Effective reaction to verbal aggression and provocation: Business Q&A Sessions case study
Analysis of business discourse from various points of view. The problem of addressing requests, especially provocative ones, during business sessions. A review of the argumentative and compelling communication strategies that are used for presentations.
| Рубрика | Менеджмент и трудовые отношения |
| Вид | дипломная работа |
| Язык | английский |
| Дата добавления | 14.07.2020 |
| Размер файла | 2,6 M |
Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже
Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.
Hymes (1972) claimed that there are four basic components of the communicative competence: possibility, feasibility, appropriateness, and occurrence. Possibility is connected the language and tackles the query whether a locution is possible from the grammatical point of view. Feasibility correlates with the speaker's ability to process the language on the whole as well as with their ability to use the locution in the speech as there may be some limitations such as memory or psycholinguistic factors. Appropriateness is whether the locution is suitable in the interaction in terms of cultural norms. Finally, occurrence refers to the fact of the locution being actually made or not.
The effectiveness of communication depends on the understanding of the components of the SPEAKING grid, culture, norms of interaction characteristic of a particular communicative situation, personalities and mental abilities of the speakers. Therefore, when choosing a communicative strategy or a tactic as a response, including both wording and behavioral patterns, a person should take into account an array of the features of communicative acts.
The present paper focuses of aggression and provocation in the business sphere. Therefore, the following part of the study will examine the notions of business linguistics and business discourse. Business linguistics might be defined as a separate discipline within the sphere of Applied Linguistics which studies how language functions in a business context taking into account languages resources, verbal and para-verbal aspects of business communication, lingua-pragmatics, lexicography and professional sublanguages. The origins of Business Linguistics might be traced to Discourse studies, Sociolinguistics, Organizational Communication and Psychology. As was stated, Business Linguistics falls under the category of Applied Linguistics and, therefore, bears practical value. It may be beneficial for the specialists and entrepreneurs' competence by contributing to their understanding of the nature of communicative processes happening in their fields of expertise as well as improving communicative practices of their businesses (Daniushina, 2010).
Communicative competence is important for businessmen and business leaders. Campbell (2006) established a model for effective communicative behaviour of leaders which is based on the theory of speech acts. According to this model, business professionals should use language taking into consideration how threatening their message is for the ego of the subordinates as well as to involve them in the process of active listening.
Business discourse is the object of the study of Business Linguistics; therefore, the language of business is studied from a discursive approach focusing on how it is realized in real-life situations. Business discourse might be defined as the `verbalization of business mentality, realized in the form of an open multitude of thematically correlated texts on a wide range of business issues, considered in combination with their extra-linguistic contexts' (Daniushina, 2010, p. 244).
As for the methodology, both quantitative and qualitative methods, such as language corpora with statistical data processing. Case study is one of the most frequently used method which is usually combined with critical analysis (Daniushina, 2010). Based on the fact that there is a considerable number of works which are based on this method, the present work will also use the method of case study. Regarding data and material which are used for the research, there is a variation incorporating authentic, experimental, and simulated materials.
The following query is whether there are any differences between communicative strategies and communicative tactics. From the perspective of communicative approach to linguistics described by Maslova (2018), strategies are `a set of speech tactics, or speech actions, focused on solving the speaker's general communicative task.' Tactics are further defined as `a set of practical moves in a real communication process' (Maslova, 2018, p. 32). Therefore, communicative strategies incorporate communicative tactics, as strategies are wider and focused on fulfilling the aim of communication, whereas tactics constitute concrete moves being realized in human intercourse. It might be then said that communication strategies encompass various communicative tactics. It is essential to highlight that there exists no generally accepted classification of neither communicative strategies nor tactics at the moment. Formanovskaya (1989) argued that there are as many tactics as speech actions. Consequently, there is diversity in the naming and classificational means regarding communicative strategies and tactics.
In research literature, communication strategy is often distinguished from communication process (Patil and Karekatti, 2015). Bialystok (1983) states that there is the obligatory/optional dichotomy regarding the notions, with processes being obligatory and strategies being optional. Selinker (1972) argues that there is an opposition between `non-strategic' and `strategic' processes of communication which, consequently, makes the usage of communication strategy a deliberate process. Tarone (1980) adds that communication strategy is an interactional phenomenon and defines it as an attempted undertake by interlocutors to create meaning out of situation where they do no share requisite meaning structures.
In the book `Strategic Communications Planning for Public Relations and Marketing' by Wilson and Ogden (2014), the planning actions are divided into strategies and plans. The book is relevant in terms of business linguistics as public relations and marketing and their discourse practices are studied by it. In the book, strategies are plans which contain final aims of communication, messages which should be transmitted, and channels via which the messages would be communication. Strategies are compiled by tactics which represent small steps needed to reach the goal. Tactics are tools which are `required to support each strategy' (Wilson and Ogden, 2014, p.125). The design of the book content and definitions overlap with the previous ideas form Maslova (2018) and Formanovskaya (1989).
