Group Effectiveness - Essay Example

Group Effectiveness Paper The effectiveness of a group or an organization requires the implementation of internal systems in which people, technology, and operational procedures successfully interact. The coordination of internal communication systems of interaction enable and ensure the alignment of the group’s activities with the strategic goals and objectives. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how the effectiveness of a group is achievable through the use of systems of verbal and non-verbal communication. Additionally, reviewing how leadership roles within an organizational culture influences the creation of an environment in which effectiveness is a product of exchanges and interaction. Effective Group Communication The primary purpose of a group (organization) is to create an entity that is sustainable and profitable (Conrad & Poole, 2005). For an organization to develop and implement internal systems enabling the group to accomplish their goals and objectives requires the coordination of people, technology, and operational procedures that align the internal activities with the strategic objectives. A discussion about effective communication is incomplete without providing a definition of communication to clarify the understanding and underscore the significance of effective communication in groups. Communication is vital for a group’s longevity and its importance crosses and transcends industry lines. Conrad and Poole (2005) define “Communication as a process through which people, acting together, create, sustain, and manage meanings through the use of verbal and non-verbal signs and symbols within a particular context” (p. 3). De Janasz, Dowd, and Schneider (2001) make the assertion that “Communication is a two-way street, communication is a fluid, evolving process involving the sending and receiving of messages between two or more people” (p. 104). The ability of a group to develop and establish systems of communications within the organizational structure and culture increases the groups’ capabilities and capacity to create a sustainable competitive advantage in the marketplace (Conrad & Poole, 2005). As an employee in the reservations department with Continental Airlines for 15-years the affects of group effectiveness were witnessed firsthand. However the process of reinventing the company through the use of effective communication practices increased the group’s effectiveness and performance. For decades the company was thought to as one of the worst carriers in the industry and routinely the company’s performance failed because of consumer reports and satisfaction ratings (Bethune & Huler, 1998). Industry peers regularly ridiculed the airline for its inability to provide an acceptable level of service. Whereas the company’s external image was in shambles upon closer inspection its internal environment revealed a cancerous condition that was plaguing each department within the company’s structure (Bethune & Huler, 1998). Despite multiple changes in leadership and unsuccessful internal changes in efforts to rectify the conditions of the declining airline the organization suffered losses in revenue and market share throughout the 1970s and 1980s (Bethune & Huler, 1998). Tasks and Maintenance Roles for Effectiveness Leadership is responsible for a group’s performance, if the group fails to meet the expectations and desires of the stakeholders those in leadership positions are removed. Klempa (2006) cites three factors that hinder effectiveness in groups: “1) poor management, in terms of efficient work planning and organization; 2) poor leadership, in terms of management demonstrating and leading change; and 3) poor internal communications” (p. 32). Undeniably leadership has significant influence on operational procedures. Inside Continental prior to effectual changes and the re-design of communication networks found employee morale vile, customers’ opinion disparaging, suppliers and vendors discontent, industry unions in fierce concessions battles, and the company’s operational procedures in various stages of implosion. The hostility between teams in the reservation department had each work unit working independently and in isolation. The ability of the company to produce a marketable product was severely hindered and reduced as a result. For example, the reservations department did not interact with the airport gate agents, or gate agents did not exchange information with the baggage crew on the loading ramps, and ticketing agents in the city ticket offices did not receive instructions or information from reservations regarding a special request such as a wheelchair or special meal order for a customer (Last Name, Initial, Personal Comnmunication, 1994-2008). This type of behavior was rampant throughout the company, accounting failing to communicate with reservations, security not receiving instructions from reservations, or the flight crews not interacting with the pilots, and as a result the safety and security of passengers jeopardized because of the internal disharmony and disorganization. As a first line of contact with customers reservations agents have the task of presenting a unified façade, however the infighting within and between leaders and departments made the task arduous affecting productivity and sustainability. Jain, Sethi, and Mukherji (2009) stress in their qualitative study the importance of the interaction between employees of a company and the customer and its affect on profitability. The study emphasizes how the perception of a group is formed as a result of the exchange of information during service calls. In the study the image of a group or company is developed and etched into the minds of the public from verbal and non-verbal interaction (pp. 56-58). Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication One of the revelations of the study of Jain, Sethi, and Mukherji (2009) was that a company’s image is formed from verbal and non-verbal information exchanged during interaction between customers and company representatives (pp. 56-58). The non-verbal communication nuances such as attitude, friendliness, creditability, and emotions comprise up to 70% of communication (Jain, Sethi, & Mukherj, 2009, p. 57). Whereas the verbal and non-verbal interaction between customers and employees forges the image of the company in the external environment the culture within the group suffers or flourishes as a result of similar practices. Beebe and Masterson (2006) state “Non-verbal communication is behavior not dependent on written or spoken words” (p. 143). Their list of non-verbal communication gestures include body posture, eye contact, facial expression, personal appearance, intonation and speed of words, and silence (p. 143). The list includes and makes reference to how the use of verbal and non-verbal practices convey messages that affect the climate and culture within a group as well. Effective Communication and Operational Goals The transformation and re-invention of Continental Airlines began with leadership. Gordon Bethune the former CEO and Chairman of the Board is given the credit of turning the company around (Bethune & Huler, 1998). His initial strategies sought to eliminate the division throughout the company and bring about cohesion. Bethune’s practices began with unifying the company and re-designing the organizational culture. The use of recognition and rewards help to create camaraderie with cooperation as the catalyst stimulating change in the environment. The use of effective communication allowed each employee to learn how to respect others and to recognize the interdependence between work groups. Through the process of re-invention employees’ esteem improved affecting profits for the company and creating higher rewards for the individual worker. The objectives of the new strategies were communicated through various media such as the company intranet, email messages, online newsletters, and group and team meetings with the effectiveness of the strategies evaluated based on monthly performance goals. Because airlines are notorious for tardiness and lost baggage, one strategy implemented by Bethune was the “On-Time Award”. The program enabled each employee in the company to receive a bonus if the airline’s flights arrived and departed on time. The measurement of performance was the averages of the top five carriers. In the months Continental ranked first or second out of the top five carriers in on-time performance the employees earned $100, for third or fourth place the payment was $75 and if the airline was in fifth place employees earned a $50 bonus. The On-time Bonus Award program initiated synergy and compelled cooperation motivating employees to work effectively and efficiency together. The process of transforming the company was not immediate. Continental experienced failures and setbacks during the process, however programs such as “On-Time” and the attendance award program earning employees the opportunity to win a Ford Expedition were two programs that proved successful (Last Name, Initial, Personal Communication, 1994-2008). The incentives, awards, and implementation of effective communication processes and techniques used by Continental demonstrated how group effectiveness is obtainable when team members learn to interact constructively and cohesively. As a result of changing the way the group interacted increased the group’s effectiveness. The new strategies affected performance creating an environment in which the company was able to go from worst to first (Bethune & Huler, 1998). Conclusion The affects of verbal and non-verbal communication has the potential of enabling a group or organization to experience success or failure. The ability of leaders to recognize the importance of communication as a means of creating group effectiveness is vital for creating a sustainable competitive advantage in the marketplace. By implementing systems of effective communication practices and incorporating procedures to evaluate their effectiveness can positively influence a group’s performance resulting in increased profitability and sustainability in the external environment. References Beebe, S. A. & Masterson, J. T. (2006). Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices, 8th Ed. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. /Allyn and Bacon. Bethune, G. & Huler, S. (1998). From worst to first. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Conrad, C. & Poole, M. S. (2005). Strategic organizational communication: In a global economy, 6th Ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc. / Thomson Wadsworth. De Janasz, S. C., Dows, K. O., & Schneider, B. Z. (2001). Interpersonal skills in organizations. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. Jain, N., Sethi, A., & Mukherji, S. (2009). Impact of communication during service encounters on customer's perception of organization image. Paradigm (Institute of Management Technology), 13(1), 56-65. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Klempa, M. (2006). Eliminating productivity roadblocks. Financial Executive, 22(8), 32-35. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Read More