Defining Human Communication

The most common definition of human communication is the verbal and

non-verbal interaction between humans in hopes of being able to convey
meaning or messages. These often include the words that we speak, gestures
we make and our facial expressions. However, the definition of human
communication goes beyond the things we do with our bodies. Our actions
and acts of self-expression are also part of our communication.
Communication is a difficult thing to define. Theodore Clevenger tells us
that “the continuing problem in defining communication for scholarly or
scientific purposes stems from the fact that the verb ‘to communicate’ is
well established in the common lexicon and therefore is not easily captured
for scientific use” (Clevenger, 1991, p. 351).
Contrary to Clevenger’s thoughts, Frank Dance (1970) outlines three
elements used to distinguish communication. The first dimension is level of
observation. The second distinction is intentionality. Some definitions
include only purposeful message sending and receiving; others do not
impose this limitation. The third of Dance’s (1970) distinctions is normative
judgment. Some definitions include a statement of success or accuracy; other
definitions do not contain such implicit judgments. (Dance, 1970, p. 201-
210).
One popular model that attempts to define communication is the Shannon-
Weaver model. It presents communication as a linear event. The model
states that communication always involves six elements. These elements are
the message, the source, the encoder, the channel, the decoder, and the
receiver (Woods & Hollnagel, 2005, p. 12).
Verbal communication is the sending and receiving of messages, typically
between individuals or groups, to convey meaning and understanding. This
includes our language usage, phrases, words or sounds. Non-verbal
communication conveys the other part of our message using hand gestures,
body language and facial expressions.
Communication is the sending of messages from a sender to a receiver in a
particular channel or medium. These channels can be air waves, pages of a
book, newspapers, visible language such as American Sign Language or
more recently developed channels such as computer screens. In our world
today, which is highly technologically oriented, people have begun to
communicate in new ways. These ways include, but are not limited to,
telephones, cellular telephones, electronic mail, video conferencing, instant
messaging or text messaging. As these new adaptations of technology
appear and become more popular, senders and receivers both are required to
learn how to interpret messages over new mediums and learn to use these
technologies. Unfortunately, it is possible for these new technologies to
negatively affect human communication. While technology often provides
faster and more efficient transmission, it often can be the cause for
misinterpretation by the receiver, or can result in the losing of a message in
the failed delivery of electronic mail.
However, the channels of communication can extend beyond these standard
or traditional written or oral communications. Communication can include
expressions of self such as the bumper stickers that we affix to our cars
expressing our political beliefs, body piercings and tattoos, or works of
graffiti on the wall of a building. Each of the above convey a certain way
that someone feels and that feeling is received by people or groups, perhaps
no one specifically, much in the same way that someone who reads a book
or newspaper story receives a message.
Human communication is any relay of message from sender to receiver. An
important part of understanding human communication is acknowledging
that it includes communications that are received or decoded correctly as
well as messages that are not, due to a language barrier or a simple
misunderstanding between sender and receiver. Sometimes during
communication, especially during a heated argument, words or actions are
misunderstood and being able to work through those is a large part of being
an effective communicator. Similarly, communication also includes
messages that are inadvertently sent by something we say or do, or
something that we don’t say or do when the other party feels that we should
have reacted differently.
Ultimately, our communication with others determines our relationships
with them; whether it is a friendship, a parent or other family member,
relationship with your boss, or a casual acquaintance with whom you may
never communicate again. The definition or perspective of human
communication will vary for each person, which is partially why it is so
difficult to define accurately. It is almost a second nature for humans to be
able to receive the oral messages from their fellow humans as well as being
able to decode the non-verbal gestures.
In conclusion, human communication is a necessary part of day-to-day life.
It is comprised of many complex aspects that most people are not even
aware of and many obstacles that must be overcome. The definition of
human communication will continue to evolve as long as technology
continues to evolve, but it will still be necessary to understand the elements
that compose communication in order to understand communication as a
whole.

THE COMMUNICATION PROCESS- The communication

process consists of a message being sent and received. The
message may be verbal or non-verbal. The same basic principles
apply whether humans, animals, other forms of life, or
combinations of these are involved. Your challenge, as an
instructor, is to not merely communicate with your students--but to
communicate effectively. Effective communication involves a
message being sent and received. Added to this however, is the
element of feedback to ensure that the message sent was received
exactly as intended. This concept may be illustrated using the
three-step communications model (fig. 5-1). Figure 5-1.—Three-
step communication process. Sending The Message There are four
elements involved in sending a message. First, as the instructor
(sender), you formulate the message you intend to communicate.
Next, you consider possible barriers that may affect the message.
This includes your experience, the terms you will use, and even
your feeling toward the subject or the students. External barriers
such as noise must also be considered. Third, you encode the
message; that is, you put the message into the words you want to
use. Last, you clearly communicate (send) the message. Receiving
The Message There are also four elements involved in receiving a
message. The students (receivers) will first hear and/or see the
message you sent. Second, the message is affected by external
barriers, if any, and the students’ own internal barriers. Possible
internal barriers may include the students experience level, their
understanding of the terms used, their attitude toward the material,
or the way they feel about you. Third, your students decode the
message through the use of mental images. For instance, when you
say the word circus, the receiver does not “see” the letters that
form the word. Instead, a mental image of some sort appears.
EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS AND
TECHNIQUES- There are many skills and techniques you must
master to bean effective communicator and instructor. Many of
these skills you already possess, all that is required is that you use
them to their best advantage. Others, you need to learn and
practice. LISTENING Listening is one of our most important
communication skills. It is an active process of hearing and
understanding that demands concentration and attention. Both you
and your students have responsibilities in the communication
process. You must ensure that the learning environment is free of
distractions that might interfere with the students’ ability to listen.
Be alert to the non-verbal behaviors of your students. Facial
expressions reveal much of what is happening in the mind of a
student. A quizzical look indicates some misunderstanding has
occurred or a question needs to be addressed. A student leaning
slightly forward and maintaining good eye contact with you is
probably interested and sincere about learning. An affirmative
head nod indicates approval, agreement, or understanding.
Conversely, eye contact out the window or someplace other than
the front of the room may indicate boredom or lack of interest.
Fidgeting in the chair or a slouched posture may also bean
indication of something other than effective listening. Raised
hands and relevant questions are sure signs that you are
communicating effectively. Learn to determine if students are
listening by the type of feedback they provide. Effective listening
depends on motivation, and you are the prime motivator in your
classroom. Students should arrive for instruction ready to learn.
They should participate and ask questions as they arise. Students
must understand that they have responsibility for their own
learning. This requires active listening on their part.

Model of Communication
There are many factors which influence the communication process, all
of which impact each other in a variety of ways. This model shows how
the most important factors function in what would be a snapshot of a
static instance of communication. Click on a part of the model for
specific information.

Sender - The sender is the speaker. A sender starts with an impulse

he or she wishes to express and then must encode that idea into
symbols (words) and signs (facial expressions, tone of voice, etc).

Message - The message is the symbols and signs which are actually
transmitted. All messages are carried by a channel (such as face-to-
face, over the phone, email, etc).

Receiver - The receiver is the listener. The receiver must decode the
symbols and signs of the message sent through the channel. Decoding
involves working through one's own perceptual filters to arrive at
thoughts which approximate the sender's original intent.

Feedback - Feedback is the signs the receivers projects while the

sender is sending a message. Feedback allows the sender to know how
his or her message is being received.

Environment - Environment is the physical, social and emotional

context the communication takes place in. Environments can place
expectation and contraints on communication.

The following are the main objectives of business

communication:
Conveying the right message: The main object of
communication is to convey the right message to the right
person, i.e., to the person for whom it is meant. The message
conveyed should be well understood and accepted by the
receiver in the right perspective. In other words, it should
carry the same meaning which has been conveyed so that it
may be translated into action effectively.
 Coordination of effort: Communication is an effective tool for
coordinating the activities of different persons engaged in running a
business. Coordination without communication is a remote possibility.
The individuals or groups come to know what others are doing and
what is expected from them only through communication.

Good industrial relations: Communication develops good

industrial relations as it conveys the feelings, ideas, opinions,
and viewpoints of one party to the other party. The two
parties - the management and the subordinates, come closer
through communication. They understand each other and
dispel any misunderstanding. Thus, it promotes cooperation
and good industrial relations.

Development of managerial skills: Communication helps

managers to understand human behavior at work. Communication of
facts, ideas, opinions, information, feelings, etc., add value to the
knowledge of managers about various happenings, in the organization
and behavior of people. Thus, communication is a process of learning

Business Communication:- communication used to promote a product,

service, or organization; relay information within the business; or deal with
legal and similar issues. It is also a means of relying between a supply chain,
for example the consumer and manufacturer.
Business Communication is known simply as "Communications." It
encompasses a variety of topics, including Marketing, Branding, Customer
relations, Consumer behaviour, Advertising, Public relations, Corporate
communication, Community engagement, Research & Measurement,
Reputation management, Interpersonal communication, Employee
engagement, Online communication, and Event management. It is closely
related to the fields of professional communication and technical
communication.
In business, the term communications encompasses various channels of
communication, including the Internet, Print (Publications), Radio,
Television, Ambient media, Outdoor, and Word of mouth.
Business Communication can also refer to internal communication. A
communications director will typically manage internal communication and
craft messages sent to employees. It is vital that internal communications are
managed properly because a poorly crafted or managed message could foster
distrust or hostility from employees.[1]
Business Communication is a common topic included in the curricula of
Masters of Business Administration (MBA) programs of many universities.
AS well, many community colleges and universities offer degrees in
Communications.