Taking everything into consideration, the study will differentiate between communicative strategies and communicative tactics in the following manner: communicative strategies are deliberate actions of people chosen in order to react to provocation with any aim, regardless whether a person wants to avoid provocation, retaliate, solve a conflict, and so on. All the actions supporting these processes such as non-verbal signs, gestures, movements, choice of words, and so on will be considered as tactics.
The first part of the theoretical framework of the study examines the key studied notions of verbal aggression and provocation as well as the types of responses to aggression and communicative strategies and tactics. However, there is the need to analyze how the strategies and tactics are employed in the context of provocation.
The following part of the study will present possible strategies to react to verbal aggression and provocation. Apart from that, some strategies to react to anger will also be described. Anger is natural response to aggression, especially when a person feels a threat. Being unable to deal with provocation and aggression, an individual is likely to get angry (Roswiyani, 2011).
In 1995, Anderson and Lawler (1995) proposed four categories of responses to anger, namely suppression, cognition, assertion, and aggression. Suppression happens when a person suppresses anger during an act of communication and does not provide any response to the provocateur. Cognition is the rumination about a response which can possibly be given or a discussion of the situation with a third party who did not participate in the interaction. Assertion presupposes confronting the aggressor with the goal of resolving the conflict. Aggression encompasses both verbally and physically aggressive actions used as responses to anger. However, there are some issues with these four categories. For instance, not all of the categories are supposed to be used during the communicative act itself. Cognition constitutes rather a self-reflection technique which may be employed after the interaction, especially when it comes to the discussion with a third party. Moreover, there are no clear distinctions between assertion and aggression. Assertion entails confrontation which may encompass verbal and physical aggression. Aggression, as the category, implies confrontation by the very nature of the concept.
In 2003, the Behavioural Anger Response Questionnaire was devised (Linden, Hogan, Rutledge, Chawla, Lenz & Leung, 2003). It consists of 34 questions with the possible answers being `not true', `sometimes true', and `often true'. The Questionnaire has in its basis six response strategies to react to anger and provocation: Direct Anger-out, Assertion, Social Support-seeking, Diffusion, Avoidance, and Rumination.
Direct Anger-out is an explicit expression of anger, or retaliation with an aggressive response. Social Support-seeking means involving more people, if possible, in the act of communication in order to receive support from then. It may occur either during the interaction or after it. Assertion has the aim of forcing a provocateur into the resolution of a conflict. Diffusion is the strategy which a person can use to reduce anger in themselves by switching to other activities or interactions. Avoidance presupposes that an individual will withdraw from a situation in which they experience anger is directed at them, especially if the situation also becomes anger-causing for them. Rumination is the contemplation about the situation.
As can be seen, some strategies proposed by Linden et al. (2003) and Anderson and Lawler (1995) overlap. For example, Direct Anger-out and aggression as well as Avoidance and suppression seem to correlate. Assertion is present in both classifications. And Cognition incorporates both Social Support-Seeking and Rumination. The category of Diffusion (Lindet et al, 2003) is unique.
Personality as well as the trait of verbal aggressiveness also matter in terms of the choice of communicative strategies (Trnka & Stuchlikova, 2011). People have inclinations towards the use of particular strategies influenced by their experience and assess them against the fact whether their intention of communication was fulfilled in the past when using the strategy.
There is also the MAR model which can be used to deal with conflicts (Agar, 1994). MAR stands for mistake, awareness, repair and pertains to the sphere of intercultural communication. Mistake happens when the participants of the communication do not fulfil each other's expectations of behavioural patterns based on their SPEAKING grids (Hymes, 1972). Awareness implies the realization of one or all the participants that their expectation do not match. Repair entails adjustment of one or several characteristics of the grid in order to eliminate issues leading to unsuccessful communication.
The study concentrates on business communications and precisely on the format of business Q&A sessions. The following part of the research will refer to the book “On the Line of Fire” by Sergey Kuzin, an international expert in business communication and a business trainer holding a PhD in Psychological sciences. His book focuses specifically on business discourses and presents real-life techniques which can be used to react to provocation during the Q&A sessions.
There are also essential notions explained by Kuzin. The first one is optimalism. It is contrasted with perfectionism. Kuzin argues that perfectionism is not helpful during Q&A sessions, especially public ones. It presupposes living up to public expectations which is impossible as every person holds their own expectations. Optimalism, in its turn, means getting the best possible results at the moment. It is the courage to be yourself and react the way you can with no guarantees of success. Kuzin believes that there is the need to give up on perfect in favor of optimal. It encompasses some risks; however, there lies the power to react to provocation effectively. Optimalists value the result as much as the process, use hurdles to their benefit, accept their mistakes, and are open to the critique.
The thinking process of perfectionists is influenced by anxiety. Consequently, their answers are not unexpected, creative, or flexible. Perfectionists are capable of giving answers unless they are really hurt, threatened, or trapped by provocation. In this case, they start to use aggression or put up defense being no longer able to answer questions normally which leads to face loss. Optimalists, in their turn, can be flexible. They change the form of the response in such a manner so that they can avoid a direct confrontation with a provocateur but solve their communicative tasks at the same time.
