Week 2

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

• To understand the nature of interpersonal communication

• To appreciate the importance of assertion in interpersonal communication and be
introduced to some key assertion strategies
• To understand the interpersonal nature of giving feedback, receiving criticism and
resolving conflicts
• To establish attentive listening as an assertion strategy

I
NTRODUCTION

Communicating interpersonally is a “way of life” in organizations. Not only is interpersonal

communication inescapable, but also your abilities in this area are of paramount importance.
Interpersonal competence in recent years has been consistently ranked high as an important
requirement for successful job performance. This is why companies and institutions put a high
premium on interpersonal communication (see below a recent NUS invitation for staff to attend
an interpersonal communication talk).

What is interpersonal communication?

Interpersonal communication
is a term usually applied to
verbal and nonverbal
interactions in one-on-one or
small-group settings. “People
skills” and “soft skills” are
terms often used to describe
someone’s interpersonal
competence, although the word “soft” seems to be an inappropriate word to describe skills
which can potentially cost you your job. If viewed from another perspective, these should be
“hard” skills too because they are difficult to learn and their impact on your career and personal
life is huge.

In the workplace, one who is good in interpersonal communication can relate to and work with
a wide variety of people, negotiate differences, handle conflicts, make requests effectively and
receive information objectively. A person who is effective in interpersonal communication will
be open to the ideas of others and willing to put forward views of her own – both essential
activities in the process of problem solving.
1|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 Interpersonal communication is usually perceived as purely oral. However, if it is about dealing
with people through, for example, negotiation and persuasion, then certain forms of written
communication are also interpersonal in nature. Emails, chats, letters of request and refusal,
and similar kinds of writing, also involve communication between people who assert
themselves through arguments, requests and demands. In other words, these written forms
also require you to negotiate interpersonal relations with your readers.

In this lesson, you will learn about the three interpersonal functions of communication. These
are:

• Asserting
• Receiving criticism
• Resolving conflicts

A SSERTION IN INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

At the heart of interpersonal

communication is assertion, thus the most
crucial strategies in effective interpersonal
Assertiveness, while desirable, is always
embedded in culture and power.
communication are assertion strategies.
These are ways that enable you to
maintain respect, satisfy your needs, and defend your rights without dominating, manipulating,
abusing, or controlling others. It is important for you to be familiar with these strategies in
order for you to develop your skills in effective interpersonal communication.

Assertion in interpersonal communication requires another person to do something, perhaps to

change her own behavior or to ask her to do things for you or others. Because of this, assertion
comes from high self-esteem and an acceptance of oneself because not everyone is able to
assert herself and get the other person to change or do something. For example, instead of
asking another person to stop doing something because it affects you, you may just keep silent.
Perhaps in your culture, demanding your rights is not a highly valued behavior. Or it may also
be possible that you would rather not tell your friend that she has done something wrong
because you value her friendship more than some truth.

Assertive behavior thus is making explicit what you think about or want from another person. It
acknowledges your rights as an individual and the rights of other people. When the occasion
demands, an assertive person can disagree, stand up for her own rights and present alternative
points of view without being intimidated or putting the other person down. In contrast, a
person who feels threatened in such situations behaves with aggressive or non-assertive
responses rather than with assertive behavior.

2|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
The pattern of behavior that leads to aggression or non-assertion is based on a number of
factors such as culture, low self-esteem and feelings of vulnerability. For example, feelings of
vulnerability make you feel threatened. A person who feels threatened has two choices of
behavior in a disagreement: attack and aggression, or fear and non-assertion. An aggressive
person may try to win at all costs. This means dominating or humiliating others, even to the
point of ignoring a suggestion that provides the best solution simply because it is someone
else’s solution. A submissive person, on the other hand, is unable to assert or promote a point
of view. When unpleasant situations arise, a submissive person tends to avoid these, leaving
someone else with the problem.

The assertive leader is able to direct others without feeling the need to manipulate or to be
aggressive as she recognizes the rights of co-workers. The assertive follower recognizes the
right of the manager or leader to make reasonable requests and to expect the job to be done.
An assertive person is therefore able to negotiate and compromise without feeling
uncomfortable.

From the above description of assertion, you have probably observed that assertiveness is an
individualist concept (refer to our lesson on intercultural communication). That is, to assert in
interpersonal communication is to think of oneself as the source of decision-making and
likewise to think of others as rational beings capable of making their own decisions.

So, if you say something like this to someone: “Please stop smoking in front of me because I am
asthmatic and it also violates the university rule on smoking” – you are asserting your right to a
smoke-free environment and you are assuming that the other person sees the logic of your
assertion, and therefore stops smoking. But if you say this to the same person: “Could you
please get out of the way because your smoking is killing me, and you obviously are ignorant of
the university rule on smoking” – you probably want to accomplish the same thing, but here
you are not being assertive. You are being aggressive.

Nevertheless, even in cases where you try to be as reasonably assertive as possible, in reality it
is sometimes still difficult to do so. How many times have you actually told someone to stop
smoking around you, instead of just walk away to avoid it? There are times when it is difficult to
confront others even if you think you are right. There are many reasons for this, but one reason
could be the collectivist context you are working in. In other words, to avoid ‘hurting’ another
colleague because of something he has done, you say nothing or just avoid him.

Assertion also involves power. You may be able to assert yourself by invoking your rights to
certain privileges, but this may come at a price. Assertiveness, while desirable, is always
embedded in culture and power as can be seen, for example, through interpersonal relations
between nurses and doctors, pilots and first officers, and call centre representatives and
clients. Your social and professional positions and affiliations influence your ability to assert.

3|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Thus, assertion is more complex than we think it is. The context of assertion is always
important because this will give you the chance to ‘size up’ the people you are communicating
with. The point here therefore is that, to be good at asserting yourself, you must, first, study
the nature of assertion and the many ways it manifests itself in real, daily situations.

