Communication In An Organization Management Essay

Communication in an organization is significant and its continuous effectiveness is fundamental for the seamless integration of its internal publics into the organization. Ferguson (1999), suggests that communication priorities must be capable of responding to the requirements of both external and internal audiences. Apparent communication channels echo the well being of an institute. Clampitt (1991) suggests that effective internal communication helps to improve an organization’s success. Clampitt’s proposition is consistent with Heath’s (2001) observations that effective internal communication leads to increased productivity, satisfied clients and maintenance of the organizational structure.

Furthermore, Clampitt and Downs 1993 cited in Hargie and Tourish (2000) suggest that organizations benefit a lot from improved internal communication. This includes improved productivity, reduced absenteeism, higher quality of service and products. Organizations also experience increased levels of innovation, fewer strikes and reduced costs of operation and high staff turnover. Taylor (2005) summarizes the benefits of effective communication in the acronym as,

SUCCESS defined as follows: S- stronger decision making and problem solving; U-upturn in productivity; C-convincing and compelling corporate materials; C-clearer, more streamlined work flow; E-enhanced professional image; S-sound business relationships; S-successful response assured (p. 11).

. For an organization to assess the effectiveness of its internal communication based on its employee’s attitudes about the firm, it needs to conduct a communication audit (Argenti, 2009). Therefore, the assurance that effective internal communication systems exists is vital to the success of any organization. This ensures that all the objectives undertaken by an organization are clearly understood by its employees.

A communication audit

Scott (2007) defines a communication audit as an indicator used in a particular time to help an organization assess its current communication practices and also to show how effective they are. She suggests that a communication audit can also be used to identify areas with problems such as frequent misunderstandings, information blocks, information gaps, information duplication or misrepresentation. McGann (2010) suggests that,

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

a communication audit is a snapshot of the organization’s communications programs, practices and activities. A communication audit will inform you on what is working, what is not working and what needs to be changed or improved in terms of communication within the organization (p. 1).

According to Hargie and Tourish (2000), communication audits have been used to identify and reward good practice and at the same time help organizations to manage crisis and improve business performance. Snyder and Morris (1994) cited in Hargie and Tourish (2000) observe that there is a positive correlation between the employee perceptions of communication and job satisfaction which in turn correlates to the overall organizations’ effectiveness. This can be achieved by the results of the communication audit.

Seitel (1995) states that, organizations utilize communication audits to analyze the perception of its constituents, evaluate the readership of its communication, annual reports and newsletters which are the vehicles of the organization. Further, the author suggests that, communication audits provide the organization with important information on how to solve problems like employees working at cross-purposes, uneven communication workloads and benchmarks against which public relations programs can be applied and measured in the future. The author concludes that, a communication audit will determine the communications systems which are being used by the organization, which are the most effective and if the information that is being transmitted by the organization is regarded as adequate by its recipients. This study is an internal communication audit of the CDF Board and Secretariat which aims to determine the effectiveness of the communication systems used within the organization.

History of CDF in Kenya

In the recent past, the government of Kenya has created a number of alternative windows to allow allocation of resources directly to devolved government units in response to the needs to ensure equitable development at the grassroots. For instance, there has been substantial increase in resources committed at the constituency level and the local government units. When President Mwai Kibaki was in opposition he introduced a motion in parliament that sought to have funds devolved at the grassroot level, however the motion was defeated by the then head of state President Daniel arap Moi’s government.

In the year 2003 when H. E Mwai Kibaki took power, the Ol-Kalao Member of Parliament Hon. Eng. Karue having been a member of his party, brought the motion again to Parliament seeking the funds to be devolved at the grassroot level and it was passed. Constituency Development Fund (CDF) became operational in 2004 with an annual budgetary allocation of a minimum 2.5% by the central government to each of the country’s constituencies. The fund aims to address imbalances in regional development. It targets community projects at the constituency level, particularly those aiming to combat poverty. It also provides individuals at the grassroot the opportunity to make development choices that maximize their welfare in line with their needs and preferences.

Some of other notable devolved funds in Kenya include the Community Development Trust Fund (CDTF), the Roads Fund, Constituency AIDs Fund, the Local Authority Transfer Fund (LATF), Women Enterprise Fund, Youth Enterprise Development Fund, Rural Electrification Programe Levy Fund (REPF), Free Primary Education Fund (FPEF) and the Constituency Education Bursary Fund (CEBF). The over-arching goal has been to improve the development outcomes by involving local communities in the decision-making process and management of projects (CDF Board Strategic Plan, 2010-2014).