The next notion is openness. Adjustment for openness is getting much recognition among researchers and practitioners. The issue is in defining borders of how open one can be. Regarding public presentations and following Q&A sessions, the borers of openness are defined by the format of an event, the topic a talk, and regulations. The optimalist - a person exercising optimalism when dealing with public presentations and tough questions - has to define these borders for themselves as well as to explain them for the public.
The state of calm presence is another term which is of relevance for the research. Provocateurs seek instinctive reactions from their victims. They try to make a victim angry waiting for them to actually get angry; they hit a victim so that the victim will run away. In provocative situations, people rely on automatic reactions being driven by stress and fear. The key to react to provocation appropriately and effectively is to overcome automatic reactions and start making choices of the reactions consciously. The state of calm presence might be defined as the inner emotional calmness during the active perception of what is going on around. It means that there is a need to concentrate on the situation, not avoid it, by reaching a deliberate state of psychological calmness despite the presence of noxious stimuli and stressors. The basic thing for adopting this technique is not to think about how provocation would hurt but to concentrate actively on the moment. Kuzin refers to Stephen Covey, a famous business consultant, and his book `The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People'. Covey (1989) defines the notion of proactivity. It is a pause between the stimuli and the reaction which allows a victim of provocation to choose their reaction. This pause constitutes the state of calm presence.
Active listening is one more essential concept to be define as the presenter and the audience change their roles during the Q&A session. In order to answer a question in a right way, the presenter must understand it fully. The state of our body and the ability to listen influence the interaction greatly. The posture of interest can actually make the audience feel interest. That is why it is vital to use appropriate non-verbal signals. Focus on the content of the speech and concentration are also important. The concept is closely connected with the state of calm presence defined earlier.
Part 2. Case study research
The following part of the work constitutes an empirical part of the study. In this chapter the cases of business Q&A sessions were analyzed in order to devise a practical communicative model to react to verbal aggression and provocation. This part presents the research design and methodology which were used to create the framework for analysis of cases. The cases are described and analyzed according to the framework. The results of the case study analysis along with the theoretical information were used to create a communicative model which encompass strategies to react to various types of provocative questions. The researcher also suggests a training session structure. The training would be helpful for business professionals to brush up on their communicative skills regarding the responses to verbal aggression and provocation. The training session encompasses theoretical topics, case analyses, and practical tasks. The present part of the research also discusses limitations and suggestions for future research.
Research Design and Methodology
The following part of the paper will describe methods and procedures used for the empirical part of the research. The idiographic approach realized in the form of the case study was chosen for carrying out the empirical part of the research. As seen from the theoretical framework, communicative situations are influenced by many components (Hymes, 1972). Therefore, the study relies heavily on the analytical approach to the data taking into consideration as many factors within the context of communication as possible. By the means of the case study, the analysis of the effectiveness of communicative strategies and tactics will be done. Case study research (CSR) provides `close reading' of the situation (Patten, 2016). In the present research, CSR was used to analyze instances of the employment of communicative strategies when reacting to provocation during business Q&A sessions. In order to gather data for the case study, a sample of convenience was drawn. The researcher used the YouTube video hosting platform for the search. On the platform, they key word search was undertaken. The key words encompassed `business', `Q&A', `session', `answer', `questions', and `pitch'.
The case study research will consider several factors so as to carry out the analysis. First of all, the context of a communicative situation will be taken into consideration, namely where the situation takes place and what type of an event it is. Secondly, the information about the speaker will be noted. Thirdly, the non-verbal signs which the speakers exhibit will be examined. Based on the information about non-verbal, it will be stated whether the speakers are present and the moment and can listen actively or be in the state of `calm presence'. Fourthly, the questions will be analyzed against the level of provocativeness as well as against their linguistic properties such as vocabulary and intonation. Fifthly, the strategies and tactics which a speaker uses will be identified. Finally, there will be made a conclusion whether the strategies were effective. If not, the researcher will make suggestions about how the speaker might have reacted to verbal aggression and provocation more successfully.
