Workplace Communicationin Relation to Change

Managerial CommunicationDevin Simmons

Table of Contents:

Introduction & Overview……………………………………………………………..

Body of Paragraph……………………………………………………………………Formal Channels of Communication in Reducing Resistance to Change…… Face-to-Face Communication……………………………………………………….Making Employees More Confident…………………………………………………Emphasizing the Positive………………………………………………………………Using Non-Verbal Communication………………………………………………….Corporate Culture as a Tool in Overcoming Employee Resistance to

Change…Building a Supportive Environment……………………………………………………Eliminating Insecurity……………………………………………………………………Diffusing the Culture……………………………………………………………………..The Grapevine as a Means of Eliminating Resistance to

Change………………….Change Agents……………………………………………………………………………Controlling Rumors………………………………………………………………………Providing a Continuous Supply of Feedback…………………………………………The Importance of Post-Change Measures……………………………………………..

Key Learnings…………………………………………………………………………….

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….

References………………………………………………………………………………..

Introduction/Overview:

"Virtually every aspect of life is affected at least

indirectly by some type of organization" (Kreitner, 2004).

Organizations today are going through constant change

brought about by competition, economics, business innovation

and a realization that remaining stagnant may mean

organizational death. "Effective business communication is

the lifeblood of every organization" (Murphy et al., 1997,

p.4). It has been said that communication is the backbone of

business, and those who possess such an ability to

communicate effectively are those most likely to succeed in

competitive business environments. But before this issue can

be tackled, the term first must be defined: what exactly is

communication? According to Robbins (2003), communication is

the process of transferring and subsequently understanding

meaning. A study by Updegraff (2003) proved that efficient

communication exhibits properties, which decrease conflicts,

augment efficiency as well as allow firms to operate in a

more coherent fashion.

The 1970s have been seen as a decade in which

communication was lacking (Wright, 2001) especially between

labor unions and corporations, executives and employees, and

different races. But today, we are overwhelmed with an

abundance of information, once again making effective

communication practically impossible. Thus businesses must

strive to implement a proper communication culture within

their organizational framework, as it is a vital component,

which will ensure proper functioning.

It is evident that communication is fundamental in

connection with any process in an organization. This is

especially true in situations demanding organizational

change. A deep resistance by employees usually follows any

kind of change within an organization, as it is perceived as

something inherently new and undefined. Employee resistance

to change is one of the most difficult aspects of dealing

with reform in a business. This paper will examine the

correlation between communication and any form of change

occurring in an organization. This paper argues that

effective communication is the single most efficient tool

organizations have in overcoming employee resistance to

change during periods of transition.

Body

Formal Channels of Communication in Reducing Resistance to Change:

In order to facilitate the transition from one

environment to another during periods of change, leaders

must take the time to openly discuss the change and any

matters relating to it with employees. The managers must

ensure to outline all the aspects concerning the change,

both the positive ones and the negative ones, which will

make an impact on the working environment of the company.

This is a crucial step in the communication process and is

the first step which should be implemented: “small

communication - informal, face-to-face conversations between

managers and their employees, is a far more powerful way of

executing change than big communication - brochures, Web

pages, e-mails" (Larkin, 2005, p.4).

Face-to-Face Communication:

Since the change begins with the managers, these people

must be there to council, support and guide their employees

through such difficult transitional periods. Managers, and

most notably leaders, must make themselves available to

their workforce despite their numerous other

responsibilities and daily tasks. A critical part in

overcoming employee resistance to change is creating

framework where the workers are able to express their

concerns and opinions about the reform. A way, in which this

can be achieved, is to schedule meetings on a periodic basis

(depending on the severity of the reform, these could be

every three months to every week), in which employees and

managers will come together and openly discuss the issues

they are concerned with (Ackley, 1999). These meetings would

most likely be comprised of the distribution of information

regarding the progress of the change, followed by a question

and answer session where employees have the opportunity to

quiz their managers. Through this process, managers will

show that they are as concerned about the change as their

employees are.