During the period of CDF existence, the fund has registered substantial achievements and has greatly contributed in transforming the lives of Kenyans. The researcher’s observations are that, the impact of the fund is widespread that in all corners of the country one can never miss a project which has been financed from the CDF kitty. They include the improved infrastructure especially in the rural areas in the form of rural access roads, education and health facilities. The fund has enabled many students to access education through bursary. In addition it has enabled locals to build capacity at the grassroot level through empowerment in participation in project management through various committees.

CDF has received a lot of media attention both positive and negative despite the fact that it has brought a paradigm shift in most of Kenya’s rural areas in terms of development. However, just like any other noble idea, the Fund has had its own share of challenges ranging from mode of financing, accountability to the public, political interference in identification of projects, approval and implementation of the projects, low level of awareness among communities on the operations of the fund among others. However, Gikonyo (2008) observes that CDF has been a great success despite the challenges faced by the fund. This idea has been seconded by New Partnership for Africa Development (NEPAD) as it acknowledges the Fund as one of the best innovations in Africa’s development and as a result many countries are seeking to adopt the CDF model.

By law, the CDF is controlled by the Member of Parliament of a constituency. This amount is then shared among all the constituencies on an established formula that factors in equality and the poverty levels of each constituency. Thereafter, the onus of disbursing and ensuring the constituencies use their share of the money efficiently and accountably falls with the CDF Board and Secretariat. This body was established under CDF (Amendment) Act 2007 section 5 (CDF Board Strategic Plan, 2010-2014). However, this Board and Secretariat is charged with the overall responsibility of managing the Funds and reporting to parliamentary Constituency Fund Committee (CFC) on its usage. The Board activities are also coordinated by a Secretariat based at its headquarters in Nairobi County. The CEO to the Secretariat is also the Secretary to the Board and the chief accounting officer to the fund.

The CDF Board and Secretariat just like any other organization is believed to have communication channels in place. These communication channels play an important role of information dissemination from one person to another. However, they need to be evaluated so as to give the guidelines based on what is working, what is not working and what needs to be changed. The communication channels used by organizations include memos, telephone, emails, newsletters, website, notice board, suggestion box, meetings, annual reports and face to face. In this study the researcher will provide a credible baseline of the actual status of communication in the CDF Board and Secretariat with its internal publics.

Problem statement

Good internal communication is supposed to ensure low staff turnover, high quality of service and goods, improved productivity, reduced absenteeism, and reduced cost of operation. For an organization like CDF Board and Secretariat good internal communication is critical because it will ensure seamless integration of its internal publics. Staff retention is important to ensure such a young organization has officers long enough to understand, establish and concretize its mandate to ensure it serves the purpose for which it was established.

A look at the CDF Board and Secretariat website indicates that several senior officers have left the organization in a period of one year. Although no exit interviews were conducted to establish the reason for their departure, poor internal communication, according to Hargie and Tourish (2000) is a major cause of high staff turnover. These authors further suggest that an organization should conduct a communication audit between five and seven years or after any major change in the organization. This enables the organization to realize what is working and what needs to be changed in terms of communication. The high staff turnover at the CDF Board and Secretariat in the long run would increase the operation costs of hiring and training new staffs regularly and also paint a negative image of the organization. This study therefore aims to investigate whether the CDF Board and Secretariat has effective internal communication and whether poor communication could have contributed to challenges like high staff turnover.

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study is to conduct an internal communication audit of the CDF Board and Secretariat and to analyze the effectiveness of its communication channels between the CDF Board and Secretariat and its internal publics.

Objectives of the study

General objective

The general objective of this study is to carry out an internal communication audit of the CDF Board and Secretariat and to establish what communication styles are in place, how they work and the perceived effectiveness of the organization’s communication.

Specific objectives of the study will be:

To establish the communication systems used to communicate amongst the internal publics of the CDF Board and Secretariat.

To verify the effectiveness of the communication systems in meeting employees information needs.

To establish employees perception on the relationship of internal communication to job satisfaction and employee retention.

To document the strengths and weaknesses of the existing communication practices and propose a way forward.

Research questions

The issues that this study will address include:-

What are the communication systems that are used to communicate among the internal publics of the CDF Board and Secretariat?

What is the perceived effectiveness of communication amongst the internal publics?

What is the employee perception on the relationship of internal communication to job satisfaction and employee retention?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of the existing communication practices at the CDF Board and Secretariat?

