Upload
hadien
View
213
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Running head: INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS
Informal Communications Channels: We Heard it Through the Grapevine
Nancy J. Campbell
Lewis-Clark State College
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 2
Table of Contents
Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………………i
Abstract................................................................................................................................ii
Introduction..........................................................................................................................4
Review of Literature............................................................................................................5
Methodology......................................................................................................................11
Participants.....................................................................................................................11
Instrument......................................................................................................................12
Analysis.............................................................................................................................13
Results................................................................................................................................13
Discussion..........................................................................................................................14
References..........................................................................................................................15
Appendix............................................................................................................................16
Table 1...........................................................................................................................16
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 3
Abstract
The grapevine is present in every organization and plays an important role in the
distribution and dissemination of information throughout the organization. This communication
channel operates at all levels of the hierarchy and travels horizontally, vertically and diagonally
throughout the organization. Prior studies have concluded that the grapevine exists in every
organization, information distributed is fairly accurate, and employees have a natural need to
send and receive information, whether formally or informally. This study sought to identify
whether or not employees derive communication satisfaction from participation in their
organizational grapevines. Downs and Hazen’s (1977) Communication Satisfaction
Questionnaire (CSQ) was used to survey a sample of employees and managers at one mid-size
health care facility. Although the study results were inconclusive, evidence along with prior
findings, encourages further research into the area of communication satisfaction in relationship
to grapevine activity.
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 4
Introduction
Throughout history, the informal communication network, commonly referred to as the
grapevine, has likely been instrumental in the distribution of information throughout
organizations and among employees at all levels in an organization’s hierarchy.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a grapevine is “… informal person-to-
person means of circulating information or gossip.” The term grapevine was coined during Civil
War times when telegraph wires were strung from tree-to-tree near battle sites, and information
coming through the wires was used by army intelligence (Mishra, 1990). According to Mishra’s
(1990) study, this informal and unsanctioned information network flows within every
organization. And, since unsanctioned, Newstrom, Monczka, and Reif (1974) found that it was
commonly misunderstood, misrepresented and often times ignored by managers who may opt to
have the organizations’ formal communications network utilized as the only source of internal
information.
Much of the early research on informal communications networks placed little emphasis
on communication satisfaction of those participating. These earlier studies placed more focus on
factors such as communication flow and role behavior. However, later research tended to place
more emphasis on the influences, perceptions and value of the grapevine, resulting in further
knowledge of the level of communication satisfaction derived from participation in grapevine
activities.
Further research into informal communication networks (the grapevine) and how
it effects employees’ communication satisfaction will help organizations better understand the
role of informal communication and why it may be on the rise within their organizations.
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 5
Review of Literature
Early studies of organizational communication networks were limited to location.
According to Sutton & Barrett (1968), prior studies completed by Bavelas & Barrett (1951),
Jacobsen & Seashore (1951), and Davis (1953a), did little to further progress in extending these
grapevine studies to real-life organizations (field studies). Thus, Sutton & Porters’ (1968) study
of the grapevine focused on adding knowledge to the studies of communications networks in
actual organizational settings.
Sutton & Porters’ (1968) study sought to partially replicate a prior study, Davis’ (1953a)
classic study of the grapevine, but also to “…extend the study further by obtaining personality
data on individuals” (Sutton & Porter, 1968, p.230). They wanted to know whether or not
communication role behavior was a function of the work situation only, as with the Davis
(1953a) study, or whether personality characteristics of the individuals played a part in this
behavior, as well (Sutton & Porter, 1968).
In a regional government tax office over a period of seven months, Sutton & Porter
(1968) sampled 79 employees, including the regional director, auditors, tax representatives and
support staff. Grapevine information was investigated using Davis’ (1953a) “Ecco analysis,”
but added Bass’ Orientation Inventory for obtaining personality data. Subjects in the study were
classified as isolates (didn’t receive the information); liaisons (received information and passed it
along); and dead-enders (received information, but never passed it along). “Of the non-
supervisory employees, 33% were isolates, 57% dead-enders, and 10% liaisons. “Those serving
in a supervisory capacity were liaisons 100% of the time” (Sutton & Porter, 1968, p.226).
