Task 1

Communications is important to the survival and existence of humans as well as to a company.

It is a practice of producing and communicating thoughts, news, opinions, realities and
emotional state, among the employee to reach a common understanding. Communication is
crucial to the leading purpose of management. A manager may be greatly competent and
trained but if he does not acquire good communication skills, all his ability becomes inapt. A
manager must communicate his directions effectively to the subordinates to get the work done
from them properly.

Communication is important to companies as it’s how they organize programs and accomplish
objectives. Communication is defined in Webster’s dictionary as a development by which info is
switched between people through a mutual system of signs, symbols, or performance. It is
well-known that 50% to 90% of a manager’s time is used to communicate. In most
organization setting, a miscommunication is a frustration as it can distrupt workflow by
instigating procrastinates and personal conflict. But, in some job grounds, like functional
accommodations and airplane rings, interaction can be a subject of life and death. The bottom
line is that effective communication is not just about being able to more perfectly and succinctly
offer communication and beliefs. It is also not just about alleviating disagreement or initiating a
more affirmative team atmosphere. Communication is fundamental to all department in any
organization; be it sales, customer relationships, team development, organization culture,
employee commitment and buy-in, and advanced assumptions.

The Communication Process

Communication provides three main roles within a company, including direction, communication
of information, and communicating feelings and emotions. All these tasks are essential to a
productive company. The matching of work within a company encourage the employee to work
toward the same goals and objective of the company. Transferring information is a critical part
of this activity. Communicating feelings and emotions connect groups and unifies community in
times of festivity and calamity. Effective communication aids people understand issues, create
understanding with associates, and achieve harmony.

1
 Figure 1: Communication Process

The following steps are involved in communication process in my organization:

1. Sender or communicator arrange the message carefully. He is the starting point where
message is created. It is he who leads the communication activity.

2. The message is to be coded figuratively which is to be delivered. This message is the sense
came into the attention of sender which he sought to communicate.

3. The message is to be conveyed through a process of communication the preference of which

is to be created. The message may be transferred verbally face to face, through messenger,
through air or a printed note in the form of order, memo, or leaflet. It is up to sender to create
suitable option.

4. Mode of communication involve phone, internet, through messenger, post, fax, and e-mail.
The selection of mode of communication again differs on the sender.

5. Recipient or transmiter is a person for whom message was sent by the source or speaker. In
my organization, receiver after getting the message he knows it in appropriate perception then
only the intention of message will be contended.

6. The receiver after interpreting the message in my company must act or take action as per
guidelines contained in the message.

2
7. The last step in my organization for the communication process to take place is to take
feedback. The feedback requires the sender should recognize whether the receiver has taken
the message and implied it. The validation concerning this is feedback. The positive feedback is
showing an effective communication. With feedback the communication activity is done.

In my company, a sender, such as a manager, colleague, or client, originates the message with
a thought. For example, my manager thought could be: “Get more printer toner holders!” My
colleagues or subordinate translates the message, interpreting the idea into actions. My
manager may converse this thinking by verbalizing, “Hey you peoples, let’s request more
printer toner units.” The channel of this determined message may be verbal words, transcribed
words, or even notices. The receiver, whom could be my colleague is the individual who takes
the message. The receiver interprets the message by giving implication to the message.

Sometimes, in my company, the meaning that the receiver delegates may not be the meaning
that the sender planned, because of circumstances such as noise. Noise is whatever that affects
with or twists the message being convertes. Noise can be exterior in the background such as
interruptions or it can be inside the receiver. For example, the receiver may be awfully anxious
and incapable to give attention to the message. Noise can still occur in the sender as the
sender may be reluctant to take the time to communicate a precise message, or the terms that
are selected can be confusing and prone to misconception.

In my company, there is two form of communication, formal and informal communication.

