Szopiński, Jósef

English

Hochschulschriftenserver - Universität Frankfurt am Main

229Z E S Z Y T Y  N A U K O W E   UNIWERSYTETU RZESZOWSKIEGO SERIA FILOLOGICZNA ZESZYT 47/2007           STUDIA ANGLICA RESOVIENSIA 4Józef SZOPI￿SKI ACTION VS. EMOTION VOCABULARY IN MANAGERIAL COMMUNICATION Introduction Dynamic changes taking place in the modern world present people with new  challenges.  One  of  the  most  desirable  features  is  broadly  understood creativity  which  means  the  skill  of  introducing  new  and  useful  changes  in personal and professional life. Creativity, which is demanded from managers, is expected to help in meeting competitors’ requirements. This paper presents an attempt to describe the personality traits of both creative and uncreative managers,  and  the  expression  of  this  creativity  manifesting  itself  in  their vocabulary and body language.∗ One would expect that the observed trends are applicable for people in general, and not only managers.  The  personality  traits  of  creative  and  uncreative  managers  established empirically here may be useful in two ways: firstly, they allow the relatively easy classification of people into the two aforementioned groups, and secondly we can consciously programme ourselves to achieve success or fail depending whether we choose “action” or “emotion” vocabulary. The  anthropologist  Turner  (2005:32)  points  out  that  certain  forms  of programming of the style of speech, rhetoric, verbal and non-verbal language are observable in a social dimension, and distinguishes the language of the crisis period, war period, the period of restoring the equilibrium and the period of restoring peace. A journalist of the Polish weekly Tygodnik Powszechny (23. 7. 2006) wrote in the weekly cultural column that nowadays there seems to exist an involuntary reluctance to call a spade a spade. For example, the word barber is replaced by a hair stylist, a flower girl is frequently replaced by a florist. The new tendency has a sublimating and elevating effect, its aim is to eliminate any ∗ I should like to express my gratitude to Ola Biela-Wolonciej from USKW for her invaluable assistance in translating this text from Polish into English. 230negative  associations,  replacing  them  with  the  new  ones  which  create  the impression of luxury and glamour. Description of the empirical research The research hypothesis was that the feature of creativity manifests itself in an empirically measurable way. The research tools selected were: Popek Creative Behaviour Questionnaire KANH and Gough and Heilbrun Adjective Test ACL translated by Z. Płu￿ek. The aim of the former was to single out those groups of people who received high and low scores of creativity, the latter was employed to describe the personality traits of managers in these two groups. The unquestionable advantage of the ACL test is its simplicity. The subjects  were  to  underline  from  among  300  adjectives  those  which characterise them best. It should be stressed that both tools meet the required statistical parameters. Description of the studied managers All  in  all,  300  managers  (146  women  and  154  men)  were  surveyed. Managers in the services sector were the largest group (111), managers in the education sector (94), managers in the production sector (47), managers in the tourism  and  agro-tourism  sector  (46).  Half  of  the  respondents  lived  in  large cities (Warszawa, Łód&, Kraków, Lublin) or in average-sized towns (Rzeszów, Kielce, Chełm, Zamo￿￿) and the remainder were the inhabitants of either small towns  or  villages.  50%  of  the  respondents  managed  large  teams  (over  31 people),  the  rest  managed  small  teams. Almost  1/3  of  the  subjects  had  only secondary  education,  11%  incomplete  higher  education  and  38%  higher education. Research results Creativity,  as  with  every  empirical  feature,  is  characterized  by  a  certain continuum. If we arrange the results from all 300 tests from the lowest to the highest, we can choose 25% of the extreme results on each side to emphasise the relation  of  these  extreme  features  to  the  respondents’  personality  traits. The managers from the group of high creativity are characterized by an optimistic and positive attitude both to themselves and to the world, which manifests itself particularly in: 1. internal strength, 2312. faith in the ability to achieve one’s goals,  3.  intensive  and  persistent  endeavours  to  achieve  the  aim,  which  results  in seeking strength primarily in oneself. One may say that all these characteristics make up a certain set of mutually supporting and complementary features or they form a set of programmes geared towards  success  in  the  future.  In  general,  one  may  say  that  the  uncreative managers were characterized by the reverse of these features. Both the creative managers  and the uncreative ones differ not only in the personality traits as shown above, but even in the choice of particular adjectives that they used to describe themselves. From among 300 adjectives as many as 76 differentiated statistically one group from the other (p<0.05). Significantly, the whole group of high-creativity  managers  used  5441  adjectives  to  describe  themselves, meanwhile, the group of low-creativity managers of similar size used only 4228 adjectives. What can be noticed here is visible self-restraint, or even scantiness on the part of low-creativity managers in choosing the adjectives. In addition to this, they more often and more willingly choose negative adjectives. This statistically confirmed regularity, expressed in statistical figures, can also be observed in classes with students, workshops, or psychological training sessions  for  managers.  There  is  no  need  to  carry  out  tests  to  know  what programme  a  given  person  realizes,  it  will  suffice  to  ask  the  participants  to introduce  themselves.  