There are several methods of business communication, including:

• Web-based communication - for better and improved communication,
anytime anywhere ...
• ε− µ α ι λ σ , which provide an instantaneous medium of written
communication worldwide;
• Ρεπ ο ρ τ σ - important in documenting the activities of any
department;
• Πρ ε σ ε ν τ α τ ι ο ν σ - very popular method of
communication in all types of organizations, usually involving
audiovisual material, like copies of reports, or material prepared in
Microsoft PowerPoint or Adobe Flash;
• τελ ε π η ο ν ε δ meetings, which allow for long distance
speech;
• forum boards, which allow people to instantly post information at a
centralized location; and
• φα χ ε τ ο φ α χ ε meetings, which are personal and should
be succeeded by a written followup.

Organizations
• Founded in 1936 the Association of Business Communication (ABC)
 [1], originally called the Association of College Teachers of Business
Writing, is “an international organization committed to fostering
excellence in business communication scholarship, research,
education, and practice.”
• The IEEE Professional Communication Society (PCS) [2] is dedicated
to understanding and promoting effective communication in
engineering, scientific, and other environments, including business
environments. PCS's academic journal, IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication [3], is one of the premier journals in
professional communication. The journal’s readers are
engineers,writers, information designers, managers, and others
working as scholars, educators, and practitioners who share an interest
in the effective communication of technical and business information.

Seven Essential Principles of Effective Communication-

In some call centers, you can feel the energy as soon as you walk in the
door. It takes many forms: pride of workmanship, enthusiasm, a feeling of
community, commitment and the willingness to make the "extra effort." The
call center "clicks." Everybody knows what the mission is; everybody is
pulling in the same direction.
While there are a myriad of factors that go into creating this sort of
environment, effective communication always plays a central role.
Communication creates meaning and direction for people. Organizations of
all types depend on the existence of what Warren Bennis, noted leadership
expert, calls "shared meanings and interpretations of reality," which
facilitate coordinated action. When good communication is lacking, the
symptoms are predictable: conflicting objectives, unclear values,
misunderstandings, lack of coordination, confusion, low morale and people
doing the bare minimum required.
Although cultures and communication styles vary, there are predictable and
notable principles that I've noticed are consistently present among high-
value call centers. Among the most important are:
• Commit to keeping people in the know
• Cultivate a Supporting Culture
 • Establish appropriate communication tools
• Develop formal and informal channels of communication
• Ensure that structure and policies support communication
• Listen actively and regularly
• Don't overdo it
Let's look at each, in turn.

Commit to keeping people in the know. Leaders of high-performance

organizations are predisposed to keeping their people in the know. They
actively share both good news and bad. This minimizes the rumor mill,
which hinders effective, accurate communication. It also contributes to an
environment of trust. It sounds simple, but just making a commitment is the
first step. I had a manager tell me recently that she decided to make great
communication a top priority — and that it's working wonders for
productivity and clarity in the organization.
Peter Senge, who popularized the notion of the learning organization in his
popular book, The Fifth Discipline, described a place "where people
continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire,
where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective
aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn
together." Shared information is the fundamental ingredient in
organizational learning — and learning both contributes to and is dependent
on effective communication.
Consistently communicate progress on projects and objectives. Hazy
objectives and vaguely defined tasks will destroy productivity and morale.
The objectives of teams and individuals — as well as the call center itself —
should be as concrete as possible. Projects should have clearly defined
milestones, with beginning and ending points.
For projects or long-term objectives, tools such as Gantt charts and flow
charts can be useful for identifying resources required, showing the
interrelated nature of individual tasks and tracking progress. They give focus
to the mission of the workgroup and can help address questions such as:
Where are we? How far have we come? What's next? They should be
updated and distributed as often as something substantial changes in the
ongoing direction and plans.
Cultivate a Supporting Culture. Culture — the inveterate principles or
values of the organization — tends to guide behavior and can either support
and further, or, as some have learned the hard way, ruin effective
communication. Unfortunately, there's no guaranteed formula for creating a
supporting culture. But many call center managers agree that shaping the
culture of the organization is a primary leadership responsibility. They do
not believe that culture should be left to chance. As a result, they spend an
inordinate amount of time understanding the organization and the people
who are part of it.
One of the most distinguishable aspects of a positive culture is that the
vision and mission are well known and understood. Why does the call center
exist? What is it working to achieve? What's in it for customers and for the
organization? What's in it for employees?
Take steps to build employee commitment to the vision. This should include
soliciting input from employees as the vision is being developed, publishing
the vision widely, and — yep, using it to guide tactical, day-to-day
decisions.

Establish appropriate communication tools. A prerequisite to an

environment in which communication thrives is that individuals and teams
have compatible and capable communications technologies. The usual
channels apply — telephone, voice mail, e-mail, intranet, instant messaging,
and collaboration and conferencing tools offer enormous potential if they are
available and compatible across the organization. Further — and this is so
simple but so effective — create directories (on-line, print, perhaps both) of
contact information for your call center and cross-functional teams. This
provides necessary information, and it creates symbolism that reinforces
communication and camaraderie.
The usual cautions apply — e.g., e-mail is popular communication tool, but
it does not eliminate the need for face-to-face communication, especially for
sensitive subjects, performance reviews or bad news. An in-person meeting,
or a telephone or video conference, will allow the kind of immediate
interaction that can prevent a problem from becoming even more serious and
emotionally charged.

Develop formal and informal channels of communication.

Effective leaders cultivate both formal and informal channels of
communication. The communication formats can include newsletters,
meetings, visual displays, e-mail, voicemail, posters, intranets and informal
"hallway meetings." But the mission and values being communicated remain
consistent. As Bennis puts it, "leadership...is based on predictability. The
truth is that we trust people who are predictable, whose positions are known
and who keep at it; leaders who are trusted make themselves known, make
their positions clear."
One of the common formal means of communication between front-line
workers and management is employee satisfaction surveys. The best call
centers track results and monitor trends to ensure continuous improvement.
Survey results are communicated back to employees, and teams are often
formed to address specific problems that are identified in the surveys. The
progress towards resolving the problem is then tracked and communicated.
Ensure that structure and policies support communication. The
organization's structure defines the alignment of roles and responsibilities
for business units, departments and individuals. In general, flatter, more
collaborative organizations help foster an environment in which trust and
communication flourish. Policies and procedures can also impact trust and
communication. For example, monitoring and coaching programs that truly
contribute to the growth and well being of individuals and the organization
help to build trust and encourage communication.
Leading call centers have also cultivated a systematic, collaborative
approach to call center workload planning. This process generally includes
forecasting, staffing, scheduling, budgeting and related activities. Systematic
planning contributes to effective communication in several ways. It creates a
body of information that wouldn't otherwise be available, e.g., here's our call
load pattern and, therefore, why the schedules are structured as they are. It
also forces people to look into the future and see their work in the context of
a larger framework. Perhaps most important, formal planning requires
communication about values, on issues such as resource allocations,
budgeting and workload priorities.

Listen actively and regularly. Listening encourages communication.

When leaders listen to those around them, they give others the opportunity
to contribute ideas, which creates a sense of ownership. Further, listening
encourages diverse perspectives, enables individuals to grow and creates
community within the organization. Active listening enables a culture that
brings out the best in people.
Listening also benefits leadership directly. There is a common myth that
great leaders create compelling visions from an inner source that others don't
have. But many studies on the subjects of leadership and strategy have
shown the visions of some of history's greatest leaders often came from
others. The leaders may have selected the best vision to focus on, shaped it
and communicated it to others in a compelling way, but they rarely
originated the vision.

Don't overdo it. Experienced leaders are aware of an interesting paradox:

too much communicating inhibits effective communication. There is an
optimal level of communication beyond which more communication
becomes counterproductive. Too many meetings, memos, conferences, e-
mail messages and on-the-fly discussions may be symptoms of weaknesses
in plans and processes.
I sometimes go sailing with racing crews in my hometown of Annapolis,
Maryland. I'm not proficient at sailing yet, and need instruction but I've
noticed with a certain amount of awe that the most effective crews
communicate among themselves with head nods, hand signals, and one or
two word instructions. Among less experienced crews, the yelling back and
forth is much more prevalent.
With better tools, more focused training and appropriate levels of
empowerment, the need for excessive real-time communicating can be
avoided — because the communication is built into individual understanding
and established processes. And a test of all this — can you go on vacation
without checking in (at least regularly)? That's a sign that you've probably
built an organization that's working. (And you need that vacation!)
Conclusion
Effective communication is inseparable from effective leadership — leaders
are only as effective as their ability to communicate. Effective
communication results in a shared understanding of what's most important.
When people are aligned behind a set of compelling values, enthusiasm,
commitment and significant productivity tend to follow.

Effective communication skill ensures your ideas reaches audience

without loosing its quality. This skill has to be nurtured for better
results.
Effective communication helps a person to be more productive and solve
issues with ease. It is the key for success whatever your profession is. Verbal
or written communication, when it is done in the right way can do wonders
for your profession or business.
Effective communication skills help you to convey your ideas more clearly
to your audience. The first part of becoming an effective communicator is
turning your ideas into words. This is a process, which needs to be improved
as far as any budding writer, or public speaker is concerned. Turning your
ideas into words without loosing the actual purpose is very tricky. It calls for
preparation, effort and thinking in different view points. A good writer
should be an effective communicator also. Otherwise he is going to be
confusing his readers without transmitting his ideas clearly and effectively.
An effective communicator can make an idea fast acceptable by others.
Read more in Marketing and Advertising
« Corruption Within the Free Press
What is True Marketing? Selling Ideas or Selling Products »
Understanding your audience first is another vital point you must consider
before starting communication process. If you know a person’s
temperament, you can tune your communication to make it more appealing
to that person. This is very important as far as any business negotiations are
concerned. The better you tune your communications according to your
counterpart’s temperament, the chances of winning the deal is higher.
Creativity is another factor that makes your communication effective. A
creative communicator can use words and images to transmit his ideas.
Creative communication is used to produce advertising materials, where a
great degree of space management is involved. A creative communicator
makes use of modern technology to make his communication effective.
Using multimedia software helps a creative communicator to communicate
his ideas effectively.

the three most important basic principles of effective communication are:

Always listen when someone is talking.
 Make sure that it is a two way process.
Affirm and acknowledge results.

