility, along with your mental health.

The greatest problem with office dating is that it's impossible to avoid the power aspect of your relationship. If you ask someone who is a subordinate to go out on a date and you've crossed the line, you've compromised your professionalism and put them into an extremely difficult situation.

Do they say yes because you're higher ranked (or, worse, their boss)? Do they say no and then fear for their job and/or evaluations thereafter? Do they say yes, then drop you after a date or two, hoping that you'll subsequently be able to differentiate between pleasant social interaction and sexual harassment at work?

And what about the opposite? If they're higher ranked than you, aren't you putting yourself in an inferior position by asking them to go out on a date? That's not the basis of a long-term successful relationship for most people nowadays.

The trite cliché of the boss and his secretary (rarely the boss and her secretary) is problematic for exactly this reason: is the secretary saying yes because she fears for her long term employment prospects or because she thinks the boss is wonderful?

Then there's the all-important question of what happens when the relationship ends?

It's a bit much to expect that your co-worker, boss, or employee can keep their feelings out of the office, and it won't take long for the rest of the group to push both parties out or raise a red flag to top-level management, or even just leave, en masse, in disgust.

If the company is a family metaphor, an organizatonal romance is incest! Most organizations do not encourage the idea of "office romance" since it can disrupt work, cause perceptions that one of the partners is being given unfair advantages and affect the credibility of the organization in the eys of the clients. Office romances are in a sense no longer dyadic relationships, they can affect the attitudes and behaviours of all co workers.

Your mileage will vary. In fact, I'm sure this is a pretty controversial subject, so what's your opinion and take on office romance? Do you think organizations should encourage it or otherwise?

Share your views!

AYO technology! :)))

In this entry I shall stress upon Computer Mediated Communication which basically refers to any form of communication using computers and computer networks, including e-mail, electronic conferences, newsgroups and Web chats.

I reckon, this is gonna be my favourite entry ! :D haha
Well this week my coms professor asked the class a debating question: "Do you think the internet is a waste of time?!"

While I was confident about my reply, I was taken aback to assimilate the fact that there were quite a few who agreed with the statement! I would have thought that everyone in the classroom was irrevocably addicted to the internet the way I was! hahaha. However, I for one would HAVE to disagree about it being a waste of time. Through the internet, I managed to establish close relationships which I'm ever so grateful for. :)

Orkut

When networking sites like Zorpia, Orkut, Myspace were introduced, it stired a certain craze among teenagers, or even adults for that matter. This was yet another way of keeping in touch with friends and family all over the world. It succeeded in grabbing my attention as well; I was a member on two of these much hyped up sites with the intention of re-kindling old ties that I left back home also seeking a new way to make friends in my adopted country. I first joined 'Zorpia' and made a couple of net friends who I absolutely adored over a period of time. Carla was one them.

At the age of 15, I guess teenagers probably think it is "cool" to have like a zillion friends in your buddy list which made me no exception. Adding random strangers on the net was definately not an issue.(A form of 'personal identity', influence of CMC comes into play here.) Three years have come and gone and even though the craze of "zorpia" has worn off, I still am very close to a few of my net friends. Infact I wouldn't call them "net friends" their more than just that! Especially Carla, she's one of the closest girl friends I've ever had and I think its safe to call her my best friend. :)) Even though I haven't met her in real life I know that she is not just in that "virtual world" as you may put it, she's reality!

Carla and ME! :))

By the looks of it I guess I'm not the only one whose thankfull to social sites like facebook, zorpia, orkut etc. FIRMS, yes ! Firms as well have started making use of these sites to promote certain ideas and recieve feedback from the people. It is known to be a faster medium of communication.
The recent article in 'My Paper,Singapore' highlights the latest social site TWITTER that has made headlines. Its editor, Mr John Davidson, told 'My Paper', "Twitter is a good tool of communication between us and our readers, because they 'tweet' regularly. "

Excerpt from 'My Paper', Singapore

Firms use Twitter to update readers to breaking news and share "short and snappy" news opinions and analysis. Other businesses see Twitter as a way to keep their business partners in the loop about what they are doing. They see it as a conventional way to update distributors and advertisers on what the company does on a daily basis. This promotes transparency.

Twitter

This shows the influence of CMC on 'the community'. The internet also has its influence on knowledge, "weired schools" also known as e-learning, which is conducted from a "distance". There are many sites that are educational such as youtube, google, wikipedia etc that are often used by many students and also by organisations to retrieve information. However majority maintain the opinion that the most important kind of learning is still face-to-face schooling.

Facebook (which I'm oh-so-addicted too! :P)

Apart from these merits, the internet does suffer major drawbacks that are a result of unethical practices like pornography, rave parties, hacking accounts etc. It is because of demerits like these that the internet is often termed as being "unsafe". Also due to the anonymity of the internet, people tend to stick to their perception of the internet being a mere waste of time!

