Week Four - Human Resources Approaches and Human Relations

The human relations and human resources approaches to organizational communication stemmed from the realization that machine metaphors were not using employees to their full potential, or making them happy.  Workers were not rewarded or allowed to contribute their ideas and knowledge to the organization.  This discovery was made popular from the Hawthorne studies, which then introduced us to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory, McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid, and Likert’s System IV (Miller 2009).

The Hawthorne studies were conducted to test how the productivity of factory workers changes in different work environments (such as different lighting, temperature, and times).  Results found that the environmental factors did not change the levels of productivity, but social satisfaction from human association did.  This led to uncovering the importance of the emotion and satisfaction of workers in productivity, and the importance of informal and group communication in organizational functioning (Miller 2009).  This further showed how feeling/knowing you’re being watched improves productivity (Gale 2004).

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory was then used to learn how to motivate workers.  In his pyramid (pictured below), human needs are categorized into five levels (the most important being at the base of the pyramid and then working up) in which, one cannot achieve a higher level until one has achieved the levels below it. 

Following this trend, McGregor developed theories X and Y to demonstrate two polar opposites of managerial thinking.  In theory X, workers are believed to be lazy, irresponsible, unintelligent, gullible and self-centered; and are therefore to be controlled using “hard” and classical approaches (McGregor 2000, p. 7).  In theory Y, workers are labeled as intelligent thinkers, self-controlled, ambitious, committed, responsible, and innovative; and are to be encouraged and motivated using Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

In human resources, the focus is both on employee satisfaction and concern for production.  This leads us to Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid (pictured below) in which the optimal management style is team management (which shows a high concern for people and production).

This was further developed by Rensis Likert in his management systems (pictured below) in which system one is called the exploitive authoritative organization, system two is called the benevolent authoritative organization, system three is called the consultative organization, and system four is called a participative organization (Miller 2009).

Difficulties with employee participation were demonstrated through the case study of Marshall’s Processing Plant (Miller 2009) in which employee’s didn’t like attending multiple meetings and having extra work, felt like they were doing the manager’s job, or did not feel that they would truly be listened to. 

Despite these complications, the above theories (which moved us away from classical approaches) help us understand how and why communication works today, and helps us prepare for working as a communication professional in the future.

References

Gale, EAM 2004, ‘The Hawthorne studies – A fable for our times?’, QJM: Monthly Journal of the Association of Physicians, vol. 97, no. 7, pp. 439-449.

McGregor, D 2000 ‘The human side of enterprise’, Reflections, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 6-15.

Miller, K 2009, Organizational communication: approaches and processes, 6th ed, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA.

Week Three - Classical Approaches

Throughout history, the way we work to create products has changed from small groups (or individually) working from start to finish, to large groups working together and sharing roles.  From the introduction of factories and assembly lines, organizations were related to machines.

This change led to three important theories which can still be seen today.  These include Henri Fayol’s theory of classical management, Max Weber’s theory of bureaucracy, and Frederick Taylor’s theory of scientific management.  Each of these theorists used machines as a metaphor for organizations.  As Miller (2009) points out, this can be shown through three aspects:

v  Specialization – each section of a machine (or organization) has its specific functions which, together, make the machine/organization work;

v  Standardization – like a machine with a faulty part, people can be easily replaced in an organization to keep things running smoothly; and

v  Predictability – like machines, organizations have specific rules/instructions which are to be followed.  Therefore, any mishap can be easily traced and the solution can be easily found.

Pryor and Taneja (2010) argue that some of these machine/hierarchical theories (specifically Fayol’s principles of management) are still very valuable today because they have created a foundation on which we’ve built today’s theories.

However, these theories dehumanized people, and have a strict, top-to-bottom chain of command (Cheney 2007).  This differs greatly from many (but not all) organizations today.

The case study ‘The Creamy Creations Takeover’ (discussed in the tutorial) shows how these machine metaphor theories can be positive and negative to organizations.  Although organizations following these theories find high levels of efficiency, they lack a human aspect that therefore causes customer/employee dissatisfaction.  This is why, with today’s understanding of the complexity of organizations and communication, these theories have been further developed or eliminated completely.

References

Cheney, G 2007, ‘Organizational communication comes out’, Management Communication Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 80-91.

Miller, K 2009, Organizational communication: approaches and processes, 6th ed, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA.

Pryor, MG & Taneja, S 2010, ‘Henri Fayol, practitioner and theoretician – revered and reviled’, Journal of Management History, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 489-503.

Weeks One and Two - Intro and Organizational Communication Challenges

This portfolio aims to explore the topics covered in tutorials and lectures over a semester of Communication and Organizations.  In addition, this information will relate to the following broad statement:

Understanding the history of communication, its development and the impact of important events and/or theories is essential in order to understand communication today, and to be prepared for working as a communication professional in the future.

For the purposes of tutorials and this assignment, we were made to develop a reading schedule (to ensure each relevant chapter was read to then be discussed in the tutorial), and to set up Refworks or Endnote (to keep track of our referencing).

Weeks one and two of Communication and Organizations covered an introduction to this course, provided insight into the assignment requirements, and discussed challenges in organizational communication.

Our first tutorial (in week two) consisted of two activities.  In the first activity we communicated and learnt a bit about each other while sharing the common objective of finding people with a piece to your puzzle.  In the second activity, we were taught (through the demonstration of a “what if” activity) how communicating in a group alters decision-making. 

Our second tutorial (in week three) also involved two activities, and looked at examples which demonstrate the importance of communication.  One activity was to write down all of the organizations we’ve been involved with to look at the different communication structures, roles and requirements; and to look at how these organizations are connected to other organizations.  The other was to combine all of our skills to make a group resume.  We were then to complete the Individual Skills Audit.  This has been designed specifically so that organizations can select the areas they deem most important for the role of their managers, and to then see how well the selected people fit into these roles and, consequently, what learning and development plan can be used to improve these skills.

In week two’s topic of challenges in organizational communication, it is important to note changes in the world which affect organizational communication.  These changes include globalization, terrorism, climate change, and changing demographics (Miller 2009).  These changes throughout history have altered how we look at and communicate in organizations today.   For example, there are many important events which fit into the above categories which have changed how we communicate in organizations today.  Some of these events include the introduction of the World Trade Organization, the September 11 terrorist attacks, and Al Gore’s publicizing of climate change and its possible effects if we do not act soon.  An important demographic change will be once the world population reaches seven billion.  According to the Bureau of Statistics (2011), the world population is currently at around 6,973,945,561.  Each of these events can alter how organizations are run, where organizations are constructed, and the communication between organizations 

Even our thinking of communication itself has altered from the past.  In 1949, Shannon and Weaver developed a simplistic communication model (pictured below). 

At this time the model was developed to assist in the use of telephone cables and radio waves (Chandler 1994).  Since this time, our thinking of communication has complicated greatly to include all purposes of communication beyond simply sending a message.

Robert Craig (1999) has since proposed a model which breaks communication into seven components (pictured below), and which fits better into the complex use of communication in organizations today.

Important events and the changes in our world, the way we communicate, and organizations today all have a significant impact on understanding communication today, and preparing for communication in the future.

References

Bureau of Statistics 2011, International Programs, viewed 8 August 2011

http://www.census.gov/population/international/

Chandler, D 1994, The Transmission Model of Communication, viewed 8 August 2011,

http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/trans.html

Craig, RT 1999, ‘Communication theory as a field’, Communication Theory, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 119-161.

Miller, K 2009, Organizational communication: approaches and processes, 6th ed, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Boston, MA.