LISTEN LISTEN and LISTEN

The most frustrating thing about communication is when the person whom
you are talking to is not listening to you. Before you even finish a sentence,
he cuts you off. A lot of the misunderstanding and misinterpretion are
caused by not listening to other party.

TWO WAY PROCESS

Communication should always be a two way process. Make it safe for other
to express his views. Effective communication means ideas are exchanging
freely.

AFFIRM UNDERSTANDING OR RESULT

Effective communication is about the RESULT you get. This is perhaps the
most important thing in any communication. It means the person you are
communicating to totally understands your point. And you also understand
his point. So to ensure that your communication is effective, you must
always confirm understanding.
That’s the three most basic pronciples for an effective communication. It
sounds simple but in practice, it is perhaps the hardest principles to follow,
and has to be constantly worked at.

The Importance of Business Communication- Communication is

essential for life in general but in business settings, it is critical.
Communication is more than just a matter of speaking and hearing,
especially within a business setting. Good communication, on the other
hand, means that your message will be sent and that the people or
organizations understand the message in its entirety. Further, they are much
more likely to respond in a positive manner if the message was
communicated effectively. A poorly communicated message will likely
result in an unfavorable response.

Today, most businesses are relying on the Internet as a way to communicate.

This can be especially trying when trying to communicate effectively as
there is no body language to rely on and no spoken words. The reader can
only then make assumptions based on your words. Electronic
communication can be difficult and challenging but can also result in
favorable outcome for all.

Body language plays a large role in communication. If you are making

person to person contact, you are then able to read non verbal body language
and possibly rely on that for a clue as to the effectiveness of your message.
Watch for disinterest, eye rolling, body slumping, lack of interest, looking in
another direction, these are all non verbal body language and not a very
good sign either. If you are delivering an oral presentation to a group, you
can feed off of their non verbal body language and determine if you are
captivating them or simply boring them. All you have to do is pay attention
and if you communicate clearly and are organized, the result will likely be a
favorable one.

Cultural communication is another area where problems can arise in

communicating. It is best when dealing with various ethnic groups or
cultures to learn about them before you attempt communications. What one
culture embraces, another finds offense to and this applies to both verbal and
non verbal communications. Be proactive when approaching other cultures.
Remember their learning styles, the religious beliefs, and their families are
completely different. Do not rely on stereotypes and do not identify them
based on their population. Differences are evident within all groups so avoid
classifying them together as one. To be effective with cross cultural
communications you have to be diverse and open to new ideas.

Ineffective communication is a major obstacle in business. Management

needs to encourage effective communication but can only effectively do so
by example. To communicate in the best interest of the organization, all
parties have to understand each other. You also need to get the attention of
the person that you are attempting to communicate with. Define the barriers
that hinder effective communication and work on them. Some of the barriers
that can cause communication breakdowns are physical barriers resulting
from people not getting to know each other, perceptual barriers because we
all view things differently, emotional barriers which are based on fear and
lack of trust, cultural barriers from a lack of understanding, language
barriers, gender barriers, and interpersonal barriers which are based on your
thoughts and your feelings.
Importance of written communication:
Communication may be made through oral or written. In oral
communication, listeners can make out what speakers is trying to say, but in
written communication, text matter in the message is a reflection of your
thinking. So, written communication or message should be clear, purposeful
and concise with correct words, to avoid any misinterpretation of your
message. Written communications provides a permanent record for future
use and it also gives an opportunity to employees to put up their comments
or suggestions in writing.

What is the importance of feedback in the

communication process?
Because you need "feed back" or another parties input for "communication"
otherwise it's just considered "talking too". Also if you get feed back you
can be assured that the other person was actively listening and that they
understood what you said. Ex: If you are talking about childcare and the
person response with tuna sandwich you know that they did not comprehend
what you were saying

The Transmission Model of

Communication
Daniel Chandler
• Greek Translation

• ϑα π α ν ε σ ε Τρα ν σ λ α τ ι ο ν

• Ιντ ρ ο δ υ χ τ ι ο ν
• Λεϖ ε λ σ οφ προ β λ ε µ σ ιν τη ε
ανα λ ψ σ ι σ οφ χοµ µ υ ν ι χ α τ ι ο ν
 • Αδϖα ν τ α γ ε σ οφ Σηα ν ν ο ν αν δ
Ωεα ϖ ε ρ ∋ σ µο δ ε λ
• Ωεα κ ν ε σ σ ε σ οφ τη ε
τρα ν σ µ ι σ σ ι ο ν µοδ ε λ οφ
χοµ µ υ ν ι χ α τ ι ο ν
• Με τ α π η ο ρ σ
• Λιν ε α ρ ι τ ψ
• Χο ν τ ε ν τ αν δ µεα ν ι ν γ
• Ινστ ρ υ µ ε ν τ α λ ι σ µ
• Ρελα τ ι ο ν σ η ι π σ αν δ πυρ π ο σ ε σ
• Χο ν τ ε ξ τ
• Τιµ ε
• Με δ ι υ µ
• Χο ν χ λ υ σ ι ο ν
• Ρεφ ε ρ ε ν χ ε σ

Introduction
Here I will outline and critique a particular, very well-known model of
communication developed by Shannon and Weaver (1949), as the
prototypical example of a transmissive model of communication: a model
which reduces communication to a process of 'transmitting information'. The
underlying metaphor of communication as transmission underlies
'commonsense' everyday usage but is in many ways misleading and repays
critical attention.
Shannon and Weaver's model is one which is, in John Fiske's words, 'widely
accepted as one of the main seeds out of which Communication Studies has
grown' (Fiske 1982: 6). Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver were not social
scientists but engineers working for Bell Telephone Labs in the United
States. Their goal was to ensure the maximum efficiency of telephone cables
and radio waves. They developed a model of communication which was
intended to assist in developing a mathematical theory of communication.
Shannon and Weaver's work proved valuable for communication engineers
in dealing with such issues as the capacity of various communication
channels in 'bits per second'. It contributed to computer science. It led to
very useful work on redundancy in language. And in making 'information'
'measurable' it gave birth to the mathematical study of 'information theory'.
However, these directions are not our concern here. The problem is that
some commentators have claimed that Shannon and Weaver's model has a
much wider application to human communication than a purely technical
one.

C & W's original model consisted of five elements:

An information source, which produces a message.
A transmitter, which encodes the message into signals
A channel, to which signals are adapted for transmission
A receiver, which 'decodes' (reconstructs) the message from the signal.
A destination, where the message arrives.
A sixth element, noise is a dysfunctional factor: any interference with the
message travelling along the channel (such as 'static' on the telephone or
radio) which may lead to the signal received being different from that sent.
For the telephone the channel is a wire, the signal is an electrical current in
it, and the transmitter and receiver are the telephone handsets. Noise would
include crackling from the wire. In conversation, my mouth is the
transmitter, the signal is the sound waves, and your ear is the receiver. Noise
would include any distraction you might experience as I speak.
Although in Shannon and Weaver's model a speaker and a listener would
strictly be the source and the destination rather than the transmitter and the
receiver, in discussions of the model the participants are commonly
humanised as the sender and the receiver. My critical comments will refer
less specifically to Shannon and Weaver's model than to the general
transmission model which it reflects, where communication consists of a
Sender passing a Message to a Receiver. So when I am discussing
transmission models in general I too will refer to the participants as the
Sender and the Receiver.
Shannon and Weaver's transmission model is the best-known example of the
'informational' approach to communication. Although no serious
communication theorist would still accept it, it has also been the most
influential model of communication which has yet been developed, and it
reflects a commonsense (if misleading) understanding of what
communication is. Lasswell's verbal version of this model: 'Who says what
in which channel to whom with what effect ?' was reflected in subsequent
research in human communication which was closely allied to behaviouristic
approaches.

Levels of problems in the analysis of communication

Shannon and Weaver argued that there were three levels of problems of
communication:
• A The technical problem: how accurately can the message be
transmitted?
• B The semantic problem: how precisely is the meaning 'conveyed'?
• C The effectiveness problem: how effectively does the received
meaning affect behaviour?
Shannon and Weaver somewhat naively assumed that sorting out Level A
problems would lead to improvements at the other levels.
Although the concept of 'noise' does make some allowance for the way in
which messages may be 'distorted', this frames the issue in terms of
incidental 'interference' with the sender's intentions rather than in terms of a
central and purposive process of interpretation. The concept reflects
Shannon and Weaver's concern with accuracy and efficiency.
Advantages of Shannon and Weaver's model
Particular models are useful for some purposes and less useful for others.
Like any process of mediation a model foregrounds some features and
backgrounds others. The strengths of Shannon and Weaver's model are its
• simplicity,
• generality, and
• quantifiability.
Such advantages made this model attractive to several academic disciplines.
It also drew serious academic attention to human communication and
'information theory', leading to further theory and research.

Weaknesses of the transmission model of

communication
The transmission model is not merely a gross over-simplification but a
dangerously misleading misrepresentation of the nature of human
communication. This is particularly important since it underlies the
'commonsense' understanding of what communication is. Whilst such usage
may be adequate for many everyday purposes, in the context of the study of
media and communication the concept needs critical reframing.