Today there is a high demand for people who are

good at influencing, persuading and convincing others
besides having a knack for developing relationships and
sensitivity to the needs of others, especially customer. 1

STRATEGIES OF ASSERTION

THE “I” MESSAGE

Let us thus begin with strategies of assertion which can help you manage interpersonal
relations more effectively. There are, in other words, strategies of how to assert yourself while
respecting the other person. You may not always be effective, but these strategies at least
provide you with opportunities to say and write what you want within the parameters of
mutual respect and understanding. There is always the possibility of hurting other people no
matter how careful you are with your language and actions, but in all assertions you must at
least ensure that they are well-intentioned and well-crafted.

A useful technique to develop assertion and show openness with others is an “I” message.

Look at the following examples:

“Your report is too sloppy. You’ll have to retype it.”

“This is the third time this month that you’ve been late for work. You’ll have to be more
punctual.”

“That was a dumb promise you made. We can never have the job done by the end of
the month.”

When we communicate with others, we deliver messages. The messages above could be what
you really want to say. Unfortunately, when we say or write them the way they are written

1
Kant, K. (2010), Job hunting: It’s a different world, TODAY, p. B7, 10 May 2010

4|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
above, we become interpersonally unsound. This is because the statements point a verbal
finger of accusation at the receiver. They are sometimes referred to as the ‘you-language’.

Examples of “you” language in interpersonal relations are: “You’re lazy.” and “You’re wrong.”
By contrast, descriptive statements are often termed “I” language since they focus on the
speaker instead of judging the other person. Notice how each of the evaluative statements
above can be rephrased in descriptive “I” language:

"I’m afraid the boss will get frustrated with both of us if we turn in a report with all
these errors. We’ll get a better reaction if it’s retyped.”

“Since you’ve been coming in late, I’ve made a lot of excuses when people
call asking for you. I’m uncomfortable with that, and that’s why I hope you’ll start
showing up on time.”

“I’m worried about the promise you made. I don’t see how we can get the job done by
the end of the month.”

Statements like these show that it is possible to be nonjudgmental and still say what you want
without landing any unnecessary verbal punches. Such statements are a way of showing
emotion and letting the other person know both how her behavior is perceived and how it
affects you.

There are specific strategies that can help you assert effectively. Let us discuss them below in
terms of what constitutes a good assertion statement.

The assertion statement

An assertion statement essentially involves the following strategies:

 Describing the behavior that needs to be changed in a non-judgmental way;

 Disclosing the asserter’s feelings; and

 Clarifying the concrete and tangible effect of the other person’s behavior on the
asserter.

5|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
For example:

Behavior When you do not let me know you will be late,

+
Feelings I feel annoyed
+
Effects because I am unable to reschedule my timetable.

To describe behavior non-judgmentally, it is recommended that you limit yourself to the

behavior description and not draw inferences about the other person’s motives, attitudes,
character and so on. In addition, the description should be specific, objective and as brief as
possible.

When it comes to disclosure of feelings, people from some cultures tend to be more
comfortable than those from other cultures. Hence, it is not unusual for feelings to be stated
less strongly (e.g., "I feel quite upset" instead of "I feel annoyed") or not to be disclosed at all,
resulting in the use of only two assertion strategies.

For example:

Behavior When you do not let me know you will be late,

+
Effects I am unable to reschedule my timetable.

In our interpersonal communication with others, it is always good to remember that

assertiveness in one culture may be viewed as aggressiveness in another culture.

By concrete and tangible effects we mean those things that unnecessarily cost the asserter
money, harm her possessions, consume her time, cause her extra work, endanger her job,
and/or interfere with her effectiveness at work. A well-delivered assertion message that cites a
concrete and tangible effect usually persuades the other person to change her behavior to
meet the asserter’s needs 2

2
These notes on assertions have been adapted from Chapter 10 of Bolton’s People Skills (1988, pp. 158 - 176).

6|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
These assertion strategies, however,
should not be followed as a formula,
such that you start with describing
behavior and end with stating the
The statement above is the title of an article written by Richard Hartung in the
concrete and tangible effects. The Comments & Analysis section of TODAY, 16 June 2010, p. 15. Although it refers
important point is to remember that to an issue concerning the painting of an SMRT train which was left
these strategies help you formulate undetected or unreported, the statement is also relevant to interpersonal
communication.
messages that point to the problem
and the solution and not to the What are underlying interpersonal issues in the statement
character of the other person. Almost above? Do you think these issues are ‘problems’? Why?
always, if you attack the person’s
character, you draw attention away
from the real issues you want
addressed and solved. People who are attacked personally tend to defend themselves first,
instead of looking at the real issues raised objectively. You will then have problems delivering
your message because others may no longer be able to discriminate between the real and the
peripheral issues.

THREE CONTEXTS OF ASSERTION

GIVING FEEDBACK

The specific assertion skills described above will be very useful as feedback skills. Giving
feedback is always a tricky act because you will never be 100% sure how the recipient of your
feedback will respond to it, much more act on it. But effective communication is based on
giving and receiving feedback, and effective feedback creates trust and an open relationship
between the sender and the receiver. This is how giving and receiving feedback (oral and
written) is interpersonal in nature.

In an organization, appropriate and constructive feedback creates an open and encouraging

organizational climate which, in turn, promotes a willingness to communicate. In contrast, a
rigid or competitive environment can make most people reticent or hesitant to communicate
and provide ideas.

Deliver your feedback clearly and appropriately

Feedback lets the sender understand how the message is being received and helps the receiver
confirm whether her perception of the message is correct or incorrect. Feedback as a form of
interpersonal communication requires you to show your receptiveness, attentiveness and
interest in your listener or reader. The essential point to remember is to deliver your feedback
clearly and appropriately. Read the following simple conversation:
7|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 John: Have you read my draft?
Ryan: Yes, yes. Last night.
John: Any comment?
Ryan: None. It’s quite ok. Not perfect, but it’s ok.

