UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF THE VETERAN EMPLOYEE: HOW

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION MAY BRIDGE GAPS

BETWEEN NEW AND VETERAN EMPLOYEES

__________________________

A Thesis

Presented to the Faculty in Communication and Leadership Studies

School of Professional Studies

Gonzaga University

___________________________

Under the Supervision of COML 680 Professor Dr. Carolyn Cunningham

Under the Mentorship of Dr. Carolyn Cunningham

__________________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts in Communication and Leadership Studies

___________________________

By

Jacqui L. Barker

Spring 2012

2

3

Abstract

Framed through evaluation of the Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT),

Constructive-Development Theory (CDT), and the Rational-World Paradigm philosophy,

this research focused on existing, or veteran, anxieties when a new employee joins an

organization‟s group or team. This research surveyed United States Navy federal civil

servants employed at two, geographically dispersed, Navy science and technology

laboratories and discovered these employees do in fact experience anxieties, and seek

various means to manage or reduce the emotion associated with a newly-hired employee

by either avoiding, talking about, observing the new person, working with the person or

taking a blended approach and incorporating one or more of these examples. The data

suggests communication gaps exist within the workplace based on supervisor and non-

supervisor roles. Recommended future research should focus on veteran employee

anxiety levels, anxiety measurement tools, lost revenue associated when a new employee

leaves a new job if associated with poor anxiety reduction by the veteran employee.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction: The Problem and Goal 5

Statement of the Problem 8

Definitions of terms used 9

Organization of Remaining Chapters 10

Chapter 2. Literature Review

Philosophical and Theoretical Basis 11

Framework of the Study 16

Organizational Communication & Anxiety Reduction 20

Employee Motivators 21

Cultural Considerations 26

Servant Leadership and Anxiety Reduction 29

Discourse and Generational Divide 31

Research Questions 32

Chapter 3 Scope and Methodology

Scope 34

Methodology 35

Chapter 4 Results and Analysis

Results 37

Analysis 39

Chapter 5 Summaries and Conclusions

Limitations of the Study 42

Further Study or Recommendations 42

Conclusion 45

References 46

Appendix A – 2012 Organizational Communication Workforce Survey 50

Appendix B – 2009 New Hire Communication Audit Results 59

Appendix C – 2009 New Hire Communication Audit Comments 64

5

Chapter 1: Introduction

When organizations hire new employees, those new employees experience

anxiety related to new employment and extensive research has been conducted to detail

various facets of the new-employee anxiety. However, little research focuses on how

existing, or veteran, employees react to the new employee. Very little, if any, research

has been commissioned to identify anxieties felt by existing employees who work for the

United States federal civil service who serve in the acquisition or science and technology

career fields.

Federal agencies combined are the largest employers in the United States. In fact,

of the 100 federal agencies who employee about 2.7 million civilians, 1.4 million salaried

employees are full time (Booz, Allen & Hamilton, January 2011) and of those 1.4 million

salaried federal employees, the U.S. Navy employs almost 204,000 (CHINFO, 2011).

While the U.S. federal government projected Baby Boomer retirements to peak between

2005 and 2008, national economic challenges have since extended that anticipated

attrition peak to 2015 when more than 48 percent of all federal civil servants will be

eligible to retire. The Office of Personnel Management expects more than 67 percent of

federal civilian supervisors will be eligible to retire within that time frame (Booz et al.,

November 2010). This is a national issue, but this research‟s findings could have farther

reaching application outside the Department of Defense (DoD). Aside from economic

ramifications linked to high attrition rates, when the Baby Boomer attrition bubble bursts,

the federal civil service corporate knowledge base will be drastically depleted. For the

DoD, that technical, corporate knowledge loss could impact overall operational readiness,

6

morale, and productivity, when the lost knowledge is within the acquisition or science

and technology communities. This lost science and engineering knowledge could cost

American taxpayers a significant, yet undetermined amount of revenue, and drastic losses

to warfighting capabilities. This research specifically evaluates a select cross section of

the United States Navy‟s federal civilians within the science and technology or

acquisition community. For the federal civilians who remain employed, few studies offer

insight on how existing employees respond to newly hired employees, and in essence, the

changing workforce environment. The changing workforce from a predominately Baby

Boomer workforce to a multi-generational workforce could be categorized as an

organizational communication issue. Organizational communication is primarily a

leadership development topic within the U.S. Navy‟s military and civilian ranks, but it‟s

important to note that few studies outside the government focus on the impact on veteran

employees when new employees enter the workspace and so research is largely a “one-

sided view of the organizational socialization process” (Gallagher & Sias, 2009, p. 24).

The new employee‟s socialization process includes several methods in which he or she

learns about the organization‟s values, cultures, languages, habits, communication

surveillance tactics, and then further develop his or her own expectations and needs for

the organization (Gallagher, 2011). The latter may determine the length of time a new

employee is retained thereby declaring this topic of study non centric to the U.S. Navy‟s

civilian workforce. At this point, it is important to note the U.S. Navy‟s federal civilian

workforce specifically the science and technology community was evaluated for this

study, as the research will primarily be used to benefit that specific community.

Therefore, no other branches of military service were evaluated for data gathering

7

purposes.

This research is primarily focused on the URT and the Constructive Development

Theory (CDT) on veteran employee‟s anxiety during the new employee‟s initial entry and

socialization phase, or stage one in the CDT, and includes discourse analysis to

understand veteran and new employee interaction through a theoretical framework for

evaluation. While the Cognitive Dissonance Theory applies to this research, the

Constructive Development Theory provides a more applicable, real-world framework to

better understand how employees socialize information, and transfer from new to veteran

employee. Interwoven throughout the study is an evaluation of how servant-leadership

approaches are being utilized today and how they may continue to reduce veteran

employee anxieties, negative results to new hires, extend amount of time a new hire

spends with an organization, and improve low performing communication approaches

that impact individuals or collective Navy organizations. Although civilian, the U.S.

