Today’s organization has access to communications technology that only a few short decades ago would have seemed like science fiction. From mobile devices more powerful than the first personal computers to the ability to create a team that never physically meets and resides in different parts of the world, the possibilities are vast. The issue for the modern manager then, is not only to understand these underlying technologies and the possibilities they provide, but also to stay cognizant of the limitations of the technology. After all, the goal is to improve the efficiency and performance of the organization, not implement the latest shiny new toy. This essay seeks to explore these new computer-based communication technologies, understand their advantages and disadvantages, and to then define which communication methods are better suited to the various tasks that a manager may face.
In this context, communication is defined as “The process by which a person, group or organization (the sender) transmits some type of information (the message) to another person, group or organization” (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 304). “New Computer-based Technologies” is defined as any communications medium that requires Information Technology (computers, data networks, etc) as its communication channel. To decide if a technology is an advantage or disadvantage to an organization, then, we must evaluate the technology against the norm, in this case communication methods that do not rely on Information Technology, such as face-to-face meetings, paper based communication and the humble telephone.
Reading the above definition of the word “communication”, one could be forgiven for thinking that it is a straight forward process: the sender of the message sends, the communication medium transmits and the receiver receives. However, it is clear from the literature that this is not the case (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008), (Thomas, Zolin, & Hartman, 2009),(Kupritz & Cowell, 2010). The clarity and source of the original message, the choice of medium and the state of the receiver all play a part in the process and impact on the quality of the communication. Not only is the quality of the message transmission at stake: the levels of trust and cohesion within an organization are effected not just by the contents of the message, but by the medium of exchange as well (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 305), (Clegg, 2011, p. 303).
Electronic mail (email) is the computer-mediated communications medium that is most familiar. The ease with which a message (and attachments) can be sent to one or more recipients anywhere in the world at almost no cost has made it an essential business tool, rivalling the telephone in importance. Because it gives the recipient time to compose a considered, thought-out response it may be superior to synchronous communications in some cases (Khoshafian & Buckiewicz, 1995). As well, email has evolved to serve as a quasi-project management tool and document repository (Berry, 2011).
However, that ease of use is also its biggest disadvantage: it is just too easy to press that send button. Users complain of “email overload” (Karr-Wisniewski & Lu, 2010), in which the volume of email has become so great that the productivity of the users is impacted. The literature reports some users refusing to check email more than once a day, and one company is reported as having implemented an “email free Friday” (Karr-Wisniewski & Lu, 2010, p. 1).
Even when email recipients have waded through their email, culling any spam that has made it through the organizations spam filtering, in order to find the ones they are actually interested in, or need to action, other issues arise. Since emails are text only they lack the informational richness of a more personal communication method; there are none of the non-verbal queues available to the receiver of the message that humans rely on so much when interpreting a message (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 319). Although the use of emoticons in a message may mitigate this to some extent (the research is contradictory at best: (Byron & Baldridge, 2007) versus (Lo, 2008)), there is much room left for ambiguity. This ambiguity affects more than just the fidelity of the message being delivered. According to (Byron & Baldridge, 2007) and (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 312) email recipients actively search for information about the sender and make judgements about the personality of the sender, not just the message itself. These judgements then go on to affect the recipient’s response to any future communications with that sender.
A similar situation is found with another communication tool increasingly being used by organizations (Dennis, 2010): instant messaging, or online chat. These tools allow the creation of an impromptu virtual discussion, somewhat akin to meeting at the coffee machine, or walking over to a person’s desk to ask a question. However, it is clear that instant messaging suffers many of the same problems that afflict email. There is the same lack of information richness (Cameron & Webster, 2005), and even more expectation from the sender of an immediate response. So, what was intended as a tool to enhance productivity, by allowing two or more individuals to carry on an ongoing real-time text-based dialogue (Cameron & Webster, 2005), has instead become a potential source of frustration, distraction and misunderstanding (Karr-Wisniewski & Lu, 2010). Once again this is due to the ease with which a message can be sent to the receiver, and the social expectation that is inferred: that the receiver will reply within a short space of time. Most instant messaging client programs do have the ability to change the user’s online status, from “available” to chat, to “do not disturb” (the virtual equivalent of shutting one’s office door) or “invisible” (appears offline to other users). This, however, can send its own message: the user may be seen by others in the organization as either anti-social, unreachable or even not at work.
