Impact of Organizational Behaviour and Organizational Communication Models - Coursework Example

Organizational Communication Table of Contents Introduction 3 Impact of Organizational Behaviour 3 Organizational Communication Models 4 Shannon and Weaver Model 4 White and Chapman Model 6 Structure of Organizational Communication 8 Self Reflection on Key Learning 8 Conclusion 9 Reference 10 Introduction A proper communication system acts as a life line of an organization. Not only does it act as a bridge between the management and the employees, but it also helps the employees to communicate and share information among them. The concept of organizational behaviour is not new, but over the years, with the advancement of technology the communication mediums have changed. Internal communication has been made easier than ever by the development of the Intranet network systems. Regardless of the physical distance it helps the employees to communicate with each other instantly (Lunenburg, F.C. 2010). As a result, it helps them to save time and increase their work efficiency. Although the communication process has evolved over the time, but the underlying principle still remains the same. Every communication process follows a particular series of synchronized stages. A successful communication depends on the successful completion of each of the stages. In this study, the underlying communication models involved in the organizational communication have been discussed. It also focuses on how the organizational communication and the organizational behaviour affect the associated employees and managers. Impact of Organizational Behaviour The interaction between the management of an organization and its employees is termed as organizational behaviour. Several factors are responsible for framing the organizational behaviour such as organizational policies, hierarchical structures, level of interaction between employees, etc. All these factors can either make the employees engaged in their jobs by making them interested in the work profile, or it can either make the employee completely disengaged. All individuals try to adapt to environment they are exposed to, this concept also holds true in case of the work environment. The output of a firm is dependent on the efficiency of its employees, which in turn is mostly dependent on the organizational behaviour (Osborn and Hunt, 2013). MacDonald (2014) opined that the motivation factor of the employees is largely dependent on how the management interacts with them. The output and efficiency of the employees increase significantly when they can clearly establish a proportionate relationship between effort and rewards. The level of communication that management maintains with its employees also plays a vital role. It helps the managers maintain a proper track of the employees’ performance and it can also help them to give proper direction to the employees’ activities. Organizational Communication Models Shannon and Weaver Model Every communication process can be discussed by particular communication models. In this section two majorly followed communication models have been discussed. A communication can only take place when there is at least more than one party present. One has to be the sender, who sends a piece of information and other is the receiver, who receives that particular information. This simple concept has been further broken down by Shannon and Weaver (1949), in their model for a better understanding of the communication process. They mentioned that the communication process is not limited to the information transfer from the sender to the receiver. The concept of “noise” had been introduced to explain the primary reason behind miscommunication. Noise can be defined as a barrier to the information transfer process. They explained that these communicational noises can be categorized under three segments, a) Physiological noise, b) Physical noise and c) Semantic noise. Lunenburg (2010) further explained the three different types of noise as follows. The Psychological noise is the mental barrier with disrupts the communication process. This includes cultural background of the individuals involved, their values and believes systems, and most importantly the filtering mechanism. Filtering is done by an individual when he is receiving a message or information. Filtering is triggered by the individual’s interests and personal needs, which tend to distort the incoming information and changes it to something the recipient wants to perceive. The Physical noise is any disturbances in the environment that can potentially disrupt a communication. This includes cacophony, low volume of voice, static over the telephone or a bad internet connection, etc. Lastly, the Semantic noise involves barriers related to misunderstanding of the language or jargons used. Most organizational cultures have their own language of communication which involves use of specific jargons or phrases, which carry a particular meaning only perceived by personnel of that particular organization (Lunenburg, 2010). Thus if two employees of different organizations communicate using their respective organizational jargons, then neither of them will be able to properly understand what the other individual is trying to say. So, in this case the jargons act as a semantic noise. The model proposed by Shannon and Weaver (1949) is shown below, which describes path of information transfer. Figure 1: Shannon-Weaver Model Source: (Shannon and Weaver, 1949) The above model shows the information being transferred from the sender to the receiver. The communication process also involves two activities, “encode” and “decode”. The information sent by the sender is encoded in his own chosen words, phrases, accent and language. In order to recover the information, the encoded message is decoded by the receiver. A successful decoding can only be done if the recipient has proper understanding of the process of encoding. The noise acts as a barrier in the communication medium, as shown in the model. For a proper communication to take place the individuals need to take care of the noise involved and also the process of encoding and decoding. The organizational communication is defined as transferring message within interrelated personnel associated with a professional network, to achieve individual or organizational goal (Daniels, Spiker and Papa, 1997). The Shannon-Weaver model can be explained in the light of organizational communication. The communication process followed in an organization is carefully designed so that the message sent is exactly same as the message received. An organization takes all the necessary steps to reduce the communicational noise so that the employees can have seamless communication among each other. The psychological and semantic noise is reduced by training new employees and making them habituated with the organizational culture. These noises are fairly reduced as the employee get familiar with the semantics and the filtering mechanism of other colleagues. White and Chapman Model White and Chapman (1996) argued that the information transfer described in the