Building interpersonal relationships as a key to effective speaking center consultations.

Building interpersonal relationships as a key to effective speaking center consultations. Although much interest has been generated regarding the functionsspeaking centers serve and the effects consultations can have, minimalresearch has addressed the dynamics of consultations themselves. Thisstudy documents what speaking center clients and consultants identify asbarriers in consultations and how they address them. Analysis ofqualitative survey data obtained from university speaking center clientsand consultants shows that emotional intelligence, empathy, andinterpersonal trust serve as necessary underlying components ofsuccessful consultations. ********** With persistent and increasingly urgent demands that studentsdemonstrate effective oral communication, colleges and universities haveturned to speaking centers (also known as communication centers) totutor students who may need special assistance (Hobgood, 2002). Thesespeaking centers often conduct consultations using a peer-to-peermethod, with trained student consultants mentoring other students inone-on-one consultations. The objective of speaking centers is todevelop public communication competencies, focusing on public speakingand other oral presentation skills. The communication between consultants (speaking centertutors/mentors) and clients (users of services) determines the successof speaking centers. Ineffective communication within speaking centerscan inhibit trust, effective listening, and constructive consultations.On the other hand, effective communication within speaking centers canenable clients to explore their public speaking capabilities whilereceiving constructive criticism to heighten their speaking potential.While speaking centers strive to use effective communication, it isimpossible to prove the effectiveness of communication without researchon the actual communication that occurs within speaking centers. Thistype of research also shows the effects of communication in the speakingcenter as a workplace. Studying communication within speaking centers isthe only way to measure the success of speaking centers. As speakingcenters are becoming more prevalent in colleges and universities, thistype of research allows one to look at the communication dynamics thatcan improve their operation and maximize their effectiveness. Consultant-client relationships are an integral part of speakingcenters. Though this relationship begins to evolve within minutes, ithas a critical impact on the success of speaking centers. While somecommunication barriers may be inevitable, many can be addressed andovercome. If communication barriers are not overcome, the client mayfeel uncomfortable, unwilling to work with the consultant, and moreimportantly, unwilling to return to the speaking center for help in thefuture. Furthermore, communication barriers can diminish the credibilityof speaking centers if not addressed appropriately. By studyingconsultant-client relationships in speaking centers, one is able to lookinto empirical data that shows what the client and consultant experienceand value during consultations. From studying the consultant, one notonly identifies communication barriers during consultations, but waysthey are addressed and overcome. Studying an entire staff at a speakingcenter can align consultants' communication barriers with those ofthe clients. The data from the clients gives an idea of ways that theirneeds can be met. Looking at the similarities and differences betweenthe communication barriers of consultants and clients can identify thefactors responsible for effective consultations. Currently, little scholarly research has been done on speakingcenters. Searching the Communication and Mass Media Complete databaseusing the phrase "speaking centers" and synonyms yielded onlyeight articles. Three were announcements of communication conferences,four concerned the services of labs from a specific university, and onedealt with listening. A literature search using the same search terms onthe PsycInfo database generated only one hit that was associated withspeaking centers. This article was not related to relationships betweenconsultants and clients, but focused on the developmental approach takenwithin communication labs. The SocIndex database generated zero hitsthat related to speaking centers. The absence of research on speakingcenters is evident in the scant results found on these populardatabases. One aspect that the results found in the databases have incommon is that none address the dynamics of the consultant/clientrelationship. The most informative way to clearly understand the dynamics ofspeaking center consultations is to collect data directly from theconsultants and clients themselves. None of the existing researchreports empirical data from consultants and clients. Thus, one couldconclude that the data on speaking centers has not yet directlyacknowledged the communication patterns between consultants and clients.If consultant-client relationships within speaking centers areunderdeveloped or developed poorly, clients will be hesitant to returnin the future. Satisfied clients not only may return, but also mayrecommend speaking center services to others. Without retaining orexpanding their client base, speaking centers will not grow and couldbecome targets of cutbacks when budgets tighten. Speaking centersflourish or flounder from