Ashford University: COM425 Communication In Organizations Final
Unconventional Barriers to Effective Communication
Unconventional Barriers to Effective Communication
“The problem of effective communication is unfortunately greater than just the recognition of its scale and importance.” (P. Diwan, 2000, cited in Bolarinwa & Olorunfemi, 2009, p. 2). It is an issue that, for many small businesses, is taken for granted. In fact, regardless of the size of the organization, effective communication is the very foundation of organizational excellence (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 4). When effective communication is the backbone of the organization, barriers cannot only be a nuisance, but can also cause hardship to those involved.
Bernard Erven (n.d.) cites the wrong channel as one barrier to communication (p. 3). Indeed, choosing the wrong channel can bar receipt of the message entirely. This is quite evident in the way technology is used as a channel. Cellular phones, although convenient, can present a significant roadblock if the receiver is in an area that has no cellular signal.
Once, on a day off, I took my son to the local pool. I notified the office where I would be if they needed anything and told them that the landline number for the pool is listed in the local directory. There is no cell service in the immediate area of the pool. As it happens, the office did need my help. Someone had quit over a schedule conflict and there was no one to fill the shift. I went about playing with my son in the pool, as, without signal, my cellular phone did not even ring.
Even when there is adequate cellular signal, the new technology of text messaging should only be used for trivial messages. The other day my mother, who is a coworker and was working that day, text messaged my cellular phone. She asked me to go to her house and feed her cat, since she would be unable to do it. Since I work night shift, I was asleep when she sent the message, and it never occurred for me to check the phone when I awoke. As a result, I never received the message, and the poor cat went hungry. While this was not a transaction that was important to our organization, I wonder what would have transpired had the message been something of particular consequence.
Such a message did go awry with another organization to which I belong as a patient of a major medical center. Since the development of the Internet, people have used email more and more as a standard form of communication (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 165). Over the past several years, this medical center has developed a website where patients can view their medical records and communicate with providers via secure email. It is not only convenient, but the providers tend to respond much quicker via email than via telephone.
Using the secure system, I emailed a message to the appointment center explaining that I needed a psychology appointment for my son sometime in the near future. I left explicit instructions to call me with the appointment time because I do not check my email every day. The appointment specialist ignored my request and simply replied to my email with the time. The policy in the psychology department is to charge a $25 fee for missed appointments that were not cancelled at least 24 hours in advance. I missed this appointment, and was subsequently charged.
In addition to technology, an organization’s own communication ethics may bar effective communication. Like many organizations today, it is necessary to institute confidentiality agreements due to the sensitive nature of the clients for whom my organization works (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 122). While meant to be helpful in maintaining the privacy of clients and their customers, these confidentiality agreements can get in the way of effective communication.
For example, it is against the confidentiality agreements for our organization to transmit medical information, such as the names of prescription drugs. This creates an inconvenience for the patients who leave a message to have their prescriptions refilled. It is necessary to have the office return their call to find out which medication they are asking for. The patients often find dissatisfaction with the answering service because of the information we cannot pass along.
Our communication ethics, influenced by individual and organizational value systems, have cost us some much-needed business (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 115). At one point in time, the organization answered the phones of two competing towing companies. Company A was a small operation servicing a very small area. Company B was a large outfit with several garages across the state. Owner A, fearful of the competition from Company B, frequently called into the office to ask about the jobs for which we had called Company B to his area. When we refused to answer his inquiries, he would respond with friendly understanding, until his own business began to suffer from the competition of Company B. Owner A discontinued his service bitterly.
The organization also has a strict policy about not releasing employee evaluations to outside companies in the reference process. Some time ago, I applied at another company who sent a form that very closely resembled an employee evaluation such as the ones used by my company. My bosses refused to complete the form, and I could not complete the application process without it. I did not get the job, which would have been double my current salary. While I appreciate this policy in principle, it created a major hardship for me.
At times, even the culture of the organization can get in the way of effective communication. The way the mood of the place, the degree of formality, and the way routines are established can have a bearing on the effect of communication. In my organization, each individual has to take responsibility to be sure that the message s/he wanted to communicate is getting through in the way s/he meant it.
Our organization is very “laid back” in culture. Sometimes, this ideal can give way to forgetfulness. For some time, the owners had us place “Request Off” slips in a locked cabinet where only they had access to them. On more than one occasion, one or both of the owners forgot to check that cabinet before making out a schedule. This caused a hardship for me because I had a number of slips in the cabinet for specific purposes relating to my son. It was only when I complained that the cabinet was checked and the slips found. The schedule had to be rearranged at the last minute because I simply could not work the shifts for which I had been scheduled. That rearranging then caused a hardship for the workers who had to cover the shifts I could not work.
These “Request Off” slips are the only formal internal communication we use in the organization. Internal communication on any other subject is done face-to-face or via Post-It note. Even the schedule itself, in the event of a last minute appointment or emergency, is done very informally. The employees have the option to rearrange the schedule themselves by switching shifts. This can become a hardship to the owners if the switched shifts do not match up. Sometimes, it can create the necessity for “overtime,” which is paid at “time and a half,” and that means an unplanned expenditure. Such a small company has to plan each expenditure carefully, so it really is important that the employees either match shifts exactly, or clear any “overtime” with one of the owners.
