Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the importance of communication in organizations
managing communication in an organization
importance of communication in organisation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: the importance of communication in organizations
Critical Theory of Communication in Organizations
The critical theory of communication developed by Stanley Deetz was designed to explore ways to insure the organizations’ health while increasing the representation of diverse human interests. He does this first by showing that corporations have become political as well as economic institutions. Deetz then employs advances in communication theory to point out how communication practices within a corporation can distort decision making. Finally, he outlines how workplaces can become more productive and democratic through communication reforms.
Humanists feel that meanings are in people not words. Deetz accepts this but goes another step and wants to know whose meanings are in people. The companies meanings, the CEO’s meanings, the perception the companies give as their meanings, this is what Deetz is looking for. When people use slang in big business, they begin to put corporate values in to play. According to EM Griffin, this theory is critical in that he wants to critique the assumption that “what’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” Furthermore, Deetz feels that most people fall into the norm that is presented to them from corporate America.
Companies in today’s society are appearing more democratic. They appear as more focused on the worker, the consumer, and society than their monetary needs. Is this to say that they are not concerned with money? No. The bottom line for the company is cash. However, the latest strategy is perception. How the company is perceived, makes a huge difference in how society interprets them. This theory will help us understand consent practices in the workplace. Corporations tend to make critical decisions for the public, regardless of if they know or not.
The four criteria Deetz uses to discuss ways that public and corporate decisions can be made are: strategy, consent, involvement, and participation. These four points are how I am going to evaluate his theory.
In the first criteria, strategy, Deetz describes the problem to be managerialism, which he defines as “a kind of systematic logic, a set of routine practices, and ideology”. Managers have one thing on their mind: control. Some employees will conform to the ways of their bosses, however some will reform against them.
Deetz uses an example of stockholder...
... middle of paper ...
...heory that has many truths to it, that most corporate employees would take as a surprise. They do not want to know that this is the reality of their world. What kind of person would want to know that they are being controlled by the people that give them the opportunity to make a living? Most people already realize it. Although most people do not have much of a choice in the matter, I think that most would continue with what they are doing. What is the difference between working at PriceWaterHouseCoopers and Chili’s restaurant, besides the major salary difference. I work at Chili’s, a large corporation with so many rules that you would think I was making more than $2.83 an hour (excluding tips). They dictate the way I communicate to customers, the way I dress and the style of my attire and how I look. They don’t give the impression that work comes before family, but they do expect me to pay them for the meals I eat while at work.
Overall, Stanley Deetz has made many good points in evaluating how a corporation is organized. If only people would break away from the corporation, but this is the way we made it, the way our world is run, and it will never be the same again.
General Motors became a “centralized organization, so decision-making authority is concentrated in the hands of top-level managers, and little authority is delegated to lower levels” (Ferrell et al., 2015, p. 199). Centralized organizations have little upward communication and top-level manager may not be aware of problems and unethical activities. According to Ferrell et al., (2015), it has been noted that “centralized organization may exert influence on their employees because they have a central core of policies and codes of ethical conduct” (p. 201). Conversely, to survive at GM employees praised the CEO intelligence and carried out their orders by keeping a low profile, and never made waves. GM rewarded employees who followed the old traditional ways and those that challenged their thinking lost promotion opportunities or their jobs. However, General Motors experienced conflict between corporate management responsibility and social responsibility. Consequently, General Motors “attempted to implement a new mentality upon its management in a short period of time” (Goussak, Webber, & Ser, 2012, p. 49) by changing the company’s environment, but
It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the only important value is the bottom line, most executives merely give lip service to living and operating their corporations ethically.
The topic I chose to analyze for this week deals with the too-nice boss. As a matter of fact, I perused one source written by Jared Sandberg on February 26, 2008 in The Wall Street Journal titled: “Avoiding conflicts, the too-nice boss makes matters worse” and I read an article about the same topic by Lisa Cullen in the Time published on February 27, 2008 titled: “Help – my boss is too nice.” Cullen mentioned Sandberg’s article and added her opinion to it. In this essay, I will analyze both articles in order to demonstrate synthesis.
In 2007, famed psychologist Howard Gardner was interviewed by Fryer (2007) to discuss this topic in detail. As is common knowledge, to say that trust between corporations and the public is feigning would be an understatement with unethical behaviors being perceived as the status quo thanks to the calamity of scandal plaguing Corporate America. Howard Gardner feels that with the pressure for employees and management to succeed at all costs in today’s ultra-competitive market-place, it can be easy to lose one’s way if they do not hold what he calls the ethical mind, helping people to make morally sound choices especially in work involving entities, colleagues and society as a whole (Fryer, 2007). This also serves as the author’s definition of ethics: To make morally sound choices regardless of influence of pressures or consequence even at the risk of forced resignation or involuntary termination (Fryer,
“Ms. GGGG, we are pleased to inform you of your 35% raise to your salary for this year’s pay. As per your hard work and dedication to our project, the business associates here at Google appreciate all you have done for our company.” Ahh! The sweet smell of success! After all of my diligence and stress over this project, I am finally able to be rewarded and it feels better than ever. None of my accomplishments would have been possible without that strict work ethic that had been implemented since the start of my internship. This method of success, as I like to call it, is one of the main reasons, I believe, that any of my triumphs were made possible. Whenever questioned, the associates would always say, “The American Puritan work ethic will get us to where we need to be. Follow it, and we will walk through the light at the end of the tunnel.” The American Puritan work ethic is a way to go about duties, tasks, and obligations and it is said that with hard work and frugality, success is achievable. The broad tree of success can be narrowed down to one branch- American business. The rave of this colonial work ethic has been on going for centuries. Businessmen follow this ethic because, throughout history, it has been proven to be beneficial. Many scholars have argued that Protestantism continues to play a powerful— and often implicit— role in the values of contemporary Americans. As with anything that seems to be dominant in a society, there are those who do not agree that the work ethic is valuable. The reports of success from working through this ethic have been documented throughout history and will continue to be. Although businessmen and journalists, such as Robert Becker, believe exploitation has been the primary outcome of th...