|
Factors for analysis |
Details |
|
|
Context of the communicative situation |
Where, when, what happens |
|
|
Information about the speaker (if available) |
Background, field of expertise, experience in public speaking |
|
|
Non-verbal signs |
Which non-verbal sings can be traced; whether the speaker can go into the calm presence state or show active listening signs |
|
|
Questions |
Level of provocativeness:reen (Light) Questions Yellow (Medium Hard) Questions Red (Hard) Questions Linguistic properties: Vocabulary Intonation Syntax Other factors which might be important for analysis |
|
|
Communicative strategies and tactics |
What strategies and tactics are used, if any. Possible strategies: adjustment opposition question for a question showdown bringing to the absurdity acceptance-depreciation disadvantage=advantage the evaluation of the question and going back to the topic quote-analogy-metaphor |
|
|
Effectiveness of the strategies used |
Evaluation of the strategies and recommendation in case they were not successful |
The framework for analysis of the data gathered was designed based on the theoretical framework and practical tips on how to react to provocation explained by Kuzin (2019). The first step is to analyze the query and attribute it to `green' (easy), `yellow' (medium hard), and `red' (hard) categories. The attribution will be based not on the fact whether it is hard to answer the questions considering the speaker's expertise but on how provocative the questions are. The factors contributing to the provocativeness will be taken from the theoretical framework of the study. Namely, the expose of provocation, the type of aggression, the degree of threat will be used for analyzing the questions. Eventually, the categorization is based on the properties of the questions, their content (regarding linguistic properties), and an alleged aim. According to Kuzin (2019), green questions are the questions which a listener asks in order to fill in on some missing parts; therefore, the listener is interested in the answer, and there is no provocation in it. The language is neutral,l and the speaker does not risk losing their face in from of the audience. Yellow questions are asked in order to voice an opinion or to let the emotions out. The answer of the speaker is partially interesting to the listener. The issue of yellow questions is that they sometimes contain conflictogenic expressions such as `Don't you think that you overestimate …?' or `Shouldn't it work the other way round?'. The listeners who ask yellow question do not necessarily want to hurt or provoke the speaker; however, the verbal means they use often contribute to the creation of the negative atmosphere. The provocation is exposed to some extent so there is the threat of face-loss for the speaker in case they choose a wrong tactic to respond to provocation. Red questions are asked in order to damage the speaker's reputation; the answer of the speaker is of no interest. They are based on manipulations: from tossing up the facts to blames; from passive aggressive questions to direct insults. For instance, `And how much money would go on the project and how much do you plan to keep to yourself?'.
Green, Yellow, Red Questions (Kuzin, 2019, p. 248)
|
Property |
Green Questions |
Yellow Questions |
Red Questions |
|
|
Aim |
To fill in on some information |
To voice an opinion or to let emotions out |
To make the speaker lose their face in front of the audience |
|
|
Interest in the answer |
Yes |
Varies |
No |
|
|
Conflictogenic expressions |
No |
Yes |
Varies |
|
|
Controversial opinions |
No |
Yes |
Varies |
|
|
The attitude of the person who asks questions |
Is ready to listen, constructive |
Is rarely ready to listen, rather destructive |
Is not ready to listen, destructive or pseudo-constructive |
After the type of a question is defined, there is the need to analyze the response of a speaker. Firstly, the non-verbal signs are to be taken into consideration. The notions of calm presence and active listening, which were discussed above, are important here. The first step is to define whether the speaker is `present' in the moment and actively perceives what is being said. As for the calm presence and its characteristics, the main thing is to see whether the speaker makes any moves, gestures, or facial expressions. If they do, it means the there is no calm presence and therefore, the provocateur is highly likely to fulfil the aim of damaging the speaker's reputation.
As was highlighted, the notion of calm presence is closely connected with the notion of active listening. Active listening also entails non-verbal means of communication which are significant for the communicative situation. The body will instinctively try to `close' and defend when confronted with a provocative question. It will be seen in non-verbal signs such as looking down, clenching fists, crossing arms, frowning, making a step backwards, smiling insincerely, fussing, making deep breaths before answering the question. These actions are indicative of the absence of active listening and, therefore, of the speaker's disability to address provocation appropriately.
After the non-verbal sings are examined, the reaction itself is analyzed. On the whole, the reactions of famous speakers fall into four categories being retaliatory aggression, shock and inability to continue, immediately leaving the scene, a humoristic comment about what has happened connected with the topic of talk followed by the continuation of the presentation. The last reaction is the most effective one when dealing with provocation (Kuzin, 2019).
The following step is to analyze whether speakers use some of the techniques to react to provocation and whether the chosen strategies are effective. Kuzin (2019) described many techniques which have practical application in real life. First of all, the author writes about changing the attitudes towards the situation, yourself, the audience, and tough queries. The situation should not be seen as an exam with only right or wrong answers. It is more effective to see the provocative interactions as a game and an opportunity to see the topic from a new perspective. The presenters see themselves neither as pupils who must answer questions as if they were at the exam nor teachers who know everything and thus should not be answering any question. The optimal variant is to be a participant of the communication, an interlocutor. As for the attitude to the listeners, they should also be seen as interlocutors, not examiners or even enemies who try to attack a presenter with questions. The last point is the attitude towards tough questions. Perfectionists see them as rocks being thrown at them, whereas optimalists see such questions as presents. They are thankful for tough or silly questions as they might be helpful to see a topic from a different perspective, to understand what is important for the audience, to see what benefits there are, to see a mistake and accept it, and to give an interesting response.
There are also techniques which are to be used during a pitch, presentation, or any other format of public speaking after which the Q&A session comes. Before the presentation, it is helpful to get to know the audience. It might be beneficial to try to find possible provocateurs and supporters as well as issues which concern people the most. It will enable the presenter to prepare for future questions to some extent. At the beginning of the presentation, it is advised to spend time to communication with the audience by asking about the mood or the situation. It will help to shorten the psychological distance and decrease anxiety. During the presentation, a number of techniques might be used. All of them are directed at decreasing the psychological distance and making the atmosphere more positive so that the Q&A session will be less aggressive and provocative. The first one is the appeal to the authority when the speaker mentions someone from the audience or a person whom the audience know. The next technique is the appeal to the shared experience such as referencing to the worries both the audience and the speaker have. One more technique is self-irony, the key for the speaker here is to make fun of themselves before someone does so as not to lose face. There is also self-openness when the presenter talks about their feelings or background. The last technique is to `paint the devil blacker than he is', or saying that things worse than they seem.