Navy acquisition community is still a military and hierarchical organization.

To clarify terms, Gallagher and Sias defined a veteran employee as one who has

been employed by an organization for more than one year, whereas Jablin identified a

socialization process between three and six months (2001). For purposes of this research,

the term veteran employee is defined as a federal civil service employee with five or

more year‟s experience. Specifically, the term veteran employee for this research purpose

expands the timeline to capture the five-year timeframe a new employee is in a

probationary status, meaning that after three years of sustained, superior performance, a

new employee is no longer considered „career conditional‟, rather they become „career

permanent.‟ However, documented studies, especially in more highly technical, white

8

collar occupational fields as is the case with the federal civil service, offer justification

for the use of the five-year mark. The five-year mark symbolizes the timeframe when an

organization‟s financial investment in hiring and training a new employee has been

satisfied. An example of the veteran justification lies within the November 2010 Booz,

Allen and Hamilton attrition study that cites the Office of the Controller of the Currency

(OCC) belief that it takes new employees five years to become full performance bank

examiners, an occupation within the OCC. If the employee leaves before that five-year

mark, the OCC has lost all funds associated with hiring and training the lost employee

and the future replacement employee (Booz et al, November 2010). This term veteran

employee is not to be confused with a veteran service member with an honorable

discharge. This definition is expanded because civil servants are no longer considered

probationary outside of a two-year timeframe. The five-year span accounts for an

employee‟s time to settle into the career path and become vested for retirement purposes

and again, recoup the initial hiring investment.

Statement of the Problem

When a new employee is hired, leadership, front-line supervisors and peers, who

all may be categorized as veteran employees, have the opportunity to guide and shape

whether a new hire will stay or leave their new organization (Gallagher & Sias, 2009).

Additionally, those veteran employees, whether supervisory or non-supervisory in nature,

can also mold how the new employee gathers information and ultimately how effectively

he or she uses send-receive tactics, as identified in the communication process model

(Miller, 2006). That molding or training could be positive or negative. Data suggests that

when new employee information is not shared with veteran employees on a timely basis,

9

the entire new hire socialization process and organizational impacts may be negatively

affected. However, this research‟s empirical data also determined that a small

representative group of federal civil servants actually contemplated retiring early when

new employees were brought into the organization (Barker, 2012). Ages of survey

respondents were not legally allowed by the U.S. Navy to be gathered so it is unclear

which generation or demographic each of the respondents were grouped, but the data

does validate that one URT tactic or reaction is to retire in minority situations.

Definitions of Terms Used

Constructive-Development Theory: A staged approach toward understanding the

development of an employee experiences from socialization until retirement.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: A dissonance theory that applies to attitude forming,

changing, and shaping.

Group: A collection of individuals who draw a boundary around themselves.

Information: The clear conveyance of data that results in reduction of uncertainty. The

more clear the message, the more credible the sender and the message. (Griffin, 2009,

p.44)

Message elaboration: Defined as the “extent to which a person carefully thinks about

issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication.” (Griffin, 2009, p.

194)

New Hire: Newly-hired employees from day one to five years of employment with one

employer.

Team: A group of people with a common purpose. That purpose is normally what

defines the team‟s goals and purpose.

Uncertainty Reduction Theory: This theory explores how humans will anticipate, and

expect future motivations and means to reduce anxiety or uncertainty (Griffin, 2009).

Veteran Employee: An employee having been employed between five and 40 years by

one Navy organization or command.

10

Organization of Remaining Chapters

Chapter 2 discusses the research topic through a review of literature that

establishes and frames the need for this research and identifies potential future issues or

problems. Chapter 3 discusses the research methodology employed. Chapter 4 offers the

results of research derived from two surveys conducted in 2009 and March 2012 survey.

The 2009 survey was an online communication audit that surveyed 300 new employees

hired at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division. The March 2012

survey was one conducted online and taken by 407 U.S. Navy federal civil servants from

two Navy science and technology laboratories located in two separate, geographically

divided areas. The final chapter concludes and offers future courses of research.

11

Chapter 2 – Literature Review

Philosophical and Theoretical Basis

Using communication theories, such as Constructive Development Theory (CDT),

Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT), intercultural, and interpersonal communication

theories, and the Rational-World Paradigm philosophy, this research also evaluates

behavioral, communication, and socialization models, such as transactional and

transformational communication models, to understand the issue and offer

recommendations for future research or actions. Complimented by an exemplary

literature review, empirical data collected for this research (Barker, 2012), a discourse

analysis was applied to understand social interactions and offers a level of reflexivity as

the author is presently employed as federal civil servant within a Navy laboratory. This

research asserts that organizations will experience, at a minimum, a lag in productivity or,

to the far extreme, a loss of corporate knowledge when leadership fails to deploy

proactive communication tools and tactics before, and during surges in hiring

Millenialists, as studied by the Partnership for Public Service (2011) and the

Congressional Budget Office (2010) stipulate. Organizational communication supports

interdependence in the socialization process that benefits both the new and veteran

employees (Gallagher, 2012) and the organization overall and are all collectively and

combined key to understanding the present problem and detailing results. Incorporating

organizational communication tactics based on transactional and transformational models

of communication and servant leadership principles will retain corporate knowledge, ease

knowledge sharing between veteran and newly hired employees and stabilize or maintain

productivity, however, this research does not recommend tools and tactics based on

12

communication methods. Rather, evaluating literature within the identified

communication models, theories and philosophy offers context in which to establish a

direction for the research and empirical data.