Metaphors
Shannon and Weaver's highly mechanistic model of communication can be
seen as being based on a transport metaphor. James Carey (1989: 15) notes
that in the nineteenth century the movement of information was seen as
basically the same as the transport of goods or people, both being described
as 'communication'. Carey argues that 'it is a view of communication that
derives from one of the most ancient of human dreams: the desire to increase
the speed and effect of messages as they travel in space' (ibid.) Writing
always had to be transported to the reader, so in written communication the
transport of letters, books and newspapers supported the notion of the
transport of meaning from writer to readers. As Carey notes, 'The telegraph
ended the identity but did not destroy the metaphor' (ibid.).
Within the broad scope of transport I tend to see the model primarily as
employing a postal metaphor. It is as if communication consists of a sender
sending a packet of information to a receiver, whereas I would insist that
communication is about meaning rather than information. One appalling
consequence of the postal metaphor for communication is the current
reference to 'delivering the curriculum' in schools, as a consequence of
which teachers are treated as postal workers. But the influence of the
transmission model is widespread in our daily speech when we talk of
'conveying meaning', 'getting the idea across', 'transferring information', and
so on. We have to be very alert indeed to avoid falling into the clutches of
such transmissive metaphors.
Michael Reddy (1979) has noted our extensive use in English of 'the conduit
metaphor' in describing communicative acts. In this metaphor, 'The speaker
puts ideas (objects) into words (containers) and sends them (along a conduit)
to a hearer who takes the idea/objects out of the word/containers' (Lakoff &
Johnson 1980: 10). The assumptions the metaphor involves are that:
• Language functions like a conduit, transferring thoughts bodily from
one person to another;
• in writing and speaking, people insert their thoughts or feelings into
the words;
• words accomplish the transfer by containing the thoughts or feelings
and conveying them to others;
• in listening or reading, people extract the thoughts and feelings once
again from the words. (Reddy 1979: 290)
As Reddy notes, if this view of language were correct, learning would be
effortless and accurate. The problem with this view of language is that
learning is seen as passive, with the learner simply 'taking in' information
(Bowers 1988: 42). I prefer to suggest that there is no information in
language, in books or in any medium per se. If language and books do
'contain' something, this is only words rather than information. Information
and meaning arises only in the process of listeners, readers or viewers
actively making sense of what they hear or see. Meaning is not 'extracted',
but constructed.
In relation to mass communication rather than interpersonal communication,
key metaphors associated with a transmission model are those of the
hypodermic needle and of the bullet. In the context of mass communication
such metaphors are now largely used only as the targets of criticism by
researchers in the field.

Linearity
The transmission model fixes and separates the roles of 'sender' and
'receiver'. But communication between two people involves simultaneous
'sending' and 'receiving' (not only talking, but also 'body language' and so
on). In Shannon and Weaver's model the source is seen as the active
decision-maker who determines the meaning of the message; the destination
is the passive target.
It is a linear, one-way model, ascribing a secondary role to the 'receiver',
who is seen as absorbing information. However, communication is not a
one-way street. Even when we are simply listening to the radio, reading a
book or watching TV we are far more interpretively active than we normally
realize.
There was no provision in the original model for feedback (reaction from the
receiver). Feedback enables speakers to adjust their performance to the
needs and responses of their audience. A 'feedback loop' was added by later
theorists, but the model remains linear.

Content and meaning

In this model, even the nature of the content seems irrelevant, whereas the
subject, or the way in which the participants feel about it, can shape the
process of communication. Insofar as content has any place (typically
framed as 'the message'), transmission models tend to equate content and
meaning, whereas there may be varying degrees of divergence between the
'intended meaning' and the meanings generated by interpreters.
According to Erik Meeuwissen (e-mail 26/2/98) Shannon himself was well
aware of the fact that his theory did not address meaning. He offers these
supportive quotations from Shannon and Weaver:
The fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one
point either exactly or approximately a message selected at another point.
Frequently the messages have meaning; that is they refer to or are
correlated according to some system with certain physical or conceptual
entities. These semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the
engineering problem (Shannon 1948).
The word information, in this theory, is used in a special sense that must
not be confused with its ordinary usage. In particular, information must
not be confused with meaning. In fact, two messages, one of which is
heavily loaded with meaning and the other of which is pure nonsense,
can be exactly equivalent, from the present viewpoint, as regards
information. It is this, undoubtedly, that Shannon means when he says
that 'the semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the
engineering aspects. (Weaver 1949)
Weaver also noted that the theory
...has so penetratingly cleared the air that one is now, perhaps for the first
time, ready for a real theory of meaning. An engineering communication
theory is just like a very proper and discreet girl accepting your telegram.
She pays no attention to the meaning whether it be sad, or joyous, or
embarrassing. But she must be prepared to deal with all that come to her
desk (Weaver 1949).
However, the important point here is that meaning-making is not central in
transmission models. It is widely assumed that meaning is contained in the
'message' rather than in its interpretation. But there is no single, fixed
meaning in any message. We bring varying attitudes, expectations and
understandings to communicative situations. Even if the receiver sees or
hears exactly the same message which the sender sent, the sense which the
receiver makes of it may be quite different from the sender's intention. The
same 'message' may represent multiple meanings. The word 'message' is a
sort of microcosm of the whole postal metaphor, so I'm not happy with even
using that label.
Transmission models treat decoding as a mirror image of encoding, allowing
no room for the receiver's interpretative frames of reference. Where the
message is recorded in some form 'senders' may well have little idea of who
the 'receivers' may be (particularly, of course, in relation to mass
communication). The receiver need not simply accept, but may alternatively
ignore or oppose a message. We don't all necessarily have to accept
messages which suggest that a particular political programme is good for us.

Instrumentalism
The transmission model is an instrumental model in that it treats
communication as a means to a predetermined end. Perhaps this is the way
in which some people experience communication. However, not all
communication is intentional: people unintentionally communicate a great
deal about their attitudes simply through body language. And, although this
idea will sound daft to those who've never experienced it, when some of us
write something, we sometimes find out what we want to say only after
we've finished writing about it.
Some critics argue that this model is geared towards improving a
communicator's ability to manipulate a receiver. Carey notes that 'the centre
of this idea of communication is the transmission of signals or messages
over distance for the purposes of control... of distance and people' (Carey
1989: 15).
In an instrumental framework the process involved is intended to be
'transparent' to the participants (nothing is intended to distract from the
sender's communicative goal). Such a conception is as fundamental to the
rhetoric of science as it is alien to that of art. 'Perfectly transparent
communication' is impossible.

Context
Nor is there any mention in the transmission model of the importance of
context: situational, social, institutional, political, cultural, historical.
Meaning cannot be independent of such contexts. Whilst recorded texts
(such as letters in relation to interpersonal communication and newspapers,
films, radio and television programmes in relation to mass communication)
allow texts to be physically separated from their contexts of production, this
is not to say that meaning can be 'context-free'. Whilst it is true that meaning
is not wholly 'determined' by contexts of 'production' or 'reception' (texts do
not mean simply what either their producers or their interpreters choose for
them to mean), meanings may nevertheless be radically inflected by
particular contexts of 'writing' and 'reading' in space and time. The 'same'
text can be interpreted quite differently within different contexts.
Social contexts have a key influence on what are perceived as appropriate
forms, styles and contents. Regarding situational context, it makes a lot of
difference if the sender is an opinionated taxi-driver who drives
aggressively, and the receiver is a passenger in the back seat whose primary
concern is to arrive at the destination in one piece.

Relationships and purposes

In the transmission model the participants are treated as isolated individuals.
Contemporary communication theorists treat communication as a shared
social system. We are all social beings, and our communicative acts cannot
be said to represent the expression of purely individual thoughts and
feelings. Such thoughts and feelings are socio-culturally patterned. Even
what we call 'our' language isn't our own: we are born into it; we can't
change the rules. Words have connotations which we don't choose for them.
An emphasis on creative individuality is itself a culturally-shaped myth
which had a historically 'modern' origin in Western Europe.
Transmission models of communication reduce human communication to
the transmission of messages, whereas, as the linguists tell us, there is more
to communication than this. They refer, for instance, to phatic
communication, which is a way of maintaining relationships. In Britain,
talking about the weather is far more a matter of phatic communication than
of 'transmitting information'.
No allowance is made in the transmission model for differing purposes. The
same TV images of a football match would have very different meanings for
the fans of opposing sides.
In models such as Shannon and Weaver's no allowance is made for
relationships between people as communicators (e.g. differences in power).
We frame what is said differently according to the roles in which we
communicate. If a friend asks you later what you thought of this lecture you
are likely to answer in a somewhat different way from the way you might
answer the same question from the undergraduate course director in his
office. The interview is a very good example of the unequal power
relationship in a communicative situation.
People in society do not all have the same social roles or the same rights.
And not all meanings are accorded equal value. It makes a difference
whether the participants are of the same social class, gender, broad age
group or profession. We need only think of whose meanings prevail in the
doctor's surgery. And, more broadly, we all know that certain voices 'carry
more authority' than others, and that in some contexts, 'children are to be
seen and not heard'. The dominant directionality involved in communication
cannot be fixed in a model but must be related to the situational distribution
of power.

Time
Furthermore, Shannon and Weaver's model makes no allowance for dynamic
change over time. People don't remain frozen in the same roles and
relationships, with the same purposes. Even within the course of a single
conversation, such relationships may continuously shift. Also, adopting a
more 'historical' perspective, however stable the text may seem to be, the
ways in which a recorded text may be interpreted depends also on
circumstances at that time of its interpretation.

Medium
Finally, the model is indifferent to the nature of the medium. And yet
whether you speak directly to, write to, or phone a lover, for instance, can
have major implications for the meaning of your communication. There are
widespread social conventions about the use of one medium rather than
another for specific purposes. People also differ in their personal attitudes to
the use of particular media (e.g. word processed Christmas circulars from
friends!).
Furthermore, each medium has technological features which make it easier
to use for some purposes than for others. Some media lend themselves to
direct feedback more than others. The medium can affect both the form and
the content of a message. The medium is therefore not simply 'neutral ' in
the process of communication.

