38 Studying Communication Competence Level and the Enneagram Type – Serena Brown

Communication competence is a construct widely studied in the communication discipline. Being able to comprehend communication and adjust behavior based on the situation are the main components of communication competence. However, communication competence is not clearly defined or measured, due to researchers’ lack of agreement concerning these elements. The Enneagram is a personality test that incorporates nine different personality types. These categories describe how an individual most likely lives their life, expresses emotions, and sees the world. Each of these are important on its own, but studying these two together can fill a knowledge gap on how people with different personalities may communicate and perform in communication situations. Studying these two constructs together is important because an individual’s personality type may be able to explain their level of communication competence. The knowledge of these two topics together is very limited. Apart from each other, there is a lot of research on each topic. However, researchers have not yet studied communication competence and the Enneagram together. These two concepts each have behavioral and cognitive features that connect them to each other, and studying each concept further, and together, will clarify the potential relationship.

There is a lot of confusion surrounding communication competence. Scholars that have studied communication competence form their own idea of what communication competence is and define the construct in their own way. There is a lot of disagreement among scholars on what communication competence is, how it is measured, and if it can change over time. Many communication scholars argue about whether communication competence can change over time (Rubin et al., 1990). Some scholars assume that communication competence is stable and unchanging (Cegala, 1981; McCroskey, 1986a), while others assume that it changes based on each situation (Rubin, 1982a; Spitzberg & Cupach, 1984). Most usually agree that communication competence “consists of cognitive, affective, and psycho-motor domains” (Duran & Spitzberg, 1995, p. 259). It is also recognizable, identifiable, and measurable (Chua, 2004). Communication competence, as a term, originated from Hymes in 1972, who argued that communication competence consists of two factors: knowledge and use (Hymes, 1972).

Monge, Bachman, Dillard, and Eisenberg in 1982 belieed that communication competence consisted of two behavioral constructs: encoding and decoding (Chua, 2004). According to these researchers, “encoding and decoding skills refer to expressing ability and listening ability” (Chua, 2004, p. 135). They also emphasize achieving goals through effective communication. Their belief was that specific communication behaviors and communication in specific relationships were needed to achieve goals (Chua, 2004).

Wiemann and Backlund’s (1980) interpretation was that communication competence consisted of cognition and behavior. They believed that only studying communication competence from the cognition point of view ignores the performance and behavior portions of communication competence. They also believed that communication competence consists of ability and skill. Wiemann and Backlund’s interpretation was supported by Zimmerman and Whitehurst’s (1979) cognitive psychology, which also interpreted communication competence as incorporating function (behavior) along with structure (cognition). During the early stages of studying communication competence, research was conducted by structuralists who ignored the performance aspects of communication competence (Almeida, 2004). Communication competence does not only encompass cognitive factors, but also behavioral factors. Only studying certain parts of a construct, especially in the early stages of research, risks false conclusions.

McCroskey (1982) critiqued the theories of communication competence by saying that their theories undermined the significance of the cognitive and affective aspects. The researcher also labeled the other scholars to be behaviorists. McCroskey did not comment on the debate between functionalists and structuralists, and their theories, in the critique, although these debates continue to influence theoretical research (Almeida, 2004). Although debates can be detrimental to research, debates and critiques within the research of communication competence are important because there is no one definition of communication competence, which makes comparing findings across studies difficult.

Communication competence can be interpreted by its characteristics. One of the most universal characteristics of communication competence is adaptability (as cited in Brunner & Phelps, 1979; Duran & Kelly, 1984; Foote & Cottrell, 1955; Hale & Delia, 1976; Hart & Burks, 1972). Individuals face a variety of situations and interactions, and one of the characteristics of communication competence is being able to adjust behavior and communication to the appropriate manner (Hinner, 2020). An individual must also evaluate the situation for rules and norms, and then mirror that in their behavior (Chua, 2004). Making these adjustments must also be effective and appropriate to the situation (Goldman, 2019).

One reason to have effective communication is that it should help reach the interlocutor’s goals in ways such as persuasive ability (Hinner, 2020). Effective communication should allow the interlocutor to persuade the other participant(s) in the conversation to do whatever it is the persuasive interlocutor is asking. Effectiveness includes using “verbal and nonverbal behaviors to obtain preferred outcomes” (Goldman, 2019, p. 78). Effectively communicating is an important factor of communication competence. Adjusting behavior or communication to have higher communication competence is completed to have effective communication and reach goals, such as a higher position in a career.

Appropriateness, in the communication field, refers to using the most suitable behaviors, gestures, tone, and other verbal and nonverbal behaviors. Appropriateness includes using verbal and nonverbal communication (Hinner, 2020). The key is using the correct “verbal and nonverbal messages” that are considered the most suitable for that “specific situation and the specific relationship that exists between the interlocutors” (as cited in Hinner, 2020, p. 41). A portion of appropriateness is also perception (as cited in Goldman, 2019). Perceiving behavior based on the established norms already established by the individuals involved is a big part of understanding what is considered appropriate and what is not (as cited in Goldman, 2019).

Empathy is helpful in selecting the correct behavior and communication. Being empathetic in communication means putting oneself in the other participant’s situation. Once one is able to put themself in the other participant’s situation, one is able to achieve cognitive complexity and make the correct selections for behavior and communication. It also allows one to understand situations from different perspectives, which include self-monitoring, a concept referring to the awareness of an individual’s behavior and communication, and other-monitoring, a concept that encompasses monitoring how a partner will perceive how an individual behaves and communicates (Hinner, 2020).

One must also be motivated, have the knowledge and skills to be a competent communicator (as cited in Goldman, 2019). Having knowledge of rules and language allows one to create and comprehend language (as cited in Chua, 2004). However, communication competence does not encompass solely language use, but also performance and skill in situations (Chua, 2004). The skills consist of behaviors used in communication that communicate a certain message (Goldman, 2019). It was Rubin and Martin (1994) that argued for 10 interpersonal skills that are consistent with communication competence (Goldman, 2019). The skills Rubin and Martin listed were: “self-disclosure, empathy, social relaxation, assertiveness, interaction management, altercentrism, expressiveness, supportiveness, immediacy, and environmental control” (Goldman, 2019, p. 78). While communication competence is not defined, these skills help researchers and individuals understand how communication competence can be represented.

Although the definition of communication competence is not agreed upon in the literature, scholars do agree it can be characterized and achieved by skill, and “communication competence can be learned” (Hinner, 2020, p. 40). In a study of nursing students, Santos et al. (2019) found that behaviors related to communication competence can be learned “during an educational process[,]” which builds “knowledge, skills and attitudes for professional practice” (p. 2). Communication competence consists of cognition and a certain bit of knowledge that represents “knowing what to say and do in communication contexts” (Duran & Spitzberg, 1995, p. 263). Becoming a competent communicator can be a long process, but it will lead to higher levels of communication competence and development of the skills needed to communicate competently.

Regardless of one’s situation or types of relationships, communication competence is important in interpersonal relationships (Lee, 2015). The importance of communication competence begins at an early age (Arroyo & Segrin, 2011). In early childhood and adolescent years, peer acceptance is greatly related to social skills. Additionally, these early relationships, and even adult relationships, help one cope with stress and distress (as cited in Arroyo & Segrin, 2011).

Competent communicators experience more advantages than those who are not competent and active communicators. An advantage of having a concrete support system, social network, and social skills is better mental health. Those that have social skills are more satisfied in their relationships (Flora & Segrin, 1999). Additionally, competent communicators that are committed to building relationships have more authentic and reciprocal communication and behavior (Hinner, 2020). In 1977, Wiemann argued that competent communicators can accomplish their own goals, while also helping their partners pursue and reach theirs (Arroyo & Segrin, 2011).

Those that are more anxious and avoidant in their relationships have lower levels of communication competence (Anders & Tucker, 2000). People who have more of an anxious attachment style have smaller support systems and report having less satisfaction with received support. Smaller network sizes are associated with lower levels of interpersonal communication competence. Although individuals with anxious attachment styles desire close relationships and support, they simply lack the skills needed to competently communicate (Ander & Tucker, 2000). Therefore, those that have lower levels of communication competence will be likely to have challenges with managing relationships and achieving goals (as cited in Arroyo & Segrin, 2011).

Communication competence has been measured and studied in various ways. Most of the research has been focused on the behavioral aspects of communication competence, and the psycho-motor and affective domain, which studies things like communication apprehension (Almeida, 2004; Duran & Spitzberg, 1995). Surveys and experiments are among the most popular ways of studying behavior in communication competence (Almeida, 2004). Observing and asking individuals about behavior can provide specific information that may not be learned via other measures, such as academic research. However, some measures, such as the Communication Competence Assessment Instrument (CCAI) (Rubin, 1982b), Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24) (McCroskey, 1982), and Interaction Involvement Scale (IIS) (Cegala, 1981) are not explained within studies, which makes replicating the findings impossible.