Professional Communication Review from Week 2

I reviewed all the examples of professional communications from my fellow students that they posted on their digital portfolio. I then compared the characteristics of these examples to the guidance provided by Paul Anderson’s Technical Communication, specifically from chapter 21 of the book.

Anderson leads the chapter with the use of the appropriate level of formality. When it came to emails or memorandum type correspondence, this did not seem to be an issue with the examples provided by my classmates. The appropriate level of formality corresponded to the communications. However, text messages were more informal and often lacked clarity. I feel that the common use of text in our personal lives and the lack of formality that often corresponds with it often crosses over into our professional lives. It is important to discriminate between personal and professional communications.

“You attitude” was mixed. Some communications appropriately used this approach to make it reader-centered, while others did not. Those that did not feel sterile and lacked involvement with those it was trying to address. The communications that brought the reader into the conversation made regular use of the word “you” throughout.

I was mostly impressed with the formats of the examples. Most of them followed the guidelines that Anderson listed in the chapter. Stating the purpose of the communication up front was commonplace. Communications were often kept short with the correct amount of detail and little unnecessary words or jargon. In addition, I saw that most everyone used headings and lists to provide clarity for the reader. This was especially useful when trying to explain procedures or when identifying requirements.

When communicating with letters and memos, many companies and organizations have established formats. It was difficult to determine if that was the case with the examples that were provided. Regardless of the letters and memos that were provided as examples, many of them were close in style and format as the examples in chapter 21. As I mentioned earlier, examples of emails were generally formatted in a formal manner. Most of them were to the point and fell within the guidelines identified by Anderson. It is difficult to make a critical determination on emails as even Anderson states, “customs for email vary widely”.