This reflection paper applies three major communication theories to the author's personal and professional experiences over 32 years. Using expectancy violations theory, uncertainty reduction theory, and social penetration theory as frameworks, the paper examines specific workplace training interactions, online dating and marriage, and a manager-employee relationship to evaluate communication effectiveness. The author reflects on whether each interaction succeeded, how it could have been improved, and what lessons inform future communication approaches.
Throughout my 32 years of life, I have experienced many situations that relate directly to communication theories I have learned. These theories apply to both my personal and professional experiences. I would like to examine three key theories: expectancy violations theory, uncertainty reduction theory, and social penetration theory (West & Turner, 2010). For each theory, I will describe a specific experience, evaluate whether the communication was effective, consider how it could have been improved, and reflect on how I would communicate differently in similar future situations.
Expectancy Violations Theory (EVT) suggests that people hold expectations about the nonverbal behaviors of others (West & Turner, 2010, p. 130). These expectations shape how comfortable or uncomfortable people feel during interpersonal interaction, particularly regarding physical distance and proximity.
Six years ago, I worked as a trainer in finance at my current employer. Our training took place in my office rather than in a classroom. I would train between one and five new employees at a time, discussing the employee handbook, business procedures, computer systems, and various software screens essential to their roles. All trainees sat in chairs arranged around my desk and chair.
After a few months in this role, I became comfortable with employees sitting close to me during training. However, I noticed that many trainees felt distinctly uncomfortable with this close proximity. Some may have felt intimidated, while others appeared shy. I made an effort to be friendly and maintained greater distance whenever I sensed discomfort in a trainee.
One particular training experience stands out. I was training an elderly Italian woman who was very attractive and sat quite close to me during our sessions. I initially attributed her proximity to a desire to pay close attention and learn effectively. She frequently smiled, shared stories about her personal life, and appeared very comfortable in my presence. On the third day of training, she placed her hand in my lap while sitting very close to me. This violated my expectations about appropriate professional boundaries and made me extremely uncomfortable. I worried that if someone observed this interaction, they might misinterpret it and believe something inappropriate was occurring. More importantly, I feared my wife might hear about the situation and misconstrue what had happened.
I responded by mentioning that my wife typically places her hand in my lap to remind me that I am married. I explained that her behavior, while well-intentioned, could get both of us into trouble if others witnessed it or if my wife heard about it. After I revealed that I was married, the trainee became more mindful about maintaining appropriate physical distance.
The communication could have been more effective if I had established clear professional boundaries earlier in the training process. In the future, I would introduce myself as a married man during the initial training session and place a photograph of my wife on my desk to serve as a visible reminder of my marital status. These preventive measures would eliminate ambiguity and help trainees understand appropriate professional boundaries from the beginning, avoiding uncomfortable situations for everyone involved.
Uncertainty reduction theory focuses on how people work to decrease uncertainty in relationships by seeking information and building communication patterns. This theory directly relates to my personal experience of meeting and marrying my wife.
I joined an Indian dating website called Shaadi.com and created a detailed profile that specified I was seeking a woman from the United States. Whenever I found a profile I liked, I verified that the woman was based in America before sending a message. One day, I received a message from a woman living in India—who is now my wife. She later told me that she was initially hesitant to contact me because my profile explicitly stated I wanted an American woman, and she was uncertain whether I would respond.
When I reviewed her profile and saw her photograph, I was genuinely interested. However, I then became uncertain myself. I did not know whether she intended to use me to obtain a visa to immigrate to the United States or whether she was genuinely seeking a husband. To reduce this uncertainty, we began chatting regularly through the internet, eventually moving to Skype calls and daily phone conversations. As we communicated more frequently, I was able to observe her family on video calls, which reassured me about her authenticity. In my Indian culture, arranged marriages typically require the father's approval. When her father approved of me, I traveled to India with my parents and uncle to meet her in person for the first time.
When my parents learned that she was an English teacher, they felt much more confident about the match, knowing we would be able to communicate without language barriers. However, my mother made a decision I questioned. She spent time with my wife's mother and sisters and told them detailed personal information about me, including my hobby of catching snakes and keeping them as pets. This concerned me because my wife is afraid of snakes. Fortunately, this revelation did not discourage her family from supporting the marriage, but it created unnecessary risk. My wife has since made clear that she does not want snakes in our home, and I have promised to respect that boundary.
In retrospect, my mother should have been more selective about what personal information she shared when first meeting my wife's family. Rather than immediately mentioning potentially negative characteristics, she should have focused on positive qualities to help them feel more comfortable about entrusting their daughter to me. In the future, I have instructed my mother to be thoughtful and strategic about what she communicates to her family members about me, ensuring that early impressions support, rather than complicate, relationship building.
Social penetration theory describes the process by which relationships move from superficial, surface-level interactions to deeper, more intimate connection. This progression typically involves increased self-disclosure and a broader range of shared experiences.
At work, my relationship with my manager was adequate but somewhat strained. While we did not always agree, I was well-respected by senior leadership—the vice president and president of the company frequently praised my work. My manager, however, was consistently harsh with me and limited our conversations strictly to work-related topics. We remained at a surface level of interaction with little personal connection.
A turning point came when a family tragedy tested our relationship. I received a call from my mother informing me that my grandmother was dying. I rushed to the hospital, but by the time I arrived, my grandmother was on life support and unable to say goodbye. She had been living with me because she wanted to stay with me and no one else. Her loss was devastating—I had never experienced the death of a family member before. After she passed away in my arms, I sent my manager a message explaining that I would need to be absent from work for several days.
Her response shattered any hope for deeper connection. She texted back, "You better have a death certificate when you come back to work." Her coldness and apparent lack of compassion made me angry. She showed no concern for my grief or my grandmother's passing. I felt judged and unsupported during the most difficult moment of my life.
About a year later, my manager experienced a similar loss when her own grandmother passed away. She took a full week off to grieve. When she returned, she called me into her office, apologized for how she had treated me, gave me a hug, and began crying as she told me how much she missed her grandmother. Only then did she understand what I had endured when my grandmother died. Through this shared experience of profound grief and loss, we finally penetrated beyond the surface level of our relationship. We grew closer through mutual understanding of life experiences beyond work.
The communication could have been far more effective if my manager had shown empathy and asked clarifying questions when I first notified her of my loss, rather than responding with suspicion and callousness. In the future, she—and all of us—should make an effort to place ourselves in someone else's shoes and try to understand what they are experiencing before responding. Shared human experiences, when acknowledged with compassion, can transform professional relationships and create genuine connection.
Communication theories relate to our lives far more than we often realize. Whether at home or at work, we encounter situations that align with established communication frameworks. When we use our past experiences and apply communication theory to reflect on how we interact with others, we gain the insight necessary to communicate more effectively in the future. After all, who does not want to improve their ability to communicate with the people around them?
You’re 98% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.