Studies prove that the trendiest means of persuading

employees not to resist change is through group meetings and

surveys (Anon, 2005). Based on such open communication a

sense of trust will begin to grow within the organization

through which, Ackley (1999) stresses, and employee

resistance to change will slowly begin to decrease. However,

this process is an ongoing one and managers must not expect

direct results overnight.

Making Employees More Confident:

A second method managers could use to improve the

transition period of the new reform is to improve their

style of communication with workers. Managers must make

their employees understand that they are in fact a valuable

part of the company. Furthermore, Ackley (1999) claims that

employees must be induced to join in the change through

rewards. He argues that the main way to inspire people to

commit to change is for the organization to reward changes

that are made in order to provoke future efforts. Also,

employees must believe that their managers care for them as

human beings, not simply as workers.

As long as employees feel secure that their positions

and former way of life will not be jeopardized by the

change, only then will they begin to view the process as

something beneficial and even necessary; this can also be

explained through job satisfaction.

Emphasizing the Positive:

A means of decreasing employee resistance to change is

to simply emphasize the positive outcomes expected from the

desired change. As Matt Kayhoe of Strategies in Play

mentions, managers must communicate with employees, in

simple language, how exactly the change will impact or

benefit their lives: "…doing this new IT project will allow

us to remain a market leader for this particular product

line, thus allowing us to keep doing what we are doing"

(Maurer, 2013, p.2). This is a crucial aspect in easing the

transition period. Rachel Butler, proprietor of Total

Business Results LLC, also stresses the importance of

explicitly communicating to employees the factors

surrounding the change as well as the importance of the

reform towards the long-term strategy of the business

(Maurer, 2013, p.2). She discusses how managers must clearly

explain what the employees will gain from the change, and an

open and straightforward environment must be created

concerning issues such as competition, finance department,

and sales; as it will lead to support for the reform.

A main element explaining the social phenomenon is that

people are afraid that the change will not be for the

better. Thus, managers must learn how to properly and

convincingly communicate to their employees the direct

benefits that will be gained from the reform. Furthermore,

these benefits must be tangible - that is, managers cannot

simply say, "you're lives will become better from this

change," that leave margin for unrealistic beliefs. People

respond to facts and figures, and so management can provide

information stating that due to the change, productivity

will increase by 15% and therefore employees will receive a

5% increase in their company bonuses.

Using Non-Verbal Communication:

Non-verbal communication is one of the most prominent

aspects, which must be kept in mind during communication.

According to a recent study by Clarke (2006), the substance

matter of messages is made up of only 7% verbal, 38% aural

while 55% is composed of visuals. Non-verbal communication

consists of gestures, facial expressions, posture,

intonation and pitch of voice, as well as the distance

between the sender and the receiver. In order for management

to show that they are in favor of the change and that the

corporation will greatly benefit from it, they must also

appear enthusiastic. The message at Hewlett-Packard is,

"don't tell people, show them" under change environments

(Matson, 1995, p.24).

Also, no one would be convinced of the benefits of the

change if managers walked around looking depressed, slouched

in posture, speaking with a soft and trembling voice while

explaining the advantages of the new changes in the

organization; employees will have a difficult time getting

excited about something if the presenter isn’t enthusiastic.

According to studies, when the verbal message differs from

the non-verbal one, the receiver will most likely rely on

the facial expressions and gestures of the sender rather

than the language (Maguire, 2012). In such cases, from the

difference between the words and the actions, it is obvious

that the managers are not speaking the truth and others

wouldn’t be inspired to actively join in the reforms.

Corporate Culture as a Tool in Overcoming Employee Resistance to Change:

A strong and solid corporate culture is fundamental in

managing change successfully. The corporate culture of an

organization is something, which is unique in every

business, and is thus impossible to simulate. Such a culture

is composed of the collective beliefs, attitudes and values

of the workforce, and it is fostered through the

communications and interactions between members of the

organization. John Kotter contends that organizational

change endeavors sometimes fail due to the failure to

communicate the company's vision of change effectively, as

well as forgetting to "anchor changes firmly in the

corporate culture" (Phalpher, 1999, p. 50). In John Kotter’s

“Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail,” he

designed an 8-step model to help leaders transform

organizations in crisis: (Hattersley & McJannet, p. 149).