The Real-World Paradigm philosophy is rooted in science and explains human

behavior as rational. Within that philosophy, and evaluating the constructive development

and uncertainty reduction theories frames this discussion to clearly understand human

behavior as rational and that when negative anxiety is experienced, a human will seek to

reduce or eradicate the feeling through any means possible. These selected theories

explain why veteran employees might use various means to reduce anxiety and by what

means. The Booz, Allen and Hamilton attrition study categorized veteran employees who

are at risk to retire as: 1) Newly hired employees; 2) Employees eligible to retire between

one and five years and 3) Mission critical employees (2011) and an attrition study

conducted in the federal government found, through a longitudinal attrition analysis of

new hires, that between 2006 and 2008, 24.2 percent of new hires, which was 115,670

personnel, left their federal jobs within two years of being hired. That 24.2 percent

translated into 27,761 of the several million federal civil servants (Booz et al, 2010). The

unanswered question in this study was whether or not strong socialization practices were

utilized within studied organizations and whether or not the new employee experienced

strong transformational or transactional types of communication.

As it pertains to Navy civil servants within the science and technology

communities, the nation faces a critical lack of trained or experienced professionals

within the science, technology, engineering or mathematics career fields. Anxiety felt by

the new or veteran employees could impact future career plans, and is certainly and area

13

for future research as attrition rates alone do not tell the entire story. Several

considerations must be factored into an employee‟s decision to retire, such as personal

financial stability and the nation‟s economic status. Workplace considerations might

include job satisfaction, happiness with an agency‟s strategic focus, lack of job

opportunities or anxieties felt between multi-generational and newly hired employees. On

April 29, 2010, the Policy, Partnership for Public Service Vice President John Palguta

testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,

Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and

the District of Columbia and stressed the need for mentoring, leadership training and

internships within the federal government (Palguta, 2010). Palguta said organizational

change in employee satisfaction is simply based on “employee attitudes toward their

supervisors and higher-level managers” (Palguta, 2010, p. 2) – a testament to the need for

consistently used, clear organizational communication tactics. Despite several attempts to

sway Congress to legislate mentoring and dyadic communication between supervisor and

employee, his efforts failed and bills introduced into the Senate died in committee.

Therefore, federal civilians are left to promote change through their own identified

leadership motivations.

Theoretical evaluation in this context provides real-world application a

foundation, a root system from which to draw. Regulation and doctrine drive day-to-day

actions made by the U.S. Navy‟s federal civil service corps, yet few exist that prescribe

how to culture or nurture interpersonal, intercultural, multi-generational relationships

using communication models and theories. Reframing the modern-day problem and

evaluating the scope and applicability from a communication theory and model

14

perspective affords the Navy‟s civilian service corps to address veteran employee

anxieties by changing the Navy‟s civilian values to include enhanced or improved

organizational communication tools and tactics (Griffin, 2009). Once these veteran

employee anxieties are realized and addressed, mentoring and new-employee research

indicates that organizational attrition rates lower, morale and productivity improve and

lost revenue associated to new hire attrition decreases. In short, consistent, honest, two-

way communications between employees, but in particular veteran employees who serve

as front-line supervisors, will offer organizations willing mentors. These willing mentors,

in turn, may serve as better supervisors, leaders and communicators who may then better

support the newly-hired employees and overall make the intellectual investment that

enables mission success. Therefore, reframing the problem and evaluating through

communication lens could not recommend today‟s civilian and military leaders place a

new emphasis on interpersonal and organizational communication, but could

purposefully improve the quality of mentors and the newly hired socialization process

consistently.

It is of value to note that in all supervisor-subordinate relationships within the

U.S. Navy, not all civilian Baby Boomers are supervisors and employees from other

generations are subordinates. Nike, Inc., staffing director Daniel Hanyzewski pointed out

in a 2008 Wired Magazine article there are 78 million Baby Boomers and 75 million Gen

Y‟ers, therefore Gen X and Y‟ers have just as much of a role in the Navy‟s civilian sector

as do the Baby Boomers (Wired, 2008.) Veteran employees experience anxiety, whether

they are a supervisor or a non supervisor, but it is how they reduce that anxiety that might

impact the new hire and the organization overall and therefore play a critical role within

15

an organization‟s communication functions. Gallagher and Sias (2002) conceptualize the

new employee as a source of uncertainty and the veteran employee as the one who

experiences the uncertainty, especially in situations when leadership does not notify the

veteran employee of newly hired employees.

This research evaluates the URT to understand sources of uncertainty, uncertainty

management, and means to reduce uncertainty (Griffin, 2009). New employees create

uncertainty as well as experience the emotion (Gallagher, 2012) and both the new and

veteran employees seek to reduce or manage the anxiety. To effectively understand

uncertainty in socialization process, managers should also consider varying factors within

an interpersonal, interdependent, dyadic communication model process as each employee

sends, receive, and reacts to the information. It is the reaction that might determine the

level of uncertainty and therefore could translate into prescribed anxiety reducing

reactions, as identified by Gallagher (2012) and Miller‟s Information Seeking Strategy

Scale (1996). Just as the new employee seeks information to reduce his or her anxiety, so

does the veteran employee, however time within an organization offers more resources to

the veteran employee and varied anxiety-reducing means. Additional variables include

each employee‟s education, worldviews, and the rate in which they are able to manage

anxiety (Jablin, 2001).