Sutton & Porter (1968) found that individuals higher in the organization hierarchy
were more informed of information passing through the grapevine than those lower in the
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 6
hierarchy and the flow of information took place predominantly within functions (departments),
rather than between them, which contradicted Davis’ (1953a) findings. Personality data showed
only a slight relationship to role behavior. Knowing who participates in grapevine
communication will aid in determining communication satisfaction.
Rudolphs’ (1973) study attempted to add general knowledge of grapevine communication
patterns and compare similarities and provide insights into the operation of grapevine
communications within a multi-shift setting vs. a single shift setting. The organization studied in
Rudolphs’ (1973) study allowed the investigator to trace the flow of information through the
work day and through multiple work shifts. Among other things, Rudolph’s (1973) study found
that informal information was found to be inaccurate less than six percent of the time, which
assumes a 94% accuracy rating overall and is similar to previous study findings. This high level
of accuracy may contribute to greater communication satisfaction among grapevine participants,
but most important to this particular study, was the finding that some shifts receive less
information than others.
Newstrom, et al.’s (1974) study reviewed what was previously known about the
grapevine and summarized common assumptions held by managers. After surveying a sample of
both managers and non-managers, it was concluded that the grapevine is present and either
functional or dysfunctional in all organizations, and, according to Newstrom, et al. (1974), if not
recognized and managed, the grapevine has the potential to undermine management authority. It
was also found that grapevines form when certain conditions are present in the organization.
According to Newstrom, et al. (1974), when formal networks are too rigid or narrow, managers
withhold critical information from employees, employees have too much free time, or they feel
insecure in their job, grapevines are likely to emerge. And, “…these conditions create an
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 7
overwhelming need in employees to receive and relay information” (Newstrom, et al., 1974, p.
12). When these conditions exist, says Newstrom, et al. (1974), employees have an
overpowering need for information. This overpowering need may lead employees to seek
information through informal channels, most likely the grapevine, to satisfy their communication
needs.
Mishras’ (1991) article focused on developing a conceptual model of the grapevine for
later testing. According to the article, grapevine networks supplement formal networks, and,
while formal networks are sanctioned, documented, and unchangeable, grapevines are dynamic
and the information that flows through them is continuous. As was found in Newstrom, et al.
(1974), Mishra (1991) found that grapevine networks satisfy a natural need for information.
Therefore, it may be reasonable to conclude that, in satisfying a need for information, grapevine
networks likely create communication satisfaction or dissatisfaction among participants. Mishra
(1974) goes on to suggest that grapevine information moves through the organization in all
directions; up, down, horizontally and diagonally and in a short period of time. And, as
communication, this informal network compares with formal communication channels. There
are positive aspects of grapevine communications. According to Mishras’ (1974) article, the
grapevine is a stress release for employees and it creates a spirit of teamwork within the
organization. Information travels quickly through the grapevine, enabling employees to prepare
for changes and adjustments in advance of formal communication (Mishra, 1974). Another
important aspect, according to Mishra (1974), is that grapevine networks indicate the health of
the organization, as well as company morale, trends and productivity of employees. Included in
the article were recommendations to management for controlling potentially harmful rumors.
Smiths’ (1996) article gives an account of an American Management Association
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 8
(AMA) conference where speaker, Elaine Re’, President of Re’ Associates Inc., a New York and
London based communications and human resources consulting firm, spoke to an audience about
the organizational grapevine. As told by Smith (1996), Re’ defined grapevine as “…that
unofficial communication network that weaves its way through every organization” and claimed
grapevine networks can be both a positive and negative tool. According to Smiths’ (1996)
account, Re’ warned the audience not to try stopping grapevine activity and referred to it as
being a natural part of life.
According to Re’, the pervasiveness of grapevine communications has much to do with
organizations not supplying real, or meaningful information, which is similar to the previous
findings of Newstrom, et al. (1974).
Crampton, Hodge and Mishra (1998) researched the factors influencing grapevine
activity with the purpose of measuring managers’ perceptions of and ability to monitor/control
grapevine communications and finding whether or not the perceptions differed among
management levels.