Conclusion
In short, the transmissive model is of little direct value to social science
research into human communication, and its endurance in popular discussion
is a real liability. Its reductive influence has implications not only for the
commonsense understanding of communication in general, but also for
specific forms of communication such as speaking and listening, writing and
reading, watching television and so on. In education, it represents a similarly
transmissive model of teaching and learning. And in perception in general, it
reflects the naive 'realist' notion that meanings exist in the world awaiting
only decoding by the passive spectator. In all these contexts, such a model
underestimates the creativity of the act of interpretation.
Alternatives to transmissive models of communication are normally
described as constructivist: such perspectives acknowledge that meanings
are actively constructed by both initiators and interpreters rather than simply
'transmitted'. However, you will find no single, widely-accepted
constructivist model of communication in a form like that of Shannon and
Weaver's block diagram. This is partly because those who approach
communication from the constructivist perspective often reject the very idea
of attempting to produce a formal model of communication. Where such
models are offered, they stress the centrality of the act of making meaning
and the importance of the socio-cultural context.

Communication Models

Contents
What is a Model?

The Advantages of Models

Limitations of Models
 Classical Communication Models
Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric
Aristotle’s model of proof
Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation
Early Linear Models
The Shannon-Weaver Mathematical Model, 1949
Berlo’s S-M-C-R, 1960
Schramm’s Interactive Model, 1954
Non-linear Models
Dance’s Helical Spiral, 1967
Westley and MacLean’s Conceptual Model, 1957
Becker’s Mosaic Model, 1968
Multidimensional Models
Ruesch and Bateson, Functional Model, 1951
Barnlund’s Transactional Model, 1970
Suggestions for Communication Models
Systemic Model of Communication, 1972
Brown’s Holographic Model, 1987
A Fractal Model
Suggested Readings
Although adapted and updated, much of the information in this lecture is derived from C.
David Mortensen, Communication: The Study of Human Communication (New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1972), Chapter 2, “Communication Models.”
A. What is a Model?
1. Mortensen: “In the broadest sense, a model is a systematic
representation of an object or event in idealized and abstract form.
Models are somewhat arbitrary by their nature. The act of abstracting
eliminates certain details to focus on essential factors. . . . The key to the
usefulness of a model is the degree to which it conforms--in point-by-
point correspondence--to the underlying determinants of
communicative behavior.”
2. “Communication models are merely pictures; they’re even distorting
pictures, because they stop or freeze an essentially dynamic interactive
or transactive process into a static picture.”
3. Models are metaphors. They allow us to see one thing in terms of
another.

B. The Advantages of Models

1. They should allow us to ask questions.
Mortensen: “A good model is useful, then, in providing both general perspective
and particular vantage points from which to ask questions and to interpret the raw
stuff of observation. The more complex the subject matter—the more amorphous
and elusive the natural boundaries—the greater are the potential rewards of model
building.”

2. They should clarify complexity.

Models also clarify the structure of complex events. They do this, as Chapanis
(1961) noted, by reducing complexity to simpler, more familiar terms. . . Thus, the
aim of a model is not to ignore complexity or to explain it away, but rather to give it
order and coherence.

3. They should lead us to new discoveries-most important, according to

Mortensen.
At another level models have heuristic value; that is, they provide new ways to
conceive of hypothetical ideas and relationships. This may well be their most
important function. With the aid of a good model, suddenly we are jarred from
conventional modes of thought. . . . Ideally, any model, even when studied casually,
should offer new insights and culminate in what can only be described as an “Aha!”
experience.

C. Limitations of Models
1. Can lead to oversimplifications.
“There is no denying that much of the work in designing communication models
illustrates the oft-repeated charge that anything in human affairs which can be
modeled is by definition too superficial to be given serious consideration.”
Some, like Duhem’s (1954), believe there is no value in models at all:
We can guard against the risks of oversimplification by recognizing the fundamental distinction
between simplification and oversimplification. By definition, and of necessity, models simplify. So do
all comparisons. As Kaplan (1964) noted, “Science always simplifies; its aim is not to reproduce the
reality in all its complexity, but only to formulate what is essential for understanding, prediction, or
control. That a model is simpler than the subject-matter being inquired into is as much a virtue as a
fault, and is, in any case, inevitable [p. 280].” So the real question is what gets simplified. Insofar as a
model ignores crucial variables and recurrent relationships, it is open to the charge of
oversimplification. If the essential attributes or particulars of the event are included, the model is to
be credited with the virtue of parsimony, which insists-where everything is equal-that the simplest of
two interpretations is superior. Simplification, after all, is inherent in the act of abstracting. For
example, an ordinary orange has a vast number of potential attributes; it is necessary to consider
only a few when one decides to eat an orange, but many more must be taken into account when one
wants to capture the essence of an orange in a prize-winning photograph. abstracting. For example,
an ordinary orange has a vast number of potential attributes; it is necessary to consider only a few
when one decides to eat an orange, but many more must be taken into account when one wants to
capture the essence of an orange in a prize-winning photograph.

Models can miss important points of comparison. Chapanis (1961), “A model can
tolerate a considerable amount of slop [p. 118].”

2. Can lead of a confusion of the model between the behavior it portrays

Mortensen: “Critics also charge that models are readily confused with reality. The
problem typically begins with an initial exploration of some unknown territory. . .
.Then the model begins to function as a substitute for the event: in short, the map is
taken literally. And what is worse, another form of ambiguity is substituted for the
uncertainty the map was designed to minimize. What has happened is a
sophisticated version of the general semanticist’s admonition that “the map is not
the territory.” Spain is not pink because it appears that way on the map, and
Minnesota is not up because it is located near the top of a United States map.
“The proper antidote lies in acquiring skill in the art of map reading.”

3. Premature Closure
The model designer may escape the risks of oversimplification and map reading and
still fall prey to dangers inherent in abstraction. To press for closure is to strive for
a sense of completion in a system.
Kaplan (1964):
The danger is that the model limits our awareness of unexplored possibilities of conceptualization.
We tinker with the model when we might be better occupied with the subject-matter itself. In many
areas of human behavior, our knowledge is on the level of folk wisdom ... incorporating it in a model
does not automatically give such knowledge scientific status. The majority of our ideas is usually a
matter of slow growth, which cannot be forced.... Closure is premature if it lays down the lines for
our thinking to follow when we do not know enough to say even whether one direction or another is
the more promising. Building a model, in short, may crystallize our thoughts at a stage when they are
better left in solution, to allow new compounds to precipitate [p. 279].

One can reduce the hazards only by recognizing that physical reality can be
represented in any number of ways.

D. Classical Communication Models

1. Aristotle’s definition of rhetoric. Ehninger, Gronbeck and Monroe:
One of the earliest definitions of communication came from the Greek
philosopher-teacher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.).
a. “Rhetoric” is “the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of
persuasion” (Rhetoric 1335b).
b. Aristotle’s speaker-centered model received perhaps its fullest development in the
hands of Roman educator Quintilian (ca. 35-95 A.D.), whose Institutio Oratoria was
filled with advice on the full training of a “good” speaker-statesman.

2. Aristotle’s model of proof. Kinnevay also sees a model of

communication in Aristotle’s description of proof:
a. Logos, inheres in the content or the message itself
b. Pathos, inheres in the audience
c. Ethos, inheres in the speaker

3. Bitzer’s Rhetorical Situation. Lloyd Bitzer developed described the

“Rhetorical Situation,” which, while not a model, identifies some of the
classical components of a communication situation (“The Rhetorical
Situation,” Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1 (Winter, 1968):1-15.).
Bitzer defines the “rhetorical situation” as “a complex of persons, events, objects,
and relations presenting an actual or potential exigence which can be completely or
partially removed if discourse, introduced into the situation, can so constrain
human decision or action so as to bring about significant modification of the
exigence.”
See more of Bitzer's approach here.
E. Early Linear Models
1. The Shannon-Weaver Mathematical Model, 1949
a. Background
i. Claude Shannon, an engineer for the Bell Telephone Company, designed the most influential of all
early communication models. His goal was to formulate a theory to guide the efforts of engineers in
finding the most efficient way of transmitting electrical signals from one location to another
(Shannon and Weaver, 1949). Later Shannon introduced a mechanism in the receiver which
corrected for differences between the transmitted and received signal; this monitoring or correcting
mechanism was the forerunner of the now widely used concept of feedback (information which a
communicator gains from others in response to his own verbal behavior).

b. Strengths
i. This model, or a variation on it, is the most common communication model used in low-level
communication texts.

ii. Significant development. “Within a decade a host of other disciplines—many in the behavioral
sciences—adapted it to countless interpersonal situations, often distorting it or making exaggerated
claims for its use.”

iii. “Taken as an approximation of the process of human communication.”

iv. Significant heuristic value.

1.) With only slight changes in terminology, a number of nonmathematical schemas have elaborated on the major theme. For
example, Harold Lasswell (1948) conceived of analyzing the mass media in five stages: “Who?” “Says what?” “In which
channel?” “To whom?” “With what effect?” In apparent elaboration on Lasswell and/or Shannon and Weaver, George
Gerbner (1956) extended the components to include the notions of perception, reactions to a situation, and message context.

v. The concepts of this model became staples in communication research

1.) Entropy-the measure of uncertainty in a system. “Uncertainty or entropy increases in exact proportion to the number of
messages from which the source has to choose. In the simple matter of flipping a coin, entropy is low because the destination
knows the probability of a coin’s turning up either heads or tails. In the case of a two-headed coin, there can be neither any
freedom of choice nor any reduction in uncertainty so long as the destination knows exactly what the outcome must be. In
other words, the value of a specific bit of information depends on the probability that it will occur. In general, the informative
value of an item in a message decreases in exact proportion to the likelihood of its occurrence.”