Ryan’s response or feedback is unclear. What does ‘quite ok’ mean? What about ‘Not perfect,
but it’s ok’? These comments are not helpful at all because John will still end up not knowing
what to change or what it is in draft that is ‘ok’. What Ryan needs is feedback that is descriptive
and specific, such as the following:

John: Have you read my draft?

Ryan: Yes, yes. Last night.
John: Any comment?
Ryan: “None. It’s quite ok. Your main argument is clear and the examples you gave to
support it are very relevant and convincing. It’s not perfect because typos have
not been corrected, and your sub-headings seem to be missing, but it’s generally
ok. Boss should be able to follow your train of thought.

Ryan’s feedback is still not complete (of course), but at least he now qualifies his feedback with
objective references to which aspect(s) of the draft are ‘ok’ and ‘not perfect’. If John is
interested, he can then ask for those typographical errors and missing sub-headings so he can
revise his draft. Ryan’s feedback, in other words, has been delivered clearly enough such that
they can both move forward in the conversation.

But it is not enough to deliver your feedback clearly. You must also do it appropriately. Check
the following version of the conversation:

John: Have you read my draft?

Ryan: Yes, yes. Last night.
John: Oh, any comment?
Ryan: “None. It’s quite ok. Your main argument is clear and the examples you gave to
support it are very relevant and convincing. It’s not perfect because you have been
careless with typos, and sloppy with your sub-headings, but it’s generally ok. Boss should
be able to follow your train of thought.

Ryan’s feedback here has become less objective and specific. Let us take out temporarily the
possibility that Ryan and John are close friends and can therefore afford to be subjective and
too personal in their feedback, and focus simply on the delivery of the feedback itself. When
you use words like ‘careless’ and ‘sloppy’, you focus on the person’s character and not on a
description of what has been done. Can you proceed with work by revising your draft with
comments like ‘you have been careless’ and ‘sloppy with your sub-heading’? If you are the
receiver of the feedback, your tendency would be to defend yourself first against these
8|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
personal attacks: e.g., “I’m not careless! I read through the draft many times. Unfortunately, I
still missed some of them, but I’m not careless.”

In other words, by using subjective, non-concrete words, you draw attention away from the
real issues: e.g., “where are the typos and the missing sub-headings so I can correct them”? The
lesson here – to borrow the words we used in the earlier section on assertion – is to be non-
judgmental and descriptive about the basis of our feedback. As much as possible, our
descriptions must also be specific and concrete so that the person receiving the feedback
focuses solely on the problem and not on defending herself against personal and subjective
attacks.

Feedback, of course, is of different types. You can give positive feedback on colleagues or
subordinates. Such feedback is much needed, especially in environments where people are
stressed and overworked. Positive feedback is also given to encourage people to continue
producing good results such as better sales and better customer service. Without positive
reinforcement, people in the workplace may feel disgruntled and uninspired. Appropriate and
genuine positive feedback can help create a happy working environment.

Nevertheless, it is negative feedback such as the above statements which needs more care and
thought because it can potentially damage relationships in the workplace and between
companies and clients.

Negative feedback is constructive feedback

In its broadest sense, negative feedback is criticism in different forms, such as a complaint or a
reprimand. If you have done sloppy work in your report, you may receive negative feedback
from your director or superior. If a colleague thinks that you do not dress up appropriately in
the office, she may tell you exactly what she feels. This is negative feedback. If you have to tell a
teammate that her executive summary is poorly written, then this too is negative feedback.

As earlier mentioned, negative feedback is a fact of life everywhere, including business contexts
where bad service or bad decisions may cause much money. But negative does not necessarily
mean ‘hurtful’. To manage interpersonal relations in the giving of such kind of feedback, you
must always remember that ‘negative’ should also be ‘constructive’. Give feedback that will
help another person improve her work, and not to destroy her character. Thus, the essentials of
good communication must be pursued vigorously: deliver the negative feedback clearly and
appropriately.

Here are some basic strategies that could help you deliver your criticism effectively:

9|P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
  Begin with positive points.

If you can, start with good feedback. Credit the person for something good that he or she
has done. This will set the tone of the criticism.

 Describe the problem in a non-judgmental way.

Inappropriate: “You are such an unethical researcher by turning in formal reports without
proper source documentation. In the next quarterly report, make sure that you
document your sources.”
Appropriate: “You turned in formal reports without proper source documentation. In the
next quarterly report, make sure that you document your sources.”

 Criticize the action or item, not the person.

Inappropriate: “You are abrupt with customers.”

Appropriate: “Being abrupt with customers portrays the company as uncaring.”

 Provide justification.
Do not forget to provide rational or reasonable justification for your criticism.

Give feedback that will help another person improve her work, and not to destroy her character.

 Focus on what needs to be done.

Inappropriate: “Your files are untidy.”

Appropriate: “This file could do with a tidy up.”

 Be specific and concrete.

Inappropriate: “Your gestures were distracting.”

Appropriate: “Your gestures were distracting, especially when you constantly stretched your
two hands forward every time you spoke.”

 Be always constructive.

Inappropriate: “Your proposal is disorganized, contains computational errors, and is a writing

disaster.”
Appropriate: “All the elements of a good proposal are here; they just need to be reordered and
be more accurate.”

10 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 Check your facts.

If your receiver identifies even one small If we want to be listened to, we must
element of your concern as being false, she also learn how to listen.
could focus on it, argue about it, and move
the conversation away from the issue at
hand. Once a sender’s credibility on an issue is tainted, the goal cannot be accomplished.

 Do not embarrass.

Criticism is difficult enough to receive without being embarrassed in the process. If

possible, criticize only in private. If not, involve others in the process only when necessary.
Give the receiver an opportunity to retain her dignity while you deliver your criticism. If
open feedback is unavoidable, exercise tact. Make sure that your feedback is again non-
judgmental.

 If appropriate, accept partial responsibility for the problem.