Rationale/ significance of the study

This study will help the organization to develop possible solutions to communication problems if they will arise and also help the organization to avoid other forms of crisis including high staff turnover. The study findings could also be adopted by the government of Kenya as a basis of developing a comprehensive policy framework for internal communication among public institutions in Kenya. Such a policy would ensure smooth flow of information on government policy and directives among the public servants, which would translate to better service delivery to the public/citizens.

Further, the study finding will contribute immensely to the body of knowledge in the country, and help scholars and practitioners better understand the subject of internal communication.

At the completion of this study, the researcher will provide significant recommendations concerning communication issues from the research findings which will be useful to the organization. This will help the CDF Board and Secretariat to improve its internal communication systems for better and more effective internal communication within the organization.

Assumptions of the study

The following are the basic assumptions of the study.

That CDF Board and Secretariat has got communication systems that can be audited.

That the CDF Board and Secretariat employees will be truthful in responding to the research questions.

That the CDF Board and Secretariat will allow the participation of its internal publics in this study.

That the CDF Board and Secretariat will provide relevant information to the researcher.

Limitations and delimitations

In this study the researcher will focus on the internal publics of the CDF Board and Secretariat who include the CEO, the staff and the Board members. The researcher will not extend the study to the external publics. In addition, some employees may opt to withhold information due to fear of victimization. This is because most of the information that flows within the CDF Board and Secretariat is classified. To delimit this, the researcher will assure the respondents that the information provided will only be used in this study. In addition, most of the Board members do not report to the Secretariat head office on a daily basis; they only meet on several occasions in a month. To delimit this, the researcher will make arrangements to have the interviews with the Board members when they are at the head office.

Scope of the study

The research will be conducted at the CDF Board and Secretariat head office which is situated at the junction of Uhuru Highway and Haile Selaisse Avenue at Harambee Sacco Plaza 10th floor in Nairobi. The study will restrict itself to the audit of communication of the internal publics of the CDF Board and Secretariat which includes the CEO, Board of Directors, management staff and subordinate staff.

Definition of terms

Communication audit

Is a snapshot of the organization’s communication programs, practices and activities which inform the organization on what is working, what is not working and what needs to be changed or improved in terms of communication within the organization (McGann 2010). For the purpose of this study a communication audit will mean a gauge which helps the organization to analyze its perceived communication to its publics.

CDF Board and Secretariat

Is the body which has been mandated by the Government of Kenya to manage constituency funds and report to the Parliamentary Constituency Fund Committee on the usage of the funds (CDF Board Strategic Plan, 2010-2014). For the purpose of this study it shall remain one and the same thing.

Communication systems:

These are the communication networks which help in the flow of information from one level of employee to another. For the purpose of this study it shall remain one and the same thing.

Effective communication:

Fielding (2006) defines effective communication as the management of flow of information, this means from the sender, the message itself, the channel, the receiver and the feedback. Collins (2009) defines effective communication as “the practical guidance on using communication vehicles and tools”. For the purpose of this study, effective communication will mean transfer of information and understanding between the sender and the receiver.

Internal publics:

Broom (2009), refers to internal publics as the employees including managers and people being supervised. Lundblad and Stewart (2005) define the internal publics as “the individuals / groups in the employ of the organization”. Seitel (1995) says that the internal publics are the publics who are inside the organization though they vary from one organization to another, depending on the nature of the organization. For the purpose of this study the internal publics will be the CEO, the Board of Directors and the employees of the CDF Board and Secretariat.

High staff turnover………….

Staff retention………………..

Summary

This chapter covered the introduction and background to the study, defined a communication audit, and gave a brief history of CDF in Kenya, CDF Board Secretariat. Problem statement, objectives of the study, justification of the study and operationalization of terminologies has also been done in this chapter. The next chapter will cover the literature review, the role of corporate communication in conducting a communication audit, theoretical, and conceptual framework.

Chapter two: Literature Review

Introduction

This chapter reviews a literature on communication audits and related concepts. Key topics covered include: the role of corporate communication in conducting audits, empirical studies of internal communication audits, and the process of communication in organizations. Others include internal publics, and barriers to effective communication, communication systems, employee information needs and the theoretical and conceptual frameworks of the study.