(tie575changemodel)

Building a Supportive Environment:

As long as employees feel they are in a supportive and

compassionate environment they will be less resistant to

change, as they will have faith in the proper functioning of

their system. A way to achieve this is to build a caring and

accommodating corporate culture within the organization.

Communication of these values and attitudes is arguably the

main tool in developing and expanding such a culture

throughout the organization.

Eliminating Insecurity:

It is of the utmost importance to eliminate any and all

trances of insecurity within an organization during a period

of change. As Ackley (1999) claims, "Uncertainty is the

killer of workplace change." (p.1). This is an

extraordinarily difficult feat to achieve, and nearly all

organizations fail during such attempts. However, if a

corporation can achieve this then it is fairly simple to

prevent employee resistance to change. Insecurity is a main

feature of organizational reform, since no one is certain

about anything under such conditions. Saunders (1999)

contends that written communication in the form of drawn

pictures on a whiteboard, or slides on an overhead projector

will ease employee resistance to changes. These forms of

communication will aid managers in presenting to employees a

more simplified version of the changes that will be taking

place in the organization. Simple is equated with easy.

Thus, once employees can properly understand what is going

on they will feel more at ease with the changes. Managers at

Sears, Roebuck & Co., used this technique when reengineering

their organizational processes (Saunders, 1999). This

corporation used "learning maps" in small team conferences

that specifically showed that the company needed to change

in this direction in order to remain competitive.

In order to decrease (or even eliminate) levels of

insecurity, management must emphasize strong cultural values

within the business. This is achieved by fostering strong

team relationships between members of all levels of the

organization. Management must communicate with their

employees in order to build such relationships under the

corporate culture.

Diffusing the Culture:

Once a strong and supportive corporate culture is

created, management must find ways to spread this to every

single layer and point within the organization. The leaders

must ensure that no one is left out of this value-system of

beliefs and attitudes because as the saying goes, "one

rotten apple can ruin the bunch". It only takes one person

who is weary and suspicious of the changes to reinstate the

insecurity and fear of reform. So once the corporate culture

(which views changes positively) is in place, the manager's

job continues in trying to keep the culture progress in that

direction.

The Grapevine as a Means of Eliminating Resistance to Change:

Apart from formal communication channels, there are

also informal ones within every organization. The informal

channels are most commonly known as the grapevine. These

channels are extremely powerful within every organization,

and management needs to learn how to deal with them in order

to utilize them to their advantage. Managers must infiltrate

the informal structures, or culture, of the organization in

order to reduce employee resistance to change from the

inside.

Change Agents:

These agents are arguably the most effective means of

transforming employee attitudes about change. A change agent

is a term given to a member of an organization (there is no

formal position of a change agent; it could be a top

executive, a middle manager or even an employee) who is pro-

change and will convince the other more skeptical workers of

the benefits of this. However, it is usually a task handed

to top management as they possess the skills necessary to

articulately communicate with employees, and are more able

to help organizations deal with the process of reform.

Change agents are very useful, as they appear to be

part of the community of the organization and share the same

views. However, these agents very subtly act on the workers

and slowly but surely alter their perceptions of the change.

These change agents can alter even the most insecure, afraid

and uncertain employees into supporters of change. An

electric wire hired Mike Hugos, a change agent, and cable

and electric communications systems company in order to

change the perceptions of their sales personnel (Hugos,

2005). The sales department believed that they needed a

large IT budget in order to reform some of the processes of

the company, but the CEO would not allow this. So Hugos was

hired to change their ideas and make them drop their

demands. Hugos managed to achieve this through winning their

trust: he put himself in their place, and although not

qualified, tried to do their job for a period of time.

Through this the workers began to respect him, and

eventually accept his ideas for changes.

Controlling Rumors:

Rumors are one of the most damaging aspects of informal

communication. However, "Literature from a range of

disciplines…suggests that gossip is an enduring and constant

feature of social and organizational life" (Waddington,

2005, p.). The characteristics of such communication, is

that it is extremely difficult to control by management.