Share your opinion! Do YOU think the internet is a waste of time? Sharing of experiences are welcome ! :D

Medias influence!

Deliberating about my entry for this week, I was watching NEWS 5 tonight and I came across this topic which I found quite intriguing (SNAP- I recorded it! :D haha) Reason being 1) I could relate to it. lol and also 2) cause (again) I could connect it to COMS 101.

Below is the recorded clip which was aired on chanel 5 last night. :))

Barbie is a fashion doll manufactured by Mattel, Inc. It has been an important part of the toy fashion doll market for nearly fifty years. Apart from all the merits, it has been the subject of numerous controversies and lawsuits. According to different surveys, it is believed that Barbies image can highten body disatisfaction for girls especially aged 5-10. When they see barbie images they in turn feel more negative about their own body which is concerning to think that girls recieve these negative images at such a young age. "The dolls make women all over the world worry about not having the legs or the looks to keep up "

A new study released in the well-respected American Journal of Health Behaviour suggests that High School girls view themselves as 5kg over their perceived ideal bodyweight, on average, which can then lead to potentially dangerous issues such as substance abuse, low self-esteem, poor eating habits and excessive dieting and even mental health issues. Some of the reasons behind the female students' perception of the 'ideal' body size inlcude overestimating their current body size and the constant 'skinny girl' bombardment seen in the media, which again can be related to the former reasoin. Whether it's on TV, magazines or computer games, young women today face massive pressure to conform to what are generally unrealistic and often unhealthy body sizes. This new study sheds light on the effect that mass media and the 'beautiful people' have on school girls and young women, who feel as though they need to measure up to what are often unachievable and dangerous body sizes.

CELEBRITIES KNOWN FOR BEING 'SIZE 0'

Nicole Richie, socialite

Kareena Kapoor, Bollywood actress

The Olsen Twins, Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen.

"Mass communication is a form of communication through which institutional sources address relatively large, heterogeneous and anonymous audiences physically seperated from one another. "

Media theories like Moderate effect model comes into play here. Agenda setting function, where the media through repeated coverage of 'body weight', raises the importance of this issue in the public's mind. Pictures of skinny models be it on the runway or product promotions or advertisements develop peoples mindset about the 'perfect physique'. Media hegemony on the other hand talks about the powerful elite. Constantly celebrities are criticized about their body shape,size,weight etc by the media. Often we see actresses suffering from eating disorders trying to meet the industries 'requirements'. This behaviour influences young women and children in a large way. Spiral of silence occurs here as people have the tendency to refrain from expressing unpopular ideas or views. (In this context, size 12 or 14 considered as being fat) The consumers tend to agree with all the media scrutiny and try to abide to them. Very rarely it is noticed that people who are sizes that are not recognised by the media, are honestly happy with the way they look. Media influences the opinion and behaviour of people, largely.

This week's question: What is your opinion about this issue? Do you support the media? If not what actions would you take?

My opinion- :))

The media often has narrow definitions of beauty. I think people need to be able to critically view the media messages by which we are bombarded with each day. Media messages about body shape and size will affect the way we feel about our bodies and ourselves only if we let them. When we effectively recognize and analyze the media messages that influence us, we remember that the media's definitions of beauty and success do not have to define our self-image or potential. Using our creative mind to view all media with a discriminating eye is essential. All media images and messages are constructions. They are not reflections of reality.

Advertisements and other media messages have been carefully crafted with the intent to send a very specific message.
When you see an ad or hear a message that makes you feel bad about yourself, your body, or others by promoting only thin, formulaic body ideals, talk back to the TV and the advertiser by writing a letter. It works, you can make a change.Also write to advertisers who you think are sending positive, inspiring messages that recognize and celebrate the natural diversity of human body shapes and sizes. Compliment their courage to send positive, affirming messages.

Groups superior to individuals?

What a performance.. ! :D

Paul McCartney and Dave Grohl for the 51st Grammy awards, February 8th 2009.

I was delighted to watch Paul McCartney’s performance for the Grammy s. His music meets my “favorite music” list, needless to say I’m a great fan of his!


For this weeks entry, I’m really glad that I can include one of the most influential and successful singer, songwriter in rock and roll history, in my blog.

While watching his performance, I thought about how he came to be known worldwide. This takes me back to when he was a member of ‘THE BEATLES’

The Beatles were a rock and pop band from Liverpool,England that formed in 1960. During their career, the group primarily consisted of John Lennon (rhythm guitar, vocals), Paul McCartney(bass guitar, vocals), George Harrison (lead guitar, vocals) and Ringo Starr (drums, vocals).Their clothes, style and statements made them trend-setters, while their growing social awareness saw their influence extend into the social and cultural revolutions of the 1960s.

