chapter15

Copyright (c) Allyn & Bacon 2008

Chapter 15: Organizational Communication

This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following are prohibited by law:

Any public performance or display, including transmission of any image over a network; Preparation of any derivative work, including the extraction, in whole or in part, of any images; Any rental, lease, or lending of this program.


Basic Terminology


Organization

Organized collection of individuals working interdependently within a relatively structured, organized, open system to achieve common goals.


Formal Communication

Communication that follows the hierarchical structure of the organization.


Informal Communication

Communication that does not follow the hierarchical structure of the organization (through the “grape vine”).


Downward Communication

Communication within an organization that flows from upper management down to the employees at lower ranks.


Upward Communication

Communication that is sent from the lower rungs of the organizational hierarchy to those people at the top of the organizational hierarchy.


Horizontal Communication

Communication that flows across the organization (from peer to peer to peer).


Hierarchy

Structure within an organization that clearly establishes the chain of command.


Tall Organization

An organization with many hierarchical levels.


Flat Organization

Communication that flows across the organization (from peer to peer to peer).


Organizational Orientations(pp. 408-410)

An individual’s predisposition towards work, motivation to work, job satisfaction, and ways of dealing with peers, subordinates, and supervisors on the job.


Upward Mobile

Organizational orientation exhibited by individuals within an organization who actively desire advancement within the hierarchy of the organization and see their work as a central part of their life.


Ambivalents

Individuals who tend to be disgruntled with the status quo within an organization and despise the hierarchy within the organization.


Indifferents

Individual’s who work out of necessity, but see their life as something that occurs outside of work.


Individual Differences in Organizations


Sociocommunicative Orientation

McCroskey and Richmond (2000) found that subordinates had much more positive attitudes towards their supervisors and their supervisor’s communication if their supervisor exhibited a responsive socio-communicative style.

Supervisors tend to reciprocate their subordinate’s socio-communicative orientation.


Nonverbal Immediacy

Immediacy within organizations appears to be reciprocal in nature (Richmond & McCroskey, 2000).

Subordinate Immediacy

Supervisor Immediacy

Subordinate Attitude of Supervisor

Job Satisfaction


Communication Apprehension

McCroskey & Richmond (1979) found that individuals who had high levels of communication apprehension gravitated towards occupations that involved lower levels of communication.

Falcione, McCroskey, & Daly (1977) Communication Apprehensives were also shown to be less satisfied with their occupations.


CA Continued

High CAs stayed at their jobs 50% shorter periods when compared to their low-apprehensive counter parts, and were not as likely to advance within the organizational hierarchy (McCroskey & Richmond, 1979).

High CAs were more likely to be downsized when compared to Low CAs.


Affinity Seeking

We first discussed affinity seeking in Chapter 10.

Page 327 – research from Richmond, McCroskey, & Davis (1986)

Employee use of affinity seeking strategies on supervisors.

“1” should be +


Perceptions of People in

Organizations


Attraction

Physical Attraction

Social Attraction

Task Attractiveness


Homophily

Demographic Homophily

Background Homophily

Attitudinal Homophily


Source Credibility

Competence

Caring/Goodwill

Trustworthiness


Credibility Results

Richmond & McCroskey (2000) found that perceived supervisor credibility was positively related to job satisfaction and employee motivation.

Porter, Wrench, & Hoskinson (2007) found supervisors who were highly extraverted and lowly neurotic and psychotic were perceived as more credible by their subordinates.


Management Communication

Styles


Tell Sell Consult Join

Your boss-centered

Leadership

Very employee-centered

leadership

High decision-making

influence by management

High decision-making

influence by subordinates


TellManagement Communication Style

where managers habitually make decisions (or receives them from above), and announces them to subordinates with the expectation that the subordinates will carry out those decisions without challenge.


Sell Management Communication Style

where managers make decisions (or receives them from above), but rather than simply announcing them to subordinates, the manager tries to persuade the subordinates of the desirability of the decisions.


Consult

Management Communication Style where managers make the ultimate decisions, but not until the problem has been presented to subordinates and their advice, information, and suggestions have been obtained.


Join

Management Communication Style where managers do not make decisions; rather, the authority to make the decision is delegated to the subordinates, either in cooperation with the manager or in her or his absence.


Richmond and McCroskey (1979)

Subordinate’s perception of her or his superior’s management communication style was positively related to subordinate’s satisfaction with supervision, satisfaction with work, and satisfaction with promotions.

Supervisor management communication style impacted the way that subordinates viewed senior management as well.


Richmond, McCroskey, Davis, and Koontz (1980)

Subordinates who rated their superiors higher on the Management Communication Style scale saw their superiors as primarily using referent and expert power during their interactions.

Subordinates who rated their superiors lower on the Management Communication Style scale saw their superiors as primarily using coercive and legitimate power during their interactions.


TEAMS


Group (Rothwell, 1995)

Three or more individuals who, through informational and persuasive communication, interact for the achievement of some common purpose(s).


Team (Devine, Clayton, Philips, Dunford, & Melner, 1999)

A group “that interacts intensively to provide an organizational product, plan, decision, or service” (p. 681).


Work Teams In Organizations

Four Possible Outputs of Work Teams Products Plans Decisions Services


Work Teams In Organizations

Five Characteristics of Effective Teams: Team Leadership Mutual Performance Monitoring Backup Behavior Adaptability Team Orientation

chapter15

Education

making influence

positively

hierarchical

organizational

job satisfaction

work teams

richmond amp

mccroskey