Patient medication guide for treatment of depressive disorders
To discuss your communication plan, you want to hold the most productive meeting possible. You know that, in general, women look for equality among other team members when speaking. Men tend to interrupt and speak more frequently during meetings, taking up more time and space. There are many communication differences between men and women. Because your staff includes 6 men and 6 women, gender communication differences are important. With your colleagues, discuss ways to ensure that everyone at the meeting has the opportunity to fully communicate their ideas. Discuss the following:
1 nonverbal difference between males and females
1 verbal difference between males and females.
How and why you can use this knowledge to communicate to the female and male audiences in the organization that you selected
Sample Solution
When it comes to communication between genders in the workplace, understanding nonverbal and verbal differences can be key in ensuring effective conversations. Nonverbally, men and women tend to differ in how they perceive personal space which, when left unchecked, could potentially lead to one party feeling undervalued or overlooked (Crawford 2020). To ensure equality among team members during a meeting for example, special attention should be paid to seating arrangements that allow all participants to feel comfortable conversing without physical barriers that may inadvertently limit one’s ability to effectively communicate their ideas (Ferraro et al., 2017).
Verbally speaking, there are also many gender-based differences worth noting such as the tendency of men using more impersonal language when talking with each other while being more polite when communicating with women (Kramarae & Treichler 1985). This difference is especially pertinent during group conversations where some male voices will inevitably dominate due measures like talking louder or longer than their female counterparts which need addressing prior start of any discussion if everyone’s input is desired (Ridgeway 1990). With this knowledge in mind organizations should introduce methods of communication that promote equality amongst its staff such as “talking sticks” or similar tools which facilitate smoother transitions between speakers thus allowing everyone present enough time and space necessary express themselves fully.
By recognizing and accounting for these types of gender-based communication differences organizations can create an environment capable of fostering meaningful dialogue across genders regardless any preconceived notions about either sex. Moreover by doing so companies demonstrate commitment towards promoting equity within work settings through simple but powerful actions thus establishing better connections with both male and female audiences within their organization.
This article examines and attempts to explain public scepticism surrounding the European Union (coined Euroskepticism). Since 1990, there has been an increasing move to make European Union decision making more democratic with increased oversight of national parliaments, greater powers for the European Parliament, majority voting within the Council, and an increase in EU referendums. This has sought to bring to an end to an era where European elites bargained treaties in the shadow of an apathetic and generally approving public. Hooghe seeks to understand what drives European Union decision making in the modern era, as well as Euroskepticism. This move was embodied in the rejection of the European Constitutional Treaty in 2005, forcing a rethink of the permissive consensus that the people in charge of the European Union were above accountability. To this day, the matter of European integration has been strictly labelled as a contentious issue.
Hooghe begins his examination by establishing two, diametrically opposed theories of European Union politics. One theory is a bottom up view of preference formation. In this argument, voter’s preferences provide a structure of incentives for party position in the context of electoral competition. Whichever party can best capitalise on voter preferences will be better situated to acquire political power. In the context of the European Union, policy makers must gauge the public mood on European integration and make decisions from that.
Another theory is the top down approach, whereby political parties cue and directly influence the opinions and decisions of the public. Political parties, according to this theory, hold the ideological maps to help navigate highly technical and multi-faceted issues (such as those facing European integration). The public can rarely grasp the complexities of these issues, and thus look to political parties for guidance.
Hooghe, in his analysis, agrees with the bottom up approach to explain Euroskepticism. Euroskepticism, then, is best understood as a rational response by citizens (and thus political parties) for whom centralized European Union power is a threat to their own personal interests, not as a result of dissent o