consultant-client relationships, thusresearching these relationships is vital to any center's success. Method To research communication within speaking centers, surveys of thepeople involved in the consultations provide the most reliable source ofempirical data. Because the surveys were not administered during a classor other timed setting, the surveys gave each consultant, currentclient, and past client the chance to consider their answers at lengthand explain them in detail. If focus groups or one-on-one interviews hadbeen conducted, the findings might have been altered due to reactions tothe facilitator or to other group members. Qualitative surveys allowedthe researcher to get explanations in the words of the consultants,clients, and past clients instead of being paraphrased or put in someoneelse's words. Overall, the surveys provided an opportunity forgenuine and detailed feedback from all participants, who described thedynamics of consultations as they experienced them rather than as aresearcher conceived of those relationships. This study took a qualitative approach because it was not alreadyapparent what factors influenced the development of productiveconsultant-client relationships. Rather than superimpose theresearcher's preconceived notions through predetermined categories,the key factors within consultations arose from the participantsthemselves. This study sought the point of view of the respondents bynoting which themes they identified as important. Asking open-endedquestions allowed for gathering the most thorough insights about why andhow consultations can succeed. Three sets of surveys were administered in this study. Because thefocus was building consultant-client relationships by reducingcommunication barriers, each survey included a brief description ofcommunication barriers. The description outlined the purpose ofconsultations and the possible communication barriers that arise withinconsultations. Consultants and past clients were given surveys that hadfour open-ended questions asking: (1) what communication barriers ariseduring their consultations, (2) how they approach these barriers, (3)how to prevent the barriers from arising, and (4) what othercommunication barriers they could face in consultations. The surveys administered to current clients were structured in adifferent format from the consultant and past client surveys. The surveyfor current clients included questions with Likert scale responseoptions assessing the effectiveness of the consultations. Thesequestions were followed by the same description of communicationbarriers that appeared on the consultant and past client surveys.Following the description was an open-ended question that asked what theconsultant did to address communication barriers. Only the responses tothe open-ended questions will be discussed in this study, which focuseson the qualitative data. All questionnaires were one page in length andwere blank on the opposite side of the page in case further room wasneeded for participants to explain their answers. Consultant surveys were distributed to 42 undergraduate consultantsfrom the speaking center at a medium-size (enrollment~16,000)Southeastern public university. Surveys were placed in the mailboxes ofconsultants, who were instructed to return the completed surveys to aseparate, unmonitored location to assure anonymity. Participation wasnot mandated, no incentives or rewards were offered, and each survey wascompleted anonymously. Twenty surveys were returned, representing aresponse rate of 47.6%. Fifty additional consultant surveys werecompleted by randomly selected consultants who attended the 2008National Association of Communication Centers (NACC) conference. Thesesurveys were distributed during the conference by two members of theinstitution conducting the study, neither of whom was the investigator.Of the 50 surveys distributed at the NACC conference, 26 were returned,representing a response rate of 52%. A total of 46 consultant surveysoverall were examined in this study. The past clients were undergraduate students who had used theservices of the speaking center one or two times. These participantsvolunteered to participate without any incentives or rewards. Ten pastclients obtained the surveys, which were completed anonymously. All 10surveys were completed. Over the course of the spring 2008 semester, 36current clients also received surveys immediately following one of theirconsultations. Participation was voluntary, with no incentives orrewards. Clients completed their surveys anonymously and placed them ina secured, unmonitored deposit box outside the consultation room. All 36surveys were completed, representing a response rate of 100%. A total of46 client surveys (10 former clients, 36 current clients) were includedin this study. Findings The surveys were analyzed for recurring themes because thematicanalysis "offers an assessable and theoretically flexible approachto analyzing qualitative data" (Braun & Clarke, 2007, p. 77).This approach focused on discovering the patterns within the qualitativedata, which was useful in that many of the responses contained similarcomments and observations. Thematic analysis could reveal howconsultants cultivate an environment that fosters the consultationexperience while creating a comfort zone for clients to engage in risktaking with their oral communication. Clients could freely express thegrounds for establishing positive relationships with their