ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE
The 21st century business landscape can be characterized as complex, dynamic, and rapidly changing. Successful companies, in their respective industries, are able to adapt internally to their external environment with the assistance of effective MC. The use of MC is a tangible tool organizations can use in order to gain a competitive advantage in this new age of innovation. Arguably, frontline organizational subsystems benefit significantly from the utilization of effective MC.
Katz and Kahn (1966) viewed communication as a social process of the broadest relevance in the functioning of any group, organization, or society. Simply interpreted, without effective MC, an organization can neither function nor attempt to create and maintain a competitive advantage. FMs and their subordinates play an essential role in the success of an organization; therefore, the way in which they interact with one another is a key determinant of organizational success. Establishing trust between employees and FMs is one of the first steps towards improving organizational performance.
Employees must have confidence in their managers in order to achieve organizational success. Trust is established when employees feel that their managers are both considerate and competent. Consideration includes understanding an individual’s competency level and his/her ability to perceive the communication. A person’s ability to perceive and understand a message is based on experience; and communication without perception is just noise (Drucker, 1974). Employees consider their managers as competent if the communicated message can be understood without any aberration. In the grand scheme of organizational performance, managers on the frontlines are just figureheads, tasked with encoding and decoding messages within the frontline organizational subsystem. Whether or not a task gets accomplished, is determined by employees’ trust in their managers, and a manager’s ability to convince their subordinates to accept communication as authority.
Authority is the character of a communication (order) in a formal organization by virtue of which it is accepted by a contributor to, or member of, the organization as governing the action he contributes (Barnard, 1968). Simply stated, authority lies with the individual in which the communication is directed. It is important for managers operating within all tiers of an organization to understand Barnard's definition of authority, because clearly defined roles within the frontlines of an organization is an essential element in accepting communication as authority. For frontline individuals, changes can occur day-to-day, or hour-to-hour, depending on the operating environment. Organizations, despite their size, must be well equipped internally to handle these changes as ambiguity gives rise to confusion and chaos. As an example, let us imagine an officer of a platoon not having a clear understanding of his role in the heat of battle. The outcome could possibly be the loss of many lives due to his inability to effectively communicate and failure to gain authority. Similarly, disjointed organizations would lose valuable customers. Not accepting communication as authority can be a major obstacle to the improvement of organizational performance, innovation, and change efforts (Longenecker & Fink, 2001). In addition to establishing authority amongst employees and manager, managers on the frontlines can seek the assistance of other organizational subsystems in order to improve organizational performance.
A manager working with human resource professionals to create ways to boost morale is an example of how employees can benefit from relationships across organizational subsystems. Human resource professionals are equipped with the training materials and other tools that can assist managers with improving organizational performance through the use of communication. In addition to the obvious benefits a human resource department can provide, such as benefit explanation and verification, they can also serve as a mediator between FMs and employees. Although authority ultimately rests with an employee perceiving and accepting communication, there are times when an employee feels uncomfortable with expressing his/her feelings to a manager. A third party entity, such as a human resource associate, can be enormously effective in serving as a mediator and taking into consideration the best interest of the manager, employee, and organization. The ability to listen is an essential attribute a manager must possess and human resource professionals can assist managers with developing this essential skill.
One of the most important determinants of organizational performance is a manager’s ability to listen and respond to feedback. Top management, including the board of directors of a company, should implement a forum in which the solicitation of feedback from employees is both warranted and encouraged. Organizational strategy is only successful if feedback is actively encouraged from those who are directly responsible for implementing the strategy.