In  many  groups  a  voluntary  introduction  is  a  difficult challenge to students, and they often limit themselves to saying obvious things (such as their names and surnames, their fields of study, the year they are in, or where they come from). One may formulate a general rule and say that the narrow boundaries of language are simultaneously the boundaries of our world. Also, when we talk, we speak not only to other people, but also to ourselves and it is through this inner  communication  that  we  shape  ourselves.  Uncreative  people  when describing the world, select passiveness, preserving and stabilising their feeling of dependence (Neuberger 1998). In our culture it is normally socially unacceptable to brag about oneself, which may be regarded as lack of modesty, to say the least. Many people find it far easier to be derogatory about themselves. Moreover, during workshops low-creativity managers have more difficulty than the creative ones in changing the verbal language into non-verbal. This difficulty is particularly present when the uncreative managers are performing some new or unconventional tasks or are asked to use the space in a room or on a large piece of paper. Their graphic forms are often squeezed and marked by the scanty means of expression, lack of colour, excessive inhibitions and self-control. When the tasks concern relations among  people,  their  human  figures  show  signs  of  self-deprecation  and  – simultaneously – signs of appreciation of other people (Szopi￿ski 2007). 232The  most  frequent  adjective  used  by  the  creative  managers  to  describe themselves  was  active  (91%  choices).  83%  of  them  regarded  themselves  as ready to co-operate, 82% selected the adjective ambitious, and 78% chose able to appreciate. Thus, one feels justified in saying that the creative managers most often use adjectives which express activity. On the other hand, managers from the low-creativity group most often used adjectives which expressed feelings, e.g. friendly (69% choices), emotional (67%), tender (66%) and kind (66%). Chart 1 given below shows 16 adjectives differentiating statistically (p<0.001) selected  from  among  76  adjectives  differentiating  statistically  (p<0.001), presented in Szopi￿ski (2004). 0102030405060708090100ActiveEnterprisingInventiveEnthusiasticIndividualistic Initiative          Timid          Stubborn             Unconventional     Energetic        Ingenions            Courageous        Confident          Adventurous   Artistic        Worrying    lowhighChart 1. Adjectives differentiating managers in the extreme groups of creativity  Only in two differentiating adjectival expressions, that is timid and worryingthe creative managers received a lower percentage of choices than the uncreative managers, apart from that, in the other 15 adjectives expressing activity, energy, ingeniousness, enthusiasm, etc., the creative managers achieved higher scores (see Chart 1). Interpretation One may conclude that the creative managers and the uncreative ones tend to use completely opposing paradigms in their private and professional lives. The creative  managers'  paradigm  is  marked  by  good  functioning  even  if  there  is 233asymmetry and diversity present. Meanwhile, the uncreative managers are able to function only in the situation of equality and symmetry. One could go as far as to say  that  the  uncreative  managers  can  function  well  in  a  collectivist-managed society, whereas the creative managers find good conditions for development in free-market economy systems, where a great deal of variety is not only allowed but also encouraged. The creative managers seem to claim that it is not necessary to be like others, and they are ready to differ from others. They seem to express their attitude that may be formulated: we are autonomous and different.The results of the study reveal that the uncreative managers focus mainly on emotions. They share their emotions with other people in order to be on familiar terms with them, according to the principle: we are close to one another and the same. The need to share the same emotions with others might result from their low self-esteem. Such principle seems to prevent or even forbid the uncreative managers from being different from people they meet. It is possible to demonstrate the above hypothesis with a real-life example. In Poland exactly twenty years ago it became legally possible for the first time to organize and offer new products in the form of psychological and educational services.  However,  the  greatest  difficulty  that  accompanied  the  process  of organizing a new privately-funded company in the Lublin region was to find collaborators, namely doctors and psychologists, who could afford to differ from a number of their colleagues objecting to seizing this opportunity of charging people for such a service. It would have been embarrassing and even somewhat unethical  to  those  who  thought  that  health  care  should  be  free  of  charge. Limiting  our  observations  only  to  the  area  around  Lublin,  it  is  possible  to observe that 20 years were needed to overcome this emotional barrier. Today it is publicly accepted that some medical and psychological services are free (i.e. paid with our taxes) while others must be paid for directly by clients. Reykowski (1995) remarks that the factor defining the level of subjectively justified social claims, especially in times of crisis and social transformation, is the  element  of  comparing  oneself  to  others.  