Week Five: Organizational Culture Theory

We now delve deeper into some alternative theories used to explain organizational behavior. Culture is a key metaphor used often in today's world. "Culture," as applied to organizational communication, is "more fluid and capable of explaining behavior that seem[s] to be irrational yet [i]s deeply rooted" (Modaff and DeWine 81). In other words, "culture" encapsulates elements of organizational life that escape classical, humanistic and systems approaches. "[A] culture provides a lens through which its members interpret, interact with, and make sense of reality" (Louis qtd. in Modaff and DeWine 83). It explains how organizational members think, feel, talk and act with relation to the organization(s).

Culture can be thought of in two very distinct ways. The first is as a phenomenon. In this case, "culture is something the organization has" (Smircich qtd. in Modaff and DeWine 85). This means that the culture of an organization changes; it is dependent upon the behaviors, attitudes and practices of its members. However, organizational culture can also be thought of as a root metaphor. This means that culture is "something the organization is" (Smircich qtd. in Modaff and DeWine 87). From this perspective, organizational culture is not so easy to change and often determines how members behave. While it is indisputable that "culture" is something that is shared among members, organizations can have multiple subcultures or countercultures that make up the larger group. This can lead to conflicts and misunderstandings, primarily in the realm of communication.

"The Office" is a great example illustrative of the many conflicting cultures existing in one small work-space.

- JOURNAL 5 -
Post an example of a work-related problem generated by conflicting cultures. Think about the different goals, values and work styles that make up the organzations you join.

The LAP Proposal

A one-page LAP proposal will be do NO LATER THAN February, 22nd.

The proposal must include the following parts:
1. A brief description of the problem you will examine. (2-3 sentences)
2. Why is the problem important to your life? (1 sentence)
3. The theory you will research and apply to your problem.
4. A thesis statement. (1 concise sentence)
5. At least three research questions.
6. A brief description of your communication audit method.
a. Who will you audit and why?
b. How will you conduct your audit? (survey, etc.)
7. At least two possible research outcomes.
8. An annotated bibliography with at least three sources.

Your proposal should be NO LONGER THAN ONE PAGE!
We will complete the all-new LAP contracts in class next week (2/22). The first class workshop will be on March 1st, and your research paper will be due on March 8th.

Here are some sites that should help you as you begin your writing venture!
How to write a bibliography?
How to prepare an annotated biliography?

Week Four: Humanistic and Systems Theory

This week, we investigated alternative ways of thinking about organizational communication. Due to the many flaws of classical theories, human-centered approaches quickly followed. Humanistic theories fall into two broad categories: human relations theory and human resources. The human relations movement developed from a series of industrial experiments known as The Hawthorne Studies (Modaff and DeWine 41). The studies, conducted from 1924 to 1932, indicated that worker output was NOT scientifically related to the work environment. Instead, worker productivity was indirectly derived from social factors (Modaff and DeWine 43). Based on this discovery, humanistic theories began to investigate the many factors that informally controlled the workplace. The most important factor that emerged was the notion of communication. For Chester Barnard, communication signals the level of cooperation present in any organization. If communication is blocked, cooperation is low and vice versa. This thesis relies on the presumption that the relationship between workers and between workers and managers IS the product of the workplace. In contrast, human resources theory posits that the workers are themselves the products of work.

Another alternative generated from problematic classical theories is systems theory. "Systems theory replaces the 'machine' metaphor of classical theory with the metaphor of an 'organisim'" (Modaff and DeWine 65). For a systems theorist, an organization is an organic being, a cell, if you will. It has permeable boundaries, an environment of interrelated organizations and a life-cycle. Similar to a living organism, an organization can be "open" or "closed;" it can learn, and it can create and adapt. Furthermore, in an organic organizational system, data or raw materials are ingested (INPUT), digested (THROUGHPUT) and excreted (OUTPUT). The final product, then, is the system's output.

- JOURNAL 4 -
Apply a humanistic theory from chapter 3 to any episode of "The Office" viewed in class. Think about the ways humanistic theories may go too far in their focus on human relationships and how this might apply to an office workplace.

Week Three: Classical Theories

We began this week with an introduction to the discipline organizational communication. Our text authors, Modaff and DeWine, define organizational communication as "the process of creating, exchanging, interpreting (correctly or incorrectly), and storing messages within a system of human interrelationships" (4). At the core of their definition is the notion of misunderstanding. For Modaff and DeWine, organizational communications, and relationships in general, are characterized by misunderstanding (6). While there are many specific reasons for the misunderstandings that occur in workplaces, schools, governments and other types of organizations, one important commonality is the discrepancy between the organic nature of an organization, or orgnanon, and the machine metaphor used to structure its communication and managment processes.

Chapter two of Organizational Communication: Foundations, Challenges and Misunderstandings outlines the classical theories of organizational communication, all of which derive from the metaphor of the machine (22). The three most influential theorists discussed are Taylor, Fayol and Weber. Although distinct, each theorist holds tightly to a hierarchical communication structure. This means that each of these guys believe that all communication within an organization MUST flow in exact patterns, usually top-down. Below is a chart showing the similarities and differences between the three (Modaff and DeWine 36).




In our class discussion, we already concluded that classical theories do not seem to fit well with today's organizations or with today's increasingly global, diverse world. In the next chapters, we will explore alternatives to the classical approach.

-JOURNAL 3-
Critique the classical approach to organizational communication. Your (brief) critique can focus on a single theory or issue, or can address general communication complications generated by the top-down approach of Taylor, Fayol and Weber. Think about the concept "misunderstanding" as you articulate your crtiticisms. Also, try to use at least one example from your life to illustrate the complexity of organizational communication.

Week Two: The Communications Audit

This week's lesson focused on an introductory overview of the communications audit. A communications audit is an evaluation of any type of communication - the exchange of information or messages. Usually an evaluation, or audit, is conducted to find the source of a problem(s), but audits can also provide overviews to new managers who want to better understand an organization or to investors looking for ways to improve efficiency. Because an audit can have multiple purposes, it is important to begin by clarifying the reason(s) for the audit. There are three primary reasons to conduct a communications audit: 1) to report on what is going on now; 2) to determine the source of a problem; or 3) to improve efficiency or effectiveness. The reason behind an audit is going to impact what research, or data collection, methods are used as well as how the data is presented. Some research methodologies commonly used for communications audits are: 1) a questionnaire or interview; 2) an experiment or test; or 3) an observational report. Oftentimes, a good audit will combine several methodologies to provide a detailed investigation of a single purpose.

Here is a steb-by-step checklist to keep in mind as you design your own communications audit:



One great way of collecting data is by using a flowchart. A flowchart is a schematic, visual representation of a process, in this case the process of communicating a message. Here is a sample flowchart of the State of the Union address:



You probably still have many questions about how to complete a communication audit. Don't worry! We will practice as a class, and you will have several chances to share your audit ideas in class workshops.

Here are a few websites to get you started:
Strategic Communications Audits by Julia Coffman for the Communications Consortium Media Center
Comparison of Communication Audit Questionnaires by Professor W. Robert Sampson, Ph.D. of the University of Wisconsin
Communications Audits Overview by Guidestar
What is a flowchart? from SmartDraw
Flowchart graphics from Enchanted Learning

- JOURNAL 2 -
Now, it's time to practice what you've learned about the communications audit. Add a comment to this posting that describes the flow of any communication. You will have to describe the flow, rather than drawing a chart. Next, critique the flow by noting any problems or miscommunications that occurred.