A great deal of new-hire anxiety might be relieved over time through active

mentoring, or effective servant leadership application, between the new and veteran

employee. Veteran employees are information sources, but motivations vary. While many

veteran employees may be able to give most of the day-to-day information, not all will be

able to give correct information regarding policies and business strategies, which may

16

increase levels of anxiety during interaction with the new employee (Gallagher & Sias,

2002). If veteran employees experience negative anxiety associated with a new employee

who joins the team, the new employee may suffer through diminished employee

interaction, decreased informational flow and organization indoctrination.

The constructive development and uncertainty reduction theories both provide the

framework to contextualize how today‟s problem may be corrected or reframed therefore

affording us the opportunity to further identify the paradigm shift required for positive

organizational change. The Rational-World Paradigm discussion is a philosophical

approach that realizes veteran employees are rational. This philosophy further enables

this study to make decisions based on arguments and facts (Griffin, 2009). This

philosophy speaks directly to this interpersonal communication and behavioral study

between humans. The fundamental understanding of dynamic, dyadic communication, as

it relates to the workforce and business productivity, and the practical and humanistic

application of mentorship and servant leadership is the inherent and underlying

philosophy of communication. Understanding the inherent value of this communication

philosophy and the practical application of the identified communication theories and

models provides all users a richer and more rewarding environment in which to serve. As

the U.S. Navy and the federal civilian service corps overall are all volunteer forces in

which people choose to serve, the need to understand and embrace organizational

communication enables veteran and new employees both to excel and mentor upcoming

generations of civil servants. Furthermore, understanding the applied communication

philosophy, theories and models also enable this research to consider another factor or

aspect of this systemic workforce issue - the hiring process itself.

17

The Literature – Framework for the Study

To frame the study, the Constructive-Development Theory (CDT) is used to better

understand how Navy civilians at military commands are enabled to immerse into an

organization‟s culture, and climate. This immersion incorporates communication theories

related to transformational and transactional communication models, which is one reason

why CDT was selected to frame this study. In 1987, authors Karl W. Kuhnert and Phillip

Lewis developed CDT to enable researchers to better understand the processes through

which humans communicate (Kuhnert & Lewis, 1987). As it applies to this study, CDT

identifies the transactional and transformational methods used to determine stages within

an employee‟s career to help understand the need for a symbiotic relationship between

veteran and new employee. Furthermore, CDT tracks an employee‟s growth and cultural

immersion into the organization. Additionally, CDT evaluates transformational

leadership at all levels and seeks to understand and appreciate present and future states

which form cohesive groups or transformational teams and ultimately to meet an

organizational needs. CDT‟s application as a frame for comparative analysis sets the tone

to understand how non-symbiotic relationship can lead to lost attrition-related revenue

(Lichtenstein, Smith & Torbert, 1995).

Graen and Uhl-Bien‟s (1995) CDT three-stage leadership making model names

the three stages as stranger, acquaintance and maturity phases (Miller & Jablin, 1991).

According to Gallagher and Sias (2002), each stage has an associated level of

uncertainty: reverent, appraisal and relational. These stages are used to better understand

the overarching CDT. Graen and Uhl-Bien‟s three-stage leadership making model also

identifies areas of opportunity for friendship, maturity, leadership and respect to translate

into group and team building, again helping to understand the transformational and

18

transactional types of communication and leadership, again relating back to this

research‟s Rational World Paradigm Theory (Griffin, 2009). While friendship and mutual

respect aid in the cohesion and speed through of relationship progression between a

veteran employee and a new hire, mentoring is another key factor that does not

necessarily require friendship, and it could have the same outcome as friendship on the

relationship stages, as identified by Miller and Jablin (1991) and as Palguta testified

before Congress. It is a combination of these elements that were used to identify

employee relationship and development stages as a member of a workforce. Together, the

CDT and the three-stage leadership model help us to frame a theory, concept and process

for action that enables us to approach further research from an ethnographic, qualitative

and servant-leadership vantage points.

To further expand on Gallagher and Sias‟s elements, Reverent uncertainty

translates into the first day jitters. Appraisal uncertainty refers to a new employee‟s

ability to execute assigned tasks and relational uncertainty refers to his/her ability to „fit

in‟ within the organization. Veteran employees also experience uncertainties when a new

employee joins the organization. Veterans might wonder if the new employee‟s skill sets

will be superior, if the new employee will take work from the veteran employee, and

overall the veteran employee may experience referent, appraisal and relational

uncertainty directed at the new employee‟s duties, skills and assignments. Veteran

employees worry more about the new employee‟s ability to perform a task or job than

they worry about their abilities to manage, lead or perform the work (Gallagher & Sias,

2002). While friendship and respect aid in the cohesion and development time between

stages and relational development between veteran employees and new hire, mentoring is

19

another key factor that does not necessarily require friendship, and it could have the same

outcome as friendship on the relationship stages.

Additionally, understanding how each employee‟s generational characteristics and

traits play into an employee‟s ability to ensure successfully transmitted and received

communications can be determined by communication evaluation using the Craig‟s

metamodel of communication theory, which really proposes a systems of system

approach to organizational communications (Miller & Jablin, 1991).

Evaluating an employee‟s status within the CDT maturity stages is time

consuming and unrealistic in a multiple-employee organization, however identifying a

veteran‟s anxiety stage could benefit not only the organization and the employee. Veteran

employees can aid the ease of socializations for both themselves and the new employees

and in turn promote interdependence between employees and improve task assignment

completion or organizational productivity. Productivity and morale may improve when

the veteran employee displays concern about the new employee‟s well being, ability and

work ethic (Gallagher & Sias, 2002) and reduces the anxieties in an open environment.