The following techniques are to be used during the Q&A sessions themselves. The first one is called adjustment. It is focused on giving the interlocutor the feeling that they belong to the insider group. The effect can be reached by using words or actions at the beginning of the answer. It is important to pinpoint, though, that there is no need in full adjustment. The presenter should be interested only in those values, emotions, or words which they can relate to or which can reinforce the answer. Full adjustment may lead to logical inconsistencies in the answer as the speaker will not be able to disprove any parts of the question if they have agreed with all the theses. Therefore, there should be partial adjustment. The scheme is the following:
1) To find the parts of the question with which the speaker can agree.
2) To voice partial agreement.
3) To move to the answer.
There is also other technique, that is opposition when the speaker makes excuses, blames anyone, evaluates the personality of a person who is querying them. It is an inefficient technique and, as a consequence, must be avoided. Opposition encompasses arguing and being aggressive, making excuses, defending oneself, making oneself a victim, and evaluation of a personality. All the aforementioned actions lead to the alienation and then irritation of the audience. There are several more things which should be avoided during Q&A sessions: negative non-verbal reactions such as sighs or rolling the eyes; repeating negative words from the question in the answer; the use of the clichйs such as `I understand you but…' or `I see what you mean…' and conflictogenes such as negations and hit-and-runs.
The following strategies are to be used when answering questions after the speaker has listened and understood them. The first technique is called `question for a question'. It is used in order to return psychological leadership in a discussion. The question should not be complex; the presenter might their interlocutor what their name is, how they would answer the question, or clarify some details such as terms, place, or time.
The second technique is `showdown'. The key is to try to find positive intentions even behind the most aggressive provocations. The search for intentions may come either in questions or statements.
The third one is `bringing to the absurdity'. The essence of the technique lies in using humor to make the provocateur laugh by making the statement seem absurd.
The next technique is called `acceptance-depreciation' and is based on the use of the double meaning of the words. By giving words new meanings, the speaker can diminish the effect of the provocation not confronting the provocateur directly.
The fifth technique is `disadvantage=advantage' and relates to the previous one. It refers to finding positive synonyms for words with negative connotations and using them in answers. For instance, saying `sociability' instead of `talkativeness' or `caution' instead of `cowardice'.
The sixth technique is called `the evaluation of the question and going back to the topic' which is extremely helpful if someone from the audience asks irrelevant queries. The task is to give evaluation (this question is too broad/personal/old) and then return to the topic of the talk.
The last technique is `quote-analogy-metaphor' and the essence is in using famous quotes or making analogies and metaphors when responding to questions. It works especially well if the speaker manages to modify a famous phrase according to the topic.
Characteristics of Communicative Strategies
|
Communicative strategy |
Characteristics |
|
|
Adjustment |
Agreeing with some parts of the questions, then moving to an answer; should be partial, not full. |
|
|
Opposition |
Inefficient; encompasses arguing, blaming, evaluation of the personality; some non-verbal signs and clichйs. |
|
|
`Questions for a question' |
Is used in order to return psychological leadership in a discussion; responding to question with a simple question. |
|
|
`Showdown' |
Finding positive intentions even behind the most aggressive provocations; is realized in questions or statements. |
|
|
`Bringing to the absurdity' |
Using humor to make the provocateur laugh by making the question seem absurd. |
|
|
`Acceptance-depreciation' |
No direct confrontation; using double meaning of the words in order to diminish provocation. |
|
|
`Disadvantage=advantage' |
Finding positive synonyms for words with negative connotations. |
|
|
`The evaluation of the question and going back to the topic' |
Is used to answer irrelevant questions; evaluating them and moving back to the topic. |
|
|
`Quote-analogy-metaphor' |
Using famous quotes or making analogies and metaphors when responding to questions; works well if famous quotes are modified according to the topic. |
However, there is the need to divide the conscious usage of communicative strategies to react to provocation from instinctive recourse to other methods to react to aggression, anger, and provocation such as the responses described in the Behavioural Anger Response Questionnaire (Linden, Hogan, Rutledge, Chawla, Lenz & Leung, 2003). The Questionnaire has in its basis six response types to react to anger and provocation: Direct Anger-out, Assertion, Social Support-seeking, Diffusion, Avoidance, and Rumination. Undoubtedly, it is hard to distinguish whether a person uses some strategies consciously or not. The following procedure will be used in order to avoid this limitation: if the speaker shows signs of calm presence or active listening, the research will be likely to look for conscious use of communicative strategies, whereas if the speaker shows signs of losing the control over the situation (which will be seen in how they process questions), then the research will concentrate on various types of unconscious or instinctive reactions to provocation.
