Is face-to-face communication still necessary for forming bonds with others?

Technology lets a person be who they want to be, but not necessarily show people who they truly are. Many states of human affairs assumed the technology acceptance model, which is an information systems theory that explains how users receive and us a modern technology based on ease of use, and usefulness. These include the way people date, apply for a job, and even how they interact with their family and friends. This is just a small list of the many situations that technology has reconstructed and desensitize in-person interaction. Robert Hooijberg and Michael D. Watkins (2021), two professors of Leadership and Organizational Change, both stated, "Face-to-face experiences inherently have the potential to generate and sustain focus. When we are physically together, it is more difficult to give in to all kinds of distractions" (para. 8). With technology improving so many things but also taking away the emotional and physical connection with other individuals, a question still looms. Is face-to-face communication still necessary for forming bonds with others?

Due to the digitalization in the modern era, many predictions have emerged on the possibility of extinction of face-to-face communication as digital communication is less expensive, less involving, and more flexible but this is not possible as face-to-face communication is the only means of communication that promotes effective bonding between the communicators (Winger, 2005). To begin with, being physically near a person enables the activation of all the senses: sight, sound, smell, and touch. Messages may be conveyed verbally, with the material resulting from logical thought. Vocally, the material can convey emotions both in terms of what is said and how it is said. Perhaps even more significant is the opportunity to see one another, which brings nonverbal signals like body movements and facial expressions into the mix. Being close also allows one to touch and smell things, which may help figure out what's going on in certain conversations. These are components of face-to-face communication, which render it the best medium of communication in promotion of bonding between the individuals involved in a conversation (Winger, 2005). While communicating in a face-to-face setting, the information is relayed and received instantaneously. This also increases the speed of receiving a response. In this sense, the pace is argued to play a significant role in circumstances where the problems to be solved are better approached with experience held in the minds of those trying to solve them. Offering better approaches to problems presented helps in creating a great bond between the people involved in the process.

Additionally, it is important for leaders to maintain good work relationship between them and their subjective and the best way to attain an effective work relationship is through face-to-face interaction between the leaders and the other employees. Transformational leadership is among the best leadership styles that promise the success of an organization. Leaders have to acquire good communication skills for successful transformation leadership because communication is an important condition for effective transformational leadership. The ability of transformational leaders to communicate values and increase mission valence among employees is based, at least in part, on their ability to communicate the vision (Jensen, Moynihan & Salomonsen, 2018). Transformational leaders must select a medium for communication that allows for more than just sharing information about the vision and its "mere" nature to effectively convey an organizational vision. Apart from changing the employees' attitude towards the organization's mission, transformational leaders attain various advantages for using face-to-face communication other than using other communication media. Face-to-face communication allows the leasers to translate the organization's vision into meaningful goals and offer feedback to the workers whenever differences arise in the organization's vision. Secondly, face-to-face dialogue between the leader and the employees helps close the authenticity gaps in attitudes of the workers towards their leader by adopting a personalized element to the communication of the organization's goal (Jensen, Moynihan & Salomonsen, 2018). Lastly, face-to-face communication helps promote the employees' self-persuasion in reflecting their contribution to the success and main purpose of the organization. It is hard for transformational leaders to attain a good work relationship with the workers by adopting other communication media.

Consequently, in the midst of emergence of remote and web means of communication, face-face- face communication continues to become the most popular means of communication in enhancing physical activity in adults by promoting a stronger bond between the physical trainers and their adult clients. Lack and minimal participation in physical activities lead to unhealthy living and promote the risk of chronic diseases and mental and physical health issues (Richards et al., 2013). Adults should adopt a regular physical activity that will attract many social, emotional, and physical health merits. According to Richard et al., there is no difference in the effectiveness of remote and web interventions and face-to-face interventions while promoting physical activity practices among adults in the community (Richards et al., 2013). However, with a face-to-face intervention through physical communication between the adults and the physical trainers, there will be a better interaction between the adults and the physical trainers. The trainers will have a better opportunity to learn more about specific individuals through face-to-face intervention because they will closely understand the needs of the person by observing and interacting with them. It is easy for a person to provide false information through remote and web communication media, but it isn't easy to communicate physically. Although the study's findings state that there is no significant difference between the two communication interventions in promoting physical activity for enhance of better living among adults, face-to-face intervention promises best outcomes in terms of better understanding of the adults their physical trainers.

Additionally, face-to-face dialogue between close friends and family members during moment of self-expression and self-disclosure helps in strengthening of the bod between mutual friends and family members. Self–disclosure can be done through face-face communication or Instant Messenger communication. Both means of communication have their own merits and demerits about an instance where a person is giving important information about themselves (Trepte Masur & Scharkow, 2018). Mutual friends are expected to support each other in times of happiness and sadness, which is the main purpose of friendship. A person reaching a point of being open about activities taking place in their life is an indicator that they require support. For the receiver of the information to offer the necessary support, they must understand the true meaning of the information given by their friend. It is easy to misinterpret information given through Instant Messenger, which might lead to offering inappropriate or unexpected replies and support, which might affect the relationship between the mutual friends. Adopting face-to-face communication while disclosing important information about oneself to a mutual friend is the most effective means of communication because there will be a minimal misinterpretation of the information (Trepte Masur & Scharkow, 2018). The friend will be better positioned while communicating physically to understand the right support and reply that the other friend requires depending on the situation. This is because it is much easier to interpret the emotions and feelings of the person through face-to-face communication.

In conclusion, face-to-face communication promotes the bond between the individuals involved in the conversation or communication despite the communication setting whether informal or formal setting. Face-to face dialogue helps in promoting a stronger bond between leaders and their subjects, mutual friends, family members and clients. This is possible because of the opportunity of effective interaction with the five senses of the other person or people while communication. Through face-to-face interaction, better understanding of the emotions, the seriousness of the matter at hand and the feelings of the person helps in increasing the level of bonding between the communicators.

Reference

Hooijberg, R. & Watkins, M. D. (2021, January 4). When do we really need face-to-face interactions? Harvard Business Reviews. https://hbr.org/2021/01/when-do-we-really-need-face-to-face-interactions

Jensen, U., Moynihan, D., & Salomonsen, H. (2018). Communicating the Vision: How Face‐to‐Face Dialogue Facilitates Transformational Leadership. Public Administration Review , 78 (3), 350–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12922

Richards, J., Thorogood, M., Hillsdon, M., Foster, C., & Foster, C. (2013). Face‐to‐face versus remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity. Cochrane Library , 2013 (9), CD010393–CD010393. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010393.pub2

Trepte, S., Masur, P., & Scharkow, M. (2018). Mutual friends' social support and self-disclosure in face-to-face and instant messenger communication. The Journal of Social Psychology , 158 (4), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2017.1398707

Winger, A. (2005). Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitizing world?  Business Horizons ,  48 (3), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2004.11.004