Effective Management Strategies For An Interview

The Roles and Powers of Participants in an Interview

How could the interview participants have managed themselves and the interview more effectively?

To know how each and every participant would have done better, it is important to first know the roles and the powers of each and every participant. The ball was more on the side of Lemon and Camerota. The reason for stating so is because they were the ones asking the questions and controlling the whole event (Ghaffar, 2009). With that in mind, it is evident that they would have more control of the interview as compared to Aslan. Aslan was just a person who was in place to contribute to a topic that was already in place. Therefore, his part was like only adding spices to a mean that the menu and ingredients were already provided. The way that each and every person conducted him or herself in the interview has so much to do with what he or she would have done better.

Between Lemon and Camerota, Camerota was the one who contributed much and took more time in the whole interview from the journalists’ side (Jasperse, 2012). Such is seen where she initiates arguments and goes ahead to a battle with Aslan so as to prove her point. There are different ways that she would have managed the interview more effectively as well as herself. First, a journalist is the voice of the society. Society is diverse, and therefore, it needs a person who stands in the middle and makes all side feel represented and respect. It is evident that Camerota took a side in the whole conversation (Johansen, 2012).

The work of the journalists is to make news and to gather information without biases. When a journalist takes a side, it becomes his or her interest and not the interest of the viewers. Why state so? The viewers of the interview might have been Islamic and maybe Christians (Karakus, 2012). It is the responsibility of a journalist not to make a specific population feel like the journalist is against it. Therefore, to manage herself more effectively, Camerota ought not to have taken any position in the debate; her work was to get information from Aslan (Lamarque, 2009).

Second, Camerota failed to give Aslan a chance to explain his points at times. By watching the interview, one would realize that sometimes Camerota would cut off Aslan because she wanted to pass a specific point. When one does not give a partner a humble time to prove his or her point, the conversation might turn chaotic. Such was almost the case in some instances; Camerota would stop Aslan from explaining his point. Camerota ought to know that she was at the center of the conversation. Such means that the work was to make sure that allegations that had been made by Maher are proved to be factual or mere personal opinions (Tekleab, 2009). Therefore, the case only called for the contribution of the professional invited and in this case, it is was Aslan. Like Lemon, Camerota was supposed to contain herself and try not to initiate arguments with Aslan.

Managing Interview Participants More Effectively

Third, as far as the effective management of the interview is concerned, Camerota failed to stick to her purpose. The best way to bring out the point is by comparing her with her partner (Tsai, 2009). When Lemon started talking, he was calm and straight to point. That is a strategy in journalism that helps the source to provide as much information as possible. In the whole interview, if Camerota were not in the newsroom, one would have confused her for a professional who was brought on board to contribute to the whole debate (Khamilov A.B, 2014).

Lemon is one of the participants who conducted themselves well in the interview. However, there are ways in which he would have managed the interview in a more effective way. Seeing that Lemon was the person who initiated the conversation and introduced the topic, it is more likely that he had the power to control the whole interview (Paula, P,2010). As far as his character is concerned, he did not go past the purpose. However, his partner ought to have been controlled. How would Lemon do so? Lemon would have made sure that not too much is spent by Camerota. The reason for stating so is because Camerota became more of a participant in the conversation than a journalist. Lemon would also have made sure that there were two different people opposing and proposing the topic of discussion. It was not fair to bring one person who only refuted the claims that Islam does not support peace. Though there were remarks from Maher, at the time of discussion, they were not well represented. If there were an availability of a person who supported the claims of Maher or Maher, the discussion or interview would be effective because it would be representing views from both sides. 

Aslan demonstrated that he stands by what he believes in. There are different areas that would have made the interview and the contribution of Aslan more effective. One, at some point, there were arguments between Aslan and Camerota on the issue of discussion. It would have been easy for Aslan to avoid that. First, he would have avoided that by making sure that he gives the journalists an enough time to ask questions. When two people talk at the same time in an interview, it becomes more of just a mere argument than a constructive discussion. There are points when Aslan and Camerota talk at the same time. The worst about it is that they both believed that they were right and that even led to them raising their voices to one another. Aslan, as an active member of the discussion, had a chance to change the scenario (Awad, 2010). Letting Camerota complete what she was talking about would make the interview orderly and smooth.

Camerota

Two, Aslan trashed almost everything that was said by Maher and Camerota. Such was one of the reasons why his conversation with Camerota was extensive and full of argument (Akinwale A, 2010). In any given discussion or argument, it is imperative to accommodate the views of others even when they are against what you believe in. Aslan acted like a person who was righteous and treated others and people who did not know what they were talking about. As a result, the interview turned chaotic at some point. It is difficult to convince a person who believes what he or she knows is the only right thing.

For the sake of the whole interview, it would be important if Aslan would accommodate the views of others that were based on facts (Brusko, 2010). For example, some of the issues brought forward ailing the Islamic nations might be problems experienced in some of the African nations. However, that does not justify why they are being carried out in the Islamic nations. Aslan was quick to trash the claims just because he believed in something different from the people in the interview. The third way was to eliminate biases. It is evident that most of the information that Aslan provided was crowded with biases (Ellis G, 2010). The reason for stating so is because he did not want to pay attention to any information that stated otherwise. By so doing, the interview looked like it was more on one side than the other; diverse views were not accommodated. 

References

Akinwale A, A., 2010. Integrating the traditional and the modern conflict management strategies. African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 3(10).

Awad, G.H., 2010. The impact of acculturation and religious identification on perceived discrimination for Arab/Middle Eastern Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 1(16), p.59.

Brusko, L., 2010. Organized Chaos: A Survey of Conflict Management Strategies, Gender Roles, and Status in an Organizational Setting. UW-L Journal of Undergraduate Research, XIII.

Ellis G, M.S.M.a.P.B.C., 2010. How democracies keep the peace; Contextual factors that influence conflict management strategies. Foreign Policy Analysis, 4(6), pp.373-98.

Ghaffar, A., 2009. conflict in schools;its causes& management strategies. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 3(2).

Jasperse, M..W.C.a.J.P.E., 2012. Identity, perceived religious discrimination and psychological well-being in Muslim immigrant women. Applied Psychology, 2(61), pp.250-71.

Johansen, M.L., 2012. Keeping the peace; Conflict management strategies for nurse managers. Nursing Management, 2(43), pp.50-54.

Karakus, M.&.S.C., 2012. The Effects of Parental Involvement, Trust in Parents, Trust in Students and Pupil Control Ideology on Conflict Management Strategies of Early Childhood. Educational Practices; Theory and Practice, 4(12), pp.2977-85.

Khamilov A.B, S.D.V., 2014. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES. 1st ed.

Lamarque, F.A.J.F.L.O.-O.Y.B.L., 2009. Human-wildlife conflict in Africa; causes, consequences, and management strategies. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, (157).

Paula, P, 2010. Organizational communication and conflict management systems. Nordicom review, 1(31), pp.125-41.

Tekleab, A.G..N.R.a.T.P.E., 2009. A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness. Group and Organization Management, 2(34), pp.170-205.

Tsai, j.s.a.C.J.S., 2009. Influences of Chinese cultural orientations and conflict management styles on construction dispute resolving strategies. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 10(135), pp.955-64.