There is plenty of scope to develop good communications in Irish workplaces. Recent research from Drury Communications and the Institute of Personnel and Development discovered many Irish workers knew little of their organisation beyond their direct job. It is easy to see why they do not feel encouraged to contribute beyond that job.
Keeping people informed is frequently described as the cornerstone of employee commitment. The need to communicate at work is underlined by the fact that we now have a more educated workforce, that wishes to be involved and informed as much as possible. It is also true that communication is increasingly crucial to the fast moving world of work, to the move toward flatter organisational structures and to efforts to provide top quality goods and services in the marketplace.
According to IBEC, most successful organisations recognise good communications is essential to success. It is one of the means by which all employees understand the organisation's objectives and where their particular role fits into the overall picture. Information sharing encourages employees to feel they belong to their organisation, enhances mutual trust and respect and underlines the interdependence of all who contribute to the entity's eventual success. It also enables good, consistent and caring leadership to flourish.
But the "traditional" school of Irish trade unionism holds that when management provides information it is inevitably misleading. This perspective was reflected in the late Jim Larkin's pragmatic advice to his union members: "When management want to provide you with information run a mile, but if they don't want to give it scream loudly until you get it!"
A motivating factor here is that the information communicated may serve only to support management's position, while weakening that of the union. Since Larkin's time the gap between management and workers has thankfully narrowed. Workers are more confident, better trained, assertive and realise their value to the organisation. Their suspicions can be reduced and trust enhanced by good communications.
Furthermore, employees need to hear the good and the bad news. Good news assures them they are working in the right direction and that their efforts are appreciated. If staff are only told the bad news, they are likely to become cynical. The good news ensures that employees get the total picture.
If management is prepared to communicate in the good times as well as the bad there will be advantages. These include more informed and responsible collective bargaining, the fostering of common ground and commitment and greater trust levels.
In this respect it is interesting to note Prof Patrick Gunnigle's observation that management appears to have shifted the focus of its communications away from trade unions and towards direct communications with employees. To some extent this is part of a managerial strategy entailing an "individualist" employee relations orientation, which marginalises or even bypasses the union.
Whatever the reason, Prof Gunnigle's research at the University of Limerick reveals a substantial increase in direct written and verbal communication with employees in Ireland over the last decade. But while there is a high level of communication on corporate strategy and financial performance to management, professional and technical grades, this is not replicated with clerical and manual staff. He also discovered that foreign (US and British-owned organisations) were more likely to communicate with employees on such matters.
Few can argue with an employee's need to understand the objectives and strategies of his/her employer. This generates commitment, and it is hard to see how this can be won if key decisions and policies are not being communicated to those expected to deliver the results. Also the absence of a formal communication system persistently spawns an informal one, often known as the "grapevine", often quite malicious in relaying information.
Research from Britain suggests the most common obstacles to good workplace communication are organisation culture and a lack of senior management commitment to the practice. And as they recently discovered at the US telephone company AT&T, confusion spreads when those with responsibility for communication attempt to disguise the real message with flowery terminology. Suddenly dismissals become "downsizing", or a "release of resources", a "career change opportunity", a "career transition programme", "right-sizing", "reshaping", "repositioning", a "schedule of adjustments" or even a "strengthening of global effectiveness"! So much for calling a spade a spade.
With this in mind Eugenie Houston, formerly human resources director at Esat Telecom, stresses that when establishing effective communications a critical factor determining its success is people. They must see that the benefits of actively participating in a communicating and learning organisation exceed the investment of time and personal risk involved. There are basic steps associated with an effective strategy, says Ms Houston.
First you need to know the current state of play. A simple survey can elicit the views of staff as to what the position is and what should be done to improve matters. As Esat discovered, this allows subsequent improvements to be measured. Arising from this employee feedback a communications policy can be devised and conveyed to all. It may contain an "open door" policy, team briefings, one-to-one face-to-face meetings, attitude surveys, employee lunches, corporate events, e-mail and intranets. Whatever combination is used, the policy should be explicit, agreed, delivered upon and reviewed. Having a policy which looks good and sounds good just is not enough.
IBEC's recently published Human Resources Management Guide also advises its members to assess the firm's communications. Then set down the objectives and targets of the communications strategy for the year ahead. When it comes to conveying the message, the IBEC rule-of-thumb is that the more important the message, the more important it is that someone should talk directly with the employees.
People cannot be committed to an organisation unless they know what is going on. As so many management gurus today never tire of telling us: people are the organisation's most competitive advantage so welcome them on board.
Dr Gerard McMahon lectures at the Faculty of Business, Dublin Institute of Technology. E-Mail: ppl1@indigo.ie