Walmart is a multi-billion dollar retail industry that hires thousands of employees a year. Over the last decade Walmart, there has been some speculation that Walmart discriminates against women. They employ 815,000 women, which is 57 percent of its U.S. workforce (Reed). Over 2,000 women from each of 48 states have filed legal complaints against Walmart and the company is said to have a history of unfair treatment of these female employees by under paid and how there are so many lawsuits against them given few opportunities for advancement (Hines). I selected this topic because after doing some research I discovered some shocking information about how Walmart supposedly treats their female employees and how there are so many lawsuits filed against them. This relates to my field of study because it shows what goes on internally between a company and its employees and how a company’s decision affects their employees. This also relates to my field of study because it an example of what occurs sometimes within a company and that is legal action from employee to the employer.
Chip Conley’s business structure is based upon a pyramid structure with the front line employees on the bottom and corporate management at the top. Conley stopped his salary and the other members of the management team took a pay decrease and salary freeze; however the front line employees were secure in their jobs knowing they would be paid and receive increases during this time. Conley knew that his business is based on customer service and if the front line employees were concerned for their basic needs then the level of customer service would diminish. So to counter act this potential economic disaster that was happening globally, Conley managed to secure the company by sacrificing his and management’s salary for the future of Joie de Vivre and recognizing the basic needs of his
However, in the real world, (real work environment) there are no two contrasting categories of employees who extremely fit theory X or theory Y and McGregor theory X and Theory Y has no empirical data that validated the theory. Moreover, since each human being is unique, which make us have our individual differences; there are numerous factors that can motivate employees. Using one or two factors as instruments of motivation may turn off some segment of employees. For example, Theory Y style managers’ may likely focus on measures of productivity rather than measures of employee well-being; or in other words, engage in an inducing form of management rather than employees' concerns, thereby patronizing only idea of inducing increased productivity from employees; and also, theory X managers may end-up being autocratic
Have you ever wondered what the line is between crazy or sane? Is there a way, a definitive test, that can tell for sure whether or not a person is crazy? If you take the time to study psychology and specifically the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, you are sure to find out that you can easily be diagnosed with some level and type of mental disorder. This line of questioning is what begins, in my opinion, one of the best TED talks I have viewed. In his speech, Answers to the Psychopath Test, writer and filmmaker Jon Ronson takes the listener on an amazing journey that explores the strange and maddening world of psychopathy.
Verschoor, C. C. (2012). New survey of workplace ethics shows surprising results. Strategic Finance, 93(10), 13-15. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=12&sid=dac69b8f-b6d7-4136-8b8f-5d852423bdf6%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4103
However, the term speculates as a shift of the influence can be established by rewards and incentives, to drive and persuade the individuals’ motives. This can too, satisfy the workers’ personal intentions as a force to motivate the individual towards the business’s objectives. Conversely, this can be seen as a deception of the individuals’ compliance as an ambivalence of Barnard’s common moral purpose ultimately raises speculations and queries. However, it can be easily described as a prompt between the organisation and the individuals’ the authenticity of mutual objectives without disrespecting the individuals’
This first section the authors bring up that continued “corporate ethics violations” have created a need for discussion of “moral issues” in the business world, including that of “corporate social responsibly” and indoctrination in managerial programs of ethical practices (Kim et al., 2009, p. 115). The authors point to the growing trend of business leaders following Christian practices, such as the founder of Chick-fil-A, Truett Cathey (Kim et al., 2009, p. 115). The authors then question how modernism affects the mainstream culture and marginalized the usefulness of worldview ethics that could provide “insight and guidance” to researchers and businesses alike (Kim et al., 2009, p. 116).
...eated in the workplace. The intended audience in the article are the people that are in the labor force or hold high leadership position in the labor force. There is a high level of comprehension when reading the article because things are explained in layman’s terms. The authors behind this article are Shelley J. Correll and Stephen Bernard. Both authors of the article are sociology professors, so their credibility is strong. They are qualified to write about this topic. The url has an .edu description. This improves the credibility of the source given. The information is backed up using evidence from research. There is an overall objectiveness inside the source. The only opinions expressed in the articles are the ones that speak against discrimination. The purpose of this article is to inform people that these actions take place whether we realize it or not. (220)
“Contingency theory is a class of behavioral theory claiming that there is no best way to organize a corporation, lead a company, or make decisions” (Pfeffer, 1997). There is no simple or one right way to run things. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, two men named Henri Fayrol and Frederick Taylor continued the study of contingency theory. Research in the 1970’s dealt with the organizational structures and leadership styles for different situations (Thompson, 2005). Contingency theory was started by Joan Woodward, whose company research found that different types of processes were linked to different structures and amounts of control. She said that certain organizational forms are appropriate for certain forms of work. Woodward was a pioneer for the theory. Woodward composed several studies using differential variables such as management levels of a company, industry compressions, and management styles in her measurement (Thompson, 2005).--. From those tests, she has identified that there are three influential aspects to contingency theory: environmental, organizational, and leadership. These factors are the key components that influence the success of a business.
Business nowadays encounter with a lot of moral challenges in today’s global economy. Everyone is thriving to be more successful than their competitors, to make their next profits, to keep their job, to earn a big bonus, or to compete effectively. There exists temptation to bend lines, omit information, and do whatever it takes to get ahead of their competition. Many business employees and executives succumb. Sadly, the theme becomes...