Clearing the schedule change is merely a matter of picking up the phone. The organization is very much like a family, and rearranging the schedule is equally like arranging for a babysitter at home. The organization is very informal and homey in that respect. The “homeyness” can make it difficult to stick to a particular routine. There are the given constants, of course. The clients will check in in the morning, check out and back in for lunch, and check out at the end of the day. Other than those, each day is very different, much like a day at home. The comfort level of such a homey establishment makes it possible for things to be forgotten. I remember a time or two when either I or the other night shift person completely forgot to do the “on call” schedule. This caused difficulty for the second shift people who actually had to contact the “on call” people.
Clampitt, DeKoch, and Cashman (2000) identify providing a proper point of identity as a characteristic of an effective communication strategy (cited in Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 344). We all seek to have our own identities. One would think that in such a small organization, identity would be easy to establish. Regardless, there are those who will resort to bending the truth in order to portray an identity.
The coworker who was the very first employee and worked very closely with the owners at the beginning of the business seems to feel that she should have some authority over others. She has not been given any more authority than the rest of us; still she feels she needs to invent herself as a supervisor. She demands additional wages for training new employees, even though we all pitch in when there is a new person to be trained. She also portrays herself to clients as the “office manager” when she has never been given such a title. This can create hardship and confusion when the clients call in and want to speak only with the “office manager,” when, in fact, there is none.
Our personal identities can, at times, become barriers to effective communication. The only male coworker has asserted himself as the computer guru of the organization. When I first started at the organization, this created complications between the owners and me when I attempted to explain some new technological concept to them. They felt that he was the only person qualified to train them on how to use this technology. As time went by, I was able to prove that I knew nearly as much as he did about the technology system used in the office. Thankfully, today, I am regarded as his backup, as I have established an identity as such. I am the only one who can understand some of the computer jargon he uses to explain what to do in the event the system “goes down.”
The identity of the organization itself is one of some deception. While we outwardly portray the business as an efficiently run organization, it is obvious from an internal perspective that there is much work to be done. I have expressed a number of ideas that could improve upon the efficiency of the business, but, as a “newer” member of the organization, I am shot down. So intent are the owners at viewing the business as they wish the clients to view it, they refuse to see the areas I suggest that could use improvement. At times, I am cut off without even a chance to explain my suggestions.
A final barrier to effective communication can be the way an organization manages conflict. While we are a small organization with few employees, we have several different ways of managing conflict. Shockley-Zalabak (2009) observes conflict tactics are used for conflict “escalation, reduction, maintenance at the present level, or avoidance” (p. 309). These tactics are a result of the predispositions each of us has toward conflict. One owner prefers to ignore it; one would rather join in. I, myself, prefer to avoid it altogether. Sometimes that means swallowing my opinions for the sake of comfort.
In the case I mentioned of the coworker who considers herself the “office manager,” the other employees have complained to one owner a number of times. Since this person is the “daughter-in-law” of the other owner, the rest of us feel it would do no good to complain to her. The owner we do complain to ignores the fact, and she insists that the rest of us do the same. Using her “avoidance” predisposition, she maintains the conflict at the current level, however, barring the truth from the clients we serve (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 303).
The other owner, in the case of an argument, will take a side and defend it viciously. She uses a “competition” orientation and prefers to escalate the issue (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 307). Usually, the side she takes is that of her "daughter-in-law”. Every year there is a weeklong fair in the town where they live. Since it is not far, I myself enjoy visiting it. Last year, the “daughter-in-law” insisted she had to have her vacation during that week, causing the rest of the employees to have less time off. I complained to the other owner, who ignored the issue. I decided to stick my neck out and complain to the “mother-in-law owner.”
I insisted it was not fair that the coworker take off the entire week of the fair, leaving the rest of us little time to enjoy it. To my surprise and detriment, the “mother-in-law” owner defended the coworker. She told me I was not the one who decided when vacations could be taken, and it was my responsibility to work the shifts to which I was assigned. She would hear no more. Since then, I feel as if I am walking on glass whenever I have to speak to her about a job-related conflict.
I prefer not to get involved in conflict, but when I am forced, I will simply agree with the majority, even if such agreement is against my personal beliefs. I avoid the conflict at all costs. According to Shockley-Zalabak (2009), I am exhibiting a preference for “accommodation” while attempting to avoid conflict (p. 308). Such a case was the time we had a white woman working for us who was married to a black man. The other workers appeared to dislike this fact. The one male worker even went so far as to use the “N” word when that particular coworker was not within hearing distance. As a result, they began to find fault with her work. I will admit that I found a few errors, but no more than I found with anyone else’s work. We all make mistakes. I feared that, had I stood up for her, I, too, would have been ousted, and I desperately needed the job. When the time came to fire her based on this “faulty” work, I half-heartedly went along with the majority to avoid the conflict.
The communication barriers I have described are unconventional. Erven (n.d.) cites such barriers as stereotyping, language, and interruptions (pp. 3-5). I argue that there is a variety of ways in which communication can be barred. Sometimes, these barriers cause a great deal of hardship for the people involved. In my particular working environment, the chance of fixing these barriers is slim. The owners come from a time when employee input was considered unnecessary. What does it say about me that I would continue working for a place where they are uninterested in changing their communication methods for more effective communication? I hope that it says that I need the job right now.
References
Bolarinwa, J., & Olorunfemi, D.. (2009). Organizational communication for organizational climate and quality service in academic libraries. Library Philosophy and Practice,1-5. Retrieved January 27, 2010, from ProQuest Central.
Erven, B. L. (n.d.). Overcoming barriers to communication. Retrieved January 28, 2010 from Ohio State University
Shockley-Zalabak, P. (2009). Fundamentals of organizational communication. Boston