consultants.There is an obvious and reoccurring interdependency between consultantand client expectations. Certain themes recurred in responses, and thisstudy sought how communication theories would explain the emergence ofthese common threads in the responses. The following sections detail thethemes that emerged prominently in the survey responses. The Emotional Intelligence Factor Keaten and Kelly (2008) define emotional intelligence as "theability to recognize, understand, manage, and utilize one'semotions and the emotions of others" (p. 105). Throughout thesurveys, consultants repeatedly mentioned their attempts to perceive howtheir clients felt within consultations. When asked in a survey how toprevent barriers within consultations, one consultant said, "I tryto interpret their emotions to work appropriately." Responding tothe same question, another consultant said, "You have to get a'feel' for your client and gauge what would make them mostcomfortable." Emotional intelligence implies that "theemotional expressions of others provide information that we can use tomake social interactions more predictable and easier to manage"(Elfenbein et al., 2007, p. 206). This point suggests that whetherclients demonstrate willingness or unwillingness to be in consultations,emotional intelligence enables the consultant to establish a means oftrust. If consultants understand their clients' actions, they willbetter be able to help them within consultations. Specifically, in onesurvey a client wrote, "She related with my past experiences."Another client said, "She used personal examples that gave me anidea of what was appropriate." Here, the consultant evidently wasfocused on bringing to the surface relatable experiences shared betweenthe consultant and client. Elfenbein et al. (2007) echo this idea bystating, "Individuals high in emotional recognition skillpresumably are more accurate in obtaining information about otherpeople's internal states, and they can use this information tonavigate their social worlds" (p. 206). Emotions are inevitable inconsultations, thus it is essential that consultants use more than theirknowledge of topics to assist clients. Recognition of the varyingemotional states of clients becomes necessary (Robertson, 2007). Another important skill set for consultants is knowledge andacceptance of self. In his research on emotional intelligence, Rao(2006) states that it is crucial to "'know thyself'before you are able to know or to help others ... when one knowsoneself, it is easier to regulate behavior, as well as to controlemotions so they will not interfere with work performance or personallife" (p. 313). In order to correctly acquire and practiceemotional intelligence, consultants have to use self-regulationeffectively. Consultants must know themselves--their strengths,weaknesses, attitudes, and perceptions--but also be able to regulatetheir personal beliefs and opinions so that they do not adversely affecttheir clients. Often clients come in with speeches on sensitive topics.These topics can be tough issues to discuss, especially if theconsultant's views differ from those of the client. If consultantsexhibit emotional intelligence, they are able to look specifically atthe dynamics of the presentation with an open mind rather than withpersonal, emotion-driven bias. With emotional intelligence, consultants also are able todistinctly differentiate their personal lives from the workplace. Toencourage this differentiation, some speaking centers mandatedisaffiliation in the workplace. This means that consultants who areaffiliated with student groups are not permitted to wear theirparaphernalia to work. Thus, a member of a sorority cannot wear a shirtwith her sorority letters on it, which in turn serves as disaffiliationfor clients coming in who may have previous stigma or negativeexperience regarding a sorority. In essence, there is a "linkbetween emotions and overall productivity of the participants in anyservice organization or business" (Taylor, 2005, p. 2). Ifconsultants are able to control their own emotions, they will be betterable to address the emotions from their clients, thus increasing theproductivity within consultations. This productivity in consultationswill increase the chances of clients returning to the speaking centerfor assistance in the future. Being in tune with such emotions,consultants are better able to assist clients, which in turn producesmore confident performance. In a past client survey, a respondentdisclosed, "I went [to the speaking center] after a long day ofwork so I didn't really want to listen to my consultant. "Whenasked how this barrier was overcome, the same past client responded,"She kept asking me open-ended questions to be sure I tuned backin. She was very patient with me." This example shows how theclient noticed the consultant's persistence and desire to help.Such an invitation to participate made a potentially unproductiveconsultation (due to the unwillingness of the client to be present) veryproductive. Current and past client surveys demonstrate desire for behaviorsassociated with emotional intelligence. When asked what a consultant didto help overcome communication barriers, a client stated that theconsultant "connected with me. Told me about her verbalfillers." Here the consultant adapted to the client's troublewith verbal fillers ("uh," "um," and othervocalizations that disrupt speech continuity) by storytelling. Theconsultant had to know