Silver foxes communication barriers p3 2 (nov 27) bennettrev

Running Head: BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION 1

Examining Barriers in Organizational Communication and Culture

Arlo Abrahamson, David Bennett, Shauna Lindsay, Myers Vasquez

San Diego State University

JMS 600B

Dr. Hongmei Shen

Fall 2012

BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION 2

I. Study Abstract.

What phenomenon causes well planned organizational communication campaigns to fail

in changing knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors? In increasingly diverse working environments,

organizations face the challenging and often complicated task of communicating with

employees. Athanassiades (1973) described the implications of poor internal communication as

far-reaching, affecting every aspect of an organization’s vitality (p. 48). Leaders and

management of large organizations continue to be challenged with understanding how to frame

messages to their internal publics and formulate open environments that diminish barriers and

embrace the influence of diverse subcultures. This study will examine barriers, influences, and

distortions in organizational communication that limit the impact of effective internal messaging

campaigns. This examination will contrast the relationship between hierarchical and participative

organizational cultures to determine if these environments contribute to limited, enhanced, or

even distorted communication patterns. An analysis of prior academic research will provide

greater insight into organizational communication, and a better understanding of why people

accept, distort, or reject messages. After such analysis, an online survey will be administered to

employees serving in management and non-management positions within U.S. military,

corporate and non-profit organizational settings. Participants will be asked closed-ended

questions that explore organizational culture, perceived communication barriers, message

framing, and the influence of subcultures within their organization.

The desired outcome of the study is to enhance the current body of knowledge regarding

barriers, influences and distortions in organizational communication, and to offer management

and communicators strategies to achieve more effective communication within the workplace.

There are no risks of harm to human subjects associated with this study and participants can opt


out of the survey at any time of their choosing.

II. Statement of Purpose and Background

Existing literature and past studies have provided only moderate insight into how an

organizational culture effects internal communication. This literature review seeks to span the

knowledge gap regarding organizational culture and communication barriers, highlight the

influence of subcultures in message acceptance, and understand the leadership’s role in

organizational message framing and acceptance. If these varying factors affecting

communication are explored under one umbrella of study, it will significantly enhance the

understanding of the broad complexities and influences of internal communication practices.

While the theories of previous scholars contributed to the initial understanding of internal

communication barriers, the inherent limitations of these studies invite an unprecedented

opportunity to sharpen and expand upon past theories and create a broadened understanding of

organizational communication practices.

Existing literature and past studies have provided only moderate insight into how an

organizational culture effects internal communication. This literature review seeks to span the

knowledge gap regarding organizational culture and communication barriers, highlight the

influence of subcultures in message acceptance, and understand the leadership’s role in

organizational message framing and acceptance. If these varying factors affecting

communication are explored under one umbrella of study, it will significantly enhance the

understanding of the broad complexities and influences of internal communication practices.

Athanassiades (1973) described the “vicious cycle of communication distortion” created

from organizational climate to be most prevalent in an authoritarian organizational culture (p.

45). Moreover, L.A. Grunig, J.E. Grunig, and Dozier (2002) theorized that excellent


organizational communication is two-way symmetrical in nature, and most often occurs in

organizations with participative cultures. Further examination is useful to determine the more

precise role and influence of organizational cultures and subcultures on communication barriers.

Dozier, Grunig, L. A., & Grunig, J. E., (1995) likened core values in organizations as

factors that “unify the social dimensions of organizations” (p. 136). However, research suggested

that powerful influences of diverse subcultures within an organization are often incorporated into

the larger cultural ethos. These subculture influences also impact the effectiveness of internal

communication practices of top-management. Looking at the barriers to communication is

beneficial, but incomplete. Understanding how organization’s cultures, subcultures and message

distortion are managed, can add value to past studies, providing necessary answers to identified

issues.

Leadership is instrumental in enacting the framework, through “framing” of the

messages, but their influence can be “overshadowed by the individuals who actually manage the

culture” (Fairhurst, 1993, p. 311). Examining how message framing can interact and be impacted

by an organization’s subculture can provide new insight for better communication practices.

The purpose of this study is to examine and better understand the complexities of

communication within organizational cultures. Specifically, research referenced throughout this

section suggests a strong correlation between organizational culture and communication barriers,

which creates communication distortion and limits message acceptance.

