Communication Modalities

The State University of New York (n.d.) define learning modalities as the sensory channels or pathways through which
individuals give, receive, and store information. In this week’s blog post, I examine one message through three modalities: email, voicemail, and face-to-face, to determine communication impact or results. 

Email 

The overall tone of the email sounds rushed, as if the sender is exasperated with trying to retrieve the report data from Mark. The word ‘report’ is included 4-5 times, seemingly to emphasize its importance. I get the sense that the receiver might have requested this report before, due to the reference that it is missing’. All of these markers in the email messages paint the picture that the receiver may not be concerned about the established deadlines. 

Voicemail

The voicemail sounded less accusatory, with the sender speaking as if they were in a rush and needed the report as soon as possible. The tone of voice was calm yet pleasant, which makes the message almost see sympathetic. Unlike the email, hearing the sender’s verbal offer option for the receiver to email the data separately sounds as if she was trying to assist the receiver in an easier way to provide her the requested information. 

Face-To-Face

The young lady’s facial expressions also display a warm demeanor towards the receiver. Similar to the voicemail, the face-to-face modality was warm. The young lady uses a calming voice to appease the receiver, displaying her need for the reports and how they affected her project deadlines. 

It is important to understand that communication can be perceived differently and have varied results and reactions based on how it is received. As a project manager, this individual will be responsible for identifying the preferred communication methods for clients, team members, and any other stakeholders to guarantee messages are conveyed and received in a positive and productive manner that keeps the task moving forward. 

Reference

Modalities (n.d.). The State University of New York. Retrieved from https://web.cortland.edu/andersmd/learning/modalities.htm

Project Management Failures

Quite often, we tend to focus on the success we’ve experienced with accomplishing projects. But what about when we fail? How can we learn from those losses? I discuss an example of a failed project below and strategies I could have implemented to make the process more fluid. 

Project Background

In July 2018, I was asked to create an evaluation norming activity to release to 450 school principals in an effort to continue honing evaluation practices. To provide context, a norming activity typically includes an opportunity for evaluation teams to view a recorded instructional lesson, script by collecting evidence, and align evidence to the assigned rubric to determine a teacher’s level of instructional performance. I was given little to no guidance on how to set this up; I was told “We want this done. Preferably around September.” I quickly began outlining what was needed for this project to happen: timelines for completion, expected outcomes, technical needs (LMS platform functions), and communication plan. At the time, I had about 3-4 weeks to create the program’s functions, with check-ins with the manager each week to report progress. No recommendations were given, no changes. By late August, a final project that met the requirements I created. I did ask for colleague feedback, inviting them to walk through the course requirements in the LMS and an overview of the discussion. Both ended with positive results. When presented to my manager with feedback, she stated the next phase was for her to include other leadership members to review the process, from outline to finished product. I was told I would have ‘feedback’ by September...yet September is when they wanted the program to rollout for participants. 

Long story short...the norming project was not released until November 2018, two months after the initial requested launch. After an additional 4 weeks of inquiring about feedback from leadership, my manager requested to broaden the audience from 450 principals to all 632 school-level administrators across the district. This meant I had to manually add the additional 182 people to the current LMS course. In lieu of each grade band receiving its own aligned instructional video, all participants were required to watch the same 3rd grade video, which angered many of the middle and high school administrators. The last piece of straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back was after the two-month delay, the project was mysteriously ‘reassigned’ from me to the Academics department lead to revise, The final product on their end was the same project I created. I did manage to determine that the transfer of the project was not due to my error or negligence; it was reallocated because leaders felt ‘the norming process would be better suited in the academics department, not the evaluation department’. By December 2018, only 27 people completed the norming assignment. 

Why did the project fail?

I believe it was due to unclear expectations on what was wanted. I created a program that could have been successful (It was when we used it in 2019) yet there were no guidelines in which the manager nor her leadership had for the process. Time was also a factor in its failure. By the time participants were granted access, it was December, a time of year that many school administrators are engulfed in many end of semester tasks (i.e. grading, district responsibilities, evaluations). If the project was launched on time, we would have at least allowed for practice before the actual evaluation season began and used the data to determine areas of focus for future practice and areas to support during the season. 

Which parts of the PM process, if included, would have made the project more successful? Why?

When I reflect on my experience, I should have asked more questions about what my manager’s expectations were, even if she initially responded with nothing. Two that come to mind is what her vision was for norming, or if the department had conducted it previously and its outcomes. Also, conducting a needs analysis to determine areas of concern would have been a great method to assess evaluation areas to pinpoint support and norming aids. 

New Course Alert! EDUC 6145: Project Management

 EDUC 6145: Project Management 

New Course Alert!

Welcome to Project Management! This is the 9th course in the Instructional Design & Technology program with Walden University. This blog will give you a glimpse into my thoughts and ideas about ID experiences within the project management field.

Be sure to follow my blog! Leave a comment below to let me know you are here!

-IDT Newbie