her own past problems with verbal fillers inorder to help the client with the same difficulty. This example supportsthe importance of consultants knowing about themselves. When asked thesame question of how communication barriers were overcome by theconsultant, another client noted, "She told me how great of a job Idid and helped in probable areas." In this case, the consultantused affirmation to assist the client in feeling more comfortable andconfident as a speaker. Emotional intelligence is extremely beneficial when working withculturally diverse clients. A client wrote, "She tried tounderstand my accent because I am not American and it's hard tounderstand me, but she did understand me and I feel comfortable speakingto her." This example shows how with the use of emotionalintelligence a consultant was able to relate to the client in a mannerthat enabled the client to reach a basic level of comfort. Theconsultant was able to understand and utilize knowledge of the contentof the material in order to assist the student while being patient andunderstanding that the client was nervous due to the language barrier.With this comfort level reached, a client will become more willing toexperience communication situations that will enhance confidence andcompetence. In the survey, this same client mentioned a desire to returnto the speaking center in the future. Emotional intelligence proves necessary in speaking centers forvarious reasons. In his research on emotional intelligence, Rao (2006)observes that "whatever the leadership style (coercive,authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting, and coaching),workplace climate and business outcomes are highly correlated with highEIQ [emotional intelligence quotient] in the leader" (p. 316). Rao(2006) adds that this finding also should apply to student and clinicalcontexts. This idea suggests that when consultants have high levels ofemotional intelligence, the outcome is not only apparent inconsultations, but also in the leadership capacity of the consultant asan individual. An important part of being a good leader is being able tonegotiate in appropriate settings. Consultants often negotiate withtheir clients in the sense that their consultations are very "giveand take." Consultants guide clients toward finding appropriateways to address challenges, giving constructive feedback so that clientstake what they learn and apply it to their oral communication skills.While some clients simply take the advice of their consultants, manyclients are curious and question or confront their consultants. Clientsare eager to get clarification about their consultants' suggestionsand feedback. In an effort to encourage clients to become more competentspeakers, consultants have to create an environment that enables theirclients to reach a level of comfort with revealing their own weaknessesas performers. Connectivity between consultants and clients can serve asthe supporting, and in some cases determining, factor as to whether ornot trust is created within consultations. The Empathy Factor While emotional intelligence involves self-knowledge andself-control, it has another dimension: empathy. Broome (1991) notesthat despite the absence of consensus on a precise definition ofempathy, "most approaches associate empathy in some way with theattempt to consider the perspective of the other person(s) in acommunication event" (p. 236). Broome (1991) adds that empathy is alearned skill and requires active participation in experiences thatconnect with others. Research on speech labs shows that when clientsfeel as if their consultants are relatable or empathetic, they"will perform more positively" (Hill & Courtright, 1981,p. 223). Such relatable behavior can change the communication behaviorand outlook of clients (Hill & Courtright, 1981). Empathy is morethan a single action. Rather, empathetic behavior encompasses a range ofskills, including those associated with active listening: attendingbehaviors, verifying content, and listening for feelings (Schwartzman,2007). These empathetic behaviors build a trusting relationship, asJinJuan Feng, Lazar, and Preece (2004) note: "Communicationpartners who talked in an empathetic, accurate and supportive way weremost trusted by the participants" (p. 103). From this observation,one can conclude that the more empathetic consultants are, the moretrust will be created within consultations. Furthermore, Forrester etal. (2008) found that the more empathy is present in communicationsituations, the more disclosure will occur. When clients feel they areable to disclose openly, they will be more likely to reveal theunderlying causes of their skill deficits or deep-seated fears.Consultants equipped with this information can more accurately diagnoseand treat these difficulties. The survey responses show that empathy is vital to counteract orprevent communication barriers in consultations. Specifically,consultants exhibit empathy by being friendly, telling stories, andexplaining the expectations of consultations. In the surveys,consultants mentioned client affirmation, maintaining a positiveattitude, and listening to clients as ways they appear friendly withinconsultations. As for storytelling, a consultant often listens to theclient's apprehensions and then tells the client of a time theconsultant had to face and overcome the same anxiety. For example, if aclient tells a consultant she fears public speaking, the consultant mayrespond with a