2Perception and ParadigmsPerception

2
Perception and Paradigms
Perception is the overriding influence surrounding our understanding of organizational
communication. In organizations, the issues we pay attention to
and the concepts we understand are based on what we perceive. The process of
perception is the selecting, organizing, and interpreting of sensory stimulations
into a meaningful and coherent picture of the world. We are constantly working
to make sense of our surrounding environment as we make mental decisions,
consciously or unconsciously, about events. These decisions represent an
individual’s or group’s assessment or ideas about the real world. Once formed,
perceptions are translated into paradigms. Paradigms are the working principles
formed from our perceptions and past behaviors that we use to guide us
as we respond to our surroundings, tackle problems, or deal with uncertainty.
The key concepts in this chapter:
Perception
Paradigms
Our perceptual base
Sensory and symbolic basis
Psychological factors
Globalization
Organizational role constraints
Focusing on perception and paradigms is one of the advantages of a communication
perspective for the study of organizations. Because the living system of
an organization, by definition, includes a large number of variables, the behaviors
we choose to “pay attention to” or select from the available data become
the determining factors underlying our own behaviors within the organization.
In a capsule, our view of reality, both in an organization and during our
entire lives, is based on our perceptions. Perception and paradigms impact
our judgment and subsequent actions dramatically. For example, medical
malpractice suits represent a multibillion dollar expense added to American
health care costs. The filing of a lawsuit is a clear indication that some aspect
of the medical process was unsatisfactory to the patient. Studies indicate that
patients who have been depersonalized, slighted, or treated abruptly are the
ones that tend to sue (Bishop, 1994). On the other hand, patients treated with
effective interpersonal skills including empathy and interest rarely sue. In
•••••••
36 • Applied Organizational Communication
other words, satisfaction with medical care has less to do with the doctor’s
credentials or the success of the treatment than the interpersonal treatment
received (Bishop, 1994; Levy, 1997). We cannot trivialize the importance of
good medical care nor the right of patients to expect adequate treatment. But,
the quality of personalized care provided by the sued and nonsued doctors
was based on the doctors’ perception of their role with patients (i.e., their
personal view of reality) and the resulting paradigms (i.e., their set of rules
for responding) that determine their interpersonal role in the doctor–patient
medical process. Stated bluntly, some doctor’s paradigms toward patient care
intentionally or unintentionally included ineffective interpersonal actions
leading to patient dissatisfaction. In the studies reported, the nonsued doctors
used more personalized care. Because both perception and paradigms are
critical concepts, we discuss each one separately.
Perception
Gaining insights into the perception process is a foundational step in helping
us become effective organizational communicators. Perception is our interpretation
of reality. Our efforts to make sense out of the information and multiple
inputs we receive are a prerequisite to knowing how to respond. This is an
immensely complex procedure that is often synonymous with growing up,
learning to make decisions, knowing how to act correctly and appropriately,
plus a host of other behaviors we undertake in an organization. Consider the
following three examples.
First, globalization presents a challenge in terms of how we view individuals
with different cultures, upbringing, and backgrounds. “The journal Science
finds that our stereotypes about different cultures, whether positive or
negative, are just plain unreliable” concluding that there is about zero overlap
between perception and reality (Weise, 2005, p. 9A). The Science study
included 3,989 people in 49 different cultures worldwide. One useful example
is a possible explanation for why Chinese and U.S. political leaders interpret
events differently leading to fundamental differences in perception. In examining
recent U.S. and Chinese dialogues and disagreements, Kuhn (2006)
asked: “Why do China and America have such difficulty communicating?”
His analysis concludes that, instead of fundamental differences over issues,
“the cause of their at times cacophonous discourse could lie in something less
obvious: the strikingly different academic training of their political leaders”
(Kuhn, 2006, p. 33). The majority of U.S. national leaders have a legal background,
whereas all nine of China’s senior leaders are trained as engineers.
“This is no small difference. Engineers strive for ‘better,’ while lawyers prepare
for the worst” (Kuhn, 2006, p. 33). So, when U.S. and Chinese leaders attempt
to understand each other’s actions and motives, both parties are proceeding
from fundamentally different educational, training, and problem solving
backgrounds. We return to globalization later in this chapter.