Ultimately, the goal is to dig deeper into the cause of internal communication barriers and

enhance the body of work in an area that has far reaching implications for organizations and

presents new horizons for communicators in practice.

Dozier, Grunig, L. A., & Grunig, J. E., (1995) likened core values in organizations as


factors that “unify the social dimensions of organizations” (p. 136). However, research suggested

that powerful influences of diverse subcultures within an organization are often incorporated into

the larger cultural ethos. These subculture influences also impact the effectiveness of internal

communication practices of top-management.

Leadership is instrumental in enacting the framework, through “framing” of the

messages, but their influence can be “overshadowed by the individuals who actually manage the

culture” (Fairhurst, 1993, p. 311). Examining how message framing can interact and be impacted

by an organization’s subculture can provide new insight for better communication practices.

The purpose of this study is to examine and better understand the complexities of

communication within organizational cultures. Specifically, research referenced throughout this

section suggests a strong correlation between organizational culture and communication barriers,

which creates communication distortion and limits message acceptance.

Ultimately, the goal is to dig deeper into the cause of internal communication barriers and

enhance the body of work in an area that has far reaching implications for organizations and

presents new horizons for communicators in practice.

Organizational culture and its effect on communication barriers

Communication barriers are physical or psychological obstacles that limit how messages

are received from the sender to the receiver. In the organizational culture, communication

barriers can severely limit the efficiency of how messages move throughout an organization.

Organizational culture, as a concept, entered the lexicon of organizational studies nearly 15 years

ago (Sriramesh, Grunig, and Dozier, 1996). But what is organizational culture? Scholars have


defined it as an organization’s core values (Deal & Kennedy, as cited in Sriramesh et al., 1996),

or the “rules of the game for getting along in the organization” (Sriramesh et al., 1996, p. 232).

Wallach and Schein referred to corporate culture as assumptions, beliefs, or understanding that is

shared by an organization’s employees (as cited in Sriramesh et al., 1996). Grunig et al (2002)

characterized organizational cuture in perhaps the most comprehensive terms as “the sume total

of shared values, meanings, beliefs, assumptions, and expectations” (p. 482).

Athanassiades (1973) distinguished two distinct types of organizational cultures, one that

is (heteronomous) hierarchical and authoritarian in nature, and potentially coercive and

secretive toward subordinates. The second organization is the (autonomous) participative

organization, which is more open and has a more flat chain of command structure (p. 48).

However, Sriramesh et al. (1996) noted that these two cultures were not mutually exclusive –

authoritarian and participative organizations may hold characteristics of the other culture. As

such, these two types of organizational climates should be evaluated on a sliding scale, as

organizations will manifest varied degrees of hierarchical or participative organizational culture

traits. Moreover, the extent of these organizational traits is strongly linked with communication

barriers.

A valuable insight to understanding organizational culture and its links to communication

barriers can be found in Rogers’ (2005) study on authority-innovation decisions and collective

innovation-decisions. In such study, Rogers (2005) posits that collective-innovation decisions are

made through consensus within participative organizations, where as hierarchical organizations

often inhibit authority-innovation decisions that are made by a small yet dominant group that

utilizes “champions” to implement their innovations among the rank-and-file (p. 403).

Organizational cultures provide the foundation for internal communication effectiveness,


based on the susceptibility of barriers resulting from the hierarchical or participative traits of the

organization. Rogers’ (2005) study makes a clear case for the open, participative organization in

fostering and spreading innovation through open communication. Such examinations also

exposed the potential limitations of both communication and innovation diffusion in hierarchical

and authoritarian organizational culture, and makes the case for further examination of how such

culture plays a role in creating barriers and enhancing, or distorting internal communication.

H1: Authoritarian and hierarchical organizational cultures have more barriers to internal

communication than organizations with participative cultures.

Perceived corporate culture and subcultures and influence on organizational communication

While much of the literature on corporate culture focuses on a single overarching culture

in an organization, many scholars questioned this notion. Sriramesh et al. (1996) warned of the

potential for multiple cultures in an organization. “Instead of being monolithic phenomena,

organizational cultures are composed of various interlocking, nested, sometimes conflicting

subcultures” (Martin & Siehl, 1983, p. 53). Other scholars (Lok, Westwood & Crawford, 2005;

Wilkins, 1983) also questioned the monolithic culture theory and believed that subcultures were

likely in large organizations.