The  egalitarian  ideology  makes everyone consider themselves to be similar, not differing from others. Therefore, there is a low tolerance for significant differences in material status. Various professional groups perceive it as an act of discrimination that their wages are below the average. In stable societies there is an acceptance of the status of persons who work in certain professions. Thus, the doctor, manager, miner or teacher knows what wages to expect. Also, society knows what to expect from persons  who  play  certain  roles  in  it. These  norms  are  no  longer  obvious  in situations of social transformation. New groups emerge, and the former ones become marginalised (e.g. workers of huge factories). Thus, the ensuing changes caused the instability of norms that formed the basis of many existing social norms and relations. Hence, social conflicts may appear unless new rules are worked out that are based on social dialogue. 234Ratajczak (1980: 38–42) claims that a conflict resulting from introducing an innovation is a form of control which aims at delaying or preventing it. More specifically, she presents five types of behaviour typical of particular members of the community in the face of novelty, corresponding to five categories of people: innovators, early assimilators, the so-called early majority, the so-called late majority and stragglers, each of these groups having different values. For innovators the predominant value is taking risk, a desire to be different and to challenge  the  values  recognised  by  the  majority.  The  early  assimilators appreciate prestige and try to achieve it by assimilating innovation. The early majority  values  prudence  and  the  late  majority  scepticism,  the  stragglers advocate  tradition  and  safety  manifesting  themselves  in  repeating  the  well-known and tried-out behavioural paths. It would appear that the above division seems to function in every social group. Normally, I finish all my classes with a students’ anonymous evaluation of the course. One of the questions is a request for advice about how to improve my next edition. Among many enthusiastic answers, such as: Keep it up, Don’t change anything, The classes made me more open and self-confident, or The classes helped me to break my internal barriers and overcome my shyness one opinion that crops up invariably is Don’t wake those who don’t feel like getting involved in class, please! The question arises in this context whether this cold description  expressed  with  the  language  of  statistical  regularities  could  be modified while taking conscious actions to shape the characteristics empirically presented above in the part of population which is ready to be affected? Perhaps then the process of introducing certain specific changes could be shortened in some local communities and it would not have to take place in a natural way over a period of 20 years. Boastful as it may sound, in my classes a large portion of the students are motivated within 15 hours. Final remarks It should be emphasized that it is neither school nor university but rather the first  years  of  life  in  a  family  that  are  the  first  place  to  learn  the  style  of communication.  In  the  family  system  the  way  of  communicating  reflects  the relations within the family. The essential factor in communicating in the subsystem of marriage – through empathy, understanding and co-operation – is the partners’ ability to differentiate to find a common point in the continuum of interpersonal space between similarity and difference. This ability helps to establish clear-cut borders  both  between  the  partners  in  the  marital  subsystem,  and  between  the marital subsystem and the subsystem of children (Szopi￿ski 2004). The creative managers operate with ease within this space of diversity both in the family system, as well as in the social one. The uncreative managers have 235difficulty differentiating in both these systems. Therefore, it appears relevant to make enquiries about the origin of this difficulty. Is it possible that some of them failed to master the skill of differentiating in their family life, and developed it only later in their professional life? Or – alternately – did they start it in the family and improve it later? It seems that – on the whole – clear-cut borders between  the  spouses  as  well  as  between  adult  children  and  their  parents correspond to the higher scores in creativity tests. Thus, the basic paradigm of differentiating,  which  has  its  roots  in  family,  seems  to  be  improved  and developed by further differentiation, depending on the concrete situation or the specific social role. The action vocabulary or emotion vocabulary the managers use to describe themselves certainly reveals their constitutive personality traits. References Capra, F. 1986. Wendezeit. Bern, München, Wien: Scherz. Fanning, P. 2001. Wizualizacja zmian. Pozna￿: Rebis. Neuberger,  O.  1995.  Miteinander  arbeiten  –  miteinander  reden.  München:  Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Arbeit und Sozialordnung. Popek, S. 2000. Kwestionariusz Twórczego Zachowania KANH. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS. Ratajczak, Z. 1980. Człowiek w sytuacji innowacyjnej. Warszawa: PWN. Reykowski,  J.  1995.  “Konflikt  i  negocjacje:  Perspektywa  psychologiczna”  [in:]  Negocjacje. Droga do paktu społecznego. Warszawa: Instytut Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych. Sternberg, R.J. 2002. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Szopi￿ski,  J.  2006.  “Od  uczenia  reproduktywnego  do  kreatywnego”  [in:]  Skrzypek,  E.  (ed.). Jako"$ kształcenia w społecze)stwie wiedzy. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS, 99–103. Szopi￿ski,  J.  2004.  Kreatywno"$  mened(erów  a  ich  funkcjonowanie  rodzinne,  zawodowe i osobowo"ciowe. Kraków: Wyd. UJ. Szopi￿ski, J. 2007. “Universitätsbildung im Wandel“ [in:] Studia Germanica Resoviensia.  Turner,  V.  2005.  Gry  społeczne,  pola  i  metafory.  Ola  Biela-Wolonciej  (ed.).  Kraków: Wydawnictwo UJ.  

Action vs. emotion vocabulary in managerial communication

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hochschulschriftenserver - Universität Frankfurt am Main