Perception and Paradigms • 37
Our second example allows us to examine health care for a second time, but
with a different focus. Increasingly, organizations are facing significant financial
demands in terms of health care costs and the effectiveness of programs
promoting healthy living (Merx, 2005). A survey of 120 large- and mediumsize
companies revealed that “nearly two thirds didn’t think their staffs were
conscientious health care users or cared about making lifestyle changes that
could lower health care costs” (Mehring, 2004, p. 28). “At the same time, 82%
of workers believed they effectively used their health care benefits” (Mehring,
2004, p. 28). This impasse is largely caused by poor communication arising
from each party making assumptions based on their perceptions of reality,
according to Tower Perrin, a leading human resource giant, who conducted
the survey (Mehring, 2004).
The last example also deals with medical issues from a personal perspective.
When you receive medical samples or advice, how do you react? Surprisingly,
“nearly 80% of blacks and 52% of whites believe they could be used as
‘guinea pigs’ for medical research” according to a survey of more than 500
blacks and 400 whites, randomly selected from across the United States (Fackelmann,
2002, p. 9D). In addition, “about 63% of African Americans and 38%
of Whites said doctors often prescribe medication to experiment on people
without their consent” (Fackelmann, 2002, p. 9D). In this survey, patients
also expressed distrust regarding receiving a full explanation of the impact of
research participation, thought doctors sometimes exposed them to unnecessary
risks, and felt they were unable to fully question their doctor. At least two
important insights developed from these results. First, there was no indication
that the surveyed patients had any evidence to support their distrust,
although African Americans often remember “the 1932–1972 Tuskegee study
in which researchers denied treatment to nearly 400 black men with syphilis
to see how the disease progressed” (Fackelmann, 2002, p. 9D). However, this
does not explain the somewhat universal patient distrust. Second, we often
misperceive what we do not fully understand.
There are two benefits to understanding the role of perception in organizations.
First, we can adjust our own perceptual capacities to enhance our performances,
and second, we can learn to better understand other people’s actions
and responses. We only can respond to behaviors by other people—knowing
the underlying motives or reasons is rarely, if ever, possible. Therefore,
the facts and knowledge we have about a situation are based on the process
of our previous experiences, obtaining information and messages, imposing
sequence and arbitrary order to the vast amount of potential data, and making
choices regarding our willingness even to pay additional attention to particular
information (Dobkin & Pace, 2006).
Our senses, including seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, or touching, provide
us with our interpretations of reality. This process of discrimination has
the inherent by-product of never being “able to see it as it is,” but only as we
38 • Applied Organizational Communication
interpret it to be. Reality, both within organizations and throughout our lives, is
a function of the interpretation we assign to our own perceptions. “There is only
perceived reality, the way each of us chooses to perceive a communication,
the value of a service, the value of a particular product feature, the quality
of a product. The real is what we perceive” (Peters & Austin, 1985, p. 71). For
example, one study concluded: “Our research uncovered one amazing fact:
Almost 70 percent of the identifiable reasons customers left typical companies
had nothing to do with product” (Whiteley, 1991, p. 9). Why did they leave? In
most cases, they were disillusioned by poor customer service that can impact
any organization (Hindo, 2006).
To bring this discussion into our context, why are you more concerned
with organizational communication than acid rain? The answer, assuming
that this is a correct assumption, lies in your response to a large number of
stimuli from which you decided to pay attention to some input while excluding
other available information.