Formal communication channel in my company is an outcome from the formal organisation
arrangement. Formal communication is one where the message goes through the formal
channel laid down by my organisation. It is the allowed channel through which an information
should pass. If ‘A’ needs to give certain information controlling some directions to ‘£’ and
between A and £ are 8, C and who form the official chain of command, then that information
takes a path as shown below.

A—> B——> C—–> D——-> E

This formal communication makes sure of organized flow of news. There is efficient and precise
flow of news to its purpose is guaranteed under this structure of interaction. It allows the line of
power to have the information of data as it passes through them.

3
The communication which is free from all procedures and regulations is informal
communication. Informal communication takes place in my organization through informal
interactions among my colleague. The informal communication harmonises with the formal
communication system in my company. Informal communication that happens in my
organization chooses in the form of notes, instructions, recommendations, casual talks and
feedbacks. This type of informal communication is also recognized as ‘grapevine-type of
communication’. The executives my company cannot influence or normalise this type of
communication system. It causes from the social interactions settled among my colleagues at
work in my company.

Having said that, human being a social species, this informal communication has to be there.
They form groups and talk over managerial stuffs among themselves and prompt their feelings
and observation upon employed, some communicate their negative responses as well. Informal
communication has definite benefits and hence the supervisors assist this type of
communication system. Some individuals disapprove informal communication by stating that it
is wrong and deceiving but it is not so always. It may be inadequate which causes in
misinterpretation. It rather supports the formal communication system by fulfilling the current
gap in formal communication process.

In my organization, informal communication takes place without comprehending the formal

lines of communication process. Such type of communication generally takes place among the
employees to discuss their opinions and to please their social desires. For example, in my
company, the staffs always chat about the behaviour of their managers, arguing about some
gossips are some of the paradigms of informal communication process. Such type of
communication disperses very quick and it is very hard to notice the basis of same. At one
point, such communication tips to gossips and thus creates misunderstanding in my company.
However, at times it proves to be very helpful to the managers as the information through
these channels can be spread very rapidly to know the reactions of my other colleagues.

To improve communication systems in my organization, I’ve identified and suggested a few

measures which is applicable. First, my organization need to define their goals and
expectations. Supervisors need to convey positive, possible goals to both groups and
employees, charting accurately what is needed on any given project, and make sure that all
employee are alert of the objectives of the project, the department and the company as a

4
whole. Next, manager need to evidently deliver his message. He needs to make sure that the
message is clear and within reach to my subordinates. To do this it is important that he speaks
normally and respectfully, this is for the message to get across clearly without causing
misunderstanding or insult.

Apart from that, managers in my company need to choose his medium cautiously. Once the
managers generated the message, he need to make sure it’s conveyed in the best possible
arrangement. While face-to-face communication medium is by far the best way to build faith
with my fellow employees, it is not always a choice. He needs to take time to decide whether
communication conveyed in a written copy that would work better than an email or if a typical
memo will suit. In order to improve the communication in my company, managers also need to
keep everyone participate. He needs to guarantee that lines of interaction are kept open at all
times to all employee. He can do this by dynamically seek and inspire progress reports and
project apprises. This is exceptionally significant when dealing with reserved employee in my
organization. Lastly, my manager can attend and show understanding to me and my other
colleagues. As communication is a two-way process and no organization or person will last long
if it does not attend and urge discussion with the other party. Listening to employee means that
the manager exhibits veneration and allows them to realise about any outstanding problems
that may need to tackle as an employer.

Effective communication in the office can improve relationship, commitment and the worker
knowledge. In the workplace, good communication is not just about moderating problems even
though it is a valuable benefit of interacting successfully. Good effective communication is also
a significant factor in client relationships, profitability, team effectiveness, and employee
engagement. Here is the summary of four strategies to help. Effective communication in the
organization create strong group connections, equipped healthy supervisors and employee
teamwork and assist the company to move toward its goals and objectives. Yet in order to
create the environment for effective communication, both at the individual side or between
branches, it can be perplexing. Internal obstacles, unethical work behaviours and a lack of clear
anticipations can all add to communications problems. Encouraging effective communication in
company pays extras across the organization. From improved cross-team collaboration to solid
manager and employee relations, taking a few key steps to develop communications
recuperates efficiency, partnership and employee commitment. Human resource managers can
deliberately drive this crucial area to have an important positive influence on their organization.

