Question

Chris was simultaneously enrolled in a university writing course and working as a co-op student at the Widget Manufacturing plant. As part of his co-op work experience, Chris shadowed his supervisor/mentor on a safety inspection of the plant, and was asked to write up the results of the inspection in a compliance memo. In the same week, Chris’s writing instructor assigned the class to write a narrative essay based on some personal experience. Chris, trying to be efficient, thought that the plant visit experience could provide the basis for his essay assignment as well.

He wrote the essay first, because he was used to writing essays and was pretty good at it. He had never even seen a compliance memo, much less written one, so was not as confident about that task. He began the essay like this:

On June 1, 2018, I conducted a safety audit of the Widget Manufacturing plant in New City. The purpose of the audit was to ensure that all processes and activities in the plant adhere to safety and handling rules and policies outlined in the Workplace Safety Handbook and relevant government regulations. I was escorted on a 3-hour tour of the facility by…

Chris finished the essay and submitted it to his writing instructor. He then revised the essay slightly, keeping the introduction the same, and submitted it to his co-op supervisor. He “aced” the essay, getting an A grade, but his supervisor told him that the report was unacceptable and would have to be rewritten – especially the beginning, which should have clearly indicated whether or not the plant was in compliance with safety regulations. Chris was aghast! He had never heard of putting the “conclusion” at the beginning. He missed the company softball game that Saturday so he could rewrite the report to the satisfaction of his supervisor.

1- Define the rhetorical situation: Who is communicating to whom about what, how, and why? What was the goal of the communication in each case?

2- Identify the communication error (poor task or audience analysis? Use of inappropriate language or style? Poor organization or formatting of information? Other?)

3- Explain what costs/losses were incurred by this problem

4-Identify possible solutions or strategies that would have prevented the problem, and what benefits would be derived from implementing solutions or preventing the problem.

Answer 1

Solution –

1. Chris has two conversations to handle –

1. Compliance Memo – This conversation is between Chris and his supervisor to depict the results of the inspection. This had a business objective of highlighting to the departments the results of the inspection.
2. Essay – This was a personal experience narrative by Chris to his writing instructor. This was a class assignment

2. The communication error in this case was that Chris wanted to produce a single writing work fits for all. Chris produced an essay which was as per the requirements of the writing instructor and was narrative in nature but he produced the same writing for the compliance memo which was a business requirement for highlighting the results of the inspection. Chris misjudged the audience and the objective of the writings. Hi writing style was more suited for a narrative approach where his introduction was as a narration but for the compliance memo he had to be specific and two the point. He had to convey a specific information and hence he missed the objective of the writing completely.
3. Chris should have formulated the compliance memo in a business writing format but he relied on the narrative draft he had prepared for the essay. This costed him time, stress when his submission was rejected by his supervisor. He also lost a bit of his credibility in the eyes of his supervisor as he showed lack of clarity. The loss in time due to Chris’s understanding is indirect loss to business.
4. There are two possible strategies that would have prevented the problem and their benefits would have been as follows –

1. Clarification – Chris should have clarified the requirement with the supervisor. This would have showed the interest of Chris towards work and would have reduced his chances of making an error.
2. Research and Consult – Chris could have consulted his writing instructor or should have researched through secondary sources and this would have perhaps given him a reliable writing template to be followed.

Both the above strategies would have assisted Chris and would have certainly minimized his chances of committing an error as the requirements would have been clarified in both the cases through different sources.