Communication audits

Communication audits have been used as indicators to help organizations assess their current communication practices and show how effective they are. They are used to identify areas with problems such as frequent misunderstandings, information blocks, information gaps, information duplication or misrepresentation Scott (2007). More importantly, the communication audits provide a snapshot of the organization’s communication programs, practices and activities. In addition, they act as a tool which helps one to know what is working, what is not working and what needs to be changed or improved in terms of communication within the organization McGann (2010).

Contribution of communication audit to organizational success

Downs and Adrian (2004) say that there is a tendency of organizations paying attention to communication only after a problem/crisis has occurred. The organizations need to overcome this behavior by conducting a communication audit periodically. Knowing the problem early enough saves image, time and reputation. They add that, organizations have got the responsibility to monitor the effectiveness of the messages they send to the employees because the survival of the organization depends on the employees’ ability to exchange and coordinate the information they are receiving. However, the authors point out that communication is not the only challenge experienced by organizations.

Organizations need to have accurate impression of what their internal publics think of them, how they receive and transmit messages. This amounts to the importance of auditing communication in an organization (Hargie & Tourish, 2009). For an organization to know how effective their communication is perceived based on employees attitudes it needs to conduct a communication audit. The results of the communication audit will guide the communication practitioners to formulate the right internal communication programs for the organization (Argenti, 2007).

According to Hargie and Tourish (2000) organizations that conduct communication audits enjoy a long running performance in the marketplace. This means that the results of the audit will help the organization to avert chaos like misunderstandings, misrepresentation of staff, strikes, high staff turnover and poor performance. Furthermore, they suggest that the communication audits have been used to identify and reward good practice and at the same time help the organization to manage crisis and improve business performance. This idea concurs with Clampitt (1991) and Heath (2000) who say that as a result of conducting communication audits organizations have experienced increased productivity, employees’ job satisfaction and a positive maintenance of organizational structure.

According to Hargie and Tourish (2009) organizations that have conducted internal communication audits have experienced high performance from their employees because there is a correlation between high performance and existence of effective internal communication programs. This idea concurs with Hicks and Gullet (1988) who say that there is a positive correlation with the openness of communication channels between the subordinate and the supervisor. The openness of communication channels can be realized as a result of communication audit where employees’ engagement and commitment to work become more significant. For instance, Arnold (1993) conducted a study of internal publics of General Motors in the United States of America. In his findings, a staff turnover rate of 30% in 1989 went down to 12% by 1991. In addition, the company’s bad debt percentage went down from 3.2% to an average of 0.4% per month.

The role of corporate communication in conducting a communication audit

According to Cornelissen (2011) corporate communication practitioners have a role to act as intermediaries between the organization and its stakeholders, and he refers to this process as boundary spanning. Kitchen (1997) defines boundary spanning as the mechanism used by organizations to gather and analyze data about their environment. He insists that the public relations practitioners/boundary spanners play an important role of strategic decision making. This idea is consistent with Tripathi (2009) who says that the boundary spanning function of corporate communication is supposed to help the management to gather information through conducting a communication audit, interpret it from its environment and represent the organization to its publics. Steyn and Puth (2000) however, refer to the boundary spanning role as the mirror/delicate and important function of the corporate communication practitioner.

Likely (2003) cited in Barker and Angelopulo (2007) says that the corporate communication has got the role to provide information for the evaluation of the internal environment of the organization. The evaluation of the communication will help the organization to identify strengths and weaknesses of the organization’s communication and the management will be able to provide the input to the development of communication strategy.

Empirical studies of internal communication audits

At Daystar University some scholars have carried out studies on communication audit to assess the impact of communication channels in organizations. Ndegwa (1996) conducted an audit among Daystar University students. In her findings the study found that students received most of the information concerning the university from the weekly newsletter known as infospot and during chapel. In addition, students expressed a desire to get more information in general and at the same time they also felt that there was need to improve the physical environment in the university. This audit was important to the university as the institution has increased the channels of information dissemination to the students.

Wamba (1999) conducted a study on public relations audit of selected publics of the Kenya Wildlife Service. In her findings majority of the respondents stated that the organization meant what it said when it made an important announcement. This was in line with employee management relations. On the issue of employees complaints being taken seriously by the management 61% of the respondents agreed that they were rarely looked into. This shows that the management did not care much about the needs of the employees. On the issue of communication from the management, 70.6% of the respondents agreed that the management was interested in telling them what they thought staff ought to know rather than what staff wanted to know.