There have been several studies that sought to identify how subcultures form within an

organization and to define these subcultures. Wilkins (1983) noted “people who associate with

each other and share common backgrounds and objectives tend to develop and share common

orientations that may differ from the orientations of other groups” (p. 29). Likewise, Lok et al.

(2005) found that subcultures could form in an organization due to a variety of environmental

factors like location, job function, and background. In their 1983 study, Martin and Siehl


identified three types of subcultures. Enhancing and orthogonal subcultures supported, to varying

degrees, the dominant culture’s core values (Martin & Siehl, 1983). Countercultures, on the other

hand, espouse core values that challenge the dominant culture’s core values (Martin & Siehl,

1983).

Consequently, many scholars sought to explain the impact of countercultures on internal

communication and message acceptance. Sriramesh et al. (1996) noted the potential influence of

subcultures in internal messaging campaigns. While an organization’s CEO or members of its

dominant coalition may propose a new corporate “vision”, it is the lower ranking members of the

organization who influence the acceptance of that vision “because they are the purveyors of the

vision” (Sriramesh et al., 1996, p. 237). Likewise, Gotsi, Andriopoulos, & Wilson (2008) noted

that organizational core values could be undermined by conflicting values of a subculture. In this

case, consensus may arise in “the boundaries of subcultures rather than on an organization-wide

level” (Gotsi et al., 2008, p. 48).

As previous research found, organizational communication is influenced by the

organization’s culture and various internal subcultures. However, what are the barriers to

message acceptance during internal messaging campaigns in hierarchical organizations? Martin

and Siehl (1983) noted that countercultures are likely to emerge in hierarchical organizations.

With this in mind, how do countercultures within hierarchical organizations prevent or influence

the acceptance or rejection of messages from top management? From the background presented,

the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2: The number of countercultures within an organization is positively correlated with more

barriers to internal communication.

Framing and its link to message acceptance


Message acceptance is interpersonal in nature and measures how people accept, reject, or

ignore communication presented to them. Organizational communication is influenced by how

the message is conveyed, and how “framing devices function in the vision implementation

process” (Fairhurst, 1993, p. 332). The leadership’s ability to frame internal messages has been

found by research as a critical contributor to message acceptance. An organization’s success is

contingent on the ability of the leadership to impart its vision on its constituencies (Fairhurst,

1993).

In a hierarchical organization the message or vision is asymmetrically framed to convey

the top leadership’s expected behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs from its members. In a

participative, more symmetrical organization, Broom (2009) defined effective framing as having

an intimate understanding of the position and problem, and to know the “needs, interests, and

concerns of the target publics” (p. 332). Fairhurst (1993) explained that a visionary framework

was created through a mutual understanding that took place between the organization’s top

leaders and its members. Framing is the “way people come to understand issues and events” (p.

312).

Management must link its members to a shared view of the organization or compete with

the members’ conflicting values, perceptions, and individual interests. Charismatic leadership

can “inspire members to move beyond their own self-interests partly through a vision that

members find compelling” (Avolio & Bass, 1987; Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978; Conger, 1991;

Conger & Kanungo, 1987, 1988; House, 1971; House, Spangler & Woycke, 1991; Kuhnert &

Lewis, 1987; Tichy and Devanna, 1986, as cited in Fairhurst, 1993, p. 334).

Management must frame the vision in a hierarchical or authoritarian style organization,

so “decisions are made at the top levels of the organization and implemented at the lower levels”


(Broom, 2009, p. 218). As such, the internal communication campaigns are “planned, organized

efforts to mold corporate images, manage issues, and articulate values” (Fairhurst, 1993, p. 340).

Leadership is instrumental in enacting the framework, through framing of the message, but the

leader’s influence can be “overshadowed by the individuals who actually manage the culture”

(Fairhurst, 1993, p. 348).

An authoritarian organization acknowledges the internal members’ influence in

acceptance of the message, but does little to institute symmetrical communication practices to

allow participation of the members. Grtonstedt (2000) emphasized integrated communication is a

“strategic management process that must permeate through entire organizations, rather than

quick fix crash program or campaign” (as cited in Grunig, L.A., Grunig, J.E., & Dozier, 2002, p.

274).

More research can be done to explain how leadership uses framing to overcome

communication barriers within the organization. From these examinations, the following

hypothesis is proposed.

H3: Message acceptance by subordinates is positively correlated with leadership’s ability to

frame internal messages.