An introduction such as “Perhaps my directions weren’t clear” can temper the impact of the
criticism that follows.

 Respect the other person’s right to respond.

Take time to listen. And listen attentively! If the response is written, take time to read and
understand where the other person is coming from. Acknowledge the response and always
entertain the possibility that the other person has a point. You cannot do this if you have
made up your mind that the other person is wrong and you are right. Mirror questions like,
“So what you’re saying is…” before you give your response, and open-ended questions such
as “Can you tell me more about it…”, can convince the other person that you are seriously
trying to understand her position or counter-feedback.

Feedforwarding is a forgotten but important feedback strategy

Another important strategy when providing negative feedback is feedforwarding. Not too
many people are aware of this as a critical strategy in interpersonal relations. Essentially,
feedforwarding is the sending of information before the main message is delivered. There is a
need to do this especially in situations where you feel the main message might offend the
receiver or reflect badly on you. You feedforward because you anticipate rejection from the
other party.

For example, you might disagree with another person by saying:

11 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
“I’m not really an expert in the area but…”

In this way, you express your disagreement by using the feedforward part of the message to
indicate the coming disagreement. At the same time, you also let the listener or reader know
she can reject your message without rejecting you. As another example, you have probably
heard someone say these disclaimers before the main message:

 “I’m not a racist but…”

 “I’m not a stubborn person but…”
 “I know this is out of topic but…”
 “This is probably not the best time to say this but…”

In all the sample feedforward, the assumption of the speaker is that her main message might
be rejected on certain grounds (e.g., it is racist, it not the best time to say it, it reflects the
speaker stubbornness, it is off-topic). Such strategic anticipation of negative reaction cushions
the impact of the message or simply gives the receiver of the message less reason to react
negatively.

LISTENING

Another context of assertion is listening. When we assert, we focus on what to say and how to
say it. In a specific context of assertion – say, providing negative feedback such as above – the
same thing happens. We strategize what to say and how to say it.

However, delivering your message clearly and appropriately does not only involve speaking and
writing. In fact, an essential part of delivering your message effectively is knowing when to be
silent so that the other person is able to explain himself (in writing, the equivalent strategy is to
focus on the main message of the writer – say, a complaint – and suspend judgment of the
person and his claims). In other words, effective interpersonal communication requires you to
let the other party do the explaining while you listen attentively. If you want to deliver your
feedback effectively, learn how to listen.

Listening attentively to the other person demonstrates your genuine concern for her as a
person and her arguments. Moreover, it also can help you clarify your message because it
allows you to understand more clearly the other person’s position. One way to demonstrate
attentive listening is to use paraphrasing.

• Show your desire to understand others through paraphrasing

Paraphrasing the other person’s message shows your desire to understand rather than evaluate
her. It is more effective when you restate the sender’s messages in your own words rather

12 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
than try to repeat the exact same words spoken by the sender. Usually, you signify your intent
to paraphrase with the following words:

 “If I understand you right, what you are saying is…”

 “Can I say that your main complaint concerns…”

 “So, your main objection is that…”

 “So, what you want me to do is…”

When you demonstrate your understanding by paraphrasing the message, the sender’s
defensiveness or fear of being judged is reduced. A closer interpersonal relationship is built
between the sender and the receiver. In work situations, paraphrasing instructions or oral
messages can reduce misunderstanding and lead to greater effectiveness.

Use affirming signals

Another strategy that demonstrates attentive listening is the affirming strategy. This strategy is
simple: if you agree with or understand the sender’s point, you signify affirmation through
verbal or non-verbal cues. You can say “Uh-huh”, “ok”, “sure”, “that’s right” and so on. Or you
can nod your head indicating that you are following the speaker’s line of argument. In writing,
affirming strategies include cues like “I agree with you that…”, “You are right about the fact
that…”, “It is true that…”

THINKING CRITICALLY
Active listening is a characteristic that many people do not engage in. Thus, if you understand
more about active listening in conversations, it will help you to be a better participant of
conversations. Reflect on the statements below. How much of each of them do you agree or
disagree with?

1. When listening for information, our opinion of someone’s delivery affects our
understanding of the message.
2. Inability to understand a foreigner’s speech (spoken in English) is an example of
ethnocentricism.
3. When you use prompts like “Uh-huh”, you are listening correctly.
4. If we do not understand the speaker’s message, it is the speaker’s fault.
5. We should focus on talking rather than listening when fostering relationships with others.
6. People who always talk more than others are the more powerful ones in the office.

13 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
MAKING REQUESTS AND GIVING DIRECTIVES

Aside from giving feedback and listening actively to others, making requests and giving
directives are also crucial activities on the job. They are the third context of assertion. Consider
your past and recent experiences as a student. You undoubtedly might have needed to ask a
large number of questions to learn your way around. You might have asked others to do things
for you too, for example when you belonged to the same project team.

How can you be sure your requests are effective? First, be specific. Make sure you describe
your request clearly and specifically. Second, be sure you are asking the right person for the
information. If you are not sure, ask an exploratory question first, such as “Are you in charge of
accounts?” If the answer is affirmative, make your request, for example, “How do I allocate the
money for next month’s regional meeting?” Third, be confident when making your requests. If
you have tried without success to find the information or to complete the job yourself, you are
justified to ask for help. Others are usually willing to cooperate, particularly if you know exactly
what you are asking for and phrase your request in a clear and friendly language.

Giving directives is another important assertion strategy, particularly when it complements a

positive request-making style. Regardless of your position in the organization, you are likely to
need both of these strategies to achieve your goals. The following list shows the difference
between requests and directives:

Requests Directives
“Can you help me solve this problem by “Be sure to finish this project today.”
finishing the project today?”
“Can we meet sometime today?” “See me at 10.30.”
“Which file should this go in?” “File this.”
“Is there any way we can finish the “I am expecting the report today.”
report today?”