Furthermore, employees see it as a very reliable source of

information, as it is their main supply of information of

the on-goings of their company. False rumors may initiate

about a certain change in the company's environment, and

this may further strengthen employee resistance to change.

Many employees rely on gossip and rumors as a main pool

of information. But, it is harder to survive the damage

created by rumors than to stop them before they begin, thus

is advisable that rapid action is taken by management to

terminate rumors (Hoover, 2005). In a worse case scenario,

the reputation of the corporation can be seriously harmed

due to gossip leading to a loss of revenue and even lay-

offs.

However, it is easy to say that gossip must be

prevented, but it is harder to put this into action. So

modern managers have developed a new perspective: "if you

can't beat it, join it". At a corporation called Owens-

Corning, management created an innovative way of ceasing

rumors: they played videos in the cafeteria of the company,

which provided employees with facts and eliminated rumors.

An employee said, "If you ate, you heard it. Literally the

tapes gave employees facts, not false rumors, to chew on"

(Saunders, 1999, p.3). Another company gave out cassette

tapes to its employees that contained explanations of top

management as to why the current changes in the organization

are necessary (Saunders, 1999).

Providing a Continuous Supply of Feedback:

It is fairly easy to initiate changes in an environment

and once they are complete to forget about employee feelings

on the matter. In such cases, the change process will most

likely be reversed and resistance will crop up again in the

form of disobedience and rowdiness. This ultimately reduces

the advantages of the change and damages the corporate

culture. Thus, managers must remember to provide a

continuous flow of feedback for a certain period after the

changes are implemented. Once this chain of information is

broken, destructive rumors may once again arise.

For a firm such as Honeywell Aerospace, they strongly

believe in keeping communications up even when this is

impossible in person. Due to changes in the company

structure, sales personnel are constantly traveling and are

not available in the company headquarters to disseminate

information. Thus, the company has made an innovative change

in their structure to allow such a feedback mechanism: they

utilize virtual technology instead face-to-face meetings

(Wilson and McGovern, 2009).

The Importance of Post-Change Measures:

After the necessary changes have been implemented into

the structure of the organization, management must

continuously provide feedback to organizations through a

mechanism that informs them of the progress of the

implemented change. This post-change course of action is

imperative as it stabilizes the reforms and makes them

permanent. As Maurer (2013) argues, in most cases changes

are reversed within months or years after implementation,

and no actual gains are ever achieved. Les Young, human

resources professional, recommends displaying obvious signs

of success every four to six months after a reform is

implemented (Maurer, 2013). In this way, employees will be

convinced of the direct benefits of the change and will

continue to work towards this change. However, he further

stresses that such displays of victory must be followed by a

statement by management reminding workers that these

achievements are only a small part of the process, and no

one should become so confident as to slow the process of

transition down.

After the implementation of the changes in the

organization, management must continue to implement

structures or programs which sustain employee enthusiasm

about the change. According to studies surveying 74

organizations, over three-quarters had successfully

implemented employee feedback mechanisms such as executive

meetings, classified e-mail addresses, intranet forums and

morning coffee discussions (Anon, 2005). These feedback

mechanisms led to a continuum of the enthusiasm for the

changes, as employees could visibly see the positive results

of the reforms. Moreover, Mcgovern (2002) argues that

employee enthusiasm will be encouraged when the positive

results of change are celebrated.

When BP and Amoco merged in 1998, both companies

experienced underlying changes. However, after the merger

employee resistance decreased significantly as BP hired

Gensler Consulting to conduct post-change surveys every six

month after the change (Ingalls, 2007).

Key Learnings:

1. Before management jumps into defining the vision and

long-term target, first get management to reach a fully

aligned understanding. Almost always when transition fails

it is not because the management vision is bad/not

compelling but because there is lacking common management

understanding on present situation/context/key

issues/priorities/organizational mindset.

2. Always have a Top-Down & Bottom-Up approach; both are

useful, but its best to tackle an issue with two solutions

just in case one doesn’t work as well.

