I started with.
Recently I came up with a model that adds “Fractal” thinking to communication models.
Notice that there is no start or stop in this model.
In many communication models, there is a beginning and an end. I don’t see it that way.
I see communication much more like a continous “Double helix,” where the communication actors participate in a back-and-forth dance to achieve some intent.
This model suggests communication is a continuous dance of listening, clarifying, persuading, and deciding, where the end of one step becomes the beginning of the next step.
Some communication events are very short-lived, ordering at a fast food drive-thru or getting directions.
And some communication events last a lifetime, including parents, siblings, and spouses.
Also, there is always an initiator of the communication event. Someone wants something (food or directions). They then construct a message that they hope will get what they want. When they get what they want they end the conversation and leave the scene.
Most communication events of any significance are ongoing and there’s no clear beginning or end.
One interaction builds on another. Going back to a restaurant example, I may go into the restaurant on a regular basis. The waiter may know me and may build upon those past experiences when communicating. (Please refer to our discussion on “Elaborated” and “Restricted” codes.)
The key point here is that no matter if the communication event is a one-time thing or lasts over many years, the focus should be on achieving a goal.
The Intent is usually started by someone but after the communication gets going the parties both try to achieve some intent. In the case of the fast food drive-thru, the intent of the person ordering is to get food. The fast food worker’s intent is to get the food to them, collect their money, and do it in such a way that they will return again.