Making requests creates a supportive climate and gives people a sense of control in carrying
out their responsibilities. Those who carry out requests are likely to have a better attitude and
to perform their duties in a more effective manner than those who are expected to obey
directives. Nevertheless, in situations that call for specific action, directives may be more
appropriate than requests (for instance, when there is danger).

It is possible to give directives in a positive way that does not assume a power imbalance. You
can do this by explaining the reason for the directive. Do not simply make a demand without
telling co-workers why they should do what you say. Indeed, if you give a directive, you should
have an important reason for doing so and be willing to explain it to others. They are much
more likely to cooperate when they see the need for such action. The directives in the table
above can be rephrased as follows:

14 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 Original Version Rephrased Version
“Be sure you finish this project today.” “Be sure you finish this project today. Lisa
needs the results tomorrow morning.”
“See me at 10.30.” “See me at 10.30. We need to discuss the
plans for the sales meeting.
“File this.” “File this. I am expecting an important call.”
“I am expecting the report today.” “I need the report today because the client
needs it by tomorrow morning.”

R ECEIVING CRITICISM

The preceding sections have introduced you to the many facets of assertion in interpersonal
communication. Assertion, to repeat what has been said earlier, is at the heart of interpersonal
communication. It is the first key interpersonal function of communication. Especially in
business, we get people to do things for us, to believe in us, to change their behavior, and so
on. We have also emphasized the importance of listening in assertion because by being silent
and letting the other person present her case, we also help build our credibility. If we want to
be listened to, in other words, we must also learn how to listen.

However, there is more to interpersonal communication than asserting ourselves in

interactions with people. It is also a fact of life that people provide feedback, including
negative feedback, on our own actions and practices. How do we keep our composure in the
midst of criticism?

When faced with criticism, people generally respond with “fight or flight” behavior. Fighting
manifests itself in defensive, argumentative or counterattack remarks. Fleeing can be physical
(e.g., avoiding face-to-face or telephone contact) or mental (e.g., tuning out). In the long run,
neither method solves the problem as effectively as (i) agreeing with the criticism or (ii) seeking
more information.

Agreeing

Criticisms can be based on facts, perceptions, or both. If, for example, your supervisor
identifies computational errors in your work, she may perceive these facts as being related to
inability or carelessness. Arguing about the facts (computational errors) may be futile, but you
can redirect the perception by pointing out that these errors are the exception, not the rule, in
your work performance. You can, however, acknowledge that you understand why she might
feel you let her down. Acknowledging the other person’s feelings does not mean you agree
with her. Say what you will do to minimize the likelihood the problem will be repeated.

15 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Seeking more information

Showing interest in what prompts the criticism can help you decide how to fix whatever
prompted it. Consider doing the following:

• Ask for specific examples.

“You’ve said I’m not presenting a good attitude to customers. Can you describe exactly
what I’m doing?”

• Describe a situation and ask whether it illustrates the problem.

“Does the formula error in the spreadsheet I prepared on the Miller account illustrate
your concern?”

• Paraphrase the criticism to focus on an outcome.

“Are you saying that when my work contains these errors, Miller is unable to use it?

• Ask how you can improve.

“Other than proofreading more carefully, do you have any specific suggestions that
might help me?”

THINKING CRITICALLY
Below is an authentic exchange of feedback between two teams in a previous ES2002
semester. This was written peer feedback on the report (no editing was done). Read Team B’s
response (sent to the tutor) and evaluate it according to your understanding of interpersonal
communication. Specifically describe what makes it a problem case in interpersonal
communication.

Team A: What does “deprecate” means? The group should seriously considers changing it to
“criticize” since this is more familiar and simple.

Team B: We do not agree with the suggestion. Our team feels that the problem lies in the fact
that the other group lacks the linguistic competence to understand what “deprecate” means.
If they knew what the words mean, we feel that they would not have proposed the change in
the first place.

16 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
R ESOLVING CONFLICTS

In this section, we will focus on the third and last interpersonal function of communication:
conflict resolution.

Conflict is inevitable. It can occur in your personal life or at work. In the workplace, conflict may
arise between you and a co-worker, between two employees you supervise, between your
department and another, or between your organization and a customer or client. Its source
can be differences in personalities (e.g., extrovert and introvert), goals or expectations, values
or beliefs, circumstances (e.g., money and time), or facts (e.g., different sources). In other
cases, conflict results from badly given or badly received negative feedback. Conflicts
associated with values and beliefs tend to be the most difficult to resolve because they are
deeply rooted cultural practices. When faced with conflict, you have four options:

• Yield. This approach should be used when the issue is less important to one person
than to the other or when maintaining the relationship is more important than the
issue. It is also the logical approach when one person knows she cannot win.

• Compromise. This approach works best when the parties have some areas of
agreement on which a mutually agreeable solution can be built or, as in yielding, when
the relationship is more important than the issue.

• Overpower. This approach should be used only in an emergency or when the issue is
more important than the relationship.

• Collaborate. This approach requires people to work things out. It fits best in the
situations that may repeat themselves or when the relationship has been long term.

Conflict may be healthy or destructive. At its best,

conflict fosters creative thinking and the opportunity to
improve. Healthy conflict is marked by the ability to
disagree on one issue while working collaboratively on
others. At its worst, conflict sabotages relationships,
destroys morale, and polarizes people. Think of the need
for conflict resolution as a way to harness your
interpersonal communication skills. This goes without
saying that destructive conflicts can still be resolved. The
following techniques can be used either when you are
directly involved in the conflict or when you are an
outside party with a vested interest in seeing it resolved.

17 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
General techniques to resolve conflicts

 Act promptly. The longer a problem goes unattended, the greater the chance it will
escalate into a major issue. If the conflict involves emotions, the parties will need time
to cool off; 24 to 48 hours should be sufficient.

 Begin by citing areas on which you agree. This technique will make both of you realize
that you agree more than you think you do. Conflict does give one the illusion that
differences are all there are that exist between the two contending parties.