Paradigms
Paradigms are our perceptual theories-in-use that influence our understanding
of organizations and guide our actions. They explain how we should
respond to our sensory experiences. As such, paradigms are a consequence
of the perceptual processes we use in gathering and utilizing meaning and
information. Paradigms, as originally highlighted by Kuhn (1962), explain
how scientific researchers are influenced by their pe

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

2Persepsi dan paradigmaPersepsi adalah pengaruh override sekitar pemahaman kita tentang organisasikomunikasi. Dalam organisasi, masalah-masalah kita memperhatikandan konsep-konsep yang kita memahami didasarkan pada apa yang kita anggap. Prosespersepsi adalah memilih, pengorganisasian, dan menafsirkan Indra stimulationske dalam sebuah gambar yang bermakna dan koheren di dunia. Kami terus bekerjamasuk akal lingkungan sekitar kita seperti yang kita membuat keputusan mental,disadari atau tidak, tentang peristiwa-peristiwa. Keputusan ini mewakiliindividu atau penilaian group atau ide-ide tentang dunia nyata. Setelah terbentuk,persepsi yang diterjemahkan ke dalam paradigma. Paradigma adalah prinsip-prinsip kerjadibentuk dari persepsi kita dan masa lalu perilaku yang kita gunakan untuk membimbing kitaKetika kita menanggapi lingkungan kita, mengatasi masalah, atau berurusan dengan ketidakpastian.Konsep-konsep kunci dalam bab ini:PersepsiParadigmaBasis persepsiDasar sensorik dan simbolisFaktor-faktor psikologisGlobalisasiPeran organisasi kendalaBerfokus pada persepsi dan paradigma adalah salah satu keuntungan dari komunikasiperspektif untuk studi organisasi. Karena sistem hidupsebuah organisasi, menurut definisi, mencakup sejumlah besar variabel, perilakukita memilih untuk "membayar perhatian" atau pilih dari data yang tersedia yang menjadifaktor yang menentukan perilaku kita sendiri dalam organisasi yang mendasari.In a capsule, our view of reality, both in an organization and during ourentire lives, is based on our perceptions. Perception and paradigms impactour judgment and subsequent actions dramatically. For example, medicalmalpractice suits represent a multibillion dollar expense added to Americanhealth care costs. The filing of a lawsuit is a clear indication that some aspectof the medical process was unsatisfactory to the patient. Studies indicate thatpatients who have been depersonalized, slighted, or treated abruptly are theones that tend to sue (Bishop, 1994). On the other hand, patients treated witheffective interpersonal skills including empathy and interest rarely sue. In•••••••36 • Applied Organizational Communicationother words, satisfaction with medical care has less to do with the doctor’scredentials or the success of the treatment than the interpersonal treatmentreceived (Bishop, 1994; Levy, 1997). We cannot trivialize the importance ofgood medical care nor the right of patients to expect adequate treatment. But,the quality of personalized care provided by the sued and nonsued doctorswas based on the doctors’ perception of their role with patients (i.e., theirpersonal view of reality) and the resulting paradigms (i.e., their set of rulesfor responding) that determine their interpersonal role in the doctor–patientmedical process. Stated bluntly, some doctor’s paradigms toward patient careintentionally or unintentionally included ineffective interpersonal actionsleading to patient dissatisfaction. In the studies reported, the nonsued doctorsused more personalized care. Because both perception and paradigms arecritical concepts, we discuss each one separately.PerceptionGaining insights into the perception process is a foundational step in helpingus become effective organizational communicators. Perception is our interpretationof reality. Our efforts to make sense out of the information and multipleinputs we receive are a prerequisite to knowing how to respond. This is animmensely complex procedure that is often synonymous with growing up,learning to make decisions, knowing how to act correctly and appropriately,plus a host of other behaviors we undertake in an organization. Consider thefollowing three examples.First, globalization presents a challenge in terms of how we view individualswith different cultures, upbringing, and backgrounds. “The journal Sciencefinds that our stereotypes about different cultures, whether positive ornegative, are just plain unreliable” concluding that there is about zero overlapbetween perception and reality (Weise, 2005, p. 9A). The Science studyincluded 3,989 people in 49 different cultures worldwide. One useful exampleis a possible explanation for why Chinese and U.S. political leaders interpretevents differently leading to fundamental differences in perception. In examiningrecent U.S. and Chinese dialogues and disagreements, Kuhn (2006)asked: “Why do China and America have such difficulty communicating?”His analysis concludes that, instead of fundamental differences over issues,“the cause of their at times cacophonous discourse could lie in something lessobvious: the strikingly different academic training of their political leaders”(Kuhn, 2006, p. 33). The majority of U.S. national leaders have a legal background,whereas all nine of China’s senior leaders are trained as engineers.