Organizational Communication Exam 261 cards

Tagged as: history, government, physics, english, language, fitness, nursing, economics

 copy deck Copy deck


Industrial Revolution

Late 1800s-early 1900s. Advent of manufacturing organizations. Advent of specialization: management and labor


Scientific Management

The workers are replaceable.


Human Relations

The workers have feelings.


Human Resources

The workers have intelligence.


Frederick Taylor- 1911 and Scientific Management

Envirionment: no labor laws, child labor laws no unions no safety regulations workers like parts in a machine workers almost subhuman


Impetus for Scientific Management

Apprenticeship=uneven work Piece work pay= rate busters= pressure to keep production down


Four Tenets of Scientific Management

There's one best way to do any job--time motion studies--efficiency experts Select the right workers Train those selected to be "first class workers"- if don't fit one job, find another-if that doesn't work, fire them Management inherently different from labor


Communication in scientific management

Content= task related, no social, no worker suggestions Direction-most downward, some horizontal at higher levels Channel-emphasis on written Style= formal-titles, professional attire or uniforms, standard English


Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Puts Status in its Place

Physiological needs: organization provides a "living wage" Safety needs: wage and safe work place Affiliation needs: organization provides social relationships Esteem needs: organization provides relative status and opportunity to achieve Self-actualization: organization provides opportunity to be responsible and creat


What scientific management wasn't about

Individual needs of employees Non-financial rewards Any place for social interaction


Human Relations

Hawthorne Studies Maslow McGreggor -Theory X -Theory Y


Hawthorne Studies

Western Electric Hawthorne Plant-Cicero, IL Elton Mayo-Harvard-1924-33 Goal-What increases efficiency-consistent with scientific management


Four Studies in Hawthorne Studies

Illumination -Control group-lighting held constant -Experimental group-lighting varied -Productivity up in both -No significant difference Relay Assembly room test -6 women isolated-assembling phone relays -Changes in working condition and environment -After year-productivity up in various situations -Constants-social


Interpretation of Hawthorne Studies

Variations in conditions/environment not really ruled out But-settled on social/emotional factors as key attention to workers (Hawthorne Effect) social interactions management style communication


Effects of Hawthorne Study

Emphasized informal and group communication Specific approaches to management -Maslow -McGreggor


McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y

Theories describe manager's assumptions about workers and organizational functioning.


Theory X

Management is responsible for the organization Employees must be controlled and motivated Without direction, employees become passive or hostile to organization's needs


Theory X-The average man

Is indolent-works as little as possible Lacks ambition-shuns responsibility-wants to be led Is self-centered-indifferent to organization's needs Resists change Is gullible-not very bright-easily duped


Theory Y

Workers are motivated by needs of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Workers are capable of independent achievement


Theory Y people

Find work as natural as play or rest If committed, will exercise direction and self control to objectives Can find reward in achieving organizational goals Can learn to accept-even seek-responsibility Can be creative in addressing organization problems Are not fully utilized in most organizations


Communication in Human Relations Organization

Content-task and social Direction-Vertical and horizontal Channel-often face-to-face Style-informal


Human Relations Summary

Organizations are more of a family than a machine Workers not only work-they feel


Human Resources

Combines Scientific Management and Human Relations precepts Adds emphasis on employee intellectual contribution


Impetus for Human Resources (Dissatisfaction with Human Relations)

Interpretation of Hawthorne Studies questionable Maslow's and McGregor's constructs not empirically supported Human relations led to job satisfaction but not necessarily to productivity "Pseudo participation" off-putting to employees


Essence of Human Resources

Both management and organizational design must enable and encourage employee participation in determining organizational goals, policies, and procedures


Pfeffer (1998): 7 practices of successful organizations

Employment security Selective hiring Self-managed teams- info for better solutions High and contingent compensation Extensive training Reduction of status differences- symbolic and real Shared information about organizational welfare


Communication in Human Resources Organization

Content- task, social and innovation Direction- all directions, team focus Channel- all channels, oral & written Style- both but especially informal


Management Communication Style

The degree to which a manager/supervisor/leader involves subordinates in decisions as to what should be done and/or how to do it.