Furthermore, identifying those new hire anxiety characteristics early on in the CDT stage

may also reduce the veteran employee‟s anxieties and misinformation during information

seeking missions. Overall, both employee levels of identification within the organization

may then influence how each deal with uncertainly about changes within the dynamic

organization that will ultimately lead to a veteran and new employee forming a group or

cohesive, transformational teams that support or improve organizational needs.

20

Communication Process Model (Yukl, 2008) Figure 1.0

Organizational Communication and Anxiety Reduction

To understand how a veteran employee reacts to a new employee in the work

place it is useful to evaluate the issue from humanistic, behavioral and organizational

communication perspectives. This communication research includes socio-cultural,

socio-psychological, rhetorical, and ethical traditions and also evaluates the impact of

servant leadership as it applies within a hierarchical structure. Without the combination

of those traditional communication elements, employees lose credibility and their

messages are lost, then becoming “noise in the channel,” as theorist Claude E. Shannon

identified in his 1949 research while working at Bell Laboratories (Figure 1.0) (Yukl,

2008). Additionally, mutual respect must be the method in which communication is

employed. Mutual respect then improves a person‟s value, or stock in other employee‟s

emotional banks (Covey, 2005) and increases the chances of a message to be received in

its entirety. To suggest, however, that each employee becomes a communication expert is

unrealistic, yet to recommend supervisors incorporate communication theories into their

leadership seminars and training could help each supervisor in their roles as leaders,

mentors or employees themselves.

Within the socialization

phase resides the rhetorical

communication tradition commonly

believed to serve as the art of

persuasion within leadership models

(Griffin. 2009) but also runs

concurrent with the CDT stages. The rhetorical

21

communication tradition within the veteran employee anxiety context frames the

discussion to evaluate how veteran employees deliver information, the importance of

orality to both the new employee and veteran, in both messaging and presentation. Then,

organizational communication analysis may rely more on the Social Penetration Theory,

and the monitoring of new employee stages within CDT to better understand

organizational communication impacts associated with the new hire and the veteran‟s

reactions. The Social Penetration Theory explains how the employee may communicate,

bond, and gain information. This theory further predicts future relationships based on

costs and rewards (Griffin, 2009) but should be used for further research. Combined,

these theories could offer a complete spectrum for communication-based evaluation and

organizational communication health assessment. The quality of information, language

barriers and cultural differences are potential communication barriers to be considered

during any theoretical or analytical evaluation during these stages or phases. However,

this research frames the discussion under the URT simply because research now states

veteran employee anxiety exists, and further evaluates how the employees manage their

anxiety, and discusses the tools, and tactics selected to manage anxieties associated with

newly-hired employees.

Employee Motivators

Information is defined as “the clear conveyance of data” that results in uncertainty

reduction (Griffin, 2009, p. 44). The clearer the message conveyed the less noise in the

channel and the message will be perceived as credible and therefore better received.

When messages are deemed as non credible or not clearly received, additional

communication factors may be evaluated to include precise verbal and nonverbal,

22

interpersonal communication methods through ethnographic evaluation or demographic

data gathering to understand a person‟s worldviews, mindset, orality expertise, truth,

honesty, respect, and accountability. In what can happen with just a few words, all

behavioral considerations converge simultaneously and could lay a strong

communication foundation within an organization and between two individuals. Clear

communication, credibility, accountability and servant leadership characteristics

demonstrated by leadership determine if a veteran employee will experience anxiety

when a new employee is hired, or how the veteran employee will reduce his or her

anxieties. The efforts will result in calm employees who trust and believe in their

company, maintained morale and retained veteran and newly acquired employees (Schell,

2009). It is unrealistic to believe that each employee, new or veteran, will invest

extensive amounts of time before each interpersonal, professional discussion in

preparation. Furthermore, employee immersion in communication theory training during

Gallagher and Sias‟ reverent uncertainty phase, or Graen and Uhl-Bien‟s stranger

leadership phase is contrary to the Rational-World Paradigm discussion. Rather,

interpersonal and organizational communication is incorporated into the U.S. Navy‟s

civilian service corps training as part of ongoing leadership development discussions

within organizations, unfortunately in a non-standardized manner. Not every federal civil

servant receives communication or leadership training, and if they receive any it most

likely organization specific and will address communication consumption habits, customs

or cultures specific to that organization. Economic and budgetary factors impact training,

which at times reduces leadership development training funded by each individual

organization and not required holistically by the Navy‟s civilian corps, but funding does

23

not preclude supervisors adopting a servant-leadership approach toward management and

communication.

The CDT suggests that people develop in stages and within each stage are

epistemological assumptions based on behaviors associated with each stage‟s

worldviews, as described in the CDT (Lichtenstein, Smith & Torbert, 1995). If the

veteran employee has worked exclusively with one organization for his or her entire adult

career and has received a bonus and a pay raise and/or promotions, and that same

individual may now display commitment problem characteristics, one must ask if the

veteran employee‟s behaviors are symptomatic of the organization‟s controls or of the

individual‟s emotional belief. Now, compare the veteran employee and the newly hired

employee, who is from a different generation and who possesses a different worldview

and merit-based pay belief based on his/her constructive-development and socialization.

Apply the beginning of the Constructive-Development Theory to that of a new

employee – they are irreverent and immaturely developed as an organization‟s employee.