 Schedule a meeting. Whenever possible, meet face to face so that the participants can
take advantage of nonverbal cues. Choose a neutral location so neither party has a
territorial advantage. But issue an invitation rather than a directive. Telling the other
person you must meet will create more tension.

 Listen attentively. Every conflict has at least two sides, and each person fervently
believes that she is on the accurate or “right” side. Both people want to be heard and
understood. Before a conflict can be resolved, both parties must be able to separate
what happened from what they feel about it. Paraphrasing, discussed earlier, can be
valuable in this effort. You can also identify points of agreement if you listen attentively.

 Focus on the problem, not the person. Laying the blame delays resolution. The
parties must respect themselves and each other.

 Brainstorm solutions. Look for win-win opportunities; negotiate if necessary.

 Formalize the solution. Putting the solution on paper allows both parties the
opportunity to see as well as hear it and minimizes the likelihood that they will later
disagree on the solution.

 Implement the solution and set a date for follow-up. The follow-up creates an air of
accountability.

18 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
C
ULTURE AND INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

We shall conclude by reflecting on the role of culture in interpersonal communication. How we

relate to people certainly is influenced by culture. For example, culture does play a great part in
the way we assert ourselves to other people.3

The “I” language, for example, may be an excellent strategy to assert ourselves by showing
respect for others while standing up for our own rights. Similarly, giving feedback in a direct
way may be necessary in the workplace. Moreover, there may be much wisdom in knowing
how to make requests or direct others
to do what we expect them to do.

However, assertiveness is not simply

about delivering the message or
feedback clearly – i.e., you say what you
want to say and you are fine. Assertiveness requires you to have appropriate tone, and this can
only be achieved if you know more about the person or people you are dealing with, such as
their cultural expectations concerning giving and receiving feedback, their individualist or
collectivist tendencies, and so on.

Many times we probably have heard of comments like, “He is brutally frank. I don’t like him.” or
“She’s rude.” even if, looking back, this was actually following the “I” assertion skills. What may
be good assertion skills in some cultural contexts, may be plain and aggressive behaviors to
others. Indeed, there is more to interpersonal skills than `correct’ use of language and
strategies.

Let us then end our lesson by analyzing the following authentic letter 4:

3
Text image on the right is taken from a letter written by Elaine Lim published in TODAY, 30 June 2010, p. 14.
4
All words in the letter are in the original letter, except the names of people and the company.

19 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Dear Wee Siang,

I was planning to have a word with you this afternoon regarding my request to
you to supervise the new team of quality controllers from Latin America starting
January 2009.

George told me that she had spoken to you about my request, and I am pleased to
learn from her that you have agreed to take on the challenge. Thank you very
much!

If you should have any queries regarding the work, please do not hesitate to
speak to George or me any time.

Once again, I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to you for your dedication
and contributions to QC Media Development™.

Best regards,
Kum Hoong

This sounds like any normal thank you letter you read. But to understand it better, let us first
know what its context is.

First, in this company supervising a new team of controllers is considered a thankless job
because of the tremendous amount of preparation that goes into it. In short, this new
assignment given to Wee Siang is something that no one in the office wants to take on.

Second, Kum Hoong (the boss) asked George to talk to Wee Siang about the new assignment. In
other words, the communication lines are indirect. You will notice then that the boss, Kum
Hoong, did not go straight to Wee Siang to tell the latter about the new assignment. Kum
Hoong has delegated the task to George to ask Wee Siang to take on the job.

Thus, given the context above, what does the letter tell us about the culture of the company?

The email above is a very friendly letter indeed. In it the boss speaks of his “request” twice, and
refers to Wee Siang’s acceptance as Wee Siang having “agreed” to take on the new task. So, if
you do not know the specific corporate culture of QC Media Development™, you might end up
thinking that a request has been made and someone has accepted it. On the surface, it is a
request but culturally, it is actually a command.

Something to think about then: what is the role of cultural context in determining whether a
piece of writing is acceptable or not? In the letter above, the message seems straightforward,
yet there are hidden meanings which the cultural context itself can illuminate.
20 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Although various techniques for improved communication with others have been suggested in
all sections above, ultimately there is NO “magic formula”: we have to bear in mind thus that
what works in one situation may not work in another. This is because we are dealing with
human beings and not machines, with all our egos and sensitivities. What is important is that
we must learn to be aware of ourselves and of others – and basically to respect and treat others
as we ourselves wish to be treated. This is the real essence of interpersonal communication.

21 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 TUTORIAL EXERCISES

ACTIVITY 1

One evening, Loke Soon Choo, CEO of EMC Greater China, went back to the office to retrieve
something. When he arrived at the door, he realized that he did not have the office key. By
that time, his secretary, Rui Hu (Rebecca), had already left the office. Loke attempted to reach
her unsuccessfully. Several hours later, he could not restrain his anger. At 1.13 am, he sent her
the following email and copied to various senior staff:

From: Loke, Soon Choo

Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 1:13 AM
To: Hu, Rui
Cc: Ng, Padel; Ma, Stanley; Zhou, Simon; Lai, Sharon
Subject: Do not assume or take things for granted

Rebecca, I just told you not to assume or take things for granted on Tuesday and you locked
me out of my office this evening when all my things are all still in the office because you
assume I have my office key on my person. With immediate effect, you do not leave the office
until you have checked with all the managers you support - this is for the lunch hour as well as
at end of day, OK?

