Communication resources of managers and business professionals. / Recursos comunicativos de executivos e profissionais em função operacional.

PURPOSE: To analyze the communication resources reported by managers in the business environment and compare the resources used to those reported by business professionals. METHODS: 82 professionals volunteered to participate in the research, divided into 50 managers (MP) and 32 business professionals (BP) from industry section in Caxias do Sul and the surrounding region (Brazil). A questionnaire with 4 topics was used: personal data, self-assessment of communicative behavior, self-assessment of communicative resources, and selection of positive and negative resources influencing communication. RESULTS: Regarding communicative behavior, both groups reported normal voice but with significant differences regarding the use of softness in communication, 25% of MP and only 4% of BP. Both groups selected the following main positive resources: knowledge of subject, use of proper vocabulary, and objectivity. The negative resources were, similarly, the lack of subject domain, criticism or prejudgment, and improper vocabulary. Finally, analyzing the degree of influence of each communicative resource, the MP highlighted tone of voice as an important positive resource, while the BP pointed the subject domain. Still, the monotonous voice for MP and nervousness for BP were indicated as the main negative influences. CONCLUSION: Managers value more communicative resources connected to communicative attitude, such as tone of voice and expression, while business professionals worry about demonstrating security and technical understanding of the subject.

Recursos comunicativos de executivos e profissionais em função operacional / Communication resources of managers and business professionals

RESUMO Objetivo Analisar os relatos de uso de recursos comunicativos por executivos no ambiente corporativo e compará-los com os recursos de profissionais em função operacional. Método Participaram 82 profissionais voluntários, sendo 50 em funções executivas (GE) e 32 colaboradores em funções operacionais (GO), do setor industrial de Caxias do Sul e região. Para a pesquisa, foi aplicado um protocolo com 4 aspectos: dados pessoais, autoavaliação do comportamento comunicativo, autoavaliação de recursos comunicativos e seleção de recursos de influência negativa e positiva no discurso comunicativo. Resultados Quanto ao comportamento comunicativo, ambos os grupos referiram ter voz normal, mas com diferença significante quanto ao uso de intensidade fraca na comunicação, assinalada por 25% do GO e apenas 4% do GE. Ambos os grupos selecionaram como principais aspectos positivos na comunicação o domínio do assunto, o uso de vocabulário adequado e a objetividade. Quanto aos recursos que interferem negativamente na comunicação, os grupos indicaram, de modo similar, a falta de domínio do assunto, críticas ou preconceitos e vocabulário inadequado. Finalmente, quando analisado o grau de influência de cada recurso comunicativo, os participantes do GE destacaram como positiva a importância do tom da voz, enquanto o GO apontou o domínio do assunto. Por outro lado, uma voz monótona para o GE e o nervosismo para o GO foram referidas como as principais influências negativas. Conclusão Profissionais executivos valorizaram mais recursos comunicativos voltados à atitude comunicativa, tais como tom de voz e expressividade, enquanto o grupo operacional parece preocupar-se em demonstrar segurança e domínio técnico do assunto.

ABSTRACT Purpose To analyze the communication resources reported by managers in the business environment and compare the resources used to those reported by business professionals. Methods 82 professionals volunteered to participate in the research, divided into 50 managers (MP) and 32 business professionals (BP) from industry section in Caxias do Sul and the surrounding region (Brazil). A questionnaire with 4 topics was used: personal data, self-assessment of communicative behavior, self-assessment of communicative resources, and selection of positive and negative resources influencing communication. Results Regarding communicative behavior, both groups reported normal voice but with significant differences regarding the use of softness in communication, 25% of MP and only 4% of BP. Both groups selected the following main positive resources: knowledge of subject, use of proper vocabulary, and objectivity. The negative resources were, similarly, the lack of subject domain, criticism or prejudgment, and improper vocabulary. Finally, analyzing the degree of influence of each communicative resource, the MP highlighted tone of voice as an important positive resource, while the BP pointed the subject domain. Still, the monotonous voice for MP and nervousness for BP were indicated as the main negative influences. Conclusion Managers value more communicative resources connected to communicative attitude, such as tone of voice and expression, while business professionals worry about demonstrating security and technical understanding of the subject.