[SOUND] Now, lets have a look at the possible expressions that we can use to offer suggestions. What we talk about here apply to both written and oral forms and especially in formal settings. Like in a work place, so what are some possible direct and therefore may appear as more forceful and less polite expressions of offering suggestions? Phrases such as you ought to/must/ or do, can, had better, I suggest, if X, then, what you're suggesting is, why don't you? And you offer your suggestion. So such phrases, such expressions appear forceful in a sense that while you're making a suggestion, it sounds like you're not giving your audience an opportunity to say no. It comes across as very forceful. For example, statements such as you ought to or must speak with Ms. Chan sounds like an instruction rather than a suggestion. So these kinds of expressions may be more widely used in a large power distance culture or community where one dominates. Where there's an emphasis on their higher and lower ranks and small likely that the higher ranked people would use these, the more individualist oriented culture where people focus more on themselves and not care so much about the emphasis of being in a group. And a masculine culture where men generally at the top and they could, so they went in terms of even when I make suggestions, they would sound more forceful. Similar to the way you give indirect instructions when you offer suggestions to some more indirect and therefore less forceful and more polite. We put the content of the suggestions itself to the later part of the question or sentence, for example, may I suggest or recommend, or would it be good, or have you considered, or you could try. You might want to think about. So these are examples of expressions that you can use whereby you phrase your suggestion as a question so that you allow your audience more opportunity or more freedom to say no to your suggestion, you sound less forceful. And even amongst these expressions, the past tense tends to be more indirect and so you can say something like instead of will, you can say X would help you if you ask him. So putting a suggestion in the past tense will make it sound even more polite and indirect. So for example, you can ask a suggestion, ask, phrase your suggestion like, may I suggest you speak with Ms. Chan about the budget proposal? Instead of saying you ought to. Ought to sounds instructional. This is purely a suggestions. Things like, you may or might consider speaking with Ms. Chan about the budget proposal. Not necessarily putting it as a question. But a more polite way of suggesting an idea would be using words like may, or could, or might that I mentioned before. So such expressions are more widely used in small power distance where there's less emphasis on ranking in a group base society and the more feminine society where men and women are of equal status. So men and women are equally able to be direct and indirect. To appear more fair, it would be good for you to add reasoning and your view point to your indirect expressions in offering suggestions as well. You might say something like, you might want to, or you might like to think about because. Or, have you thought about, or if I were you, next time I would or would not do something. Did you consider, the way I see it, you probably should or should not have. So you offer reasons for why you make the suggestions. This way, you are more convincing and your audience is more likely to listen to your suggestion. So for example, you could say something like, if you ask me, it probably would have been better for you to speak with Ms. Chan about the budget proposal. Ms. Chan has completed many budget proposals for advertising companies like the one you're working on. So she would be able to help you, so this sounds like a valid reason for why you're making a suggestion to your audience. So it's more likely that your audience will listen to you. So you may want to try some of these expressions when you make suggestions next time. Now, lets have a look at Question 2: Offering suggestions in the Pre-lesson task. The situation is, Peter is the team leader of a design project for Client A, and Mandy works as part of Peter's team. They have been working on the budget for Client A in the past week. One day, client A writes an email to Peter and his team and asks, please let me know exactly how much should be spent on salaries based on the budget. Thinking Peter is in a meeting at that moment, Mandy believes in taking initiative and rings Client A to tell the client the suggested amount written on the budget. Just as Mandy says 'Based on the budget it's about X amount, Peter walks into Amanda's office and he hears that line and becomes very angry at Mandy and shouts, "what did you just say! Mandy did not speak but did not understand why Peter shouted. How did this miscommunication happen? Let's consider some possible reasons for why this miscommunication occurred, that is, why did Mandy not understand Peter was angry and shouting. So in terms of cultural values and differences, if we were to look at power distance, for example, it could be because of different cultural values in how people pursue the distribution of power or how much emphasis is there on the rankings in power. So in this situation the Client A emails to request for budget for salaries. Without checking, Mandy rings to reply. If Peter is from a large power culture, Peter would feel that in terms of hierarchy, Mandy should have checked with Peter about what to say to Client A. Regardless of whether the information is accurate or not because the whole email was sent to Peter, being the leader, and his team. So Peter may feel that Mandy should respect that hierarchy. So Peter is angry because he may feel that Mandy should respect and checks information first before the message is sent to Client A even if the information is correct. And also, if wasn't budget that they were working on, so it may even be that there are changes in the figures. So Mandy, for that reason, should have checked as well. For Mandy, Mandy could also