Of particular interest to the researchers, was to what extent, if any, managers’ positions,
affected their perceptions of the grapevine. The methodology used in Crampton, et al.’s (1998)
study was a fifty-three item questionnaire, designed to obtain information on managers’
perceptions and attitudes toward grapevine communications in organizations. The questionnaire
included the following areas: 1) intensity and importance to employees, 2) ambiguity and lack of
clarity to employees, 3) an insecure or threatening environment, and 4) a lack of trust among
employees toward formal communications. The questions used a five-point Likert-type rating
scale, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. A random sample was sent via mail to
416 diverse, profit and non-profit organizations with at least fifty employees. One hundred and
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 9
fifty-eight of those organizations responded with completed questionnaires giving a response rate
of 38 percent. Of the 38 percent, the highest percentage of completed questionnaires came from
top management.
Crampton, et al.’s (1998) study resulted in a majority indicating there was, indeed, an
informal communication network (grapevine) operating in their organizations, and most
managers indicated grapevine activity increased when information was perceived to be
important. The sample also indicated activity increased when a threatening or insecure
environment existed and the organizational climate created a lack of trust among employees.
Accuracy of the information was examined, as well, with 62 percent of managers perceiving the
information to be partially accurate. An 82 percent majority considered the grapevine to be
useful to employees in times of stress and ambiguity. Managers were also asked if grapevine
activity should be monitored and if so, to what extent, and 86 percent believed it should be
influenced indirectly by improving formal communications channels. Ninety-two percent of
managers indicated they had no formal policies in place for dealing with grapevine activity.
Crampton, et al.’s (1998) study concludes that grapevine activity increases when four
conditions are present: uncertainty, importance of the information, insecure environments where
formal communication is lacking, and ambiguous subject matter, which is similar to previous
studies that also indicate a need for communication satisfaction amongst those participating in
grapevine activity. Crampton, et al.’s (1998) position is in agreement with experts who suggest
that management should influence, rather than control grapevine activity and make
recommendations to management based on this position.
Harcourt, Richerson, and Wattiers’ (1991) study attempted to determine the quality of
communication within organizations and to compare one company’s data findings to that of
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 10
national findings. The study focused on middle managers, who were assumed to play a central
role in the operational success in organizations. According to Pearce & Robinson, (1989),
middle managers are in a position to communicate up, down and diagonally, which puts them in
a good position to evaluate communication quality.
Harcourt, et al.’s (1991) study used a survey instrument designed to gather data on the
quality of information managers receive in organizations. Frequency distributions, cross
tabulations, and Chi-square tests were used to analyze the data. The questionnaire covered 14
information topics (e.g., company objectives) and 3 sources of information (formal, grapevine,
and network communication). The survey was mailed to 3,602 middle managers across the
United States and 36 middle managers from a small marketing organization. Participants were
randomly selected from an American Management Association mailing list of 83,867 middle
managers. Estimated error rate for this sample was approximately 3.3 percent with a 95 percent
confidence level. Of the managers surveyed, 871 responded (24.2 percent). Findings were
presented in three parts: quality of information, sources of information, and a comparison of a
company’s assessment to the national assessment. Over 62 percent of the managers surveyed
disagreed or strongly disagreed that the quality of information they receive is good, company
information was rated good by only 19.2 percent, and departmental information was rated even
lower. Over four-fifths of the managers reported overall poor communication received in their
organizations. In rating sources of information, managers used three different modes of
communication: formal communication, grapevine communication, and other informal network
communication. Formal communication was ranked lowest, 49.1 percent ranked the grapevine
higher than that of formal communication and the grapevine, but on average, 61 percent of
managers ranked other network communications as the best out of the three.
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 11
Findings from Harcourt, et al.’s (1991) study found that the grapevine and informal
network communications were frequently ranked higher than that of formal communication
channels, which encourages further study of communication satisfaction associated with
informal communication networks in organizations.
Numerous studies have been conducted on the topic of informal communication networks
in the workplace, resulting in similarities in the findings. These findings suggest that people
have a natural need to send and receive information, and have further suggested that when
certain conditions exist within an organization, grapevine activity increases. Most studies in this
literature review concur; grapevine activity is present in every organization. Thus, it is important
for organizations to understand the level of communication satisfaction employees derive from
informal communication channels. Further studies can help organizations better understand the
grapevine and its significance in the workplace.
H: Employees who report greater participation in an informal communication network
such as the grapevine, also report greater communication satisfaction than employees who report
little or no participation in grapevine activity.