2.) Redundancy-the degree to which information is not unique in the system. “Those items in a message that add no new
information are redundant. Perfect redundancy is equal to total repetition and is found in pure form only in machines. In
human beings, the very act of repetition changes, in some minute way, the meaning or the message and the larger social
significance of the event. Zero redundancy creates sheer unpredictability, for there is no way of knowing what items in a
sequence will come next. As a rule, no message can reach maximum efficiency unless it contains a balance between the
unexpected and the predictable, between what the receiver must have underscored to acquire understanding and what can be
deleted as extraneous.”

3.) Noise-the measure of information not related to the message. “Any additional signal that interferes with the reception of
information is noise. In electrical apparatus noise comes only from within the system, whereas in human activity it may occur
quite apart from the act of transmission and reception. Interference may result, for example, from background noise in the
immediate surroundings, from noisy channels (a crackling microphone), from the organization and semantic aspects of the
message (syntactical and semantical noise), or from psychological interference with encoding and decoding. Noise need not be
considered a detriment unless it produces a significant interference with the reception of the message. Even when the
disturbance is substantial, the strength of the signal or the rate of redundancy may be increased to restore efficiency.”
4.) Channel Capacity-the measure of the maximum amount of information a channel can carry. “The battle against
uncertainty depends upon the number of alternative possibilities the message eliminates. Suppose you wanted to know where a
given checker was located on a checkerboard. If you start by asking if it is located in the first black square at the extreme left
of the second row from the top and find the answer to be no, sixty-three possibilities remain-a high level of uncertainty. On the
other hand, if you first ask whether it falls on any square at the top half of the board, the alternative will be reduced by half
regardless of the answer. By following the first strategy it could be necessary to ask up to sixty-three questions (inefficient
indeed!); but by consistently halving the remaining possibilities, you will obtain the right answer in no more than six tries.”

vi. Provided an influential yet counter-intuitive definition of communication.

From Littlejohn, Stephen W. Theories of Human Communication. Second Ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1983, p 116.

Information is a measure of uncertainty, or entropy, in a situation. The greater the uncertainty, the more the information. When
a situation is completely predictable, no information is present. Most people associate information with certainty or
knowledge; consequently, this definition from information theory can be confusing. As used by the information theorist, the
concept does not refer to a message, facts, or meaning. It is a concept bound only to the quantification of stimuli or signals in a
situation.

On closer examination, this idea of information is not as distant from common sense as it first appears. We have said that
information is the amount of uncertainty in the situation. Another way of thinking of it is to consider information as the
number of messages required to completely reduce the uncertainty in the situation. For example, your friend is about to flip a
coin. Will it land heads up or tails up? You are uncertain, you cannot predict. This uncertainty, which results from the
entropy in the situation, will be eliminated by seeing the result of the flip. Now let’s suppose that you have received a tip that
your friend’s coin is two headed. The flip is “fixed.” There is no uncertainty and therefore no information. In other words, you
could not receive any message that would make you predict any better than you already have. In short, a situation with which
you are completely familiar has no information for you [emphasis added].

vii. See Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication (Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1949). For a number of excellent brief secondary sources, see the
bibliography. Two sources were particularly helpful in the preparation of this chapter: Allan R.
Broadhurst and Donald K. Darnell, “An Introduction to Cybernetics and Information Theory,”
Quarterly Journal of Speech 51 (1965): 442-53; Klaus Krippendorf, “Information Theory,” in
Communication and Behavior, ed. G. Hanneman and W. McEwen (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley,
1975), 351-89.

c. Weaknesses
i. Not analogous to much of human communication.
1.) “Only a fraction of the information conveyed in interpersonal encounters can be taken as remotely corresponding to the
teletype action of statistically rare or redundant signals.”

2.) “Though Shannon’s technical concept of information is fascinating in many respects, it ranks among the least important
ways of conceiving of what we recognize as “information.” “

ii. Only formal—does not account for content

1.) Mortensen: “Shannon and Weaver were concerned only with technical problems associated with the selection and
arrangement of discrete units of information—in short, with purely formal matters, not content. Hence, their model does not
apply to semantic or pragmatic dimensions of language. “

2.) Theodore Roszak provides a thoughtful critique of Shannon’s model in The Cult of Information. Roszak notes the unique
way in which Shannon defined information:

Once, when he was explaining his work to a group of prominent scientists who
challenged his eccentric definition, he replied, “I think perhaps the word ‘information’ is
causing more trouble . . . than it is worth, except that it is difficult to find another word
that is anywhere near right. It should be kept solidly in mind that [information] is only a
measure of the difficulty in transmitting the sequences produced by some information
source” [emphasis added]
3.) As Roszak points out, Shannon’s model has no mechanism for distinguishing important ideas from pure non-sense:

In much the same way, in its new technical sense, information has come to denote
whatever can be coded for transmission through a channel that connects a source with a
receiver, regardless of semantic content. For Shannon’s purposes, all the following are
“information”:
E = mc2
Jesus saves.
Thou shalt not kill.
I think, therefore I am.
Phillies 8, Dodgers 5
‘Twas brillig and the slithy roves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.
And indeed, these are no more or less meaningful than any string of haphazard bits (x!
9#44jGH?566MRK) I might be willing to pay to have telexed across the continent.
As the mathematician Warren Weaver once put it, explaining “the strange way in which,
in this theory, the word ‘information’ is used .... It is surprising but true that, from the
present viewpoint, two messages, one heavily loaded with meaning and the other pure
nonsense, can be equivalent as regards information” [emphasis added].
iii. Static and Linear
1.) Mortensen: “Finally, the most serious shortcoming of the Shannon-Weaver communication system is that it is relatively
static and linear. It conceives of a linear and literal transmission of information from one location to another. The notion of
linearity leads to misleading ideas when transferred to human conduct; some of the problems can best be underscored by
studying several alternative models of communication.”

2. Berlo’s S-M-C-R, 1960

a. Background
i. Ehninger, Gronbeck and Monroe: “The simplest and most influential message-centered model of
our time came from David Berlo (Simplified from David K. Berlo, The Process of Communication
(New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1960)):”

ii. Essentially an adaptation of the Shannon-Weaver model.

b. Significant after World War II because:

i. The idea of “source” was flexible enough to include oral, written, electronic, or any other kind of
“symbolic” generator-of-messages.

ii. “Message” was made the central element, stressing the transmission of ideas.

iii. The model recognized that receivers were important to communication, for they were the targets.

iv. The notions of “encoding” and “decoding” emphasized the problems we all have (psycho-
linguistically) in translating our own thoughts into words or other symbols and in deciphering the
words or symbols of others into terms we ourselves can understand.

c. Weaknesses:
i. Tends to stress the manipulation of the message—the encoding and decoding processes

ii. it implies that human communication is like machine communication, like signal-sending in
telephone, television, computer, and radar systems.

iii. It even seems to stress that most problems in human communication can be solved by technical
accuracy-by choosing the “right” symbols, preventing interference, and sending efficient messages.

iv. But even with the “right” symbols, people misunderstand each other. “Problems in “meaning” or
“meaningfulness” often aren’t a matter of comprehension, but of reaction, of agreement, of shared
concepts, beliefs, attitudes, values. To put the com- back into communication, we need a meaning-
centered theory of communication.”

3. Schramm’s Interactive Model, 1954

a. Background
Wilbur Schramm (1954) was one of the first to alter the mathematical model of Shannon and
Weaver. He conceived of decoding and encoding as activities maintained simultaneously by sender
and receiver; he also made provisions for a two-way interchange of messages. Notice also the
inclusion of an “interpreter” as an abstract representation of the problem of meaning.

(From Wilbur Schramm, “How Communication Works,” in The Process and Effects of
Communication, ed. Wilbur Schramm (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1954), pp. 3-26):
b. Strengths
i. Schramm provided the additional notion of a “field of experience,” or the psychological frame of
reference; this refers to the type of orientation or attitudes which interactants maintain toward each
other.

ii. Included Feedback

1.) Communication is reciprocal, two-way, even though the feedback may be delayed.

a.) Some of these methods of communication are very direct, as when you talk in direct
response to someone.
b.) Others are only moderately direct; you might squirm when a speaker drones on and
on, wrinkle your nose and scratch your head when a message is too abstract, or shift your
body position when you think it’s your turn to talk.
c.) Still other kinds of feedback are completely indirect.
2.) For example,

a.) politicians discover if they’re getting their message across by the number of votes cast
on the first Tuesday in November;
b.) commercial sponsors examine sales figures to gauge their communicative
effectiveness in ads;
c.) teachers measure their abilities to get the material across in a particular course by
seeing how many students sign up for it the next term.
iii. Included Context
1.) A message may have different meanings, depending upon the specific context or setting.

2.) Shouting “Fire!” on a rifle range produces one set of reactions-reactions quite different from those produced in a crowded
theater.

iv. Included Culture

1.) A message may have different meanings associated with it depending upon the culture or society. Communication systems,
thus, operate within the confines of cultural rules and expectations to which we all have been educated.

v. Other model designers abstracted the dualistic aspects of communication as a series of “loops,”
(Mysak, 1970), “speech cycles” (Johnson, 1953), “co-orientation” (Newcomb, 1953), and overlapping
“psychological fields” (Fearing, 1953).

c. Weaknesses
i. Schramm’s model, while less linear, still accounts for only bilateral communication between two
parties. The complex, multiple levels of communication between several sources is beyond this model.

