Skip to content
Question

Q.Kamal is working as a gang boss in the assembly unit of 'Sokia Ltd.', a laptop manufacturing company. He supervises the work of ten trained workers who perform the various activities related to the assembly of the laptops. One day when he was supervising the work of his workers, he told Ashok, a worker that his work could be improved. Ashok interpreted the comments of Kamal as that his work was not good. Identify the type of barrier to effective communication in this case.

CBSECBSE Class XII Board 2019Subjective· 1mImportance★★★★★
🔒 Locked · start free trial →

You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

The communication breakdown between Kamal and Ashok is a semantic barrier, arising from the misinterpretation of words due to ambiguity in the message.

Effective communication is the lifeblood of any organisation, ensuring that messages are conveyed, understood, and acted upon as intended. However, this process is often hindered by various obstacles, known as communication barriers. These barriers can distort the message, lead to misunderstandings, and ultimately impede organisational efficiency. In the scenario involving Kamal and Ashok, the core issue lies in the interpretation of the message itself, pointing directly to a category known as semantic barriers.

Semantic barriers arise from problems in the encoding and decoding of messages, specifically concerning the meaning of words and symbols. The word "semantic" refers to the study of meaning in language. When the sender and receiver attach different meanings to the same words or symbols, or when the message is poorly constructed, a semantic barrier occurs. This leads to a situation where what is said is not what is understood, creating confusion and potential conflict.

In Kamal's statement, "your work could be improved," the intention was likely constructive feedback, suggesting potential for growth or refinement. However, Ashok interpreted this as "my work was not good," implying a criticism of his current performance rather than an encouragement for future betterment. This divergence in understanding stems from the ambiguity inherent in the phrase "could be improved."

Several aspects of semantic barriers are at play here:

  • Badly Expressed Message: While Kamal's statement isn't grammatically incorrect, its phrasing lacks precision and can be interpreted in multiple ways. A message that is unclear, uses inadequate vocabulary, or omits necessary details can easily lead to misinterpretation. Kamal's choice of words, though perhaps well-intentioned, was not explicit enough to prevent Ashok from drawing a negative conclusion.
  • Symbols with Different Meanings: Words are symbols, and often, a single word or phrase can carry multiple meanings depending on context, tone, and the individual's background or emotional state. The phrase "could be improved" can mean "it's good, but can be made even better" or "it's not good enough and needs improvement." Ashok, perhaps feeling insecure or perceiving it as a direct criticism, chose the latter interpretation. …

Unlock everything free for 14 days

  • Full step-by-step solutions
  • Concept-first explanations
  • Methods, shortcuts & mistakes
  • PYQ mapping + timed mock tests

Full access for 14 days. No credit card required.