While a new employee tends to be nervous about his or her first day on the new job

(reverent), veteran employees may have been experiencing stressors and jitters before the

new employee arrives on the job. The new employee may also be nervous about his or

her abilities to perform tasks (appraisal uncertainty) and therefore seek solutions to gain

positive praise and further reduce their anxieties. Veteran employees who are forced to

move office spaces or experience a reconfiguration to their facility to accommodate one

or more newly acquired employees may begin to feel stressed, agitated or irritable to the

employee before they even meet, a type of relational uncertainty (Gallagher, 2010). This

is a source of veteran employee anxiety, yet both types of employees can experience

24

stress or anxiety during any stage of their careers. Employees will become actively

motivated and seek to reduce the anxieties in similar or separate ways. Both will seek

information any way they can, as described in the Uncertainty Reduction Theory devised

by Berger and Calabrese in 1975 and further researched by Gallagher in 2010. Through

an evaluation of the Uncertainty Reduction Theory, it becomes clear that new or veteran

employees will seek to reduce stress by social interaction and group identification. For

instance, a veteran Navy civil servant in a mid-level, non-supervisory position might seek

to identify himself with other project managers of his caliber to understand the

ramifications associated with an individual new hire or a surge of newly hired employees

(Berger & Calabrese, 1975). These actions may be classified as actions within the

uncertainty management category (Gallagher, 2010). Both the new and veteran

employees will seek to reduce or manage their anxieties by gathering information from

their first-line supervisors, or counsel from peers and higher or lower-level management,

again validated in both the 2009 and 2012 online Navy laboratory surveys for both new

hire and veteran employees, respectively (Barker, 2012). Both the new employees use

indirect and direct modes of information gathering, but veterans also have their own

unique coping strategies to reduce anxiety, such as asking fellow veteran employees

about the new hire (Gallagher & Sias, 2002). Negative consequences may be avoided

when leadership proactively identifies communication differences, and challenges in

diverse, multi-generational, multi-cultural workforce (Booz et al, 2010). Various methods

for managing anxiety exist, such as face-to-face communication with the new employee,

training with the new employee as a team, new employee observation, reviewing the new

employee‟s knowledge, skills, and abilities as identified in their resumes, asking other

25

employees to train or inform the new employee, or to talk to peers about the new

employee‟s socialization process. The 2012 online, organization survey resulted in 179

respondents who employed one or more of those anxiety-reducing tactics where 79 of the

407 total respondents said none of those were tools they utilized (Barker, 2012).

Public Relations Society of America author James Lukaszewski said that 30

percent of the information an employee receives first about their organization comes

directly from their first-line supervisor; 24 percent of the information comes from the

person who sits next to that employee (TGWSNTM) and 20 percent of an employee‟s

information, understanding or belief is based upon information they‟ve received from

multiple sources and eventually made up (IMIU). Only 5 percent of an employee‟s

information actually comes from the chief executive officer or organization‟s top leader

(Lukaszewski, 2009). The assumption here is that a disgruntled veteran, first-line

supervisor could deter a new employee from remaining with a company long term and in

essence cost the company thousands of dollars in recruiting, and training costs, as cited

by the earlier cited Booz, Allen and Hamilton studies. Again, the CDT and a supervisor‟s

fundamental understanding of transactional and transformational communication and

leadership methodologies should be incorporated into leadership development and

training courses utilized by the Navy‟s civilian service corps.

26

Cultural Considerations

Cultural and communication theories offer key

approaches to managing an organization through

periods of change. Change may occur for various

reasons. For example, a business‟s product line may

change, or a new leader may take position and declare

a new organizational focus. Using a cultural approach

toward organizational change requires identifying an

organization‟s present culture and desired end-state

culture. A proficient technical manager, as perhaps

seen in the Navy‟s science and technology

directorates, may be a recognized technical leader, however, he or she may not have

leadership vision or tools in which to inspire, motivate or challenge resistance.

Additionally, multi-generational communication practices, demographics, and behavioral

factors must also be considered during an organization‟s evaluation to better understand

the organization as a culture. Understanding an organization‟s culture and subsequent

communication habits offers leaders with a roadmap for managing change within their

organization. Culture is what an organization is and what it represents. Culture is an

organization‟s group‟s norms, their agreed upon languages, observed rituals or

ceremonies, accepted levels of organizational surveillance, reward criterion, performance

boundaries, an organization‟s values, group levels of education and cooperation (Deetz,

Tracy & Simpson, 2000). Organizational cultures may also be subdivided unknowingly

by organizational structure, the nature of work, the types of jargon used, or the tools used.

Figure 2.0 NSWC PCD Communication Audit. (Barker, 2009)

27

Figure 3.0 The Culture Process (Deetz, Tracy & Simpson, 2000)

For the Navy‟s workforce overall, cultures may be classified by technical or non-

technical work, military or non-military, and direct or indirect project support. Within

each of those cultures may be subcultures, such as business operation teams within the

indirect project support groups and that subculture may be defined by their education,

experience or terms used daily to execute their work. How each subculture interacts, uses

rhetoric and integrates or responds with each other further defines an organization‟s

overall culture. An example of a culture and subculture characterization was in the Naval

Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division 2009 communication audit (Figure 2.0).

Author Margaret Wheatley (2006) in her book Leadership and the New Science:

Discovering Order in a Chaotic World described organizations today as more fluid,

seamless, less mechanical, and with a greater need for effective communication to create

a whole of community culture. Should an organization desire to morph into this new

culture, processes must be evaluated, organizational demographics should be identified,

and disorder to get to the desired state must

be accepted. Reluctant leaders and the

impact they play in a morphing organization

must also be considered because their role is

akin to a reluctant veteran employee

assigned to indoctrinate and socialize a new

employee. Figure 3.0 identifies The Culture

Process, which authors Deetz, Tracy &

Simpson identify as a daily tool managers can use to communicate and reframe vision.

