• Do you think these emails were effective or ineffective? Why? • Identify the major steps of professional communication that are seen in the exchange. How well were the steps used here? • Identify the major steps of professional communication that are not seen in the exchange. How would integrating these steps improve the email? • How could the tone improve in these messages? Would that improve the clarity as well? • Take one of the exchanges, and rewrite it to improve the professional communication. Explain what you improved and why. • Respond to two of your peers’ posts and consider their analyses - do you agree or disagree? Be respectful, and please use additional examples from the email exchange to support your point. I think that these emails had not been effective because of the ways in which there had been conflict developed between the sender and receiver of the emails. Moreover, the issue had not got resolved because of the ineffective ways of communication and incorrect approaches taken by the two individuals. There has been establishment of trust by the receiver of the email while responding to the first email. This is because the receiver of the first email message had clearly stated about helping the sender of the message by receiving the call of the sender. There had been clarity in the ways in which the receiver of the first email message had communicated with the sender. The receiver had clearly stated the priority and the issue for which the receiver could not meet the sender in person. There had been speaking concisely by both individuals. Kyle Donner had shown unprofessional attitude by demanding Jorge Laserna to physically meet Kyle Donner. There had not been any assumption made by any of the individuals in communication. Jorge Laserna had not given the excuse of doing any personal work. There had been lack of identification of issues in professional communication by Kyle Donner. Kyle Donner did not show patience for which there had been issues created. Jorge