To sum up, the following parameters will be used in order to analyze the Q&A session videos using the method of case study: questions, their types and categories; non-verbal signs and actions of the speakers; the responses which the speakers resort to when being confronted with provocation; strategies and types of responses which speakers use to react to provocation.
2. Case Studies Analysis
In this part of the research the cases of Q&A sessions will be analyzed according to the framework presented earlier. The following analysis contains a concise description of the case, questions from the sessions, their types, inferences about their acuity, the analysis of the strategies which the speakers used while answering and, eventually, the discussion of the effectiveness of the answer as well as recommendations on which technique might be more effective. At the end of each case analysis there is a discussion regarding a speaker's communicative behavior.
|
Case 1: Eugene Kaspersky, a Russian businessman, at INSEA Business School. Eugene Kaspersky delivered the keynote lecture om cyber immunity at one of the top business schools. After the lecture, there is the Q&A session. |
|||||
|
Question |
Type of Question |
Acuity of question |
What strategies were used |
Effectiveness and Recommendations |
|
|
Yes, good evening. Donald Trump said he launched a cyber-attack against Iran a few days ago. Can you say more about it? |
Yellow |
The question is quite acute as it refers to the theme of the talk only to some extent. Apart from that, it touches upon personalities (Donald Trump) and politics (attack on Iran) which is not the area of the speaker's specialization. There is also a word `attack' which has a negative connotation. |
The speaker looks down and moves here and there, he loves scrubs his cheek. He does not even look at the interlocutor when he asks the question; it might mean that he is not listening actively and that he is nervous. The speaker first resorts to the adjustment partially agreeing with the interlocutor that there was such news and `they' have seen it. It is done to diminish psychological tension and then moving to the answer which is more about the topic of the talk - cyber security. Apart from that, the speaker uses the `disadvantage=advantage' technique. He does not say that this is a fact, he uses the word `rumours'. The speaker uses many conditional constructions so as to be careful about voicing his opinion on topic. |
The answer is quite effective, although the speaker's nervousness might be seen. The strategies help him to address the topical part of the question specifically without voicing his opinion on the political part of the question regarding Donald Trump and Iran. It might be better for the speaker to show more non-verbal sings of active listening. |
|
|
You spoke about cyber immunity and the cost of an attack. Do you see quantum computing could bring down that cost? |
Green |
The question is not acute because the person from the audience refers to what was said in the lecture (`You spoke about…) and is genuinely interested in the response. No conflictogenes or provocative phrases are used. |
The speaker forgets about the second question after answering the first one. He is reminded of it by a moderator of a Q&A session. The speaker starts to answer the question immediately without taking his time to think as is important for the state of calm presence. The speaker seems to use a kind of an `acceptance-depreciation' technique while he finds related meanings and terms for quantum computers. However, he does not cover the part about costs. The speaker also tries to use some humor and laughs but it seems to have no effect on the audience. |
The answer is not effective as the speaker does not cover all parts of the question. It would be more effective to provide an analogy with something or to use `question for a question' to see what the interlocutor wants to know and what opinion he has. |
|
|
I think you've mentioned it that your source code is opened so that your potential partners can test it, right? But at the same time, you just mentioned that the code can be copied in order to come up with a greater threat. So, how does it work with Kaspersky software products? |
Yellow |
The question is quite provocative because the speaker unveils the inconsistencies in the speaker's talk and answers which can damage the reputation. However, there is still the interest. The phrase `But at the same time you just mentioned…' may be considered conflictogenic in this case. There is also a word with a negative connotation - `threat'. |
It is not shown in the video how the speaker reacts when being asked the question. However, he looks down and moves here and there not looking at the audience after the query is asked which also signalizes about the absence of calm presence and active listening. The speaker looks puzzled as he moves his hand to his chin which is a negative non-verbal sign, especially coupled with looking down and fussing. |
The question is answered not by the speaker but his colleague. While the colleague is answering, the speaker continues to look puzzled or deep in his thoughts. The speaker only adds to the previous answer somehow falling for opposition because he tries to explain that the source code is not everything for the business; it might make the question and the person who asked it look not that smart in the eyes of the audience. This is not an effective technique. It would be better to use `evaluation of the question', thank the person and move back to the topic. |
|
|
Most of the time we hear things in a reactive fashion. So, we here like data breaches have happened and now you're productive. Do you see any trends where things can be productive, and you don't hear the word `data breaches'? Thanks. |
Green |
There is a subtle reference to the speech. No inconsistencies of the speech are mentioned as well as there are no conflictogenes. The person gets straight to the answer. Therefore, the answer is not provocative, there is genuine interest. |
The speaker uses the analogy technique comparing the work of his cyber security company with the police. He also laughs so as to diminish psychological tension. |
The answer is effective as the analogy can be read quite well. Apart from that, the contents of the question are addressed specifically in a quite concise manner. The speaker used a suitable technique for the question. The audience loves which means that the atmosphere remains positive. |
|
|
So, you talked about some IOT devices with security embedded technology. But in large enterprises you still see a lot of legacy hardware, legacy software. So, these highly complex enterprises, how can they keep up when they have these weaklings throughout the organization? |
