Communication in the Workplace
Many organizations provide communication through open forums, roundtables, email, and newsletters. Receiving and providing communication enables employees to share knowledge between team members, managers and employees, and among various other departments. An organizations ability to receive and deliver direction requires various forms of communication channels. The channels allow directions to flow upward, downward, side-to-side, and in a multi-directional pattern. Receiving and providing directions allow an organization or team to be informed simultaneously, reducing confusion and increasing the opportunity for innovation through shared knowledge.
Penley, Alexander and Norton (1983) believed that communication style provides signals for the receiver, enabling the receiver to interpret, filter, or understand literal meaning (p. 47). The receiver categorizes the points the provider transmits using verbal and nonverbal cues. Each leader has his or her own cues that allow the receiver to understand meaning. Without understanding the meaning of the verbal or nonverbal cues, the receiver can misinterpret directions. Therefore, style gives communication both form and function. (Martin,et al, p. 295) The form and function of communication enables others to understand the meaning of what is being communicated.
Suchan (2006) indicated that organizations and researchers spend time and money determining how to change communication style, patterns, and flow. Faber (2002) believed change is a difficult process, and organizations that want to communicate strategy have to change the organizations language and direction. Changing the organizations language and direction allows the organization to redevelop how the organization interprets, delivers, and receives information from all employees. Changing a restrictive communications environment requires organizational leaders to break with past communication assumptions (Suchan, 2006). In some cases, leaders understand their organizational culture and leadership style can prohibit employees from receiving directions.
Employees feel empowered when they are involved with decisions and receive information for input (Martin et al., 2006). Employees feel a sense of personal power and increased job satisfaction when they can freely share information and locate information (Martin et al., 2006). According to Martin et al. (2006), employees are empowered to act and be innovative because effective communications provide the necessary information for actions to occur (p. 299). Researchers believe open communications encourage both individuals and teams to seek information from different sources within the organization (Martin et al., 2006). Accessing information from various sources and through different communication channels and outlets requires cooperation. Martin et al. (2006) believed communication among team members and teams from various departments to be a predictor of employee involvement. Through knowledge sharing, employees and team members can locate information even if it was not readily available.
Communication theorists, such as Bass (1999), believe communication flow reflects the type of managerial leadership within an organization. Communication skills have a direct impact on job performance, job skill level, and career advancement of employees while having a direct correlation with organizational effectiveness (Argyris, 1962). Lateral, vertical, and multi-directional communications are transmitted in specific ways. The vertical style of communication transfers information and knowledge from the top of the organization downward to frontline workers (Spillan et al., 2002). Lateral communication transfers information from one employee to another or within the same department at the same peer level (Spillan et al., 2002). Multi-directional communication transfers knowledge from all directions within the organization simultaneously (Gutterling Kuttschreuter, 2005).
The flow of communication is indicative of the quality and level of knowledge sharing among managers and employees. Within any organization, divisions and departments provide different communication patterns based on how leadership teams manage employee needs and departmental goals. The effective use of a cohesive communications strategy plays a role in organizational innovation.
Effective Communication
Communication is effective when it contributes to positive effects on innovation or team dynamics. Communication can be effective or ineffective, resulting in negative or positive outcomes for an organization. The effects communication has on a team or organization has been researched in both quantitative and qualitative studies. Communication effectiveness is a popular topic for research because communication is vital to all functions of an organization (Goris et al., 2002, p. 664). Communication is a vital part of leaderships ability to meet environmental pressures and inform stakeholders of organizational goals, beliefs, and direction.
One aspect of communication effectiveness is risk communication. Risk communication affects information transfer, persuasion of dialog and the direction of communication through empirical and theoretical studies (Gurabardhi, Gutteling, Kuttschreuter, 2005, p. 500). Gurabardhi et al. (2005) described risk communication as a dialogue among all stakeholders that reveals a decision based on the action that is to be implemented.
Conversations and information sharing sessions allow all stakeholders to make informed decisions. Informed decision-making is considered risk communication, because the stakeholder is capable of making his or her own decision without the influence of others. Therefore, organizational stakeholders have subjective ideas that are expressed within the organizational culture. Subjective opinions are risky because communication is fluid and unfiltered, allowing stakeholders to share information liberally.
Risk communication is information that is openly shared through several communication channels at once. The possibility of communication overload exists because there may be too much communication without boundaries. Conversely, too little communication and too many boundaries can cause communication under load. Goris et al. (2002) stated that communication overload consists of too much information and that communication under load results in the need for more information. Communications overload and under load affect employee job congruence, also defined as the job characteristics model, that is the relationship between job performance and job satisfaction (Goris et al., 2002).
Communication and job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is directly correlated to the accuracy of information employees get from their organization. Employees who are less satisfied with their jobs state that the information they receive is inaccurate. Goris et al. (2002) revealed that the accuracy of information and communication load were predictors of job satisfaction (p. 665). Goris et al. (2002) reported that communication overload and under load have a direct effect on employee performance and satisfaction. As a result, communication overloads and under load affects team dynamics and organizational performance, negatively or positively affecting innovation.
Jains (1973) early study showed a positive correlation between communication satisfaction and supervisor job performance. Jains (1973) research provided a questionnaire interview format to examine the relationship between communication effectiveness of hospital supervisors and their job performance as perceived by subordinates. Effective criteria were supervisor behavior, supervisor-subordinate communication frequency and amount, employee knowledge of policies and procedures, employee communication satisfaction, and non-supervisory formal communication channels use.