“This is no small difference. Engineers strive for ‘better,’ while lawyers preparefor the worst” (Kuhn, 2006, p. 33). So, when U.S. and Chinese leaders attemptto understand each other’s actions and motives, both parties are proceedingfrom fundamentally different educational, training, and problem solvingbackgrounds. We return to globalization later in this chapter.Perception and Paradigms • 37Our second example allows us to examine health care for a second time, butwith a different focus. Increasingly, organizations are facing significant financialdemands in terms of health care costs and the effectiveness of programspromoting healthy living (Merx, 2005). A survey of 120 large- and mediumsizecompanies revealed that “nearly two thirds didn’t think their staffs wereconscientious health care users or cared about making lifestyle changes thatcould lower health care costs” (Mehring, 2004, p. 28). “At the same time, 82%of workers believed they effectively used their health care benefits” (Mehring,2004, p. 28). This impasse is largely caused by poor communication arisingfrom each party making assumptions based on their perceptions of reality,according to Tower Perrin, a leading human resource giant, who conductedthe survey (Mehring, 2004).The last example also deals with medical issues from a personal perspective.When you receive medical samples or advice, how do you react? Surprisingly,“nearly 80% of blacks and 52% of whites believe they could be used as‘guinea pigs’ for medical research” according to a survey of more than 500blacks and 400 whites, randomly selected from across the United States (Fackelmann,2002, p. 9D). In addition, “about 63% of African Americans and 38%of Whites said doctors often prescribe medication to experiment on peoplewithout their consent” (Fackelmann, 2002, p. 9D). In this survey, patientsalso expressed distrust regarding receiving a full explanation of the impact ofresearch participation, thought doctors sometimes exposed them to unnecessaryrisks, and felt they were unable to fully question their doctor. At least twoimportant insights developed from these results. First, there was no indicationthat the surveyed patients had any evidence to support their distrust,although African Americans often remember “the 1932–1972 Tuskegee studyin which researchers denied treatment to nearly 400 black men with syphilisto see how the disease progressed” (Fackelmann, 2002, p. 9D). However, this
does not explain the somewhat universal patient distrust. Second, we often
misperceive what we do not fully understand.
There are two benefits to understanding the role of perception in organizations.
First, we can adjust our own perceptual capacities to enhance our performances,
and second, we can learn to better understand other people’s actions
and responses. We only can respond to behaviors by other people—knowing
the underlying motives or reasons is rarely, if ever, possible. Therefore,
the facts and knowledge we have about a situation are based on the process
of our previous experiences, obtaining information and messages, imposing
sequence and arbitrary order to the vast amount of potential data, and making
choices regarding our willingness even to pay additional attention to particular
information (Dobkin & Pace, 2006).
Our senses, including seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, or touching, provide
us with our interpretations of reality. This process of discrimination has
the inherent by-product of never being “able to see it as it is,” but only as we
38 • Applied Organizational Communication
interpret it to be. Reality, both within organizations and throughout our lives, is
a function of the interpretation we assign to our own perceptions. “There is only
perceived reality, the way each of us chooses to perceive a communication,
the value of a service, the value of a particular product feature, the quality
of a product. The real is what we perceive” (Peters & Austin, 1985, p. 71). For
example, one study concluded: “Our research uncovered one amazing fact:
Almost 70 percent of the identifiable reasons customers left typical companies
had nothing to do with product” (Whiteley, 1991, p. 9). Why did they leave? In
most cases, they were disillusioned by poor customer service that can impact
any organization (Hindo, 2006).
To bring this discussion into our context, why are you more concerned
with organizational communication than acid rain? The answer, assuming
that this is a correct assumption, lies in your response to a large number of
stimuli from which you decided to pay attention to some input while excluding
other available information.
Paradigms
Paradigms are our perceptual theories-in-use that influence our understanding
of organizations and guide our actions. They explain how we should
respond to our sensory experiences. As such, paradigms are a consequence
of the perceptual processes we use in gathering and utilizing meaning and
information. Paradigms, as originally highlighted by Kuhn (1962), explain
how scientific researchers are influenced by their pe