model of Shannon and Weaver (1949) is invalid as it is a one way communication model. They opined that the communication process is essentially a two way process and it is incomplete till the receiver sends a feedback to the sender. Figure 2: White-Chapman Model Source: (White and Chapman, 1996) This model not only includes the individual and interpersonal feedback system, but also it includes the individual’s “horizon of experience”. The filtering mechanism of an individual is dependent on his horizon of experience. The horizon of experience includes the individual’s values, belief system, knowledge, attitude, etc. The model suggests that a proper communication is only possible in an area where both the individual’s knowledge horizons merge. From an organizational perspective this merging of knowledge area is of extreme importance. An employee will not be able to connect with the organization if both of them do not share a common knowledge base. To ensure having a common knowledge base, an organization designs its recruitment system in such a way that the new employees have all the required knowledge to work in the organization’s culture and environment. The organization also makes sure that a two way communication system is maintained, so that the employees can give report back to the management regarding work related issues. This two way system helps the employee to improve its work efficiency by maintaining proper communication with the supervisor and at the same time the overall organizational performance also improves (White and Chapman, 1996). Thus it can be stated that a proper communication system within an organization improves the overall productivity. Structure of Organizational Communication Organizational communication can be broken down based on the hierarchical levels of the organization as upward communication, downward communication, horizontal and diagonal communication (Pauley, 2010). The upward communication is the transfer of information from the employees to the higher level management. It allows the employees to report their supervisors regarding work progress or any issues. The downward communication on the other hand is the transfer of from the higher management to the lower management. Its main purpose is to serve guidelines and job responsibilities to the employees. The downward communication is mostly dominant in an Authoritative leadership style. The horizontal communication is defined as the communication among employees of same hierarchical level within a same department. It helps to improve proper coordination within a team, which in turn helps to increase overall efficiency of the employees. The diagonal communication is flow of information between employees of different departments, who are not related by direct hierarchy (Spaho, 2013). Self Reflection on Key Learning Since I belong from Science background, I had never written a long essay like this. I have mostly written short essays. Although 2000 words was not long enough based on university standards, but due to lack of my essay writing experience, it has cost me a lot of time framing the structure of the topic. I went through a lot of journal articles based on organizational communication to find out the theoretical models and I further studied the class notes to find out the implications in the organizational practices. Based on the facts that I collected, I have learnt that the performance of an organization is largely dependent on the organizational behaviour and more precisely on the organizational communication process. The concept of communication is primarily a two way information transfer, where a sender sends information, which is perceived by the receiver and he in turn sends a feedback to the sender. I can easily relate this concept with every day communication, so I think the theories are designed for communication process as a whole, and not just for organizational uses. This project gave me great insight about the communicational process and I have learnt how miscommunication can be avoided in an organization. I struggled a lot to keep the quality of the project up to the mark, but if I am asked to redo a project I will consult with my professor to point me out the mistakes I have made. This way, I will be able to learn from my mistakes. Conclusion Proper communication is a vital factor in establishing a good relationship between the managers and the supervisors. Most of the stages involved in the communication process explain the traditional communication models have explained. However, with the rise in email communication, the interference of the communicational noise has reduced severely. The individual can easily rely on the technology to reduce the physical noises. The psychological noise on the other hand is dependent on the mentality of the individuals involved in the communication process. Thus for a proper communication, both the sender and the receiver must share the same knowledge horizon. The communication process followed in an organization ensures that all the personnel are able to have a proper interaction with the authority and with other team members; as a result it leads to improved organizational efficiency. Reference Daniels, T. D., Spiker, B. K. and Papa, M. J., 1997. Perspectives on organizational Communication. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Lunenburg, F.C. 2010. Communication: The Process, Barriers, and Improving Effectiveness. Schooling. 1(1), pp.3-9. MacDonald, L., 2014. Impacts of Organizational Behavior in Business. [online] Available at: [Accessed 3 December 2014] Osborn, S. and Hunt, U-B., 2013. Organizational Behaviour. 12/e. New Jersey: Wiley. Pauley, J. A., 2010. Communication: The key to effective leadership. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press Shannon, C. E. and Weaver. W., 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Spaho, K., 2013. Organizational Communication and Conflict Management. Management, 18 (1), pp.103-118 White, K.W. and Chapman, E.N., 1996. Organizational Communication – An Introduction to Communication and Human Relations Strategies. Needham Heights, MA: Simon and Schuster Custom Publishing. Bibliography Antos, G., 2011. Handbook of interpersonal communication. Mouton De Gruyter, The Hague Eisenberg, E. M., 2010. Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. Saint Martin’s, New York. Hener, G., 2010. Communication and conflict management in local public organizations, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 30 (E), pp.132-141. Keyton, J., 2011. Communication and organizational culture: A key to understanding work experience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, Matthews, L. J., and Crow, G. M., 2010. The principalship: New roles in a professional learning community. Boston, MA: Pearson Shettleworth, S. J., 2010. Cognition, evolution, and behavior. New York: Oxford University Press Ubben, G. C. Hughes, L. W., and Norris, C. J., 2010. The principal: Creative leadership for excellence in schools. 7/e. Boston, MA: Pearson, Weiss, B., 2011. How to understand language: A philosophical inquiry. Montreal: McGill University Press Read More