story such as: "I understand your anxiety. I used tobe very scared of public speaking myself. I hated all the people staringat me and my heart would race. But after much practice anddetermination, I have not only overcome my anxiety, but I have found myniche in public speaking." when asked how the consultant overcamecommunication barriers within consultations, a client responded that theconsultant "connected with me." Another client wrote,"She was very friendly and made me feel more comfortable."This suggests that the consultant being friendly served as a means ofempathy with the client, which in turn positively affected the outcomeof the consultation. In the survey s of past clients, respondents repeatedly stated thattheir main communication barrier was not knowing what to expect, butthat it was overcome when the consultant told them step by step whatwould occur during the consultation, when asked about barriers, a clientstated," I had never been to the speaking center before and Ididn't know what to expect." when asked how this communicationbarrier was overcome, the client wrote, "When the consultationfirst began my consultant told me exactly what to expect." Thiscomment supports the idea that structuring client expectations canqualify as a form of empathy because it demonstrates sensitivity to theclient's fear of the unknown. The responses also indicated that clients face the communicationbarrier of apprehension not only because they don't always knowwhat to expect, but because they fear that their lack of competence incertain areas of oral communication is only felt by them, as individualclients. To overcome these feelings of personal inferiority, someconsultants disclose that they have dealt with similar, and in somecases identical, apprehensions. In these instances, a mirror effect mayoccur, with reciprocal self-disclosures by consultant and clientindicating development of mutual trust and deepening the relationship(Won-Doornink, 1979). After consultant self-disclosure, clients maybecome more willing to expose their vulnerabilities through disclosinginformation and get help with their specific communication needs. Onceclients realize their consultant is empathizing with them, they can gainconfidence in their speaking abilities because they now have a rolemodel of someone who experienced and managed their own inhibitions. The Trust and Caring Factor Credibility within a consultation requires trust. Credibility isencompassed by competence, trustworthiness, and goodwill (Banfield,Richmond, & McCroskey, 2006). How clients perceive their consultantsis tied to whether trust is established within consultations. Ifconsultants "engage in behaviors that communicate such positiveintent to the student [client], it is likely that the student willengage in more effort to learn" (McCroskey & Teven, 1999,p.110). The findings of McCroskey and Teven (1999) in classroom teachingsuggest that the more trustworthy and caring consultants appear to be,the more clients will be inclined to put themselves in the necessarysituations of vulnerability (appearing inarticulate, nervous, etc.) toenhance their oral communication skills. Schwartzman (2007) identifiesunderstanding as a major facet of caring. He explains that someonequalifies as understanding if they "recognize the needs, desires,feelings, and thoughts of others" (p. 277). This definitionsuggests that to show caring behaviors, consultants must make an effortto notice and acknowledge the needs of clients. When asked howcommunication barriers were addressed in consultations, one consultantwrote, "I ask questions." Asking questions is a form ofshowing caring behaviors in that it gives room for clients to discloseinformation that consultants can use to help them. In their research oncredibility, Myers and Bryant (2004) found that credibility is linked toone being knowledgeable about the topic at hand. By asking questions toclients, consultants are able to adapt their knowledge of the materialto each client, which in turn builds trust because each session iscustomized to fit the individual. In the surveys, consultants consistently mentioned that makingclients feel more comfortable, maintaining an open mind, and offeringencouragement were caring behaviors that they showed in theirconsultations. Clients responded to these caring behaviors in theirsurveys. When asked how the consultant overcame communication barriers,one client wrote, "She gave positive feedback." Another clientresponded to the same question by saying, "She was confident andknowledgeable of material. She also related with past experiences of herown." All clients who wrote feedback that aligned with the quotesjust mentioned noted that they had positive consultation experiences.There is a link between students who wrote that they saw the speakingcenter as effective and the comments listed on the surveys about caringbehavior. When asked if they would consider making another appointmentat the speaking center for help in the future with oral communication,clients wrote positive feedback. Specifically, one client said, "Iwill definitely use the speaking center again." Another clientanswered the same question by saying, "VERY HELPFUL!" Whenclients recognized caring behaviors from their consultants, theiranxiety was minimized, they were more likely to see their consultants ascredible, and they were more likely to use the services of the speakingcenter in the future. McCroskey and Treven (1999) observe, "We