Answer the following question in 100 words or LESS.



You’re sitting in a restaurant enjoying a meal when two men at a nearby table start fighting. Well, it really isn’t a fight but more of an argument. Well, it really isn’t an argument but more of a discussion. Okay, you were eavesdropping but for good reason. At the nearby table sits Charles Berger and Eric Eisenberg. Charles tells Eric that people communicate to reduce uncertainty (or manage it) while Eric tells Charles that people have a need to be strategically ambiguous when communicating. Your job is to resolve the issue by (1) showing that you understand both theories while (2) offering your perspective of what makes the most sense based on the two theories (3) that provides a real example from your life experiences that proves that your perspective is highly effective.



Examples will be on attached files 



Strategic Ambiguity:

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-19527181/the-ethics-of-strategic-ambiguity#/



Uncertainty Reduction:

https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Interpersonal%20Communication%20and%20Relations/Uncertainty_Reduction_Theory/