In a study by Pincus (1986), 327 hospital nurses were surveyed to measure nine communication factors, grouped into three dimensions (a) informational, (b) relational, and (c) informationalrelational. The results reflect that employee perceptions of organizational communication satisfaction relates significantly to both job satisfaction and performance. Data indicates a stronger relationship between communication satisfaction and job satisfaction than communication satisfaction and job performance. Similarly, in a study by Pearce (2004), analysis of the data showed communication satisfaction correlating strongly with staff evaluations, but not correlating significantly with job performance itself.
Clampitt and Downs (1993) used Downs and Hazens (1977) communication satisfaction survey to measure perceptions of eight of the nine factors Pincus (1986) measured. Respondents were 65 employees of a service firm and 110 employees of a manufacturing firm. The respondents perceived all eight communication satisfaction factors as affecting their productivity (a) coworker communication, (b) subordinate communication, (c) supervisory communication, (d) media quality, (e) communication climate, (f) organizational integration, (g) corporate information, and (h) personal feedback. The strongest relationships are between personal feedback, productivity, communication climate, and productivity.
Knowledge sharing within an organization can be explicit, implicit, or tacit. Nonaka (2001) stated that explicit knowledge can shape the knowledge development of others through writing and reading, as well as talking and listening (p. 34). Therefore, explicit knowledge prospers when a communication style is effective. Tacit knowledge cannot be transferred to others by writing or speaking. Tacit knowledge transfer is difficult to achieve despite having different communication styles. According to Nonaka (2001), implicit knowledge is in between explicit and tacit knowledge and can be communicated after an exploration of its full meaning. According to Nonaka (2001), using one form of communication to share knowledge and increase innovation would be too exhaustive to linguistically convey all personal experiences or because some experiences do not lend themselves to thematization (p. 33).
Nonaka (2001) maintained that there are four learning model concepts (a) externalization, (b) combination, (c) internalization, and (d) socialization. Externalization relates to the expression of tacit knowledge and its communication with others, which is clear and comprehensible. Combination converts explicit knowledge into more complex, explicit knowledge. Internalization relates to new knowledge that is translated from explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge. Socialization relates to sharing knowledge among many individuals.
Nonaka (2001) believed that bestowing knowledge is the most favorable way for an organizations staff to share knowledge. To bestow knowledge, an organization has to develop multi-directional communication patterns allowing staff members to communicate with anyone in the organization at any given time. Nonaka (2001) acknowledged, unlike seizing knowledge, bestowing knowledge characterizes individual knowledge development where organizational members make themselves mutually accessible (p. 42). Employees benefit from bestowing knowledge because employees are more helpful to one another and no one person is left to achieve a task alone. Team members and staff work together across departmental lines. Staff members are encouraged to seek and share knowledge by communicating throughout the organization. Nonaka (2001) believed that bestowing knowledge allows staff members to ask for help improving their performances. Multi-directional communication facilitates this knowledge transfer.
Effective Communication and Age and Racial Disparities
Effectiveness of communication is also affected by age or generation gaps. Field (2007) claimed that one of the biggest problems in the workplace is conflict avoidance, by avoiding conflict critical details are never resolved. Lander (2006) added an additional reason that multiple generations struggle in embracing and resolving conflict is that members tend not to communicate well with each other. Lander goes on to say members from all four generations tend to communicate differently members of the Matures and Baby Boomers generations often prefer face-to-face communications and will use the telephone, whereas members of Generations X and Y tend to prefer email and text messaging. Generation X and Y members tend to have less layered, more informational communication styles.
Members of the Matures and Baby Boomers generations are often more structured and prefer formal communication styles Marshall (2004). Despite the communication differences, the answer may be in communication. Rainmaker Thinking, Inc., a Connecticut-based strategic think tank that helps companies manage better the mutigenerational workforce, suggested bringing employees, managers and leadership together to discuss generational differences (Flynn, 1996). The more groups discuss the issues between older and younger workers, the less likely the grudges against work styles will fester. The conundrum is that younger workers may not be willing or capable of communicating well enough to allow multiple generations to work together in a group or as a team.
Racial disparities affect effective communication in the workplace as well. Blacks often face hindrances to effective communication and this affect their workplace performance and promotion. Although their skills receive acknowledgement, they face hindrances from advancement as these white managers wanted to keep them in tow and wanted to keep them as part organizations (para. 6). According to Maume (1999), analysis showed that African Americans and White women waited longer than did White men for the managerial promotions they received. The findings suggested the impact of a glass escalator for White men, a glass ceiling for Blacks and others, which contradict the notion of a declining significance of race.Oswell (2005) posited that, unless the effects of diversity are well managed, turnover, miscommunication, and interpersonal conflicts may increase, resulting in lower productivity and ultimately lower performance on profit, market share, or other strategic goals. Branch (1998) stated that blacks are not wholly buying into the hype surrounding diversity in the workplace and that majority of them believed that top black executives are in their positions just for the sake of the corporations image. This perception emerged from the observation that companies offer opportunities for black advancement rarely and that the Blacks do not receive similar levels of regard from the senior executives compared to the Whites (Branch, 1998).
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment