Effective Communication in Organizational Management and Behavior - Essay Example

? Organizational Management and Behavior Q Effective communication is essential in the management and operation processwithin any organization. It allows employees and the management to interact with each other as they discuss the essential elements of the organization, policy formulation and implementation. The medium of communication has a great potential in ensuring the success of the communication and allowing the sender to pass his information to his audience without the fear of misinterpretation. The development of information technology tools has made it quite possible for employees and managers to communicate with each other efficiently and effectively, thus enhancing production in the organization. There exist two schools of thought on the effectiveness of information technology in communication, with one school arguing that information technology has enhanced organizational communication while the second group arguing in opposition to that stand. In this section, an argumentative analysis of the two sides of arguments will be provided to ascertain the benefits and demerits of information technology in communication. The growth and advancement in information technology has provided a better medium for communication to most organizations as it allows access to a vast information which can be effectively passed on to end receivers. Organizations today use the internet and emails as the effective means of communication with other employees as it allows the transfer of mass information at a click. Emails have today replaced the tradition postal services, printed internal, memos, fax communication and the use of messengers. However, the opponents of increased use of information technology in communications in organizations argue that the information that can be transferred with this medium is highly unlimited making it possible to send a lot within a short time. This, according to their arguments, results into situations where the employees use a lot of their working hours reading the information sent in their mails. This has the potential of significantly reducing the productivity of the organization as office and working hours are spent reading mails and virtual internal memos (George and Jones, 2012). The proponents of the continued use of information technology to enhance organizational communication points to increased efficiency with which communication process in organizations have been enhanced. Before the growth and advancement in information technology, organizations would be forced to make large volume printouts of their training manuals, documentation, brochures, legal requirements and any other document that should be used by the employees. This increased the cost of operation for such organizations, as communication was manual and time consuming. The advance of information technology as a means of communication has enabled organizations to post important documents in their websites from where the employees can access from their different workstations. The audited financial reports of the company are also made available for the different stakeholders to access from the comfort of their offices and homes by simply accessing the company’s website. This advancement has thus led to abolition of annual posting of dividend reports to organizational shareholders as they can be emailed the documents at a much cheaper cost (George and Jones, 2012). With advances in communication, organizations have been enabled to create login portals for their employees and suppliers. This has enabled the management of these organizations and their employees to interact on a more personalized but virtual level that enhances productivity within the organization. Different employees are therefore assigned different roles virtually which are then posted to their portals and communication effected through a similar system. This application is common in banks and companies that have installed intranet services within their systems. The intranets also allow organizations to store crucial information that can be accessed by different employees based on their security levels. Organization thus maintains large databases that contain directories, manuals and different customer and supplier details like delivery schedules and places. Those in favor of information technology as a means of communication thus argue that it holds the potential to the speedy communication at different levels within and without the organization (George and Jones, 2012). According to George and Jones (2012), information technology can be a source of losses for the organization and decreased productivity within the organization. This arises from misuse of the organization communication channels by employees who end up losing a lot of working hours which translates to loss of billions of dollars for most organizations in the world. The inability to monitor internet use effectively by employees creates scenarios where the employees overuse this channel for personal communication. It is a common occurrence within organizations for employees to use the mail and other internet services provided by the company for personal communication. Social media misuse also arises in most organizations that provide internet services for their employees as most of the employees end up visiting non business sites during working hours. Opponents of the advances in information technology in communication thus argue that it reduces the productive of businesses as compared to the traditional channels that were initially available for organizational use. Q.2 Different organizations have different levels of decision making depending on the approaches adopted by the organization. Most organization prefers the teamwork approach in which different individuals within the organization are allowed to brainstorm and come up with a decision that is adopted by the organizations. However, some organization prefers to use individual experts in their decision-making processes resulting into a scenario where one employee is given the decision-making powers within the organization. Two views are presented on this issue with one side of the argument supporting the use of groups for decision making while the other prefers the use of individuals who are experienced in the areas. This section of the paper will evaluate the two arguments and provide evidence to support either of the views as provided by George and Jones (2012). Most organization prefers to use special groups in the processes of decision making with each group working under the supervision of the group leaders. The choice of using groups for decision making in most organizations are guided by different benefits that groups presents to the organization as opposed to individuals. In highlighting the reasons for supporting the use of groups in decision making, I will highlight some of the advantages that group decision making presents. First, every employee in an organization possesses special skills, knowledge and abilities, which can be of much benefit to the organization. Adopting the use of groups in decision making result into a situation where the knowledge and skills of the different members of the group is pooled together. This increases the possibility of coming up with a constructive decision which has the potential of improving the position of the company. A single individual cannot posses all the qualities needed to make an informed decision in a matter. This thus makes decisions made by individuals to confine to their individual abilities, capabilities and experiences, which results into a restrictive decision. For example, if a company is planning to launch a new product into the market, the decision cannot be left to the sales manager alone due to his inability to understand other areas of product performance in the market. In this situation, the organization must involve the inputs of both the marketing officer, the brand promoter, the sales team and the production officials to ensure that they come up with a well-informed decision (George and Jones, 2012). Decisions made by organizations also affects different people either in the organization or from outside the organization. These people have different demographic and racial properties and preferences, which determine the ability to accept such decisions. Group decision making allows for the creation of a team that show diversity in the ages, professional training, gender, race and even religion. This allows the group to make a decision that can be considered as an all-inclusive decision that touches on the needs of the different people within the organization and from outside including the stakeholders and customers. According to George and Jones (2012), all decision made at the organization level are prone to errors which may limit their impacts to the organizations. Group decision making provides an opportunity for the members to detect any error well in advance before the implementation thus providing room for correction. Errors may occur at different stages of decision making which include the information gathering stage or when evaluating the available alternatives. With individual decision-making, the possibility of identifying the error in time is highly reduced as all the process are facilitated, evaluated and proofread by the same individual. These errors can have significant impacts on the success of the organization especially if discovered at an advanced stage when the damage cannot be reversed. The decision made in an organization must be widely accepted by all key players and stakeholders in the organization. The acceptance of a decision is higher in instances where groups are used to make the decision as opposed to individuals. This is because groups consider all the important issues depending on the representation in the group as opposed to an individual who may make a decision based on his individual assessment, judgment and abilities. The side of the argument in favor of individual decision-making points at some of the weaknesses of group decision making which can only be bypassed if organizations use individuals to make decisions. In individual decision-making, little time is needed before the final decision can be arrived at, as there are little or no consultations. Group decision making however requires the input of all the members of the group and consultative approach must be adopted before the decision is finally made. This consumers a lot of time as members may fail to agree on the vital parts of the decision making process. This school of thought argues that time taken for groups to achieve a common stand and come up with a decision may depend on the number of people in the group (George and Jones, 2012). Q.3 The success of any organization is influenced by the organizational structure developed as it outlines the reporting channels within the organization. Organizations adopt different organizational structure approaches depending on their goals and how they actually intend to achieve these goals. In this section, the mechanistic and organic structural approaches in organizations will be evaluated to enable the attainment of a well-informed viewpoint of the two. In so doing, the advantages, disadvantages and scenarios that necessitate choosing of either of the approaches will evaluated. According to George and Jones (2012), the decision to adopt any organizational structure is influenced by the extent to which the organizations understands its external environment, complexities in technologies that exists and the knowledge, experiences and skills of its workforce. Organic structure in organizations refer to the adoption of a system that promotes flexibility in the organization thus allowing employees to freely initiate change programs and be able to respond to the changing environment promptly. This structure thus equips employees at different levels of management with decision-making authority as different conditions within the organization may demand. Mechanistic organizational structure is on the other hand an approach that enables employees to develop predictable and accountable ways behaviors. This approach provides decision-making authorities to the top management of the organization with each employee provided with a clearly stated role. Rules and regulations in this kind of structure are used to govern the behaviors of the employees and determine how they relate with each other and the management of the organization. Mechanistic structured organizations thrives best in organizations where teamwork is less practiced and thus every employees work as independent unit. Tasks are assigned to the different employees by the top management depending on their special qualifications and they are expected to deliver the tasks within the timeline provided individually. This structure thus restricts the ability of an organization to adopt groups in making decisions as one individual is tasked with the roles of making these decisions. Mistakes and errors are therefore common in this structure as individuals high in the management rank assume roles of decision making irrespective of their training and experiences. With organic structures, teamwork is encouraged as employees are made to work together in groups to implement the policies formulated by the organization (George and Jones, 2012). Mechanistic structures also have simple integrated mechanisms of administrations within the organization, which provides a hierarchy of authority. Within the hierarchy, different administrators are provided with different roles and the decisions from the top managers are biding to all employees. The development of this kind of hierarchy takes mechanistic structures of organization close to dictatorial leadership in which decision and policy formulations are made from the top and implementations assigned to the employees below the hierarchy. These employees are allowed no opportunity to question or analyze the decisions but to function as the implementing levels. With organic structures, that encourages participation of all the employees, taskforces, implementation and formulation teams are created, and this forms the basis of the integrating mechanism. Organic structures thus make it quite easy for such organizations to implement changes programs without fears of resistance by other employees. It provides room for employee involvement and engagement using teams and group works. Decision making within mechanistic structures are also highly centralized and reserved for the top management who do not adopt an engaging approach. This approach does not favor the current organizational management techniques being adopted by leading organizations. With organic structures, decision-making is decentralized and all employees are allowed to have their contributions and inputs factored in. With mechanistic structures, communication is highly vertical with instructions and orders emanating from the top of the hierarchy while results and inputs from the employees moving up the axis. This approach is so thus close to totalitarian leadership and increases the levels of employee dissatisfaction and lack of motivation. Organic structures adopt a lateral communication system in which decisions, policies formulated, implemented, adopted and results move up and down the ladder irrespective of position and influence. Mechanistic structured of leadership however disadvantageous in instance where an organization prefers job delegation approaches. It allows the top management, from where power and influence is centered to delegate duties to the employees through vertical communication approaches. Supervision and management of the human resource is highly effective in this model, as the structure of leadership remains rather static. Planning and management of tasks using this structure is relatively simple as the human resource management department is familiar with the capabilities of the different departments. It also allows for stability and predictability within an organization making roles assigning easier and predictable. Management and employees in mechanistic structures finds operations. ` Organic structured organizations also provide no boundaries for the employees as they are allowed to work independently with little supervision. This kind of structure increases the possibility of employees working to services their personal and selfish interest due to the vacuum created by lack of strict supervision. It also affects customer relations, as there is no defined response to consumer queries and concerns. In this kind of structures, it is a common thing for a customer to be handled by different independent employees, resulting into situations where different answers to one question are generated. Q.4 Organization culture determines how different employees within the organization relate with each other and with the stakeholders to the organization. According to George and Jones (2012), organizational culture are a set of values, beliefs and behaviors shared by the organization that have significant influences on the employees thinking, felling and acting towards each other and towards other stakeholders in the organization. Organizations teach their new recruits and employees their culture and beliefs to ensure continuity and congruence of employees’ actions. In this section, the impacts of organizational cultures to effectiveness both positive and negative will be evaluated. Each point shall be supported with rational example according to George and Jones (2012). Organization culture results into the creation of an identity that is bestowed upon all the employees of the organization. Each employee in the organization thus relates with this identity and work towards strengthening its impacts on performance. In an organization that breeds the culture of responsibility to the environment and adopting measures that conserve the environment, every employee works towards ensuring that their actions tally with this desire. It thus becomes easier for the organization to implement and achieve its desires as it is not just a mere policy, but also an identity of the business. Developing products that are clean and have less impact on the environment thus becomes the dream of every employee at all times. An organization’s culture also enables its employees to understand and relate to the organizations behavior towards different situations that affects it performance. Theses include the way the organization interacts with employees, the customers and even the responsibility of the organization to the society. Business results and performance within an organization is influenced by the culture of positivity within the organization. Such a culture provides room for all the members of the organization to understand the needs for proper behavior and hard work (George and Jones, 2012). Establishing a set of behaviors for employees alone is not enough to create significant impact on their productivity. An organization must seek to establish codes and standards of behavior that is accepted and revered by all the employees irrespective of their administrative ranks. Understanding and relating with the culture established by the organization enhances employee motivation thus increasing efficiency, productivity and effectiveness of the culture. For example, an organization that breeds a culture of innovativeness like Samsung and Apple must make all the employees to understand the rationale for such a culture and train all the employees on the innovation skills that improve their productivity. This allows for every employee to think along the innovation line and work towards developing new ideas that benefits the organization (George & Jones, 2012). However, there exists conditional scenario when an organizations culture has a negative impact in employee productivity and efficiency. This results into decreased employee performance, participation and motivation, thus making the culture ineffective. Participation and involvement of all employees in needed whenever an organization seeks to establish new behavior codes that define their cultures. Lack of this crucial step results to situations where not all employees in the organization accept the culture. Such a situation may decrease the efficiency and productivity of the culture and the impacts it has on the organization and its employees (George & Jones, 2012). As indicated in other sections of the paper, some organizations may develop teamwork and collaboration as their culture and this defines their success ratio. This culture can however become highly unpopular if the majority of the employees favor an individualistic approach as practiced in other organizations. Organizations must therefore encourage the participation of other employees in developing the cultures by factoring in their needs and desires. Despite the benefits of organizational cultures as seen by various case studies, the success of the culture depends on its flexibility and understanding of the different situations (George & Jones, 2012). A culture that is so stringent and strict even when situations demand a change may lead to ineffectiveness and high levels of failure. Any approach adopted in implementing the organizational structure must thus access the situation and environment before being fully implemented. Every employee must also be made to understand the dynamics of the culture before it can be successfully enforced. Reference George, J. and Jones, G. (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. Read More