5
Task 2

Organizational conflict or otherwise known as workplace conflict, is called as the state of

difference or misinterpretation, occasioning from the actual or alleged disagreement of desires,
opinions, capitals and correlation between the employee of any organization. At the workplace,
whenever, two or more persons mingle, conflict happens when ideas with respect to any task or
decision are in inconsistency. In simple terms, organizational conflict indicates to the outcome
of human contact, that happens when one member of the company perceives that his or her
objectives, standards or approach are mismatched, with those of other associates of the
organization. The inharmoniousness in judgements can come into being, within an associate,
between two groups, or between clusters of the organization.

A common conflict that happened in my company known as task conflict, often implicates
particular issues related to my other colleagues work tasks and can include arguments about
how to divide up assets, arguments of views on measures and strategies, handling
opportunities at work, and decisions and interpretation of realities. Of all of these factors of
conflict mentioned here, task conflict may seem to be the simplest to determine. But task
conflict often goes out to have hidden roots and more convolution that it seems to have at first
glance. For example, my colleagues who are quarrelling about which one of them should go to
an out-of-town discussion may have a greater conflict based on a point of competition.

Task conflict often give advantages from the interference of an organization’s heads. Operating
as de facto intermediaries, leaders can focus on recognising the deeper goods of causing
parties’ opinions. This can be done through active attention, which includes asking questions,
recapping back what the manager hear to confirm his understanding, and asking even deeper
inquiries intended at exploring for deeper apprehensions. Manager can try to involve with both
parties in a joint problem-solving project in which they innovate possible ways. When both of
the parties acquire the solutions together, rather than having an upshot forced on them, they
are more possibly to stand by the understanding and get along better in the future.

6
In my company, there is always a personality clashes between managers and my colleagues
which can cause a range of personal conflicts to happen. My colleagues may feel oppressed or
pressured by more authoritarian leaders, or may notice a lack of direction from more hands-off
leaders. Managers with type-A characters may set objectives that are too single-minded for
their employees, setting them up for disappointment and foreseeable encounter. To handle
these personality gaps, first my leaders need to try to acquire a thoughtful between my
supervisor and my colleague so that each of them understands the others' viewpoint in the
situation. Manager must never treat conflict management circumstances as disciplinary
inquiries, as if managers are fundamentally right and workers are essentially wrong; this is a
dependable way to lose good workers. If the two cannot come to an agreement, managers can
place them under the supervision of another supervisor if possible.

There are a number of organizational sources of conflict that I can relate happens in my
company. Those involving to hierarchy and the incapability to undertake disagreeing goods are
quite prevalent. Apart from that, labour or management and supervisor or employee pressures
are increased by power differences. Differences in managerial styles between responsibilities
can be a cause of conflict as well. Also, there can be work style arguments, seniority/juniority
and pay paroty conflict. Conflict can result from over resource allotment, the dissemination of
responsibilities, workload and advantages, different levels of acceptance for risk taking, and
varying opinions on responsibility. In addition, conflict can happen where there are observed or
actual changes in treatment between departments or groups of workers. A thorough review of
the company is proposed for such causes of conflict. Again assessments, meetings and focus
groups can help disclose these sources of conflict. Furthermore, organizational sources of
conflict can be anticipated based upon best habits from similar organizations. All company
experience such conflict. Much can be understood from the programs of similar company who
have made a study of this cause of conflict.