This model takes internal and humanistic factors into account and forms an integrated

28

approach to interpersonal organizational communication and leadership functions. This

model recognizes that values impact behaviors and behaviors shape values and Deetz,

Tracy and Simpson collectively submit that both create organizational culture (2000).

Group compositions may be clearly determined not just by task or affiliation, but

also by demographics – race, gender, socioeconomic background, worldviews, religious

preferences, educational levels and/or backgrounds, age, culture or race. NSWC PCD

scientists and engineers are not only categorized as cultures with subcultures, they are

also labeled as a homogeneous group as they all have several shared skill sets.

Parcells clearly identifies the reasons why people form groups: Security; Esteem;

Social Needs; Proximity and Attraction (Parcell, 2000). These reasons also determine

how employees might form subcultures within an organization. Federal civil servant

veteran employees with the same ethnicity and approximate age may be more likely to sit

next to like employees during a meeting or at lunch and also may form a perceived group

or subculture. The 2012 online survey commissioned for this research determined that of

the 407 employees at the two different Navy laboratories who responded, groups formed

not based on generational likenesses, rather by organizational status – supervisor or non-

supervisor.

Generation or status aside, evaluating an organization using a system of systems

thinking approach also helps to identify an organization‟s limits or boundaries as it

pertains to ethical, moral or culturally accepted boundaries. This evaluation is identified

as “The Mental Model” (Werhane, 2002). The Mental Model is the notion that humans

have mental images associated with their own worldviews that model the data of which

they observe. These images and associated perceptions, or frameworks, then set up

29

boundaries and parameters for which they may operate within (Werhane, 2002). These

models then parlay into not only the personal beliefs, but also become organizational and

systemic beliefs but they need reinforcement and consistence use to become rooted in the

organization‟s culture and communication practices. In essence, employees will then

project their perceptions into reality and embrace a symbolic convergence through verbal

and non-verbal communications. These false realities could translate in the workplace

into office gossip or urban legend that could interfere with promotions, productivity and

mission accomplishment. This symbolic convergence could also become a way to reduce

anxiety either by the new or veteran employee and contribute to the overall socialization

process. An example might be the senior veteran employee who is promoted. His

coworkers might not know he was promoted because he holds technical degrees,

certifications or achievements or that he was interviewed by several senior managers to

be hired for the position. They might only believe he was promoted because he is the

neighbor of senior supervisor granting the promotion. To a younger, newly hired

employee, the Mental Model or perception of the veteran employee might be that because

he‟s the oldest and not the most technically proficient, he was hired for the position.

Werhane submits that leadership must use communication and moral imagination often to

break the incorrect mental models. Moral imagination is the “ability to get out of these

models and traps” (Werhane, 2002, p. 39).

Servant Leadership and Anxiety Reduction

Cameron and Green (2002) submit leaders “do not need to be fully immersed in

the day‟s projects to be an effective leader or manager” (p. 57), a belief that if adopted

could assist veteran employees to reduce their own and newly hired employee‟s anxieties.

30

Cameron and Green submit that leaders are responsible for establishing “credibility and

accountability,” leaders must also establish limits (Cameron & Green, 2002, p.71). The

discipline of servant leadership, however, takes Cameron and Green‟s ideas steps farther

and states that leaders are responsible for delivering an organization‟s vision and for

unifying their personnel to increase morale and thus productivity. Therefore, servant

leadership philosophy evaluation and application to this discussion could also serve as

possible organizational solutions for reducing uncertainty by both the new and veteran

employees.

Where Cameron, Green and servant leadership founder Robert Greenleaf all agree

that leadership can empower, unit and create teams rather than just groups through

modeling, taking individual responsibility and empowering all employees to employ

similar traits (Greenleaf, 1977). Overall, effective servant leadership and communications

will empower employees, create teams, improve morale and productivity and increase a

leader‟s credibility and emotional databank (Covey, 2009) within the organization. The

application of servant leadership attributes could also improve dyadic communications

between veteran and new employees, help organization‟s to retain corporate knowledge

when a veteran employee retires, and avoid creating reluctant managers or leaders within

a workforce that may lead to large divisions between groups or teams and later negatively

impact morale, retention and productivity simply through the use of empowerment

(Greenleaf, 1977).

From a macro perspective, Abraham Maslow‟s model of human motivation

identifies that all employees have five basic needs – psychological, safety, belonging, ego

and self actualization. The hierarchy of needs was further developed to recognize

31

workforce motivations by Chris Argyris who also identified how employees become

counterproductive to organizations (Conrad & Poole, 2002). Social costs are associated

with employees who proactively seek information, particularly with the new employee,

however research also indicates that veteran employees prefer new employees seek

information directly from that first-line supervisor. The veteran employee prefers to be

asked questions, rather than to actively deliver information he or she believes the new

employee may require. This is one way a veteran employee can reduce his or her personal

anxiety associated with the newcomer (Gallagher & Sias, 2002). Identified conflicts are

also derived from differences in generations and communication practices and a lack of

symbolic convergence utilized in cohesive groups or teams.

Discourse and Generational Divide

Discourse analysis as it relates to patterns within social relations also applies to

the behavioral approach within this research. Furthermore, points of contention from a

generational and communication process model helps us to further understand the clash

points that experience when two generations seek to collaborate because a lack of cultural

or sub-cultural awareness hinders their abilities to form teams. Discourse is both

interpersonal and collective and both inter-subjective and contextual (Ewing, 2007).

