Proper Communication Theory
By Msc, Msd, Bsc Cristian Guerrero Castro.
The experts from various fields are focusing on the things they call Proper Communication, that has produced numerous people who talk about "their science", express their findings and dictate norms that are attempting to establish something similar to a structure inside a non-existent science.
I only say "non-existent science" since it is not established as a result, getting neither an absolute conceptualization, nor a present or perhaps a systematic and unified lineament.
You will find several disciplines claiming the Proper Communication, for example pr, journalism, visual communication, advertising, marketing yet others. Therefore making clear questions arise, for example: which discipline does proper communication fit in with? Or: Can every discipline communicate smartly? Now my real question is: just how can a discipline confirm to speak smartly without understanding about strategy?
When we evaluate the varied ideas of communication, we are able to mention the idea of mass communication by Harold Dwight Lasswell that defines it as being "structure and performanceInch, meaning communication may be the supervision or surveillance from the atmosphere, the correlation of various areas of the society reacting towards the atmosphere leading to speak.
We're able to title many communication advocates, for example David Berlo who examined the goal of mass communication by emphasizing the easiest: "To ensure that there's communication between your sender and also the receptor, they have to speak exactly the same language and comprehend the same signs to be able to make the entire process of communication perfect", or possibly famous advocates who led considerably towards the science of communication like Gerhard Maletzke, Warren Weaver, among many more.
Herewith we clarify the communication is made like a science, because it has ideas and scientific lineaments. But what went down using the strategy? Within this point the "autopoiesis"(MATURANA) or unification of communication and strategy doesn't get established for individuals who don't comprehend the "logic of action" of strategy. However, later I'll prove the technique is both a art and science.
So, do you know the ideas of strategy? What exactly are its primary advocates? Do you know the techniques of strategy? So how exactly does the process work? Or a simple question like: what's strategy? Questions that paralyze all of the alleged "experts" from the so-known as "proper communication" that people see nowadays with innocent and illusory guides on something they don't have a precise understanding about and haven't examined completely. Understanding from the communication ideas yes, but no understanding from the theory of strategy and it is implementation.
Proper Communication today, once we have previously mentioned, is a combination of diverse activities, because both versions needs to a greater or lower degree structured its methods of research, evaluation and control, a scenario that's not defined within the real scenario of proper communication.
This system, that we're missing, must retain the vital objectives from the entity, what are foundation of the proper process in the 3d (proper, operational and tactical).
This system should also incorporate a structured research into the factors from the scenario using the pertinent qualitative and quantitative instruments of research, thinking about the qualities from the scenario, the foundation from the conflict, the chances, measures, rates, considerations, the indirect and direct stars, the intervening factors in each and every stage from the scenario, and also the behavior from the stars previously, present and future.
The possible lack of a methodology to define the proper communication has as result that used each entity, company, institution or organization evolves these activities based on how it's construed by who manages el born area. That leads to wrong, incomplete or certainly inapplicable communication management.
With no precise understanding from the ideas from the strategy like a tool, method, discipline so that as science, individuals dont unify. This can lead to among the formerly indicated problems where lots of people from various disciplines irresponsibly call proper communication the things they consider "interacting smartly", supported by their encounters, cases, or sometimes by their "enlightened gift of smell"
They confuse social communication with proper communication.
This really is very important because with no structured methodology in which the sciences communication and strategy work, we neglect to develop proper communication, we simply communicate, because technique is the science of getting pregnant, initiating, determining, planning, performing, using and guiding the press in a particular time, place and space to attain or keep up with the set goals inside a particular scenario.
This theory, with different thorough 5-year research proposes a methodology for determining communication methods, thinking about the technique is the nucleus and also the motor driving the communication whit an integration of Mass communication and Strategy sciences.
S+A = (S-radio wave + C.radio wave) = S= (S*) + M+C= (Sig1, chn, cod, sn, sig2) = C = (C*)
+ [Mng] S.C
"Without strategy we are able to only communicate. Just with strategy we are able to communicate smartly." Cristian Guerrero-Castro. 2011.