The Beatles are one of the most commercially successful and critically acclaimed bands in the history of popular music, selling over one billion records internationally.

In February of After the band broke up in 1970, all four members embarked upon successful solo careers.

Paul McCartney however continues to shine even today. He received two nominations for the 51st annual Grammy awards, and performed the Beatles classic "I Saw her standing there" with Dave Grohl on drums. Sirius XM launched a limited run channel devoted exclusively to the music of Paul McCartney. Entitled Firman Radio, an homage to McCartney's alter ego, the program will premiere on February 14, 2009, and run until March 13, 2009.

I thought I could relate this to what I learn t in my COMS 101 class this week. I believe 'The Beatles' are a great example of group communication. They illustrate the factors that are found in effective team members; the ability to create a positive climate, the ability to solve problems, group synergy, group think etc.
However after they split, all four members had successful solo careers.

What makes me wonder is that would Paul McCartney become as successful as he is now, if he wasn't a part of that group?
I personally think that we are who we are because of the groups we have been a part of. Beyonce, who was a part of her home production "Destiny's child" and Simon Webber from the boy band "Blue" to name a few have had successful solo careers even after they spilt from their groups. However I don't think they would be as successful as they are today if not for the groups they belonged too.

This brings me to my question; do you think groups are more effective than individuals?
Although there is evidence that mature, cooperative groups or otherwise make better decisions than do individuals working alone, groups are not always superior to individuals. Group synergy occurs only under certain conditions and when the group structure is such that each member is encouraged to do his or her best. Justin Timberlake was a member of the boy band "N sync". After he split from the group and 'went solo' , he began achieving more success for himself than that from the boy band.

This week's question: Do you think we are who we are because of the groups we have been a part of? Also are groups more effective than individuals or vice-a-versa?

Share your views! :)))

♥A Vals Day Special♥

The recent news about Prince Harry's break up with his girlfriend Chelsy Davy made me deliberate on what I learnt in class this week i.e. Interpersonal communication.

PEOPLE reports in its upcoming issue on Wednesday January 28, 2009

After five years of dating, what caused Prince Harry and girlfriend Chelsy Davy to finally call it quits last week?
Those close to the prince believe time and distance may have pulled the 24-year-old royal and the Zimbabwean-born beauty apart, PEOPLE reports in its upcoming issue, on sale Friday.
Chelsy, 23, is set to graduate from Leeds University this spring and is homesick for Africa, while Harry seems more committed than ever to army life.

For more information, click on the site below :)
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20255395,00.html

While reading this article what intrigued me the most was the fact that the two of them were disimilar in many ways. I wondered if different backgrounds was one of the reasons behind the split. Chelsy Davy is Zimbabwean-born and a student where as Harry is royalty,the Prince of England. They both come from very different cultures. I couldn’t help but wonder if they were from the same backgrounds, would they have had better chances of sailing through this relationship?

How many of you think that couples who have many similarities with respect to nationality, profession, likings tend to stay together longer than couples that are dissimilar in the same context as mentioned above?

I am of the opinion that couples who are similar and have things in common tend to bond well for a longer time as opposed to the couples that are dissimilar.

Examples :

Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes both work in the film industry.

Zac Efferon and Vanessa Hudgens, worked in the biggest teen sensation 'High School Musical' together.

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, Hollywood's sexiest couple!

Andre Agassi and Stefi Graph are among the tennis players in the world.

I believe that couples who share common interests better yet a common profession have better understanding and are more sympathetic towards each other. This reduces insecurity and instability in a relationship. It is especially helpful as they can discuss professional problems together and seek each others advise.This strengthens a relationship and takes it to greater heights!

However, as we all know it is not only common interests that help in making a relationship work. Other factors such as trust, patience, personal perceptive, right speech etc play a vital role.

On the other hand couples like :

Eva Longoria, an actress and Tony Parker , a basketball player.

David Beckham, regarded as the worlds best soccer player and Victoria Beckham, a pop star.

Imraan Khan, a Pakistani cricketer and Jemima, known for her royalty.

Paris Hilton, a famous socialite and Benji Madden, a rock star!

are among the rest who share a difference in terms of either profession or culture.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Do couples who have many similarities with respect to nationality, profession, likings tend to stay together longer than couples that are dissimilar in the same context as mentioned above?

I'm looking forward to your comments!

last but not the least, "Happy Valentines Day" to one and all! :)

‘When you say nothing at all....’

Scene from Twilight.

The picture above illustrates 'Eye contact' between two individuals.

Do you think non- verbal communication weighs the same as verbal communication in terms of getting the message across?

“Communication that occurs when a stimulus other than words creates meaning in the mind of the communicator.”