Therefore, the effective management of workplace conflict involves a tolerant of the

environment and causes of conflict in the organization. Conflict happens when there is an

7
assessment of ill-assorted attentions between workplace members. This should be renowned
from differences. Arguments are simply a by-product of conflict. They are the external
expression of conflict. Common differences come in the form of formal court situations,
objections, advices, pressures and counter threats. Conflict can happen without argument, but
argument do not exist without conflict. Conflict, however, might not be so undoubtedly
observed. Much conflict happens in every workplace without turn into arguments.

2562 words

References

Agarwal SD, Bennett WL, Johnson CN, Walker S. 2014. A model of crowd enabled organization:
theory and methods for understanding the role of twitter in the occupy protests. Int. J.
Commun. 8:646–72

Ashcraft KL. 2005. Feminist organizational communication studies: engaging gender in public
and private.

Ashcraft KL. 2014. Feminist theory. See Putnam & Mumby 2014, pp. 127–50

Askay DA, Gossett L. 2015. Concealing communities within the crowd. Manag. Commun. Q.
29:616–41

Atouba Y, Shumate M. 2010. Interorganizational networking patterns among development

organizations. J. Commun. 60:293–317

Bailard C.S. 2012. A field experiment on the Internet’s effect in an African election: savvier
citizens, disaffected voters, or both? J. Commun. 62:330–44

Barbour JB, Jacocks CW, Wesner KJ. 2013. The message design logics of organizational change.
Commun. Monogr. 8:354–78

Barrett AK. 2014. Breaking boundaries: temporality and work–life practices in hospital
organizations. W. J. Commun. 78:441–61

Bean H, Lemon L, O’Connell A. 2013. Organizational rhetoric, materiality, and the shape of
organizational democracy. S. Commun. J. 78:256–73

Beck SJ, Gronewold K, Western K. 2012. Intergroup argumentation in city government decision
making: the Wal-Mart dilemma. Small Gr. Res. 43:587–612

8
Berkelaar BL. 2014. Cybervetting, online information, and personnel selection: new
transparency expectations and the emergence of a digital social contract. Manag. Commun. Q.
28:479–506

Bisel RS, Kramer MW. 2014. Denying what workers believe are unethical workplace requests:
Do workers use moral, operational, or policy justifications publicly? Manag. Commun. Q.
28:111–29

Bisel RS, Messersmith AS, Kelley KM. 2012. Supervisors-subordinate communication:

hierarchical mum effect meets organizational learning. Int. J. Bus. Commun. 49:128–47

Bonito JA, Ruppel E K, Saul JE, Leischow SJ. 2013. Assessing the preconditions for
communication influence on decision making: the North American Quitline Consortium. Health
Commun. 28:248 259

Colin R, Omilion-Hodges L. 2013. The effect of leader-member exchange differentiation within

work units on coworker exchange and organizational citizenship behaviors. Comm. Res. Rep.
30:313–22

Collier MH. 2015. Partnering for antipoverty praxis in CirclesR USA: applications of critical
dialogic reflexivity. J. Int. Intercult. Commun. 8:208–23

Conrad C, Sollitto M. 2017. History of organizational communication. See Scott et al. 2017.

from the human resource professional’s perspective. Qual. Res. Rep. Comm. 14:97–104

Cowan RL, Bochantin JE. 2009. Pregnancy and motherhood on the thin blue line: female police
officers’ perspectives on motherhood in a highly masculinized work environment. Women Lang.
32:22–30

Dailey SL. 2016. I’m new...again: reconceptualizing the socialization process through rotational
programs. Commun. Stud. 67:183–208

Dempsey SE, Barge SE. 2014. Engaged scholarship and democracy. See Putnam & Mumby
2014, pp. 664–88

Doerfel ML, Chewning LV, Lai C-H. 2013. The evolution of networks and the resilience of
interorganizational relationships after disaster. Comm. Monogr. 80:533–59

9
Donnellon A. 1996. Team Talk: The Power of Language in Team Dynamics. Boston: Harvard
Bus. Sch. Press

Driskill GW, Meyer J, Mirivel J. 2012. Managing dialectics to make a difference: tension
management in a community-building organization. Comm. Studies 63:243–61

