communication

Student’s name
Professor’s name
Class
Date Communication: Coordinated Management of Meaning
Coordinated management of meaning (CMM) was created by Pearce and Cronen to solve issues about the social world and make it better. This theory explains how people create their social world through communication.
Four claims were discussed to understand what coordinated management of meaning is. The first claim describes that people create a social world during the interaction. Griffin stated that “the way people communicate is often more important than the content of what they say” (Griffin 68). He has explained that body language, the tone of voice and other factors can determine how good or bad the interaction would be. “Mood and manner that persons-in-conversation adopt play a large role in the process of social construction” (Griffin 68). A similar statement was announced in a lithograph created by Escher in 1955 called “bond of Union” (Griffin 67).
Another claim is that people’s perception of different actions differs. Griffin called this phenomenon “stories told, and stories lived” (Griffin 68). It emphasizes on the truth people make of the world they live in and how they live in the world. This method describes that people may live in a repetitive pattern which might occur as a result of a difference in opinion on a particular conversation or topic. According to CMM, it is called coordinating actions together (Griffin 68). “Pearce and Cronen maintained that it is possible for people to mesh their stories lived without agreeing on the meaning of their stories told” (Griffin 72).

Further claims were based on the result we get from how we construct our pattern of communication. A positive interaction would create a “more open relationship” while a negative one would create a “defensive relationship” (Griffin 73). In these claims, there was a term called the bifurcation point which according to CMM can make or break a communication process. Bifurcation point “is the turn in a conversation where what happens next will affect the unfolding pattern of interaction and take it in a different direction” (Griffin 74). This theory is applicable for interpretation of different conversations and relationships. Once I used it to interpret my best friend’s story. She tried to tell me of what happened to her after ignoring my calls on a day where we had a date planned. I tried to analyze her explanations, and it created a happy social outcome.
The strong point is that if we apply a particular model to analyze the stories in our communication, it will bring about a better output in interaction which indicates the practicality of the theory as explained by Griffin, basically creating a better social environment. The drawback, however, is that communication involves two or more people and a variety of temperament. Sometimes, “even when persons-in-conversation engage in dialogic communication in good faith, coordination is not possible when their premises, values, and expectations differ significantly” (Mclish & Langan 60). Thus, this theory of communication could only work for a calm individual. People with bad temperament would not be affected by this model.
Finally, we can, therefore, conclude that the theory of CMM would create a social world free of conflict, and foster better relationship among people. “Social change, just like its apparent opposite, social order is co-constructed in a recursive process that reconstructs us as persons, relationships, and institutions” (Pearce & Pearce 421). However, stable communication patterns are possible between people of the same or approximately similar social statuses and experiences.
Works CitedGriffin, Emory. A first look at communication theory 8th edition. Boston, McGraw-Hill. 2012. Print.
McClish, Glen, Langan, J. Emily & Griffin, Emory. Instructor’s manual and test bank to accompany the first look at communication theory sixth edition. Boston, McGraw-Hill. 2006. Print.
Pearce, W. Barnett & Pearce, A Kimberly. Extending the Theory of the Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM). Through a Community Dialogue Process, Communication Theory, Volume 10, Issue 4, 1 (Nov.2000): 405-423. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00200.x.