The secretary replied in a Chinese-language email and then translated into English after (see
both versions below):

SoonChoo，首先，我做这件事是完全正确的，我锁门是从安全角度考虑的，北京这里不是没有丢过东西，如果一旦
丢了东西，我无法承担这个责任。
其次，你有钥匙，你自己忘了带，还要说别人不对。造成这件事的主要原因都是你自己，不要把自己的错误转移到别
人的身上。
第三，你无权干涉和控制我的私人时间，我一天就8小时工作时间，请你记住中午和晚上下班的时间都是我的私人时
间。
第四，从到EMC的第一天到现在为止，我工作尽职尽责，也加过很多次的班，我也没有任何怨言，但是如果你们要求
我加班是为了工作以外的事情，我无法做到。

第五，虽然咱们是上下级的关系，也请你注重一下你说话的语气，这是做人最基本的礼貌问题。
第六，我要在这强调一下，我并没有猜想或者假定什么，因为我没有这个时间也没有这个必要。

22 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 From: Hu, Rui
Sent: 2006-4-10 13:48
To: Loke, Soon Choo
Cc: China All (Beijing); China All (Chengdu); China All (Guangzhou); China
All (Shanghai); Lai, Sharon
Subject: FW: Do not assume or take things for granted

Soon Choo,
First, I have behaved correctly on this matter. I locked the door out of concern for security. We have
lost things in Beijing in the past. I cannot afford to take the chance and be held responsible for missing
articles.

Second, you do have a key which you forgot to bring, yet you are placing the blame on others. You are
the main cause of your situation today, do not attribute your own mistake to others.

Third, you have no right to disrupt and control my private time. I work for 8 hours a day, please
remember that lunch time and evening time belong to my private time.

Fourth, since my first day at EMC until now, I have been diligent in performing my job. Many times I
have worked overtime and I've never complained. But if you demand that I stay overtime for tasks
outside of my job, I cannot comply.

Fifth, even though you are my superior, please pay attention to your wording. It's a matter of common
courtesy.

Sixth, let me stress that I did not guess or assume anything because I have neither the time nor the
need.

Rebecca copied her reply, along with Loke’s original email to all of EMC’s staff in China.
Someone forwarded the email to a friend outside the company, and during the next couple of
weeks the email exchange was forwarded around other companies in China, apparently
reaching thousands of people, some of whom posted it on online forums. It became the cause
of heated online debate, and eventually Chinese newspapers and TV picked up the story.

EMC is the world’s largest network information storage company, with headquarters in the
United States and revenues of over US$10 billion. Loke Soon Choo is the EMC Greater China
CEO. He is a veteran IT professional, having been in senior management of IBM & Siemens.
Before joining EMC, he was the Greater China CEO at DP International. He was a graduate of
the NUS Business School. Both Rebecca and Soon Choo eventually resigned from the company.

23 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Questions

1. The email exchange gives us a complex picture of the interplay of power and culture in the
context of EMC.
a. How do you explain the tone of Soon Choo’s email? Where do you think is he coming
from? Does it reflect his assumptions of a superior-subordinate corporate relationship?
Why and how?
b. How do you explain Rebecca’s use of Chinese to respond to Ng’s email? What are her
assumptions of what corporate culture is or should be?

2. Both Soon Choo and Rebecca resigned from the company because of this controversy.
Looking back, how do you explain what happened?

a. If Soon Choo wrote the email differently, could the response have been different?
b. Could national cultures, individual interpersonal characteristics, gender, corporate
culture, and use of language have contributed to this controversy? What hidden facets
of communication do you think were at play?

3. What lessons in interpersonal communication can you learn from this controversy?

ACTIVITY 2

Read through the following scenario and the meeting transcript that follows. Then answer the
question at the end of the transcript.

Star-Asia Biomedical Research Group (SABRG), a pioneering biomedical laboratory plant based
in Penang, Malaysia, has recently registered its highest annual growth rate of 23% from the
previous year’s $213 million ringgit. It feels it is now ready to open itself up for an IPO or initial
public offering which will enable the public to buy shares in the company. In this connection,
the company is hoping to engage the services of a public relations firm to initiate and intensify
its efforts towards the IPO.

This move, however, has been met with criticism from some of the staff who believe that (1) an
IPO is not needed since the research group has established itself as a very stable business
venture and/or (2) the company does not need a PR firm to do the job of information
dissemination. Below is an excerpt from a closed-door meeting between three high-ranking
officials of the research group. The purpose of this particular meeting is to identify the
contending positions and arrive at a consolidated decision, if possible.

Dr Faridah Hasan is the CEO of SABRG who believes that both an IPO and PR firm are needed.
She is a Malaysian with a doctorate in bioengineering from Sweden.

24 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Tomoko Iwai, a Japanese, is Head of the Human Resources Department who believes that an
IPO is both timely and needed, but is not sure whether the company actually needs a PR firm to
do the job of informing the public about its initial offering. She has a firm grasp of the
company’s human resources capability since she has been in it for six years now.

Razlan Jafaar, the eldest of the three participants, is a Malaysian bioengineer who is in charge
of SABRG’s sub-group in biomedical engineering research. While he believes that the company
is also a business venture, he strongly resists the idea that money should top everyone’s
concerns. If SABRG has survived – and succeeded – with a purely research focus, why concern
itself with so many other issues?

TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING

(1) Faridah: The options are clear: we go public to survive or deteriorate in the next few
years.
(2) Razlan: Why say that? If we have succeeded for the past few years…
(3) Tomoko: We can’t think of the past at this stage. We know that this is a volatile world
we are in. Why, even the tsunami disaster has affected our stocks since December!
(4) Razlan: My only worry is that we are turning out to be a completely
investment/business affair.
(5) Tomoko: I don’t think so. Research is still top…
(6) Razlan: Top priority? Then, why are we meeting now? To discuss where the
best penang laksa is?
(7) Faridah: So, what do you wish us to do, Razlan? An IPO is actually our way of providing
firm controls for our company. That is, the public CAN share the ups and downs of
SABRG. At the rate we are going now, without public shares, all it takes is another Asian
tsunami for our company to go bankrupt.
(8) Razlan: I see your point there.
(9) Tomoko: Of course, that’s a good point.
(10) Faridah: Hold on, Tomoko.
(11) Razlan: But, is it really the point? The issue here is: do we need the public to help us
defend our shares against economic or political dangers? With or without external
pressures, for as long as we are doing good, with topnotch research…
(12) Tomoko: You really don’t get it, Razlan.
(13) Razlan: …we will survive.
(14) Faridah: But this is not a question of survival now, Razlan. It is a question of being
consistently the best in the field.
(15) Razlan: A good penang laksa will always be good, no matter how the economy is doing.
(16) Tomoko: But how many people will buy a good penang laksa if they don’t have money?
(17) Faridah: Hold your analogies! This is serious business.
(18) Razlan: But we’re talking serious business here!
(19) Faridah: No.
(20) Tomoko: Why are you so against an IPO, Razlan?
25 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
(21) Faridah: Razlan has already answered that question many times, Tomoko. He doesn’t
see the point of an IPO since we are already a stable company which is engaged in solid
biomedical research. He fears that we will ultimately be distracted from the main
agenda of SABRG.
(22) Razlan: In your case, Tomoko, you favor an IPO but don’t want a PR firm to do the job?
(23) Tomoko: Exactly, for the…
(24) Razlan: See! Because SABRG is such an established biomedical company that we no
longer need anyone to let other people know about us! You just proved my point,
Tomoko.
(25) Tomoko: Huh?
(26) Faridah: Go ahead, Tomoko.
(27) Tomoko: I go for a compromise. If the public wants to invest with us, then they will
pursue it because of our credibility. We don’t need to spend money on a PR firm to
encourage people to buy shares from us. If they don’t want to come to us, so be it.
(28) Razlan: That’s an even more confused position.
(29) Faridah: You don’t give a solid, confident face for the company with that kind of
approach.
(30) Tomoko: It’s the market’s hands working, that’s what I mean! Let the market decide
what it wants to do to us because…
(31) Faridah: That’s not right. Not right at all. We need to have an active role in defining the
wants and desires of the market. After all, we have established a niche in the biomedical
research business BECAUSE we have defined our paths our way.
(32) Razlan: Emphasis on BECAUSE, Tomoko.
(33) Faridah: We can’t make any decision now. But some points are good: that we need to
guard ourselves against external pressures but still make research our top priority.
(34) Razlan: And the point is to find a way to make research our main priority despite
investment/stocks concerns.
(35) Tomoko: What about the thing on the PR firm?
(36) Faridah: Let’s think about it more.
(37) Tomoko: I say we don’t need it at all.
(38) Faridah: Let’s think about it more.

Question

If you were asked to rate the participants on their interpersonal skills with 1 being the best and
3 being the worst, what would your ratings be? Justify your answer.

26 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 ORAL FEEDBACK: GUIDE QUESTIONS

GENERAL
The receiver of feedback finds it effectively persuasive because its core message or main points are clear,
relevant and consistent, and its delivery is assertive, appropriate and constructive.

1. Does the receiver of feedback find it effective because the core message or main points are clear
and relevant?
2. Does the receiver of feedback find it effective because its delivery is assertive, appropriate and
constructive?

SPECIFIC
Content

Clear, relevant & consistent feedback

Content
• How clear are the main points of the feedback?
• How relevant is the feedback?
• How accurate are the information provided?
Delivery

Assertion Strategies
Non-judgmental/objective & concrete feedback

• How non-judgmental is the description of the problems/points?

• How specific and concrete is the feedback?
• Does the feedback clarify the impact of the problem on you (if appropriate)?

Focused on what needs to be done

• How focused is the feedback on what needs to be done?

• How feasible and concrete is the feedback on what needs to be done?

Appropriate and constructive tone

Tone
• Does it criticize the action or item, not the person?
• How constructive is the feedback?
• Does it avoid embarrassing the listener/receiver of feedback?
• How fluent is the articulation of problem(s)?

27 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
 ORAL INTERACTION: GUIDE QUESTIONS

GENERAL

Tutor and peers find your oral interaction effective because you consistently demonstrate the
various skills learned in the course through active and constructive class discussions and group
work.

SPECIFIC
Content

Clear and persuasive messages during class discussions

Content
How clear and persuasive are the messages delivered during class discussions and group meetings?
• Are these messages relevant, thus contributing to their persuasive content?
• Are these messages delivered with ease, thus contributing to their clear content?
• Are clear and persuasive messages delivered consistently throughout the semester?
Delivery

Positive and constructive feedback on work and ideas of peers and tutor
Tone
• How positive and constructive is feedback given on work and ideas of others?
• Is feedback frank and persuasive yet delivered appropriately (e.g. in consideration of the other’s
‘face’?
• Does feedback contribute to tutor or peers’ improvement in particular aspects of work in class?
• Does feedback contribute to (and not impede) open and engaging discussions of ideas and issues
relevant to the lessons/topics in the course, including those discussed in group meetings?
• Is positive and constructive feedback consistently given throughout the semester?

Effective listening skills

Listening skills
• Are listening skills deployed effectively in class discussions, including during giving and receiving of
feedback?
• Are listening skills (including pauses and use of affirming words) deployed effectively as assertion
strategies?
• Is tutor and peers’ feedback received positively, not defensively?
• Does receptiveness to criticism contribute to an open and warm learning environment in the
classroom?
• Are effective listening skills deployed consistently throughout the semester?

28 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore
Bibliography
Adler, R., & Elmhorst, J. (2002). Communicating at work (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dwyer, J. (1993). The Business Communication handbook (3rd ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.

Krizan, A., Merrier, P., & Jones, C. (2002). Business Communication (5th ed.). Ohio: South-Western
College Publishing.

O'hair, D., Friedrich, G., & Shaver, L. (1998). Strategic communication (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Co.

Paterson, R. (2001). The assertive book. Mumbai: Magna Publishing Co.

Timm, P., & DeTienne, K. (1980). Managerial communication (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Walton, S., & Jeffrey, W. Communication principles: A modular approach. Sydney: Prentice-Hall.

29 | P a g e
©Centre for English Language Communication
National University of Singapore