Reference no: EM133231073

Bruce, a research chemist for a major petro-chemical company, wrote a dense report about some new compounds he had synthesized in the laboratory from oil-refining byproducts. The bulk of the report consisted of tables listing their chemical and physical properties, diagrams of their molecular structure, chemical formulas and data from toxicity tests. Buried at the end of the report was a casual speculation that one of the compounds might be a particularly safe and effective insecticide. Seven years later, the same oil company launched a major research program to find more effective but environmentally safe insecticides. After six months of research, someone uncovered Bruce's report and his toxicity tests. A few hours of further testing confirmed that one of Bruce's compounds was the safe, economical insecticide they had been looking for. Bruce had since left the company, because he felt that the importance of his research was not being appreciated.

The questions are:

a. What was a communication problem with this scenario?

b. What was the purpose of the document being described? Was this purpose achieved?

c. Who was the audience?

d. What approach, direct or indirect, was used? Was this the most effective approach? Why or why not?