be from a small distance culture so she could possibly believe that all ranks are equal so it doesn't matter who replies. And if Peter is busy, even though he's the boss, she could do it because they are equal, they have the same level of information and so, you have the right to share it, as well, before checking. So this is how cultural values could differentiate people's believes and behavior in a workplace. Let's have a look at the possible considerations on how context affects the communication between Peter and Mandy, in this case. So in terms of the context, definitely it should be formal because it was a communication on a official matter that is Client A's request for a budget for salaries. So the matter is formal, the communication between all parties should also be formal. And so, therefore, politeness, indirectness should be applied. In terms of the exchange between all parties as well, if the language is formal the tone should also be formal. And the form in which the information, that is communicated should also be formal, meaning to say Client A emailed to us for the budget for the salaries. Mandy replied with a phone call. Now, because the information that is exchanged between Client A, Mandy and Peter and the whole team is about budget for salary so all that important information should be recorded down in written form, as well. That is, in this case, it could be file an email, so that all parties are updated and people know what information is being circulated. So in this case because Mandy only replied with a phone call with Client A, Peter actually would not know what has been communicated unless he hears it. Or in this case he found out by accident. So the way in which Mandy replied was not appropriate. It should have been written down on records, file email and include all parties concerned in the email. So everybody is updated. Now, let's have a look at how the seven principles of effective communication can possibly affect communication. In terms of coherence, Mandy and client never both coherent, there was no distraction. The communication was clearly about the budget, in terms of conciseness, yes there was no problem, in terms of clarity, the goal of message. Meaning Peter's request for the budget and Mandy's goal in replying were both very clear, very focused. No distraction. In terms of correctness though, both Mandy and Client A used grammatically correct messages, but the content is not precise in the sense that Peter asked for the precise budget for salaries. When Mandy replied, she did not specify whether the amount was an estimation or precise and whether the budget is over or only for salaries. So definitely in terms of the correctness for the message, it can be better improved. In terms of concreteness, Client A's message was definitely concrete. Client A said, please let me know exactly how much should be spent on salaries based on the budget. Everything is accurate, is clear, is concise. And Mandy clearly understood the content and replied to the request by saying based on the budget is about and quoted the A's amount. Mandy's language was all very clear. The information was not concrete. She provided only an estimation of their budget and did not specify whether the actual amount quoted to Client A was indeed only for salaries or for the entire budget. So the miscommunication in the amount quoted could potentially cause big mistake on the overall budget for their company. In terms of completeness, this was a very bad process communication by Mandy's part. Message was not complete because with Mandy's estimation on the budget, Client A would have to follow up on, one, the precise amount that is given on the budget. Because Mandy only quoted an about amount and whether the amount she specified was indeed for all the salaries or only for the entire budget. So then Client A would have to follow up. Even worse, if Mandy's boss, Peter, did not walk into the room at the time that she quoted this amount over the phone to Client A, Peter probably wouldn't know this has been communicated. And then, he will reply over the email. So this would create more miscommunication between all parties concerned. And finally, in terms of courtesy, Mandy was not rude when Peter shouted, what did you just say! Mandy, however, did not know why Peter was shouting at her. So in terms of courtesy, Peter was rude. Peter didn't comply to the formality of communication in terms of politeness. Although it may be understandable that Peter is frustrated by Mandy's communication with Client A, he still should not shout. So how may we fix the concreteness and politeness of expressions used in this case? So now, at the beginning the request from Client A, as we mentioned, is clear. So we don't need to do anything to fix it up, but Mandy's communication needs some work. Mandy should provide to specify at the beginning, that when she rang up Client A that it was only a suggested an estimated amount, and also Mandy should say whether it is for salaries, or for the entire budget. So that has to be communicated clearly. In terms of politeness of the expression to offer suggestions, Peter instead of getting angry, this is the main point here. Instead of Peter getting angry at Mandy he could suggest that in future she would consider including him in the communication first, so something in the effect of what is presented to you here, would be a good way to suggest to Mandy what she must do in future. So Peter could probably consider saying something like, in future you could perhaps think about checking the information with me first, in case there is an error or he could say something like, whether it would be appropriate for you to reply as Client A may feel that the head of the team should reply. So instead of shouting what did you just say which will eventuate to a meaningless conversation. Offering a suggestion like this, on Peter's part, could open up to pointing out to Mandy what she had done wrong, and what she should do in the future. So this is how we offer suggestions on correcting of people's behavior instead of shouting.
