Study of Communication and Interaction of Management members with Members SAE Pujon Cooperative of Malang Regency, Indonesia
Keywords:Communication, Cooperative Members, Social Interaction Theory, Symbolic Interactionism Theory
This study focuses on the SAE Pujon Cooperative Communication with the aim of knowing the use of communication symbols or symbols in the interaction process. To see the process of interaction between the Management, which in this case is the Chairman of the Cooperative, with employees or members, is carried out with a qualitative approach with participatory observation, in order to directly observe symptoms related to the use or use of verbal and non-verbal communication symbols or symbols, In-depth interviews were also conducted to explore and understand more deeply the meaning of symbols or symbols of their interaction process, guided by the statements in the research objectives, namely analyzing and describing the communication between the committee and members of the SAE Pujon Cooperative, Malang Regency. East Java Province and analyzes and describes the inhibiting and supporting factors of communication and interaction between the management (Ketrua) and members of the SAE Pujon Cooperative, Malang Regency, East Java Province. The results showed that the process of interaction or communication between the Management (Chairperson) and employees as well as members who use verbal and non-verbal symbols or symbols can be seen when the Chairman of the Cooperative gives "orders", "prohibitions", and "advice" to employees and members. Likewise, members' perceptions of the use of the symbol or communication symbol used by the Chairman of the Cooperative. In giving orders, prohibitions and advice, the symbol or symbol of verbal communication used is Nyuwun tulung (asking for help), do not and don't even insist (don't be like that). Meanwhile, the non-verbal symbols or symbols used are moving the pen back and forth many times, moving the pen left and right and shaking the head, sitting back and not leaning, the clothes worn and other symbols of success. Members' perceptions of the symbol or communication symbol used by the Management (Chair) in interacting are very positive, it can be seen from the daily lives of cooperative members according to what the Chairman of the Cooperative says.Efforts to legitimize symbols or symbols with the values of the cooperative community, also aim to build an impression (image) to the community, that the symbols used by the cooperative are symbols that do not conflict with social values of society. In fact, it is said that the content of these symbols or symbols complement and co-exist with the social values of society. Furthermore, a compromise attitude towards the Cooperative movement creates a new atmosphere in symbols, meaning that these symbols are given a rational nuance, with the hope that the function of the symbol or symbol will gain legitimacy from the Cooperative community, with the aim that these symbols can survive in practice. -practices of life in the cooperative community.
Kotler, Philip. 1995. Marketing Management Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Usability, Eighth Edition, Salemba Empat, Jakarta.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1998), SERVQUAL: A multiple item scale for Measuring consumer perceptions of service quality, Journal of Retaling, vol. 64 No, 1, pp. 12-40.
Supraticnya, A. 1997. Interpersonal Communication, Psychological Review. Third Print. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
Widjaja, A.W. 2000. Introduction to Communication Studies. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Sobur, Alex. 2003. Communication Semiotics, Youth Rosdakarya, PT, Bandung.
Mulyana, Deddy. 2005. Communication Studies: An Introduction. Bandung: Youth Rosdakarya.
Ali, Muhammad and Mohammad, A. 2004. Developmental Adolescent Psychology, Students. Jakarta: Earth Literacy.
Rahmat Kriyantono, Ph D, 2014. Practical Techniques for Communication Research, Kencana Prenada Media, Jakarta.
Moleong, Lexy. J. 1991. 2001. Qualitative Research Methods. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Miles and Huberman. 1992. Qualitative data analysis. (translated by Ole: Tjetjep Rohedi Rosidi). Jakarta: University of Indonesia
Dawn, Marhaeni. 2009. Communication Science Theory & Practice. First Edition, Graha Ilmu ,. Yogyakarta.
Cangara, Hafied. 2006. Introduction to Communication Studies. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo. Homeland.
Sarafino. E. P. 1997. Health Psychology: Biopsychosocial Interactions. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Inc.
Wursanto. 2005. Fundamentals of Organizational Science. Yogyakarta: Andi.
Devito, Joseph A. 2011. Inter-Human Communication. Pamulang-Tangerang. South: Karisma Publishing Group.
Effendy, Onong Uchjana. 2000. Science, Theory, and Philosophy of Communication. Citra Aditya Bakti, PT, Bandung.
Pinker, Steven. 1994. The Language Instict. New York: A Division of Harper Collins Publisher.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Bambang Sigit Pramono, Samsul Wahidin, Praptining Sukowati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.