tend to see peoplewho behave responsively toward us as caring about us" (p. 92). Thesurveys showed a clear relationship between consultants caring for theirclients and clients trusting their consultants in return. One clientsurvey included the comment: "She talked very formally, but warmlyas if she was a friend trying to help." The consultant balancedprofessionalism with personal concern. When asked if the consultant washelpful, a client wrote: "She made me feel comfortable enough toperfect my speech a second time" (sic). McCroskey and Treven (1999)explain this boost in confidence by stating,' 'We certainlyare going to listen more attentively to a person who we believe has ourbest interest at heart than to one who we think might be wanting to putone over on us" (p. 92). By experiencing caring behaviors, clientsare more likely to see their consultants as competent. In the surveys, consultants listed numerous ways they show caringbehaviors to their clients to ease anxiety and establish trust. Oneconsultant noted, "I try to be as personable as possible toencourage comfort, then find their way of limiting anxiety and encouragethem that getting up there is half the battle." Semlak and Pearson(2008) support this consultant's response by saying, "Credibleinstructors are perceived to be more engaging than instructors who lackcredibility"(p. 77). This remark suggests that engaging in caringbehaviors such as exploring clients' anxieties may enhance thecredibility of consultants from the clients' perspective. Limitations Several factors besides the actual consultation experiences couldhave influenced the survey responses. Many clients are very apprehensivewhen it comes to using the services of the speaking center. Clients mayhave felt that noting communication barriers within consultations wouldbe equivalent to pointing out negative aspects of their owncommunication capabilities. In an effort to avoid losing face, clientsmay have simply pointed out all the positive aspects of theconsultation. By doing this, they alleviated the direct connectionbetween their personal communication capabilities and the communicationbarriers. Consultants filling out the surveys may have had a biased view inthat admitting to the presence of communication barriers may havereflected on their abilities as a consultant. By shedding light on themore positive aspects of the speaking center as well as consultations,consultants could downplay some of their own insecurities withinconsultations. Responses to the client surveys were overwhelmingly positive, withvirtually all clients agreeing that their consultations were free ofcommunication barriers. When asked to explain their opinion, someresponses were: "Good/positive experience!" "I had a verygood and beneficial time here ... Keep up the great work," and"Very helpful." All of these responses reflect positiveexperiences, but insinuate that because their consultant was helpful, nocommunication barriers were present. The first items on the clientsurveys used phrasing that may have primed respondents to offer positiveresponses. Examples include: "This session was helpful" and"My consultant seemed professional and knowledgeable."Following these types of questions came two questions aboutcommunication barriers. After the clients had answered the first fivequestions about their actual consultation and noted it as helpful, theymay have felt it inappropriate or inconsistent to then mention thepresence of communication barriers. The current client questionnaires were distributed immediatelyafter the consultation, so the clients may have felt some socialdesirability bias: they "owed" their consultant somethingsince they were just helped. The past client feedback forms were givenrandomly to people who had used the services of the speaking center onceor twice. If these people recognized the person distributing the surveysas a speaking center employee, they may have felt it would have beeninappropriate to write critically on the surveys, so they may not haveexpressed themselves fully in their answers. The consultant surveys were put in consultants' mailboxes,thus they were usually filled out while consultants were in theenvironment of the speaking center. This setting could have createdbiases in that they were filling out a survey about a location they werecurrently in. A Hawthorne effect could have occurred if the respondentsaltered their comments because they thought they were being monitored(Payne & Payne, 2004). The consultant surveys filled out at the NACCconference may have been biased because those consultants were in acontext that fully promoted speaking centers and their services, makingit harder to be critical at that time. Implications This study has important implications for consultants, for clients,and for speaking centers in general. Consultants may not receiveextensive feedback about their capabilities or needed areas ofimprovement. As times change, so do the needs of clients. Clients becomemore diverse and their needs may become more acute. Keeping this inmind, consultants not only need to know how to communicate effectively,but they also need to know how their personal behaviors influence therelationships established within consultations. From this study,consultants are able to see empirical data from clients that state whatworks best. Consultants may be able to adjust their practices to buildmore supportive relationships with clients. Overall, this study showsconsultants