As opposed to these asynchronous technologies, desktop video conferencing allows real time video and audio communication between two or more parties. As such, it allows for a partial emulation of a face-to-face meeting with much more information richness than email and instant messaging, without the need for the attendees to be in the same place at the same time. This has obvious financial benefits for the company in reduced travel expenses, and raises possibilities such as employees telecommuting rather than travelling to the office each day, thereby increasing staff morale and retention. However, the emulation of a face-to-face meeting is far from perfect. (Webster, 1998) suggests that much of the non-verbal communication found in a true face-to-face meeting is lost during a video conference. As well, some participants many feel uncomfortable being on camera and this may actually impair the communication (Taylor, 2011). Technical issues such as signal latency (the amount of time needed to transmit the signal) and the quality of the communications medium used can all affect the emulation (Webster, 1998).
The rise of computer-mediated communication has also led to a new type of organizational structure that could not have existed before: the virtual team. These are groups of individuals who use computer-mediated communication methods to overcome the boundaries or distance and time. This is a powerful new construct for an organization to take advantage of, and the advantages are many: The manager of the team has access to a much wider pool of talent (possibly even inter-organizationally), travel costs are significantly reduced and diversity of employees is encouraged (Bergiel, Bergiel, & Balsmeier, 2008). However, there are a number of disadvantages to implementing such a model. Virtual teams rarely (possibly never) engage in face-to-face meetings, which may hinder the trust and synergy of the team. Certain personalities seem to cope better in a virtual team environment than others and the team may consist of multiple cultures, which will complicate any communications that take place. As well, the members of the team may exist in multiple time zones around the world, making real-time communications problematic (Bergiel, et al., 2008).
As well as the issues discussed above that are specific to a certain class of technology, some general disadvantages of computer-mediated communication exist, which must be borne in mind before an organization decides to implement them. The first drawback is that of user education. This is essential to the success of any communications technology, but can be costly. The second is technical support: the users must be able to contact a knowledgeable, helpful service desk to support them in the use of the technology. As well, some technologies have specific performance requirements (for instance video conferencing requires a fast, stable, reliable network connection, a fairly powerful personal computer, a camera and a headset) (Webster, 1998).
As stated above, a manager must bear in mind many factors when choosing a method of communication. The manager must consider the nature of the message, the noise (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 306) created by the communications method and the nature of the receiver of the message: their relationship with the manager, the receiver’s personality and their cultural background.
Consider an invitation to an office function. This is a message of a positive nature, with a minimal chance of ambiguity or noise in the message (Hannagan & Bennett, 2008, p. 306) and a need to be broadcast to a large number of people. Given these criteria, an email is the most appropriate method of communication.
Another example where a manager needs to choose carefully is a subordinate’s performance review. This is a task that a manager will regularly face. Here, the requirement for a clear, information rich communication is paramount, and should take priority over all other considerations such as travel costs or convenience. Therefore face-to-face communication (Kupritz & Cowell, 2010) is called for.
A manager can also expect to conduct regular status meetings with his team. If the team is established, then the manager could reasonably decide that a less information rich communication could take place, and utilize desktop video-conferencing if convenient (Webster, 1998). If however, the team is not well established, or a new member of the team is joining or there is something particularly important to discuss, then the manager should decide on a face-to-face meeting (Kupritz & Cowell, 2010).
Managers spend a large amount of their time communicating, and high quality communications are obviously an important part of creating an efficient organization. The advent of new computer-based technologies has created new means of communicating, each with advantages and disadvantages. The key point for the manager, then, is to remember that no communications medium – even a face to face meeting – is a perfect transmitter. Some of the message is always “lost” in the “noise” created by the medium of exchange.
Various methods have been proposed to help reduce this noise: the rise of “email etiquette” guidelines and the use of emoticons for instance are intended to reduce the noise in email communications. While these may help – although there is contradictory evidence that they do – the manager must always accept that noise will exist. Above all, the manager must always remember that after all the receiver of the message is a human being.