Green |
There is the reference to the speech and interest in what the speaker has to say. There are words with negative connotation such as `complex', `weaklings'; however, the person has genuine interest in receiving information from the speaker. |
The speaker seems to have collected himself together and to be more present in the situation. He uses the `evaluation of the question' technique and looks and the interlocutor and the audience in general. The speaker uses adjustment because he agrees with the person from the audience. He also uses a kind of a `quote-analogy-metaphor' technology by providing his personal story and then explaining the question on its example (analogy). |
The techniques used are effective as they create a positive atmosphere. Analogy serves good for answering the question as it helps to somehow structure it and address the contents in an appropriate fashion. |
|
|
Hi. What motivated you to be the good guy and not the bad guy. Was it the intellectual challenge? |
Red |
Direct reference to the speaker's personality. The question itself is personal, it touches distantly on the subject. The person is trying to undermine the speaker's reputation. (there is the indirect supposition that the speaker might be a bad guy after all). |
The speaker deals with the question immediately using the `evaluation of the question' technique so as not to answer seriously this irrelevant question. He says that the question is easy and gives a short answer so that he can move back to the topic. |
The technique chosen is effective as the speaker manages to deal with the query quickly without damaging face. |
|
|
Just on the talent though. So, you said that here is always this temptation in the Russian market. I mean potentially for these smart engineers. Do you do things particular to make sure you're attracting the best talent and reinforcing the ethics of the industry. So, they don't, I don't know, come to you, learn what you do and then flip as it were. |
Green |
The person who asks this question is a moderator of the Q&A session. He refers to some parts of the speech and asks a genuine question which, he thinks, might be interesting for the audience. |
The speaker starts to show verbal signs of active listening - he looks at the person who is asking a question and steps up closer to the audience. The speaker seems to use the `showdown' technique searching for positive intentions behind the question (which might be the one that there are talented people working in the speaker's company). He makes a pause at the end of the answer and gets interrupted. He tries to speak louder than the interrupter so as to retain leadership. |
The technique seems to be not as effective, and the answer happens to be quite scattered. Nevertheless, the speaker manages to answer the question well addressing its topic. The flaw of the answer is that he gets interrupted. It would be better to listen to the interrupter, then evaluate his question or statement and then move back to the topic. |
|
|
Thank you for your time. You just speak about the bad guys but sometimes the bad guys are government entities. How do you deal with lobbing to make Kaspersky kind of easy [dashers] for [criminal hackers] or something? |
Green to Yellow |
It is hard to determine whether the question is fully Yellow. It touches upon a tough subject of government entities being bad guys. This part is the person's expression of his stance. However, the question itself is rather green, with no conflictogenes in it. |
The speaker does not get the question completely and has to ask for clarification. This is the manifestation of a `question for a question' technique which gives the speaker enough time to come up with the answer. The speaker uses the phrase `I have the answer'. During the answer the speaker also uses the `quote-analogy-metaphor' technique. |
The technique seems kind of effective, it helps the speaker to have some time to think. It would be better to make adjustment so as to establish closer psychological distance. It goes smoothly after the speaker uses the analogy as the audience nod and smile; therefore, the techniques prove to be effective. |
|
|
Do you wanna share a little bit, well if you want, about you going on market strategy and the use of partners and this kind of stuff? I guess it could be relevant from the earlier days. |
Green |
The person who asks this question is a moderator of the Q&A session. He refers to some parts of the speech and asks a genuine question which, he thinks, might be interesting for the audience. |
The speaker firstly state some points of the question before answering it which is a kind of an adjustment technique - the speaker proves that the process of establishing the company was about market strategy, partners, and other components of the question. |
The answer is effective because adjustment helps the speaker to go on answering freely expanding the topic of the answer during speaking. The audience seem to like the answer. |
|
|
Thank you. So, the companies like IBM have kind of put on some clichй that normally when companies got the cyber tactic, they tend to keep it secret. And the companies don't learn from each other, they kind of don't share the attack […]. This whole idea of creating a more open ecosystem when one is attacked that you share with the others - what kind of role can Kaspersky play in that? |
Yellow |
The question is asked rather to share the person's own opinion on the matter. The question is rather provocative as the speaker has to somehow address the first part with the person's stance as well. |
The speaker uses the `evaluation of the question' technique right after the query is asked (`Thank you for this very good question') and thanks the person. Here the change of attitude can also be seen as the speaker seems to be happy to answer this particular question as he was planning to speak about it himself before the question had been asked. |
The technique used is effective because it helps to create a positive psychological atmosphere so that the speaker can easily answer the question without losing the reputation. |
On the whole, Eugene Kaspersky manages to answer questions quite successfully implementing various techniques according to the situation. At the start of the session, he seems to be quite lost and then wins the psychological leadership back. He uses humor and analogies well to answer questions, although he is not the speaker of the English language. This is highly likely to indicate that his skills regarding public speaking are quite strong. His communicative behaviour and consequently answers would be more successful if he showed non-verbal signs of active listening or learned how to go into the state of calm presence.
