Communication Approaches Used by Corporations - Essay Example

?Organizations can be defined as a set of people who are coordinating with each other in order to achieve common goals. These goals are usually set by an organization and are difficult to achieve unless there is synergy between the members of the organization. Many organizations provide the human resource with certain tools in order to make it easy for them to coordinate their activities. Much of the work and bulk of the activity in the organization is done through communication. In case there is no communication within the members of the organizations, there are chances that the work will not be of very high quality. It is therefore important for the organizations to provide excellent and efficient means of communication to the people working in the organization to make sure that all the work that is done is of highest quality (Fritz, Narasiman & Ree 1998). Communication has become an important part of corporate planning. Specialist communication departments and Management Information Technology professionals have been recruited by organizations over the years to streamline its communication resources and flow. These specialist have also developed approaches of Corporate communications have been developed over the last few years to provide organizations around the world as a guide as to what is the best communication approach in the given scenario. There has also been good amount of research done in this field and many new approaches were innovated and test. Although there is no absolute answer as to which approach is the best, an organization is supposed to change its communication approaches over the years in order to obtain the best possible results. The process of communication these days is very different to what was practiced in the past. The developments of internet and cellular communication technologies have changed the entire paradigm of communication. The top level management, as a result of this, is more aware of what is happening at the production lines than they were before. This has improved the decision making as top level management is closer to the production level activities. This is a good thing and further development in the communication strategy and channels would lead to further streamlining of an organization’s operations. (Hax & Majluf 1984) A good example of corporate communication strategy and approach can be learned from the Shell/Royal Dutch Case. In 1995, the company decided to sink its Brent Spar in the Atlantic Ocean. This resulted in protests and a campaign against the company. Many customers boycotted the company’s products, most notably in Germany, The Netherlands and The United Kingdom. As a result, the company experienced massive drop in sales and was financially hurt badly. At first Shell responded stubbornly. It stated sink Brent Spar was the best decision and the accusation by conservationists and Greenpeace were wrong. This did not improve the company’s image and neither changed the public opinion against Shell resulting in further drop down of sales. Nine months down the road, Shell was involved in another controversial environment degradation activity in Nigeria. This time Shell responded more proactively. It invited stakeholders, environment experts, interest groups and other concerned parties for a debate. The change in communication style from Shell was evident this time around. Its communication strategy was changed from “Buffering” to “Bridging”. It was more willing to talk and hear the other side. Later that year Shell published an ethical report on its focus on Corporate Social Responsibility and followed it up with another report. Meanwhile it continued to fund public projects and keep telling the public that it is a socially responsible company. Shell also acknowledge that the problem has arisen because in the past communication was not very open. It issued “Tell Shell” cards to the protestors to put forward their ideas and guide Shell what to do. This is an example of effective communication and it eased the problems that Shell was facing and shows the importance of communicating effectively in the corporate settings. (Hooghiemstra 2000) Another study done on the topic tells us the importance of hierarchy and informal networks running side by side. These two types of communication lines are used by the managers and workers to communicate effectively among themselves. Sometimes corporations use “grapevines” to get messages to its employees when it is impossible to talk with organization staff effectively through formal channels of communication. Technology is also playing a very important role in corporate communication these days and it has made two-way communication very easy. (Hind & Kiesler 1995) The next study correctly highlights how the increases in globalization and technology have made communication a complex process within organizations. Although technology can reduce the complexity, but still it is of no use unless a realistic and practical communication model is designed to meet the needs of an organization. The author of the study has proposed a “cognitive-affective communication model” for corporate communication. Figure 1: Communication Model Reference: (Te'ni 2001) This model of communication can be used by almost all organizations with great effect. At first stage for this model to worm well there should be feeling of mutual trust between the top level management and employees. In the second stage goals are identified and strategies to achieve these goals are directed to employees through medium of communication. Then the employees give their feedback about the strategies using a medium agreed in the communication process. After the feedback tasks and norms are determined and employees convey them to the top level management which approves or disapproves the feedback. Later two-way communication takes place to finalize the tasks and goals. This type of communication is done when the top management trusts the workers and workers feel part of the organization. Many organizations that treat their workers fairly can use this model, because workers usually respect and associate themselves with these organizations. (Te'ni 2001) Case Study of McDonalds: McDonald’s is one of the largest MNC in the world. It is present throughout the work is recognized as the largest food chain around the world. McDonald’s and all its offices need to communication very often. It needs to communicate from one part of the world to another for communication of strategies and goals. There are a lot of barriers that exist in the communication process. Most notable of these barriers is the language barrier. McDonald’s also operates in non-English speaking nations. This makes the communication difficult for the organization. The communication approach used by McDonald’s to convey its message is creating a regional head office and then communicating all the necessary details to country level head office using the regional head office. This minimizes the language barrier. McDonald’s is also open to two way communication. Its country level head office can communicate with regional head office if something is not understood or if there is any question. This two way communication has contributed greatly to the success of the organization. (Hind & Kiesler 1995) The model discussed above along with the other research papers studied show that there is no one single approach to communication. Many organizations use different approaches of communication at different point in time to meet its needs. For example, a growing organization may need different communication approaches as compared to an already matured organization. Hence, there is no absolute right or wrong communication approach. The best way to communicate for an organization is what it considers to be the most effective form of communication. All the experts on communication unanimously agree on the fact that the ideal communication approach in most cases is two-way communication where both parties to the communication process can forward their own views and arguments and give feedback. The reason behind this is the fact that both parties can understand other party’s views on the thing that is being discussed and a better concerted decision can be made using two-way communication. References: Fritz, M, Narasiman, S & Ree, H-S 1998, 'Communication and Coordination in the Virtual Office', : Journal of Management Information Systems, vol 14, no. 4, pp. 245-255. Gossener, O, Hernandez, P & Abrahams, N 2006, 'Optimal Use of Communication Resources', Econometrica, vol 74, no. 6, pp. 323-330. Hax, A & Majluf, N 1984, 'The Corporate Strategic Planning Process', Interfaces, vol 14, no. 1, pp. 47-60. Hind, P & Kiesler, S 1995, 'Communication across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies', Organization Science, vol 6, no. 4, pp. 373-383. Hooghiemstra, R 2000, 'Corporate Communication and Impression Management: New Perspectives Why Companies', Journal of Business Ethics, vol 27, no. 2, pp. 55-68. Jehiel, P 1999, 'Information Aggregation and Communication in Organizations', Management Science, vol 45, no. 5, pp. 650-655. Monge, P, Cozzens, M & Contractor, N 1992, 'Communication and Motivational Predictors of the Dynamics of Organizational Innovation', Organization Science, vol 3, no. 2, pp. 250-258. Nobel, R & Birkinshaw, J 1998, 'Innovation in Multinational Corporations: Control and Communication Patterns in', Strategic Management Journal, vol 19, no. 5, pp. 480-490. Te'ni, D 2001, 'A Cognitive-Affective Model of Organizational Communication for Designing IT', MIS Quarterly, vol 25, no. 2, pp. 284-300. Wisenfield, B, Raghuram, S & Garud, R 1999, 'Communication Patterns as Determinants of Organizational Identification in a Virtual', Organization Science, vol 10, no. 6, pp. 780-790. Read More