Dunn AM, Scott C, Allen JA, Bonilla D. 2016. Quantity and quality: increasing safety norms
through after action reviews. Hum. Relat. 69:12091232

Dutta MJ, Dutta D. 2013. Multinational going cultural: a postcolonial deconstruction of cultural
intelligence. J. Int. Intercult. Commun. 6:241–58

Eisenberg EM, Johnson Z, Pieterson W. 2015. Leveraging social networks for strategic success.
Int. J. Bus. Commun. 52:143–54

Erhardt N, Gibbs J. 2014. The dialectical nature of impression management in knowledge work:
unpacking tensions in media use between managers and subordinates. Manag. Commun. Q.
28:155–86

Kirby EL, Buzzanell PM. 2014. Communicating work-life issues. See Putnam & Mumby 2014, pp.
351–73

Leonardi PM, Rodriguez-Lluesma C. 2013. Occupational stereotypes, perceived status

differences, and intercultural communication in global organizations. Commun. Monogr.
80:478–502

Maglio M, Scott C, Davis AL, Taylor JA. 2016. Situational pressures that influence firefighters
decision making about personal protective equipment: a qualitative analysis. Am. J. Health
Behav. 40:555–67

Norander S, Harter LM. 2012. Reflexivity in practice: challenges and potentials of transnational
organizing. Manag. Commun. Q. 26:74–105

O’Connor A, Paskewitz EA, Jorgenson DA, Rick JM. 2016. How changes in work structure
influence employees’ perceptions of CSR: millionaire managers and locked-out laborers. J. Appl.
Comm. Res. 44:40–59

Poole MS. 2014. Systems theory. See Putnam & Mumby 2014, pp. 49–74

10
Putnam LL, Mumby DK, eds. 2014. The Sage Handbook of Organizational Communication:
Advances in Theory, Research, and Methods. Los Angeles: Sage. 3rd ed.

Rivera K.D. 2015. Emotional taint: making sense of emotional dirty work at the U.S. Border
Patrol. Manag. Commun. Q. 29:198–228

Scott CR, Lewis L, Barker JR, Keyton J, Kuhn T, Turner PK, eds. 2017. The International
Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication, Vols. 1–4. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. In press

Scott CW, Trethewey AC. 2008. Organizational discourse and the appraisal of occupational
hazards. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 36:297–317

Scott ME. 2013. “Communicate through the roof ”: a case study analysis of the communicative
rules and resources of an effective global virtual team. Commun. Q. 61:301–18

Seibold DR, Hollingshead AB, Yoon K. 2014. Embedded teams and embedding organizations.
See Putnam & Mumby 2014, pp. 327–49

Sheer V. 2012. Supervisors’ use of influence tactics for extrarole tasks: perceptions by ingroup
versus outgroup members in organizations in Hong Kong. S. Commun. J. 77:143–62

Shumate M, Contractor NS. 2014. Emergence of multidimensional social networks. See Putnam

Waldron VR. 2012. Communicating Emotion at Work. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press

Walker KL, Stohl C. 2012. Communicating in a collaborating group: a longitudinal network

analysis.Commun. Monographs 79:448–74

Weber MS, Kim H. 2015. Virtuality, technology use, and engagement within organizations. J.
Appl. Commun. Res. 43:385–407

Wellman N, Mayer DM, Ong M, DeRue DS. 2016. When are do-gooders treated badly?
Legitimate power, role expectations, and reactions to moral objection in organizations. J. Appl.
Psychol. 101:793–814

Williams EA, Connaughton SL. 2012. Expressions of identifications: the nature of talk and
identity tensions among organizational members in a struggling organization. Commun. Stud.
63:457–81

11
Zanin AC, Bisel RS, Adame EN. 2016. Supervisor moral talk contagion and trust-in supervisor:
mitigating the workplace moral mum effect. Manag. Commun. Q. 30:147–63

12