|
Case 2: Donald Trump, the US President and a businessman, answers to a question of the reporter as he is departing to Paris, France. |
|||||
|
Question |
Type of Question |
Acuity of question |
What strategies were used |
Effectiveness and Recommendations |
|
|
Do you want him (Attorney General Matt Whitaker) to rein in Special Counsel Robert Mueller? |
Yellow |
The question has no direct aggressive discourse. It is rather used to voice an opinion. The question seems to be an `uncomfortable' one because it touches on personalities as well as contains the word `rein in' which in this case has a negative connotation. |
What a stupid question. But I watch you a lot. You ask a lot of stupid questions. |
The answer is not effective. It constitutes a Direct Anger-out, or retaliatory aggression, and opposition. First of all, the answer seems to be harder than needed as the question is not `red' but `yellow'. It is opposition as Trump does not answer the question but rather evaluates the personality of the reporter and her skills. The answer may fall under `evaluation of the question' technique, although this instance of using it is unsuccessful. It would be better rather to withdraw from the situation completely, to use the `evaluation of the question' in another manner, or to use `showdown' or `analogy'. In this case, Trump could have avoided answering the question without insulting the reporter. |
Trump's communicative behavior is destructive but so is the attitude of the reporter. He answers question in a very negative key using offensive vocabulary and evaluating the personality and skills of the reporter. He might have lost face but makes the reporter lose face instead. His communicative behavior and the answer would be more successful if he just avoided answering the question.
Case 3: Thyngs company's representatives pitches at the Rising Stars Grand Final in London and answers the questions after the talk.Rising Stars is the UK pitch competition for early-stage tech startups. |
|||||
|
Question |
Type of Question |
Acuity of question |
What strategies were used |
Effectiveness and Recommendations |
|
|
I've had some exposure to the company that was taking QR-codes to the next level because a huge amount of fraud in QR. So, when you talk about a scanning element of this, how are you managing that particular challenge within the sector, especially with Asian products coming in, [they] have a major fraud and copy issues. |
Yellow |
The question is asked to, to some extent, to share an opinion because the person has expertise in the subject. It contains several topical parts (fraud, managing challenge, Asian products) which makes it harder to answer. There are also words with negative connotations - fraud, challenge, issues. |
The speaker shows the signs of calm presence as he stands still and does not make any moves or gestures and looks on the person answering the question. He also indicates active listening by saying `yeah' to shows that he is actively involved. However, it seems to be inappropriate as it might irritate the person asking a query. The speaker seems to use the `disadvantage=advantage' technique by converting the negative part about the Asian products to an advantage. |
The answer is effective as the technique helps the person to focus on positives sides of the question and avoid telling about its negative components. |
|
|
You mentioned that the chipset you use is pence. Can you just talk me through that because I've watched IT industries like this for two or three years and the minimum that the chipset has got is about 8.50 |
Green to Yellow |
The question is asked to, to some extent, to share an opinion because the person has expertise in the subject. However, the interest in response is genuine. |
Подобные документы
Formation of intercultural business communication, behavior management and communication style in multicultural companies in the internationalization and globalization of business. The study of the branch of the Swedish-Chinese company, based in Shanghai.
статья [16,2 K], добавлен 20.03.2013Six principles of business etiquette survival or success in the business world. Punctuality, privacy, courtesy, friendliness and affability, attention to people, appearance, literacy speaking and writing as the major commandments of business man.
презентация [287,1 K], добавлен 21.10.2013Impact of globalization on the way organizations conduct their businesses overseas, in the light of increased outsourcing. The strategies adopted by General Electric. Offshore Outsourcing Business Models. Factors for affect the success of the outsourcing.
реферат [32,3 K], добавлен 13.10.2011Investigation of the subjective approach in optimization of real business process. Software development of subject-oriented business process management systems, their modeling and perfection. Implementing subject approach, analysis of practical results.
контрольная работа [18,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016The essence, structure, оbjectives and functions of business plan. The process’s essence of the bank’s business plan realization. Sequential decision and early implementation stages of projects. Widely spread mistakes and ways for their improvement.
курсовая работа [67,0 K], добавлен 18.12.2011Improving the business processes of customer relationship management through automation. Solutions the problem of the absence of automation of customer related business processes. Develop templates to support ongoing processes of customer relationships.
реферат [173,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Milestones and direction of historical development in Germany, its current status and value in the world. The main rules and principles of business negotiations. Etiquette in management of German companies. The approaches to the formation of management.
презентация [7,8 M], добавлен 26.05.2015M.A. Rothschild is a German banker and the founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty, business leader, which is believed to have become the wealthiest family in human history. A brief sketch of his life and career. Main stages of empire building.
презентация [425,6 K], добавлен 10.06.2014Company’s representative of small business. Development a project management system in the small business, considering its specifics and promoting its development. Specifics of project management. Problems and structure of the enterprises of business.
реферат [120,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Evaluation of urban public transport system in Indonesia, the possibility of its effective development. Analysis of influence factors by using the Ishikawa Cause and Effect diagram and also the use of Pareto analysis. Using business process reengineering.
контрольная работа [398,2 K], добавлен 21.04.2014