F. Non-linear Models
1. Dance’s Helical Spiral, 1967
a. Background
i. Depicts communication as a dynamic process. Mortensen: “The helix represents the way
communication evolves in an individual from his birth to the existing moment.”

ii. Dance: “At any and all times, the helix gives geometrical testimony to the concept that
communication while moving forward is at the same moment coming back upon itself and being
affected by its past behavior, for the coming curve of the helix is fundamentally affected by the curve
from which it emerges. Yet, even though slowly, the helix can gradually free itself from its lower-level
distortions. The communication process, like the helix, is constantly moving forward and yet is
always to some degree dependent upon the past, which informs the present and the future. The
helical communication model offers a flexible communication process” [p. 296].

b. Strengths
i. Mortensen: “As a heuristic device, the helix is interesting not so much for what it says as for what it
permits to be said. Hence, it exemplifies a point made earlier: It is important to approach models in a
spirit of speculation and intellectual play.”

ii. Chapanis (1961) called “sophisticated play:”

The helix implies that communication is continuous, unrepeatable, additive, and accumulative; that is, each phase of activity
depends upon present forces at work as they are defined by all that has occurred before. All experience contributes to the
shape of the unfolding moment; there is no break in the action, no fixed beginning, no pure redundancy, no closure. All
communicative experience is the product of learned, nonrepeatable events which are defined in ways the organism develops to
be self-consistent and socially meaningful. In short, the helix underscores the integrated aspects of all human communication
as an evolving process that is always turned inward in ways that permit learning, growth, and discovery.

c. Weaknesses
i. May not be a model at all: too few variables.
Mortensen: “If judged against conventional scientific standards, the helix does not fare well as a model. Indeed, some would
claim that it does not meet the requirements of a model at all. More specifically, it is not a systematic or formalized mode of
representation. Neither does it formalize relationships or isolate key variables. It describes in the abstract but does not
explicitly explain or make particular hypotheses testable.”

ii. Generates Questions, but leaves much unaswered.

Mortensen: “For example, does not the helix imply a false degree of continuity from one communicative situation to another?
Do we necessarily perceive all encounters as actually occurring in an undifferentiated, unbroken sequence of events? Does an
unbroken line not conflict with the human experience of discontinuity, intermittent periods, false starts, and so forth? Is all
communication a matter of growth, upward and onward, in an ever-broadening range of encounters? If the helix represents
continuous learning and growth, how can the same form also account for deterioration and decay? What about the forces of
entropy, inertia, decay, and pathology? And does not the unbroken line of a helix tacitly ignore the qualitative distinctions that
inevitably characterize different communicative events? Also, what about movements which we define as utterly wasted,
forced, or contrived? Along similar lines, how can the idea of continuous, unbroken growth include events we consider
meaningless, artificial, or unproductive? Countless other questions could be raised. And that is the point. The model brings
problems of abstraction into the open. “rtificial, or unproductive? Countless other questions could be raised. And that is the
point. The model brings problems of abstraction into the open. “

What is communication?
What is communication? It's an interesting exercise to ask members of a group to write,
in a short paragraph, their meanings for the term. Two things become apparent: most
individuals have difficulty writing out their actual meaning for the term communication,
and there is a great variation in meanings.
We can look up the origin of the word. Communication comes from the Latin communis,
"common." When we communicate, we are trying to establish a "commonness" with
someone. That is, we are trying to share information, an idea or an attitude.
Looking further, you can find this type of definition: "Communications is the mechanism
through which human relations exist and develop." This broad definition, found in a book
written by a sociologist, takes in about everything.
In contrast, some people limit their definitions of communication rather narrowly, saying
"communication is the process whereby one person tells another something through the
written or spoken word." This definition, from a book written by a journalist, seems
reasonable for those in that field.
Some definitions fall in between these two extremes. Carl Hovland, a well-known
psychologist of a few years ago, said communication is "the process by which an
individual (the communicator) transmits stimuli (usually verbal symbols) to modify the
behavior of the other individuals (communicates)."
This definition describes what many extension workers hope to achieve. You'll be trying
to change behavior.
Some object to this definition. Their objections center on the phrase "modify the
behavior." They say there are numerous occasions when they communicate, in their
family and social lives for example, with no intention of attempting to modify behavior.
But, we most likely do modify others' behavior even though that may not be our
intention.
We could find many other definitions of communication. However, "meanings are in
people and not words" and it's not likely that we could get a group of any size to agree
exactly on one meaning. Besides, an exact definition of the word isn't necessary. My goal
is to illustrate that it's difficult for many to formulate their own definition and that there is
a wide range in meanings.

The communication process

To communicate effectively, we need to be familiar with the factors involved in the
communication process. If we are aware of them, these factors will help us plan, analyze
situations, solve problems, and in general do better in our work no matter what our job
might be.
This leads to a discussion of the communication process. Let's look at it part by part as
viewed by several communication theorists. Communication is a concern to many people.
So a lot of thought, work and discussion has gone into different communication
situations. Today, such people as psychologists, educators, medical doctors, sociologists,
engineers and journalists represent only a few of the professional groups whose members
have developed ways of looking at and talking about the communication process in their
specialized fields.
Several theorists have discussed the communication process in ways that have important
implications for those involved in informal education programs such as extension work.
Each of the "models" that we review has a point of vital interest.
Communication models come in a variety of forms, ranging from catchy summations to
diagrams to mathematical formulas. One model of the communication process reviewed
is also one of the oldest.

Aristotle's model
Aristotle, writing 300 years before the birth of Christ, provided an explanation of oral
communication that is still worthy of attention. He called the study of communication
"rhetoric" and spoke of three elements within the process. He provided us with this
insight:
Rhetoric falls into three divisions, determined by the three classes of listeners to
speeches. For of the three elements in speech-making — speaker, subject, and person
addressed — it is the last one, the hearer, that determines the speech's end and object.1
Here, Aristotle speaks of a communication process composed of a speaker, a message
and a listener. Note, he points out that the person at the end of the communication process
holds the key to whether or not communication takes place.
Our failure to recognize what Aristotle grasped thousands of years ago is a primary
cause, if not the primary one, for communication failure. We fail to recognize the
importance of the audience at the end of the communication chain.
We tend to be more concerned about ourselves as the communications source, about our
message, and even the channel we are going to use. Too often, the listener, viewer, reader
fails to get any consideration at all.
Aristotle's words underscore the long interest in communication. They also indicate that
man has had a good grasp of what is involved in communication for a long while. So we
might even wonder: If we know so much about the communication process, and if we've
known it for so long, why do we still have communications problems?
It's unlikely we will ever achieve perfect communication. The best we can hope for is to
provide improved communication. Hopefully, we'll be more aware of the process and
work harder to minimize problems with communications.

Lasswell's model
Harold Lasswell, a political scientist, developed a much quoted formulation of the main
elements of communication: "Who says what in which channel to whom with what
effect."2 This summation of the communications process has been widely quoted since
the 1940s.
The point in Lasswell's comment is that there must be an "effect" if communication
takes place. If we have communicated, we've "motivated" or produced an effect.
It's also interesting to note that Lasswell's version of the communication process
mentions four parts — who, what, channel, whom. Three of the four parallel parts
mentioned by Aristotle — speaker (who), subject (what), person addressed (whom). Only
channel has been added. Most modern-day theorists discuss the four parts of the
communication process, but use different terms to designate them.

The Shannon and Weaver model

Figure 2
Schramm's model.
Wilbur Schramm, a well-known communications theorist, developed a straightforward
communications model (Figure 2) in his book The Process and Effects of Mass
Communications4.
In Schramm's model he notes, as did Aristotle, that communication always requires three
elements — the source, the message and the destination. Ideally, the source encodes a
message and transmits it to its destination via some channel, where the message is
received and decoded.
However, taking the sociological aspects involved in communication into consideration,
Schramm points out that for understanding to take place between the source and the
destination, they must have something in common.
If the source's and destination's fields of experience overlap, communication can
take place
If there is no overlap, or only a small area in common, communication is difficult. if not
impossible.
For many years cooperative extension service agents developed considerable skill in
communicating with the large American middle class. That success is understandable. A
large number of extension workers came from this middle class, and there was a large
overlap between the extension communicator and the middle-class audience.
However, in the 1960s, a period of growing social awareness, many extension workers
were challenged — even mandated — to work with a "disadvantaged" audience. Many of
the middle-class extension workers found it difficult to communicate with a
disadvantaged audience. In many cases, there was only a small overlap in the fields of
experience of the source and the disadvantaged receiver.
Extension met this communications challenge to a degree by employing individuals from
the target disadvantaged audience, training them, and in turn allowing them to provide
the important communications linkage. Those employees are given such titles as leader
aides, nutrition assistants, paraprofessionals and other like names.

The Rileys' model

FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=The Riley's model"

Figure 3
The Riley's model,
John W. and Matilda White Riley, a husband and wife team of sociologists, point out the
importance of the sociological view in communication in another way. The two
sociologists say such a view would fit together the many messages and individual
reactions to them within an integrated social structure and process. The Rileys developed
a model (Figure 3) to illustrate these sociological implications in communication.5
The model indicates the communicator (C) emerges as part of a larger pattern, sending
messages in accordance with the expectations and actions of other persons and groups
within the same social structure. This also is true of the receiver (R) in the
communications process.
In addition, both the communicator and receiver are part of an overall social system.
Within such an all-embracing system, the communication process is seen as a part of a
larger social process, both affecting it and being in turn affected by it. The model clearly
illustrates that communication is a two-way proposition.
The important point the Rileys' model makes for us is that we send messages as members
of certain primary groups and that our receivers receive our messages as members of
primary groups. As you likely can visualize, group references may be a positive
reinforcement of our messages; at other times they may create a negative force.