Rationale and relevance of proposed research

Broom (2009) suggested that organizational communication is one of the least

understood aspects of public relations scholarship by both researchers and practitioners alike.

Moreover, organizational communication is often deeply misunderstood by the dominant

coalition or leadership within organizations, who are the essential people to carry out such tasks.

Broom (2009) and other communication scholars attributed this lack of understanding in

organizational communication practices to a cause for declining job satisfaction and productivity.


Consequently, this study is relevant in adding to a body of work for an area of

communication scholarship that is moderately understood, and further, an area where scholars

themselves admit there is room for deeper understanding. Existing theory will guide this study,

but new discovery and enhanced understanding of communication barriers will not only help add

to the existing knowledge in organizational communication, but also make suggestions to

improve practices. The impact of such scholarship is limitless, considering that organizations

continue to diversify and the challenges of organizational communication will only intensify as

society moves progressively into the post-modern world.

III. References

Athanassiades, J. C. (1973). The sounds and silences of employee communication. Journal of

Business Communication, 10(4), 43-50.

Broom, G. M. (2009). Cutlip and Center’s effective public relations (10th ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Dozier, D. M., Grunig, L.A., & Grunig, J. E. (1995). Manager’s guide to excellence in

public relations and communication management. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Fairhurst, G. T. (1993). Echoes of the vision when the rest of the organization talks total

quality. Management Communication Quarterly 6(4), 331-371. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/232857217

Gotsi, M., Andriopoulos, C., & Wilson, A. (2008). Corporate re-branding: Is cultural

alignment the weakest link? Management Decision, 46(1), 46-57. doi:

10.1108/00251740810846734

Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and

effective organizations: A study of communication management in three countries.


Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. APA

Lok, P., Westwood, R., & Crawford, J. (2005). Perceptions of organizational subculture

and their significance for organizational commitment. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 54(4), 490-514. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00222.x

Martin, J., & Siehl, C. (1983). Organizational culture and counterculture: An uneasy

symbiosis. Organizational Dynamics, 12(2), 52-64.

Rogers, E. M. (2005). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Sriramesh, K., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (1996). Observation and measurement of

two dimensions of organizational culture and their relationship to public

relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 8(4), 229-261.

IV. Subject Characteristics

The research will utilize participants from the U.S. Military, a California state

government organization, corporate, and non-profits. The study involves gender-neutral

hypothesis and will include both male and female subjects. All study participants will be 18

years of age or older.

V. Subject Selection Criteria

This study will utilize participants who work in both management and non-management

roles. Management personnel in the context of this study are defined as people serving in

positions of leadership in responsibility within organizations. They can be middle management

to top-staff positions within the chain of command. This group is critical for this study because

managers and leaders are often paramount in creating the culture and climate within an

organization. Non-management personnel are defined as those workers within an organization

who work in lower management and rank and file positions. These personnel are extremely


important to the study as they are the recipients of organizational messages from coming from

management and they determine the success rate of message acceptance.

VI. Subject Recruitment Source

PAO subjects will be recruited with assistance from the Navy’s Chief of Information

Office (CHINFO) for U.S. Navy participants. For corporate and non-profits organizations, study

coordinators will work directly with the respective communication departments within the

organization to obtain permission to recruit participants and to coordinate the administration of

the survey.

VII. Subject Recruitment Methods

Nonprobability convenience sampling study will use subjects recruited by e-mail

notification. A designated communication staff member from every participating organization

will liaise with study coordinators to help recruiting suitable participants and help monitor

progress in survey response. A recruitment memo will be sent or participating organization

describing the intent and purpose of the study. An example below highlights memos that will be

sent to various organizations:

From: Deputy Navy Chief of Information

To: Navy Public Affairs Officers and Mass Communication Personnel

Subject: Organizational Communication Barriers Study

Dear Navy Public Affairs Team,

LT Arlo Abrahamson, LT David Bennett, LT Myers Vasquez are graduate

students in the Navy’s Public Affairs Graduate Studies program at San Diego State

University. They are conducting a study on organizational communication trends within

various government, corporate, and non-profit organizations. The study instrument will


include a confidential survey administered to volunteer participants in management and

non-management positions. For the Navy’s participation, study coordinators would like

to utilize media department and public affairs personnel aboard aircraft carriers and large

public affairs staffs ashore.