how clients perceive positive relationships are built withinconsultations, enabling consultants to best help their clients. Inaddition, clients are able to see their consultants more as partners inbuilding supportive relationships rather than as superiors dictatinginstructions. The findings of this study could improve operations of speakingcenters by incorporating relationship-building into the structure ofconsultations. For example, the protocol for consultants to tell clientswhat to expect at the very beginning of the consultation builds trust,credibility, and confidence. This research demonstrates that speakingcenters can gain valuable empirical data using feedback directly fromclients and consultants. Often speaking centers only have the feedbackfrom consultants, administrators, directors, faculty, and staff, when inactuality the ones most affected are the clients. The client feedbackwithin this study is a starting point for seeing what clients think ofservices and most importantly how speaking centers can better servetheir clients' needs. The results can be generalized to other consultative interactionseasily. The study has offered specific factors to prioritize inconsultant-client relationships: emotional intelligence, empathy, andtrust/caring. With these focal points, participants in consultative andclinical activities can begin to look at the way they incorporate meansof fostering these factors in consultations. Whether adjustments occurwithin consultant training or during the actual consultation, this studyserves as a basis for improving interactions in a variety of settings. Additional research might address the effects that race, gender,ethnicity, and personal communication patterns have on the quality andnature of relationships within consultations. Correlations betweenconsultant demographics and client demographics is a needed area ofstudy. With campuses becoming more diverse, it is essential thatspeaking centers keep up with a broader range of clientele. Similar studies should be conducted at institutions of varioussizes and with different types of consultation formats to determinewhether the same factors undergird a wider range of consultant-clientrelationships. Future research could focus on other facets ofrelationships besides those discussed here. Furthermore, which factorsprove most crucial in developing supportive relationships? Does anysingle factor play a decisive role? If not, what other factors areneeded and how are they established? References Banfield, S., Richmond, V., & McCroskey, J. (2006). The effectof teacher misbehaviors on teacher credibility and affect for theteacher. Communication Education, 55(1), 63-72. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis inpsychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Broome, B. (1991). Building shared meaning: Implications of arelational approach to empathy for teaching intercultural communication.Communication Education, 40(3), 235-249. Elfenbein, H., Foo, M., White, J., Tan, H., & Aik, V. (2007).Reading your counterpart: The benefit of emotion recognition accuracyfor effectiveness in negotiation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31(4),205-223. Forrester, D., Kershaw, S., Moss, H., & Hughes, L. (2008).Communication skills in child protection: how do social workers talk toparents? Child and Family Social Work, 13(1),41-51. Hill, S. & Courtright, J. (1981). Perceived empathy: Itsrelationship to selected interpersonal variables and students'interpersonal laboratory performance. Western Journal of SpeechCommunication, 45(3), 213-226. Hobgood, L. (2002). The pursuit of speaking proficiency: Avoluntary approach. Communication Education, 49(4), 339-351. JinJuan Feng, P., Lazar, J., & Preece, J. (2004). Empathy andonline interpersonal trust: A fragile relationship. Behaviour andInformation Technology, 23(2), 97-106. Keaten, J. & Kelly, L. (2008). Emotional intelligence as amediator of family communication patterns and reticence. CommunicationReports,21(2), 104-116. McCroskey, J. & Teven, J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination ofthe construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66(1),90-103. Myers, S. & Bryant, L. (2004). College students'perceptions of how instructors convey credibility. Qualitative ResearchReports in Communication, 5, 22-27. Payne, G. & Payne, J. (2004). Key concepts in social research.London: Sage. Rao, P. (2006). Emotional intelligence: The sine qua non for aclinical leadership toolbox. Journal of Communication Disorders, 39(4),310-319. Robertson, S. (2007). GotEQ?: Increasing cultural and clinicalcompetence through emotional intelligence. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 29(1), 14-19. Schwartzman, R. (2007). Fundamentals of oral communication.Dubuque, IA: Kendall/ Hunt. Semlak, J., & Pearson, J. (2008). Through the Years: AnExamination of Instructor Age and Misbehavior on Perceived TeacherCredibility. Communication Research Reports, 25(1), 76-85. Won-Doornink, M. J. (1979). On getting to know you: The associationbetween the stage of a relationship and reciprocity of self-disclosure.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 229-241. Kiya Ward, graduate student, Communication Studies Department,University of North Carolina at Charolette. Roy Schwartzman, professor,Communication Studies Department, University of North Carolina atGreensboro. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr.Roy Schwartzman at