MGMT206 Written Assignment: Case Study Analysis
Colleen E. Mills
1. What expectations about communication were revealed by the various employees’ comments? Comments made my employees about communication varied over the whole company showing mixed expectations. The expectations differed from expecting more information to have been provided, to simply expecting the medium used in communication to have been more personal. There was also a group of employees that were satisfied with the communication and had no further expectations. And another group whose expectations were surpassed by even being communicated too, and in turn thought it as unnecessary or a joke.
2. Why were the various ways that individuals and groups of employees made sense of the messages regarding the CEO’s departure and he recruitment process? How can we account for these differences? Due to the many levels inside the organization, the sense made varied drastically throughout the organization. For example, Ross (executive team) voiced his expectation to John (HR department) of how the message should have communicated face-to-face with the team members themselves, had the HR department genuinely wanted feedback. Whereas financial secretaries found her expectations satisfied with both the information presented in the email and how the information was communicated with them by the HR department to announce the process of recruitment and their wish for feedback. These two examples clearly highlight the dual capacity communication model in action and how it is the cause for the various ways that different individuals made sense of the communication. The dual capacity model proposes that every organizational medium has the ability to carry two kinds of messages. (Miller, 2009) Where the first part of the message is the informational part and the second part representing the symbolic meaning of the medium, meaning that the medium in which the message was communicated with, also effects the perception of the informational message sent. This can be seen where two different groups were sent the same informational message with the differing symbolic meaning, where one group (financial secretary amongst secretaries) was satisfied with the communication of the overall message whereas the other group (executive team) weren’t. However it suggests that had the same information been communicated to the executive team, but in a in a more personal way, by phone or face-to-face for example, the overall message would have been also satisfactory to this group and stimulated a more positive and helpful response. This is because the executives value their thoughts on the new CEO more important that others because they will be the ones working in such close contact with the new recruit, this is where the difference lies and can account for the various ways sense was made of the communication about the CEO’s exit and the recruitment process.
3. How might the HR manager have reduced the range of reactions to the request for staff to contribute to the recruitment process? The HR department may have been too focused on the dissemination of the information as a way of casting a wider net for a chance of more responses whilst remaining efficient time-wise. This led to such a vast range of reactions and little feedback responses. What should have been put into consideration to reduce the range of differing reactions and increased feedback would have been to evaluate the different levels in the organization and to tailor a communication medium and message that would stimulate a positive and helpful response. To do this, two-way communication is encouraged and more feedback will then be received.
4. Communication is not merely a process of sending messages. Find TWO examples in the case of the other roles of communication plays in an organization. For people to work well in an organization being able to work well as a team is very important. Communication such as...
Bibliography: Nelson, D. L., Quick, J. C., Wright, S., & Adams, C. (2012). ORGB 1st Edition. Cengage Learning Australia Pty Limited.
Miller, K. (2009). Organisational Communication: Approaches and Processes (Vol. 5). Boston: Cengage Learning.
Mills, C. (2007). One size doesn not fit all: The consequences of not tailoring change comminication in a complex organization. In T. Zorn & D. Pages (Eds.), Communication and organisations: Case studies in New Zealand and Australia. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Mills, C. (2000). The interfaces of communication, sensemaking and change (Vol. 1). Australian Journal of Communication.
Mills, C. (2002). The hidden dimension of blue-collar sensemaking about workplace communication (Vol. 3). Journal of Business Communication.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document