The survey questionnaire will ask participants in management positions (officers

and chief petty officers) and participants in non-management positions (petty officers and

below) questions regarding perceived organizational culture, potential barriers in internal

communication, perceptions about the influence of sub-cultures within an organization,

and questions about framing impact of command messages. The survey will

administered via surveymonkey.com at the following link (LINK TBD)

Participation in this survey is strictly voluntary and confidential. The responses

will help the research team understand more about the nature of organizational

communication and offer solutions to improve or capture best practices.

If you have difficulty accessing the survey, please make sure that JavaScript and

cookies are enabled on your computer. For any other technical help, please contact

project manager LT Arlo Abrahamson at 757-338-8154 or arlokane@gmail.com.

The second recruitment email that will be forwarded to corporate participants:

From: XXX (TBD) Communication Department

To: Volunteer Employee Participants

Subject: Survey – Organizational Communication

Graduate students in the U.S. Navy’s Public Affairs Graduate Studies program at

San Diego State University are conducting a study on organizational communication

trends within various government, corporate, and non-profit organizations. For your


organization, we seek volunteers in management and non-management roles who can fill

out a short confidential survey on organizational communication. All coordination and

permissions will occur through your communication department or designated

representative.

The survey questionnaire will ask participants in management positions and

participants in non-management positions questions regarding perceived organizational

culture, potential barriers in internal communication, perceptions about the influence of

sub-cultures within an organization, and questions about framing-impact of command

messages. The survey will administered via surveymonkey.com at the following link

(LINK TBD)

Participation in this survey is strictly voluntary and answers are anonymous and

confidential. No names of organizations will be released in any of the findings; only the

types of organization, i.e. government, corporate, or non-profit. The responses will help

our research team understand more about the nature of organizational communication and

offer solutions to improve or capture best practices. We will be more than happy to share

any findings in the overall study with your organization.

If you have difficulty accessing the survey, please make sure that JavaScript and

cookies are enabled on your computer. For any other technical help, please contact

project manager LT Arlo Abrahamson at 757-338-8154 or arlokane@gmail.com.

VIII. Informed Consent Process

Before participants can access the survey at www.surveymonkey.com, they will read an

informed consent form online. Clicking to begin the survey will constitute granting the

researchers consent to use their responses for this study. The informed consent form will read:


You are about to access a survey about Internal Communication Practices. A team of

graduate students at San Diego State University is conducting this study. The procedures

involve filling out a questionnaire on-line, which will take approximately 10 minutes.

None of the information will be deceptive. Your participation is voluntary, and you may

withdraw from participation at any time without penalty. If you have any concerns about

this study, you can contact the coordinator, Arlo Abrahamson, at arlokane@gmail.com.

You may also contact SDSU’s Institutional Review Board at XXXXXXXX for further

information. By clicking to begin the survey, you acknowledge that you consent to

participate in this study.

There are minimal risks associated with the study. All participants will be

assigned randomized identification codes. The data will be stored in a locked drawer in

the principal investigators office at the university. Once the study is complete, the

investigators will destroy the data.

Your choice of whether or not to participate will not influence your future

relations with San Diego State University. If you have any questions about the research,

please contact the study coordinator, Arlo Abrahamson, at arlokane@gmail.com.

After viewing this consent statement, volunteers will have to click on the box “I agree to provide

my consent for this research study” in order to continue. If they do not provide their consent,

they will not be allowed to participate in the study.

IX. Permission

Before beginning the study or soliciting participants, the researchers will obtain

appropriate permission from the U.S. Navy and/or additional corporate/organizational

participants as identified.


X. Research Design

Participants will complete an online survey at www.surveymonkey.com. Questions will

ask respondents to consider a variety of factors, conditions and dimensions relating to

communications within their organizations.

The online research questionnaire will test the following hypotheses:

H1: Authoritarian and hierarchical organizational cultures have more barriers to internal

communication than organizations with participative cultures.

H2: The number of countercultures within an organization is positively correlated with

more barriers to internal communication.

H3: In the organization, message acceptance by subordinates is positively correlated

with leadership’s ability to frame internal messages.

This study will be conducted using a single online questionnaire distributed to employees

and to managers/directors/officers.

The first part of the questionnaire will ask qualifying questions about exposure to and

awareness of internal communications (including print and online newsletters as well as face-to-

face meetings). The second part will determine respondents’ awareness of barriers to internal

communication and the role of countercultures within the organization. The third part will ask

basic demographic questions to ensure that none of the differences noted in the results can be

attributed to demographic factors.