Although non- verbal communication has its own demerits; for instance it could have several interpretations as it is receiver- oriented, I think non- verbal communication is significant, reason being it allows us to express certain emotional themes that are hard to describe verbally.

Here is a scene from an American T.V show, Gossip Girl.

When I came across this scene, I was quite intrigued by it simply because of the fact that I could relate it to what I studied in COMS 101. This is a perfect example that illustrates non- verbal communication. The boy in the video (Chuck) is communicating, he is intentionally creating a message for the girl (Blair’s) consumption.

The scene depicts different types of non-verbal communications like in the first half of the clip; Blair observes the physical appearance of Chuck i.e. the tears in his eyes, the tired and dejected look across his face. It is then that she realizes that he is in pain and hence rushes to support him. This establishes the association with hap tics, the non-verbal communication study of touch. Here, it gives the viewers an idea of their relationship, the intimacy, friendship, perception of liking. The scene also insinuates proxemics, the non-verbal communication study of space and distance. The manner in which Chuck and Blair are seated highlights intimate distance among the four zones of personal space.

The latter half of the video shows Blair left all alone with the note aside her being her only explanation to the situation she is in. Emotional expressions are easier to express using non-verbal codes. When people have something emotionally important to say, they need full range of non-verbal channels. In this scenario, Chuck avoids an emotional scene by writing a letter rather than announcing it face-to-face.

It is merely a look, awareness, an understanding, a way to get what you want without having to use words. It is more useful in situations where one is unable to express in words what they feel or in the case of informing the death of a person to his or her family relative, non-verbal ques are best suited. Speech is not entirely an adequate substitute for human contact.

Sometimes when it is not possible to express certain things into words, we turn to non- verbal communication.

Here are a few non verbal cues that are used conventionally.

The ‘shh’ sign which indicates ‘silence’ .

Joining ones hands together also known as ‘namaste’ which implies to ‘greetings’ in the Indian culture.

The last picture illustrates a girl who is not very pleased, in cases like these verbal communication is voluntary.

IT’S WHAT YOU’RE NOT SAYING!

The Smoking Scourge

Recently, I came across this advertisement on you tube.

Quit Victoria is dedicated to eliminating the pain, illness and suffering caused by tobacco.

The current campaign titled ‘Everybody Knows’ produced by the Cancer Institute NSW, presents a series of memorable scenes from existing campaigns. It shows the range of health consequences caused by smoking, and reinforces that smoking will lead to one of these diseases.

Importantly the television commercial recognizes that smokers know the health consequences of smoking but they still smoke, highlighting the fact that quitting smoking can be hard and that smokers may need help to break their habit once and for all.

The ‘Everybody Knows’ advertisement will air in metropolitan and regional Victoria in conjunction with the ‘Bronchoscopy’ advertisement from January 18 - February 14.

This is yet another campaign to scare smokers into quitting.It gives smokers a preview of the effects of long-term smoking on their physical appearance and a chance to look into their future.
I perceive that this advertisement can be very astounding to a person. It could play into their vanity a little bit once they realize what smoking has an effect on besides the usual things like cancer and lung diseases.I think this campaign could be categorized into the selecting process of perception.

"Perception is the process of selecting,organizing and interpreting information in order to give personal meaning to the communication we receive."
- Seiler and Beall

Hence, selection is a critical aspect of perception which in turn influences our communication and behavior. This campaign showcases the qualities of selection such as intensity,novel stimuli and contrast. It includes a man who breathes through a hole in his throat, a woman who is missing four fingers because of smoking, and operations to remove fatty deposits from the brain and amputate a gangrenous foot.Other campaigns have matchbooks that carry various grisly images with the stark words, “Cigarettes Are Eating You Alive.” The “Gum Disease” version shows decayed teeth, yellowed and blackened. Other matchbooks show large, painful tumors and smoke-ravaged lungs. The images that are shown are vehement in nature and that of an extreme degree which attracts the viewers attention. It illustrates the hazards of smoking with a goal to effective communication i. e to reduce the number of smokers worldwide.

Views:

Dr. Susan D. Karabin, the immediate past president of the American Academy of Periodontology, said in a phone interview:

"I applaud the health department for doing this. These images are accurate: Smoking interferes with healing, with the immune system, and if you have periodontal disease — a chronic, low-grade infection — it exacerbates it, and makes the body less able to deal with that infection. Smoking is also considered an independent risk factor for bone loss. Smokers lose more teeth and have worse periodontal disease than nonsmokers."

Dr. Karabin, who has a private practice on the Upper East Side and is not involved in the city’s ad campaign, added, “Unfortunately, I think it does take scare tactics to get people to stop smoking.”

For further reference on 'Quit Victoria' campaign you can visit this site:

http://www.quit.org.au/browse.asp?ContainerID=1639