Methodology
Participants
This study used a survey methodology and quantitative analysis. The population of
interest in the study was managers and subordinates of U.S. businesses. Due to time constraints,
this study was limited to one organization, a for-profit health care facility comprised of 150-200
employees and included employees from all levels of the organization’s hierarchy. The sample
included all employees of the organization to better generalize findings to the population of
interest. Obtaining data from those higher up in the organization was thought to determine
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 12
whether or not managers in the organization feel that informal communication channels are or
can be beneficial to the organization and more specifically, to its employees.
Instrument
The instrument used in the study was Downs & Hazens’ (1977) Communication
Satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ), which utilized a five point Likert-type rating scale with 45
closed-ended questions ranging from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. Test-retest (2-week
interval) reliability of the CSQ was reported at .94 (Downs & Hazen, 1977). Coefficient alpha
reliabilities have been consistently high, ranging from .72 to .96 for studies in the United States.
The study was used in an attempt to discover a relationship between communication satisfaction
and participation in grapevine communication. Three of the 45 questions included categorical
questions that were demographic in nature and included questions of position level (manager,
supervisor, subordinate, etc.), gender, and length of employment.
Procedure
An invitation to participate was distributed to all employees through the company’s email
system, and a hyperlink to the on-line survey via electronic survey software, Survey Monkey,
was included. Using closed questions was helpful in capturing employees’ attitudes and
perceptions of the grapevine, which produced data that can be linked to the level of
communication satisfaction derived from participation in the grapevine. The survey was
anonymous, so that employees could feel free to respond openly and honestly about their
communication behaviors as they relate to participation in the company grapevine.
The framework for this research is firmly grounded in organizational communication
theory. The goals of the study are: 1) to help organizations better understand the grapevine and
the level of communication satisfaction derived from it, 2) to further research in the area of
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 13
informal communication channels in the workplace, and 3) to gather findings to test the
hypothesis.
Analysis
Statistical tests used to analyze data were the ANOVA (one-way) to determine
differences in the mean communication scores between satisfaction levels with an active
grapevine and with an active and accurate grapevine, independent sample t-tests were used to
determine whether differences existed between two different groups such as males/females and
managers/supervisors/subordinates, and a Pearson Chi Square (one-way) was performed to test
for differences in responses between job satisfaction and communication satisfaction.
Results
Of 150 employees invited to participate in the communication satisfaction survey, sixty-
nine (N=69) responded, which resulted in a 46% response rate, of which 80% were subordinates;
sixty surveys were complete and usable. Of the sixty employees who participated, fifty-eight
(87%) were female and eight (13%) were male. The mean overall score was one hundred
twenty-eight with a minimum score of seventy-five, a maximum score of two hundred and a
range of one hundred twenty-five. Averaged scores in each category were calculated and
indicated overall response ratings of 51% satisfaction, 3% dissatisfaction and 46% neutral
ratings. Results of statistical testing showed a statistical significance of p<.001 for mean
communication scores and satisfaction levels with an active and accurate grapevine. While other
tests resulted in high communication satisfaction levels among responses, they failed to show
statistical significance.
Appendix, Table 1
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 14
Discussion
Study findings have concluded that the research hypothesis is not supported and the null
hypothesis, which suggests that participation in the grapevine has no effect on communication
satisfaction, is assumed to be true. However, evidence does indicate a trend towards higher
satisfaction levels in relationship to employee participation in the grapevine, which encourages
further research in the area.
46% of the overall responses were rated as neutral and included the majority of questions
considered to be directly related to the hypothesis. There is speculation as to the reason why
46% of employees surveyed would respond with this high rate of neutral responses. It could be
that the survey questions were not understood or ambiguous in some way, which is unlikely
given the CSQ questionnaire shows consistently high reliability; the questionnaire is considered
to be valid and reliable. It more likely means that employees were apprehensive about
responding truthfully due to a lack of confidence in their anonymity. Also, question number six
on the survey asked: “If the communication associated with your job could be changed in any
way, would you change it?” Overall response rate to this question was 78% “yes,” which may
indicate that employees are not completely satisfied with their organization’s communication. It
would be beneficial to future research to ask how employees would like to change the
communication associated with their jobs. Statistical testing also found that less satisfaction with
the grapevine also produced lower satisfaction scores, but was not statistically significant.
