CommLog

Symbolic Messages

As we've said in the past, the two "loudest" channels for sending messages in organizations are leadership decisions and actions and rewards and recognition. The latest issue of Knowledge @ Wharton (free registration required) highlights an example of each.

First, an article on the trade-off between "talent and disruptive behavior" examines the Philadelphia Eagles' heretofore under-reported decision to boot T.O. from the team.

Employees like Owens are found in almost any organization, but they can be more difficult to manage in cultures that demand top-flight results and, at the same time, place a premium on cooperation and harmony. [Wharton management professor Peter] Cappelli says the Eagles' decision to cut Owens sends a signal through the organization about culture. "By letting T.O. go, the Eagles are saying, 'We're willing to pay a pretty high price to maintain teamwork. We will not tolerate people who are not contributing to the overall good of the organization. This is an exercise in refocusing the organization and getting people's priorities clear."

The challenge with symbolic messages, of course, is translating intentions into outcomes. To date, there's no evidence the "exercise" has refocused the organization. But in the midst of distraction, the team seems to have heard the message about the organization's intolerance for...eh...distraction (last paragraph).

Continuing the theme of symbolic messages, a second article examines whether process management programs such as Six Sigma and TQM unintentionally discourage innovation. Wharton professor Mary Benner says they do.

Changing the culture at GE or any established company to embrace long-term innovation will be challenging, Benner acknowledges. "Most managers know they must do this. But there are few short-term rewards for focusing on long-term. When you give people a choice of something that's new and distant in time, they will choose the short-term, measurable goal... You can get stuck being very, very good at something you were good at yesterday. That's what some managers choose because it is measurable."

Measuring innovation is not easy because there is no yardstick. Rewarding innovation makes compensation a tricky exercise. Managing those who innovate is also challenging. "Creative people will push back in an environment where people are required to follow standard processes and are being measured," says Benner. "People who are comfortable in such an environment are not exactly the most innovative."

This is part of a larger issue we've seen time and again: Organizations implementing Six Sigma, TQM, or some other program in such a way that employees interpret adoption of the methodology in its most orthodox form as not a means to an end but the desired end in and of itself. When this happens, reduced emphasis on innovation is just one of the negative unintended consequences to result.

Can Leaders Concede Confusion?

A recent Phi Delta Kappan essay examines “what leaders should do when they don’t know what to do.” As the authors note, this is a challenging issue, since “[a]t the gut level, many managers believe that saying ‘I'm at a loss here’ is tantamount to declaring ‘I am not fit to lead.’”

No matter how capable or well prepared, managers regularly find themselves confronting bewildering events, perplexing information, or baffling situations that steal their time and hijack their carefully planned agendas. Disoriented by developments that just don't make sense and by challenges that don't yield to easy solutions, these managers become confused -- sometimes even lost -- and don't know what to do. Many managers inevitably will respond to these symptoms by simply denying that they are confused. Others will hide their confusion -- their search for sense -- because they see it as a liability… Acting as if they are in control while really not knowing what to do, these managers reflexively and unilaterally attempt to impose quick fixes to restore their equilibrium. Sometimes, these managerial responses may even succeed in making the immediate symptoms of problems go away, but they rarely address underlying causes. More often, they lead to bad decision making, undermine crucial communication with colleagues and subordinates, and make managers seem distant and out of touch. In the long run, managers who hide their confusion also damage their organizations' ability to learn from experience and grow. Yet, despite these drawbacks, few managers can resist hiding their confusion.

The authors prescribe a sensible solution, which boils down to being strategic about framing the issue: Candidly acknowledge your confusion but speak with certainty about the next step needed to achieve clarity. You can read the whole thing here.

Let's Start Meeting Like This

Let's Start Meeting Like This summarizes "Can Absence Make a Team Grow Stronger?" (Ann Majchrzak et al., Harvard Business Review, May 2004), a study of virtual workgroups:

E-mail, while essential in today's workplace, quickly overwhelms team members, as multiple chains bounce back and forth. Videoconferencing is not quite ready for prime time; according to the study, desktop versions have too little bandwidth, and remote locations require too much travel. But online team rooms, also known as virtual work spaces, received top marks from successful virtual teams. These networked, file-sharing spaces provide a place for team members to access the latest versions of files at any time, carry on asynchronous discussions (without getting sidetracked into multiple conversations), and keep track of deadlines and time lines. In sum, they collect all relevant information into one place.

The researchers make an interesting point about media richness:

It's often pointed out that nonverbal cues are an important dimension of face-to-face meetings. For virtual teams, the absence of body language and facial expressions is actually a boon to productivity, the researchers said. Virtual meetings are more democratic than face-to-face discussions; participants don't feel the effect of hierarchy as much.

The Outlook for Social Networking Technology

MIT's Technology Review has an excellent primer on social networking technology and its potential business applications.

The premise behind this new social-networking technology is simple: you may know a lot of people from work, college, church, or your neighborhood, but you probably don’t know exactly who their friends are—and forget about their friends’ friends. But join an online social network and invite a few acquaintances, and the software will begin to reveal previously hidden second- or third-degree connections that can lead to an interview, business meeting, or tee time with that elusive potential client or employer.

It’s About Apprehension, Not Shyness

A recent article in Communication Quarterly (CITE(Vol. 51 No 1 Winter 2003, Pages 101-110)) presents research examining the relationship between communication apprehension, shyness and communication quality for supervisors. Aren’t communication and apprehension the same? Not according to communication scholars, who define communication apprehension as

an individual’s level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons.

Shyness, however, is

the behavior of not talking … the actual frequency of a person talking … and not a person’s preference toward communication or a person’s anxiety about communication.

In the study, the researchers learned that direct reports of communication-apprehensive supervisors see those supervisors as significantly less credible, less likeable, and has having a significantly less favorable general affect. Shy supervisors, however, were not seen this way. Why it matters: It’s a common misconception that shy leaders are less able to effectively manage or motivate employees. This research, however, suggests that shyness really isn’t the issue: apprehensiveness or anxiety about communicating is, and while apprehensive supervisors may appear shy, not all introverted supervisors are apprehensive. The consequence: There is much organizations can do to help communication-apprehensive supervisors overcome their anxiety. Common approaches include training, coaching, or education, but the end result should be the same: address the anxiety, not the personality.

Is Your Upward Communication Process Missing The Most Important Content?

"A particularly telling finding was the relatively low level of dissent expression to managers, supervisors, and coworkers about issues related to ethics and preventing harm."--Kassing & Armstrong, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 1, August 2002 39-65

Not long ago, the standard practice for fostering upward communication in most organizations was to establish a suggestion box. With rise of information technology, however, we've seen the channels for fostering upward communication expand to include telephone hot lines, e-mail, and employee feedback intranet sites. But do these channels really capture the key information that internal communication strategists and leadership need to proactively respond to issues before they become crises? Recent research published in Management Communication Quarterly suggests not.

In the August, 2002 Issue (Vol. 16, Issue 1) Jefferey W. Kassing and Todd A. Armstrong of Arizona State University West present an interesting study on how the sources of employee discontent relate to how employees express that discontent. A key finding from the research: that employees appear to be significantly less likely to express concern or discontent to managers, supervisors, or coworkers when the topic that aroused their discontent involved concern over unethical practices or things that may be endangering employees or customers.

The authors call for communication processes that "layer" feedback tools such as e-mail boxes and Town Halls with others that further encourage openness. These might include anonymous "tip" lines, Ombudsman programs, or--an idea we often use--informal "pulse" networks that regularly provide employees with the opportunity to share sensitive information with other employees while retaining a measure of anonymity.