Berlo's model
The final communications model that we will consider is the SMCR model, developed by
David K. Berlo, a communications theorist and consultant. In his book The Process of
Communication,6 Berlo points out the importance of the psychological view in his
communications model. The four parts of Berlo's SMCR model are — no surprises here
— source, message, channel, receiver.
The first part of this communication model is the source. All communication must come
from some source. The source might be one person, a group of people, or a company,
organization, or institution such as the University of Missouri.
Several things determine how a source will operate in the communication process. They
include the source's communication skills — abilities to think, write, draw, speak. They
also include attitudes toward audience, the subject matter, yourself, or toward any other
factor pertinent to the situation. Knowledge of the subject, the audience, the situation and
other background also influences the way the source operates. So will social background,
education, friends, salary, culture — all sometimes called the sociocultural context in
which the source lives.
Message has to do with the package to be sent by the source. The code or language must
be chosen. In general, we think of code in terms of the natural languages — English,
Spanish, German, Chinese and others. Sometimes we use other languages — music, art,
gestures. In all cases, look at the code in terms of ease or difficulty for audience
understanding.
Within the message, select content and organize it to meet acceptable treatment for the
given audience or specific channel. If the source makes a poor choice, the message will
likely fail.
Channel can be thought of as a sense — smelling, tasting, feeling, hearing, seeing.
Sometimes it is preferable to think of the channel as the method over which the message
will be transmitted: telegraph, newspaper, radio, letter, poster or other media.
Kind and number of channels to use may depend largely on purpose. In general, the more
you can use and the more you tailor your message to the people "receiving" each channel,
the more effective your message.
Receiver becomes the final link in the communication process. The receiver is the person
or persons who make up the audience of your message. All of the factors that determine
how a source will operate apply to the receiver. Think of communication skills in terms
of how well a receiver can hear, read, or use his or her other senses. Attitudes relate to
how a receiver thinks of the source, of himself or herself, of the message, and so on. The
receiver may have more or less knowledge than the source. Sociocultural context could
be different in many ways from that of the source, but social background, education,
friends, salary, culture would still be involved. Each will affect the receiver's
understanding of the message.
Messages sometimes fail to accomplish their purpose for many reasons. Frequently the
source is unaware of receivers and how they view things. Certain channels may not be as
effective under certain circumstances. Treatment of a message may not fit a certain
channel. Or some receivers simply may not be aware of, interested in, or capable of using
certain available messages.

Summary
Here is a summary of the important thoughts illustrated by each model:
Aristotle: The receiver holds the key to success.
Lasswell: An effect must be achieved if communication takes place.
Shannon and Weaver: Semantic noise can be a major communication barrier.
Schramm: Overlapping experiences makes it easier to communicate successfully.
The Rileys: Membership in primary groups affects how messages are sent and received.
Berlo: Several important factors must be considered relating to source, message, channel,
receiver.
These are just a few of the many views of the communication process that have been
developed. There are many other communication theorists — McLuhan, MacLean,
Westley, Stephenson, Gerbner, Rothstein, Osgood, Johnson, Cherry and others. Those
briefly described here are pertinent to many everyday communication situations.
For an ending thought, let's return again to the idea that successful communication
depends upon the receiver. As a communications source, we can spend a lot of time
preparing messages and in selecting channels, but if the receiver doesn't get the message,
we haven't communicated.
It's as Aristotle said 300 years before the birth of Christ: "For of the three elements in
speech-making — speaker, subject, and person addressed — it is the last one, the hearer,
that determines the speech's end and object."
References
W. Rhys Roberts, "Rhetorica," The Works of Aristotle, volume XI, editor, W. D. Ross
(London: Oxford University Press, 1924) p. 1358.
Harold D. Lasswell., "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society," The
Communication of Ideas, editor, Lyman Bryson (New York: Institute for
Religious and Social Studies, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1948) p.
37.
Claude F. Shannon and Warren Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of
Communication, (Urbana, Ill.: The University of Illinois Press, 1964) p. 7.
Wilbur Schramm, "How Communication Works," The Process and Effects of Mass
Communication, editor, Wilbur Schramm (Urbana, Ill.: The University of Illinois
Press, 1961) pp. 5-6.
John W. Riley. Jr., and Matilda White Riley, "Mass Communication and the Social
System." Sociology Today, Volume II, Robert K. Merton, Leonard Brown and
Leonard D. Cottrell, Jr., editors. (New York: Harper and Row, 1965) pp. 537-578.
David K. Berlo, The Process of Communication, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc., 1960).
Material in this paper is drawn primarily from a chapter in the author's doctoral dissertation: Lee,
Richard L. "The Flow of Information to Disadvantaged Farmers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Iowa, 1967. However, the author has drawn from several sources. Contents also are
used in an expanded oral presentation prepared primarily for extension workers and adapted for
other groups.

CM109, reviewed October 1993

Business Definition for: Materials

Management
• an approach for planning, organizing, and controlling all those
activities principally concerned with the flow of materials into an
organization. The scope of materials management varies greatly from
company to company and may include materials planning and control,
production planning, purchasing, inventory control and stores, in-plant
materials movement, and waste management.
 Definition
Planning and control of the functions supporting the complete cycle (flow) of materials,
and the associated flow of information. These functions include (1) identification, (2)
cataloging, (3) standardization, (4) need determination, (5) scheduling, (6) procurement,
(7) inspection, (8) quality control, (9) packaging, (10) storage, (11) inventory control,
(12) distribution, and (13) disposal. Also called materials planning.

Definition & Scope of Materials Management

As you know , the
fundamental
objectives of the
Materials
Management
function ,often
called the famous 5
Rs of Materials
Management, are
acquisition of
materials and
services :

• of the right • •
quality

• in the right
quantity

• at the right
time

• from the
right
source

• at the right
time

From the
management point
of view , the key
objectives of MM
are :

• To buy at • • •
the lowest
price ,
consistent
with desired
quality and
 service

• To maintain
a high
inventory
turnover ,
by reducing
excess
storage ,
carrying
costs and
inventory
losses
occurring
due to
deterioratio
ns ,
obsolescen
ce and
pilferage

• To maintain
continuity of
supply ,
preventing
interruption
of the flow
of materials
and
services to
users

• To maintain
the
specified
material
quality level
and a
consistency
of quality
which
permits
efficient and
effective
operation

• To develop
reliable
alternate
sources of
supply to
promote a
competitive
atmosphere
in
performanc
 e and
pricing

• To minimize
the overall
cost of
acquisition
by
improving
the
efficiency of
operations
and
procedures

• To hire,
develop,
motivate
and train
personnel
and to
provide a
reservoir of
talent

• To develop
and
maintain
good
supplier
relationship
s in order to
create a
supplier
attitude and
desire
furnish the
organisatio
n with new
ideas ,
products,
and better
prices and
service

• To achieve
a high
degree of
cooperation
and
coordinatio
n with user
department
s

• To maintain
 good
records and
controls
that provide
an audit
trail and
ensure
efficiency
and
honesty

• To
participate
in Make or
Buy
decisions

Materials
Management thus
can be defined as
that function of
business that is
responsible for the
coordination of
planning, sourcing,
purchasing, moving,
storing and
controlling materials
in an optimum
manner so as to
provide service to
the customer, at a
pre-decided level at
a minimum cost.

Learn Scope of a
Materials Manager

The broad Materials

function has the
following as
identified and
interlinked sub
functions:

Materials planning
and control:
Materials required
for any operation
are based on the
sales forecasts and
production plans.
Planning and
control is done for
the materials taking
into account the
materials not
available for the
operation and those
in hand or in pipe
line. This involves
estimating the
individual
requirements of
parts, preparing
materials budget,
forecasting the
levels of
inventories,
scheduling the
orders and
monitoring the
performance in
relation to
production and
sales.

Purchasing:
Basically, the job of
a materials
manager is to
provide , to the user
departments right
material at the right
time in right quantity
of right quality at
right price from the
right source.

To meet these
objectives the
activities
undertaken include
selection of sources
of supply,
finalisation of terms
of purchase,
placement of
purchase orders,
follow up,
maintenance of
relations with
vendors, approval
of payments to
vendors, evaluating,
rating and
developing vendors.
Stores : Once the
material is delivered
, its physical
control ,
preservation ,
minimisation of
obsolescence and
damage through
timely disposal and
efficient handling,
maintenance of
records, proper
locations and
stocking is done in
Stores.

Inventory control :
One of the powerful
ways of controlling
the materials is
through Inventory
control. It
covers aspects
such as setting
inventory levels,
doing various
analyses such as
ABC , XYZ etc
,fixing economic
order quantities
(EOQ), setting
safety stock levels,
lead time analysis
and reporting.

Materials
Management's
scope is vast. Its
sub functions
include Materials
planning and
control, Purchasing,
Stores and
Inventory
Management
besides others.

Materials
management can
thus also be
defined as a joint
action of various
materials activities
directed towards a
common goal and
that is to achieve an
integrated
management
approach to
planning, acquiring,
processing and
distributing
production materials
from the raw
material state to the
finished product
state.

• Planning •
and
control

• Purchasin
g

• Value
analysis
and

• Physical
distributio
n

In its process of
managing ,
materials
management has
such sub fields as
inventory
management ,
value analysis,
receiving, stores
and management of
obsolete , slow
moving and non
moving items. The
various activities
represent these four
functions:

BUSINESS AND ITS ENVIRONMENT

NATURE OF BUSINESS
Business may be understood as the organized efforts of enterprise to
supply consumers with goods and services for a profit. Businesses vary in size,
as measured by the number of employees or by sales volume. But, all businesses
share the same purpose: to earn profits.
The purpose of business goes beyond earning profit. There are:
• It is an important institution in society.
• Be it for the supply of goods and services
• Creation of job opportunities
• Offer of better quality of life
• Contributing to the economic growth of the country.
Hence, it is understood that the role of business is crucial. Society cannot
do without business. It needs no emphasis that business needs society as much.