3. Top management is the most important when communicating

change because they are the leaders who express the plan and

motivate employees, but middle management makes the

difference; if the team managers and supervisors buy into

the change, it will get done.

4. Communication is key! There is no such thing as over

communication.

5. This research has opened my eyes to how important

feedback is in management. I had an understanding that it

was useful, but it has the potential to change an employee’s

work ethic tremendously.

6. Overall, I knew the role of a CEO or VP was far from

simple, but I had no idea they had so much that weighs in on

their actions and decisions.

Conclusion:

Communication is the most important tool management has in

overcoming employee resistance to change. Yet, the effect of

an improved culture towards change within an organization is

an ongoing process whose benefits cannot be observed

overnight (Croft and Cochrane, 2005). Management must be

careful not to force changes on their workers, but must

guide them slowly into the transition.

According to the president of a U.S. training and consulting

company that helps individuals improve performance through

communications, "If communication isn't working, nothing

else will" (Taylor, 1998, p.26). It is thus highly

beneficial for companies to use communication as a main tool

for supporting the members of the organization during

transitional phases. Yet despite all of the examples in this

paper and the solutions provided in dealing effectively with

change, it must be noted that there is no one right answer.

Which policies and tactics to adopt when dealing with

resistance to change vary from situation to situation

(Sinickas, 2002). Thus, an organization must first analyze

its environment and the specific communication challenge it

will be dealing with. Only then can communications

strategies be designed to overcome employee resistance to

change.

References:

Anon. (2005) You Can't Beat Face-to-Face Communication. Management Issues News[online]. Available from: http://www.management-issues.com

Hathaway, P. (1999) Powerful Communication Skills that Get Results! The Change Agent[online]. Available from: http://www.thechangeagent.com/communication.html

Maurer, R. (2013) 23 Great Ideas to Help Keep a Change Alive. Beyond Resistance [online].Available from: http://www.beyondresistance.com/htm/popups/sustain_commit2.html

Phalpher, R. (1999) Sustaining Organizational Change. Engineering Dimensions [online].Available from:http://www.peo.on.ca/publifications/Dimensions/marapr9s/manage.pdf

Taylor, K. (1998) Corporate Change: Creating Messages That Motivate. StrategicCommunication Management, 1 (12), p.26

Ackley, D. (1999) Change for the Better - How Communicators Can Make Change Work.Strategic Communication Management

[online]. Available from:http://www.dennisackley.com/pdf/communicating_change.pdf

Croft, L. and Cochrane, N. (2005) Communicating Change Effectively. ManagementServices, 14 (2), p.18

Larkin, P. (2012) Communicating Change. Strategic Communications Management, 9 (3), p.4

Saunders, R. (1999) Communicating Change: A Dozen Tips From the Experts. HarvardManagement Communication Letter, 2 (8), p.1

Waddington (2005)

Clarke, D. (2006) Big Dog, Little Dog. Communication & Leadership [online]. Availablefrom: http://nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/leadcom.html

Hoover, G. (2005) Maintaining Employee Engagement When Communicating DifficultIssues. Communication World, 22 (6), p.25

Maguire, T. (2012) Barriers to Communication - How Things GoWrong. ThePharmaceutical Journal, 268 (3), p.246

Wilson, R. and McGovern, L. (2009) Seeing Change in a New Light. StrategicCommunication Management, 5 (3), p.2

Sinickas, A. (2002) Contradicting Common Sense. Strategic Communication Management, 5(1), p.12

Matson, E. (1995) The People of Hewlett-Packard v. The Past.Fast Company, 1 (3), p. 24

Mcgovern, L. (2002) Communicating Change - Where to Begin? Strategic CommunicationManagement, 4 (1), p.10

Hugos, M. (2005) How to Become a Change Agent. CIO Asia Magazine, 12 (1), p.13

Ingalls, L. (2007) BP Measures for Merger Integration and Culture Change. Tradeline[online]. Available from: http://www.archibus.com/success/pdf/tradeline_bp.pdf

Wikispaces[online]. Available from: http://tie575changemodel.wikispaces.com/Kotter's+8-step+model