Although the evidence is not conclusive, the trend towards higher communication
satisfaction levels with participation in the grapevine, along with reasonable assumptions and
prior research findings, there is likely enough evidence to encourage further research into
organizational grapevines with regards to employee communication satisfaction.
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 15
References
Bavelas, A., & Barrett, D. (1951). An experimental approach to organizational communication. Personnel, 27(1), 366-371.
Davis, K. (1972). Grapevine analysis for organizational communication. Arizona Business Bulletin Aug.-Sept., 10-14
Davis, K. (1953). A method of studying communication patterns in organizations. Personnel Psychology, 6(1), 301-312. (a)
Downs, C. W., & Hazen, M. D. (1977). A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction
[Abstract]. In Palmgreen, Rubin & Sypher (Eds.), Communication research measures: A
source book (pp. 114 - 119). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum, L. Associates, Inc.
Crampton, S. M., Hodge, J. W., & Mishra, J. M. (1998). The informal communication network: Factors influencing grapevine activity. Public Personnel Management, 2(4), 569.
Harcourt, J., Richerson, V., & Wattier, M.J. (1991). A national study of
middlemanagers’ assessment of organization communication
quality. Journal of Business Communication, 28 (4), 348-365.
Jacobson, E., & Seashore, S. (1951). Communication practices in complex organizations. Journal of Social Issues, 7(1), 28-40.
Mishra, J. (1990). Managing the grapevine. Public Personnel Management, 19(2), 213.
Newstrom, J. W., Monczka, R. E., & Reif, W. E. (1974). Perceptions of the
grapevine: Its value and influence. Journal of Business Communication, 11(3),
12-20.
Pearce III, J.A., & Robinson, R.B. (1989). Management. New York, NY: Random House, Inc.
Rudolph, E. E. (1973). Informal human communication systems in a large organization. Journal of Applied Communications Research, 1(1), 7.
Smith, B. (1996). Care and feeding of the office grapevine. Management Review, 85(2), 6.
Sutton, H., & Porter, L. W. (1968). A study of the grapevine in a governmental organization. Personnel Psychology, 21(2), 223-2
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 16
Appendix
Table 1Averaged Response RatesDissatisfied: 3% In the past 6 months, what has happened to your level of satisfaction?Neutral: 46% Information about organizational policies and goalsInformation about how my job compares with othersInformation about how I am being judgedRecognition of my effortsInformation about government action affecting my organizationInformation about changes in our organizationReports on how problems in my job are being handledInformation about accomplishments and/or failures of the organizationExtent to which my superiors know and understand the problems faced by subordinatesExtent to which the people in my organization have great ability as communicatorsExtent to which my supervisor offers guidance for solving job related problemsExtent to which the organization’s communication makes me identify with it or feel a vital part of itExtent to which the organization’s communications are interesting and helpfulExtent to which conflicts are handled appropriately through proper communication channelsExtent to which the grapevine is active in our organizationExtent to which horizontal communication with other organizational members is accurate and free flowingExtent to which the attitudes toward communication in the organization are basically healthyExtent to which informal communication (grapevine) is active and accurateExtent to which the amount of communication in the organization is about rightSatisfied: 51% How satisfied are you with your job? Information about my progress in my jobPersonal newsInformation about departmental policies and goalsInformation about the requirements of my jobInformation about benefits and payInformation about our organization’s financial standingExtent to which my supervisor listens and pays attention to meExtent to which my supervisor trusts meExtent to which I receive in time the information needed to do my jobExtent to which my supervisor is open to ideasExtent to which communication practices are adaptable to emergenciesExtent to which my work group is compatibleExtent to which our meetings are well organizedExtent to which the amount of supervision given me is about rightExtent to which written directives and reports are clear and conciseExtent to which my subordinates feel responsible for initiating accurate upward CommunicationExtent to which my subordinates anticipate my needs for informationExtent to which I do not have a communication overloadExtent to which my subordinates are receptive to evaluation, suggestions, and criticismsExtent to which my subordinates are responsive to downward directive communication
Table 1
INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 17
Nancy,
Do add your table(s), and in the Results and Discussion, change the text of percentages to
numbers with %. I’ve made some minor corrections, so use this copy. See the yellow
highlighting.
This is good overall.
Content = 39/40
Writing = 9/10
48/50
Late -10
38