Survey questions will determine participants’ knowledge of communication barriers


within their organizations and the degree to which their organization practices participative

communication. (expand further based on completed questionnaire)

The survey will employ a Likert scale to measure each variable. After collecting data, the

research team will aggregate and analyze results from each responding

organization/department/company and apply appropriate statistical tests to measure the study’s

reliability.

Correlating Data

In order to correlate data yet still protect confidentiality, participants will be assigned a

randomized number through SurveyMonkey with their corresponding responses. No names will

be released from the researcher.

XI. Subject Involvement

The organizational managers and members will complete an online survey that should

take no more than 15 minutes. Directions and an informed consent form will be included with

the survey. Once the study is completed, the researcher will contact the participating

organizations to share results and answer any questions.

XII. Study Location

The survey will be administered online, participants can take the survey by logging on to

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/YHM7FW6 from any computer with internet access.

XIII. Tests, Questionnaires, and Interview Guides

This study will utilize an online questionnaire that will be administered to

individuals in management and non-management positions within their organization.


Organizational Communication Barriers Questionnaire
Table

Introduction Your opinions and experiences regarding communication
within your team/company/unit are requested for a research
study being conducted by military public affairs and
civilian graduate students. Results of this study will be
used to help improve communication processes within
these and other organizations. All responses are anonymous
and confidential. By clicking “submit” on the survey
response, you indicate your willingness to participate in
this survey. This survey will take less than 10 minutes to
complete.
Measures
Concept
(Items in this section are by selection)
Organization type and My organization would best be categorized as a (military/local
position held government/corporate/not for profit organization)
My position in my organization is (top
management/management/non-management position) in my
organization

Organizational Culture
Measures
Concept (All items measured on a 5-point “Strongly Disagree” to
“Strongly Agree” Scale)
Knowledge, attitudes Key decisions at my organization are made at the highest level
and behaviors about My organization encourages new ideas
organizational culture My boss often accepts my ideas
I have access to top management
My opinions are considered when decisions are made
Perceived Communication Barriers
Organizational I know my organization’s core values
Communication In my organization information moves efficiently throughout each
level of management
I believe my boss withholds important information


Organizational Subcultures
Identification and There are individuals within my organization that are not ream players
affiliation with There are individuals within my organization that are not loyal to the
subcultures within organizational leadership, policies or core values.
organization There are individuals within my organization that support different
views from those of my organizational leadership
There are individuals within my organization that resist the authority of
my organizational leadership
- Based on your previous answer, about how many individuals do you
think exist within your organization?
- On a scale of 1 to 4, 4 being very influential and 1 being not
influential, please indicate how influential you think these individuals
are in influencing the behavior or attitudes of other individuals in
the organization
An organizational counterculture is defined as a group of two or more
individuals within an organization that advocates a set of values that
present a direct challenge to the core values of the organization. Based
on this definition: “Countercultures exist within my organization”

Message Framing
Message framing and Leaders/managers/officers are candid in the information they share
acceptance in My boss communicates in a way I understand
organization Information communicated by my organization to its members is
truthful
My organization communicates bad news as well as good news
Most things my bosses say about the organization I dismiss
Top management clearly communicates its expectations
Top management in my organization are charismatic

XIV. Potential Problems

Because this study involves multi-level sampling from different organizations, gathering

data poses a challenge. To mitigate these challenges, the research team will work through

appropriate members of participating organizations to ensure a sufficient response rate.

XV. Potential Benefits

This study’s findings will potentially provide insight into the challenges organizations

face when communicating with employees. By examining barriers, influences, and distortions in


organizational communication that limit the impact of internal messaging campaigns, this study

will provide managers and communicators strategies to achieve more effective communication

within the workplace.

XVI. Identification, Assessment, and Management of Risks

Subjects may experience minimal psychological harm from participating in this study.

The survey will prompt them to disclose personal feelings and behaviors related to their work

environment, which may provoke changes in their thinking or emotions about their work. Also,

subjects may experience minimal social or economic harm in this study. The survey will prompt

them to disclose perceptions or activities that impact communication within the organization,

which may, if confidentially is breached, lead to individuals being labeled in a way that could

affect their reputation or employment.