Decision-Making Assumption

Management approach= maker of decision= Communication style Theory X= no involvement Theory Y= completely involve


Likert's Continuum

Exploitive Tell Benevolent authoritative Sell Consultative Text Consult Participatory Join Management makes final decision in 1-3 Inexperienced manager uses extremes


Determinants of Style Organizational Factors

Culture-values, beliefs, habits Preferences of immediate supervisor Point in organizational hierarchy


Determinants of Style Manager/Leader Specific Factors

Belief system (X or Y or "earn it") Sociocommunicative style Experience



Determinants of Style Subordinate Factors

Capabilities- knowledge, experience Preferences


Change and Conflict

Although inevitable, organizational change can lead to a damaging conflict among the people involved. Certain communication practices are helpful in reducing the likelihood or the seriousness of conflict.


Change is inherent in organizational life

Solving problems Gaining an advantage Pursue an agenda


Those affected by change

Subordinates (employees, staff, members)--directly and indirectly Leaders-instigation change risk reputation and credibility


Management style may make a negative outcome

Conflict-more or less likely


An honest disagreement about the desirability of the change to the organization can lead to constructive conflict

Some may feel the change isn't really warranted--there's no serious problem or little advantage to be gained Even if there is a problem or something to be gained, this isn't the right approach Negative Consequences may outweigh the good that could be gained The dialogue may lead to a better change


Change is often seen as negative to some in the organization

It may be perceived as threatening to one's status It may be seen as unfair-differential effects make some winners, some losers Some may feel they should have been consulted but weren't Some may feel betrayed-expectations were violated Some feel leadership exceeds its mandate


Conflict can be damaging

A. to the organization 1. short-term productivity can be affected 2. workers may lose motivation 3. long-term working relationships can be affected-vertical and horizontal B. to individuals 1. staff spend emotional energy and suffer stress 2. leaders may lose credibility or be distracted to side issues


Why Organizations Change

Planned External Factors Internal Factors Unplanned External Factors Internal Factors


Planned External Factors

Economic downturn (recession) Loss of "market share" Perceived opportunity to "grow" Regulations (taxes?) Image Problems Others are doing it


Planned Internal Factors

Perceived inefficiencies Perceived inequities Predetermined "agenda"


Unplanned Factors

External- e.g., natural disaster, product failure Internal-e.g., personal catastrophe


A different Look: Organizations change to...

Solve a problem Gain an advantage Pursue an advantage Easiest to solve a problem Hardest to pursue an advantage


What do Organizations Change?

Existence- i.e., dissolve New parts- merge or acquire Location- move Products or services- add or subtract Policies Culture Procedures- e.g., technology Personnel- add or subtract Standards of production Crisis preparation, prevention techniques Image


Who Decides on Change- Innovativeness

Innovators (2.5%) Early adopters (13.5%) Early majority (34%) Late majority (34%) Laggards (16%)


Innovativeness Model applies to Leaders

Leaders mandate change Leaders delegate authority and approve change Leaders approve requests and recommendations made by subordinates


Innovativeness Model does not apply to most subordinates

Must be independent enough to determine their own work procedures If they are, is it really organizational change


Innovativeness Model applies to some "whys"

Opportunity to grow Gain market share Improve efficiency


Innovativeness Model applies less or not at all to other "whys"

Crises Regulations Downsizing Image issues Inequities


Innovativeness Model applies to some "whats"

Adding products or services Procedures Acquisitions


Innovativeness Model applies less or not at all to other "whats"

Dissolution Setting standards Crisis preparation and prevention Image issues Policies Culture Job classifications


Make Rationale Clear before Implementation

Rationale= "case"= why-efficacy-net gain "Clear" doesn't necessarily mean it's welcome


Implementers should be involved

Input=better change= more acceptance Why do leaders resist involving implementers? Involve everyone? Every time? All the time?


Involve subordinates in all changes?

Maybe not -Routine minor changes with set criteria -Complicated enough to justify input -Really an organizational change


Is it Practical to Involve Everyone?

Text: -"Key Personnel"- bridges, liaisons, opinion leaders, etc. -Informal as well as formal networks



Guiding coalition Position power-relevant managers Expertise- relevant knowledge and experience Beware the "representation fallacy" Credibility- reputation for competence, honesty, likable Leadership- specific track record for leading some sort of change When to involve implementers: When analyzing need?


More Kotter--Communication During Implementation--Vertical and Horizontal

Vigilance stresses importance Upward feedback essential Acknowledging mistakes adds to credibility Problem Solving approach to "glitches" adds to credibility Reinforce-criticism=defensiveness- resistance Plan to reinforce with "short-term" wins Helps make stresses worth it Rewards implementers and keeps them on b


More Kotter- Timing is Important

Early input reduces glitches, negative impacts, inequities Premature announcements may create unnecessary anxieties and pushback Problems need prompt attention and celebrations of progress maintains focus and commitment