Communication in the US Congress about the DACA Program

The discussion on whether or not to keep the DACA program depicted an oral type on communication dominantly and was characterized by intergroup conflict at its onset. The bipartisan interests surrounding the program tore the US Congress apart, culminating into a resolution that upheld the CADA program with 81-18 Senate votes (The New York Times, 2018). In this context, the debate about deferred action for childhood arrivals program is an example of group communication within the US Congress. Stages of Group Development Exhibited by the US Congress Based on Tuckman’s Model The US Congress passed through the stages of group development to resolve the DACA issue. Based on Tuckman & Jensen (2010), the US Congress was at the storming phase of small group development at the beginning of 2018 in which intergroup conflict took center stage.

The communication barrier was demonstrated from both inside the Congress and the media. Noise is another barrier that came into play in the US Congress when they were discussing the DACA issue. Noise is simply the disruption of the clarity of what is going on, and in the context of the US Congress, the media was identified as instrumental in creating noise. For instance, there is an array of divergent opinions, originating both sides of the conflict shared on all forms of social media platforms including Newspaper articles, Facebook and Instagram posts. The US Congress further experienced a communication barrier attributed to selective perception, which according to Robbins and Judge (2015), is the tendency to selectively interpret what one considers to be of interest when it comes to factors such as background, experiences, and attitudes.

For instance, during the case pertaining to the DACA issue, the US Congress elected representatives who sympathized with their position on the matter or who were affiliated to their party to influence the decision. Recommendations for the Improvement of Group Communication Communication between and among parties is improved when rest is applied. The concept of reset is analogous of a machine button which allows a machine operator to clear a machine’s memory after failure to bring it back to the initialized state (Maes, Stansbury & Schifo, 2015). This method of resolving conflicts is much like restarting a computer to clear an issue, giving the groups an opportunity to re-approach the issue at hand in a manner that bypasses the original situation that created the conflict.