To minimize this risk, participation in the study will be voluntary, and respondents will be able

to exit the survey at any time. Additionally, the study may inconvenience participants, as the

survey will require them to sacrifice about 15 minutes of their time. The online survey format

should relieve some of this inconvenience by allowing them to complete the survey in a variety

of settings and at any time.

XVII. Confidentiality

As part of this study, each respondent and participating organization will remain

anonymous. The study will collect only the personal information that is required to meet the

sampling protocol of the research design: respondents’ organization type (e.g. corporate,

nonprofit, governmental), departmental affiliation, and, for military respondents’, current


community affiliation (e.g. aviation, submarine, surface, special operations, expeditionary, etc.).

Collecting this information will be necessary in order to cross-sectional analyze the data.

Data collected online will only be accessible through a password-protected website as a further

protection of participants’ anonymity and confidentiality.

XVIII. Costs to Subjects

Outside what participants may pay to use the internet and time spent taking the online

survey, the subjects will incur no costs from participating in this study.

XIX. Compensation and Incentives

The research team will offer no compensation or incentives to those participating in the

study.

XX. Investigator Experience

The research team are graduate students at San Diego State University in the Journalism

and Media Studies department. They will be conducting this study and training in social science

research methods concurrently.

Please add your piece here, alphabetically.

Arlo Abrahamson is an active duty Navy officer with 20 years of experience in public

affairs and visual information. He previous assignments include Director of Public Affairs for

East Coast based Navy SEAL teams and public affairs officer aboard the aircraft carrier USS

Carl Vinson. Abrahamson has deployed numerous times to both Afghanistan and Iraq in support


of Operation Enduring Freedom.

David Bennett is an active duty Navy officer who has served as a public affairs officer

since 2007. He has deployed multiple times in support of global operations and humanitarian

assistance missions. Before Bennett's admission into SDSU's Graduate program he served on

staff as the PAO for Explosive Ordnance Disposal Group One on the West Coast. He has

extensive experience in national and international media relations, event planning , and crisis

communication.

Shauna M. Lindsay is a graduate student in Journalism and Media Studies. She is a

former public relations manager and internal communications manager for Verizon, AT&T and

Siemens Mobile. She has more than 15 years experience developing plans and content for media

relations and employee communications programs in corporations and agencies. Lindsay is a

former newspaper reporter and communications consultant. Currently, she is employed as a

service executive at AT&T.

Myers Vasquez is an active-duty Navy officer with 13 years of service. Since 2005,

Vasquez has served as a Navy public affairs officer (PAO) with multiple deployments overseas

and high profile jobs as a fleet PAO and on the Navy headquarters staff in the Pentagon. Through

these varied positions, Vasquez has acquired extensive experience in national and international


media relations, event planning , and crisis communication.

Dr. Hongmei Shen (Ph.D., Communication, University of Maryland, 2009) will supervise

the graduate students conducting this study. Shen also holds a graduate certificate in

measurement, statistics, and evaluation from the University of Maryland. Prior to her academic

career, Shen worked as a staff writer and reporter for the Beijing Review, an English-language

news weekly under the State Council in Beijing. She also interned and freelanced for various

organizations both in the U.S. and China, including the National Institutes of Health,

International Women’s Media Foundation, and American Journalism Review. Shen is a member

of the Commission of Public Relations Education and chair of PRSA’s the Committee on Work,

Life, and Gender. She advises the PRSSA San Diego State University Chapter and serves on the

PRSA SD/IC Chapter Board. She also serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Public

Relations Research and Case Studies in Strategic Communication. Her research interests include

strategic management of public relations, relationship management, international public

relations, corporate social responsibilities, crisis communication, health communication,

organizational psychology, and quantitative research methods. She has won top paper awards

from top international and national communication conferences. Her research has been published

in Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Journal of Public Relations Research,

Communication Booknotes Quarterly, Public Relations Review, Public Relations Journal,

Health Communication, Journal of Health Communication, and International Journal of

Communication. Shen teaches core research methods and advanced quantitative research

methods in the School of Journalism & Media Studies at SDSU.

XXI. Conflict of Interest


The research team does not have any financial interest associated with this project.

Silver foxes communication barriers p3 2 (nov 27) bennettrev

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Silver foxes communication barriers p3 2 (nov 27) bennettrev

Similaire à Silver foxes communication barriers p3 2 (nov 27) bennettrev (20)

Plus de David Bennett

Plus de David Bennett (6)

Silver foxes communication barriers p3 2 (nov 27) bennettrev