Ngugi (2004) carried out a communication audit of the internal publics of Kenya National Library Services. About 63.8% of the respondents stated that they would like to receive information from management. A small fraction of 1.3% of the respondents stated that they received information from the communication department. About 57.5% of the respondents stated that they had never heard about an internal news letter as much as it had been available. According to the study, the Kenya National Library Services had a policy guideline on forwarding issues to the management, but according to the respondents departmental heads did not forward their issues to the management (Ngugi, 2004).

Pokumensah (2011) carried out a communication audit of the internal publics of the Elris Communication Services Limited. In his findings about 88% of the lower level employees received most of the task oriented information from their supervisors. This explained that the network for task oriented was top – down. Another 80% of the lower level respondents states that they share task oriented information with their colleagues. This indicated that the horizontal communication happened among the employees of the same level of organizational structure (Mounter, 2003).

In conclusion……………

The process of communication in organizations

Communication is a continuous process of exchanging verbal and nonverbal messages. A message must be conveyed through some medium to the recipient. It is essential that this message must be understood by the recipient in same terms as intended by the sender and a response given within a time frame. Thus, communication is a two way process and is incomplete without a feedback from the recipient to the sender on how well the message is understood by him.

According to Hicks and Gullett (1988) most organizations have taken communication for granted. They assume that if an individual can read, write and speak they are communicating. However, communication is not just speaking, reading and writing; rather it is the transfer of information and understanding from the sender to the receiver.

According to Watson and Hill (2000) communication includes five key factors that include the initiator, the recipient, the vehicle, the message and the effect. However, they argue that the communication process, sender, message and receiver are all subject to a multitude of cues which are likely to influence the message. Taylor (2005) suggests that as a communicator it is important to ensure that your message is understood, and stimulates the recipient to take appropriate action.

Communication can be affected by the context in which it takes place. This context may be physical, social, chronological or cultural. The sender chooses the message to communicate within a context. Second is the sender / encoder a person who sends the message. A sender makes use of symbols (words or graphic or visual aids) to convey the message and produce the required response. For instance, a training manager conducting training for new batch of employees. Sender may be an individual or a group or an organization. The views, background, approach, skills, competencies, and knowledge of the sender have a great impact on the message.

The verbal and nonverbal symbols chosen are essential in ascertaining interpretation of the message by the recipient in the same terms as intended by the sender. The third component is the message which is the key idea that the sender wants to communicate. It is a sign that elicits the response of recipient. Communication process begins with deciding about the message to be conveyed. It must be ensured that the main objective of the message is clear. Fourth is the medium which is the means used to exchange / transmit the message. The sender must choose an appropriate medium for transmitting the message else the message might not be conveyed to the desired recipients. The choice of appropriate medium of communication is essential for making the message effective and correctly interpreted by the recipient.

This choice of communication medium varies depending upon the features of communication. For instance, written medium is chosen when a message has to be conveyed to a small group of people, while an oral medium is chosen when spontaneous feedback is required from the recipient as misunderstandings are cleared then and there. Fifth is the recipient / decoder who is the person for whom the message is intended / aimed / targeted. The degree to which the decoder understands the message is dependent upon various factors such as knowledge of recipient, their responsiveness to the message, and the reliance of encoder on decoder. Last but not least is feedback which is the main component of communication process as it permits the sender to analyze the efficacy of the message. It helps the sender in confirming the correct interpretation of message by the decoder. Feedback may be verbal (through words) or non-verbal (in form of smiles, sighs, etc.). It may take written form also in form of memos and reports among others (Management Study guide -Online).

Internal publics

Grunig (1992) suggests that the employees who are the internal publics of an organization are the most important strategic publics of an organization. He further says that their “communication should be part of an integrated and managed communication program”. However, Baskin, Aronoff & Lattimore (1997) argue that identification of the key publics by the organizations is important for the survival of the organization. Internal publics are the active publics of the organization and seek and process information about the organization or an issue of interest to an organization (Grunig, 1992).

Importance of effective internal communication in organizations

According to Hamilton and Parker (1993) organizations are made up people and the decisions made on a daily basis are likely to affect the organization, customers, other workers and even the destiny of the organization. This idea makes internal communication to be an important aspect of the organization because it is through communication the organization can gain and offer the information needed to its publics which enables them to make successful decisions. Miller (2006), however, says that internal communication helps the organization to answer the following questions; what information needs to be communicated to the publics? When should it be communicated? Who will be in charge of communicating to the public? How will the information be communicated?

Miller’s proposition is consistent with Katz and Kahn’s (1966) observations that effective internal communi