Initially, this research‟s theory believed veteran anxieties were apparent because of

generational gaps, however, the empirical data determined otherwise. The 2009 Naval

Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division communication audit indicated new

employees believed a generational gap existed, however, the 2012 online veteran

employee surface taken by that division and a similar one in Crane, Indiana determined

divides were not generational rather they were between supervisor and non supervisor.

32

Ewing states that identifying four clear, key distinctions regarding organizational

communication helps to further consider interpersonal communications in terms of

listening, oral, written expression either electronic or hand written and both verbal and

nonverbal cues. Those four distinctions are: 1) Levels; 2) Formal versus informal; 3)

Direction (vertical, horizontal, diagonal), and 4) Internal versus external focus. For this

discussion, Ewing might consider formal versus information communication, associated

with interpersonal, horizontal communication within an organization‟s hierarchical

structure as a potential hindrance to effective organizational performance. He submits

that “ongoing, dynamic and non-formal, if not informal, communications has become

more important to ensuring the effective conduct of work in modern organizations”

(Ewing, 2007, p. 5). From an organizational perspective, a focus on organizational

communications will ensure mission success because veteran and newly hired

employee‟s communication needs will be met “on a less grandiose scale, new

communication technologies can enable almost every aspect of organizational

management and effectiveness, including change management, knowledge management,

participative management, innovation and organizational partnership and alliance”

(Pelez, 1952, p. 11). Ewing and Pelez both submit that organizations need to strike a

balance between technology tools, leadership and organizational communication.

Understanding the need for balance, the following research questions were created based

on the exemplary literature review and the data obtained from the Navy laboratory

communication survey (Barker, 2009).

33

Research Questions

1. Do U.S. Navy civilian employees believe communication gaps exist between

multi-generational employees?

2. How do veteran employees manage anxiety related to a newly hired employee

who joins their group or team?

3. Do differences in generational communication habits play a factor in anxieties, if

experienced?

4. How do veteran employees reduce anxieties?

34

Chapter 3: Scope and Methodology

Scope

The scope of this research expands existing research conducted by researchers

Gallagher and Sias (2009), and further identifies tools and tactics utilized by veteran

employees, who are predominately non supervisory, by a specific group of federal civil

servants as a means for anxiety reduction or management. This research is complimented

by original, empirical data obtained by the author in October 2009. That data was a

communication audit commissioned at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City

Division for graduate research and to benefit the organization‟s internal communication

program (Barker, 2009). The two main groups of U.S. Navy civilians evaluated were

newly hired employees and veteran employees. Newly-hired employees are defined as

new civilian employees with five years or less experience total civil service. This

research does not focus on demographic divides, because the empirical research was

prohibited from gathering specific demographic information, but the 2012 empirical data

and the 2009 communication audit suggests further research specifically within U.S.

Navy federal civil service employee pools at the field activity level might identify

communication gaps between multi-generational employees. As little research exists

within the Navy as an organization on this specific topic, research is expanded to

scholarly and literature reviews to conduct a comparative analysis of functioning and

non-functioning businesses and apply best business practices to this specific Navy

research. The literature review and ethnographic observations from a cultural vantage to

determine presently used communication tools and tactics used by Navy leadership,

effectiveness and utilizes behavior oriented and historical research to evaluate human

35

behaviors, attitudes, opinions brought about by the leadership actions were also

evaluated. As Gallagher and Sias recommended for further research in their 2002 study,

future research should examine factors, such as differences in generations that foster

anxiety about new hires, which has been accomplished through generation identification,

compare and contrast analysis of this author‟s organic and original research at the field

activity level in 2009 and 2012. This research‟s 2012 online survey that netted empirical

data was based upon the future research recommendations presented by Gallagher and

Sias.

Methodology

To deploy this survey, permission was obtained by the head of the Naval Surface

Warfare Center Workforce Council. This individual is the leader of a 12 member council

who govern the human resource functions of more than 11,000 U.S. Navy federal civil

servant employees located throughout 12 locations in the United States. The majority of

each site‟s workforce is comprised of scientists and engineers and thereby indicates

higher socioeconomic levels than their community counterparts. After permission was

given to administer this survey, the workforce council head sent an e-mail with the online

survey hyperlink to the 12 different site council members and invited them to participate.

Of the 12 sites, only 2 participated (Crane and Panama City); Of the 11,000 potential

employees, only 407 responded. Using the online survey tool, e-SurveyPro.com, the

electronic survey was administered between March 13 and midnight March 23, 2012.

The purpose of the online, anonymous organizational survey was to identify

whether employees believe multi-generational gaps exist within their workforce, identify

if the employees experience anxiety related to new employees, and to understand how

36

veteran employees react to new employees, or manage their anxieties within the URT and

CDT frameworks. The online survey is complimented by the 2009 new employee

communication audit, an exhaustive literature review of behavioral, humanistic and

organizational communication disciplines and is predominately qualitative in nature.

Procedures utilized qualitative research methods during examination and content analysis

phases of the current literature on the subject of generational personalities and differences

that can result. The literature review comes from several sources – books, scholarly

journals, blogs and articles. The questions, answers and comments are offered in this text

in Appendix A.

37

Chapter 4 – Results and Analysis

This chapter is devoted to building upon the earlier chapters that stated the

problem, offered literary context, and explained theories and models, and will offer

empirical data. As Cameron and Green (2004) drew clear distinctions between a group

and a team, the literature review, NSWC PCD communication audit (Barker, 2009), and

online veteran employee survey (Barker, 2012) validated the literature review through

deliverance of relevant empirical data that furthers this discussion and future courses of

organizational communication research.

Results

The NSWC PCD 2012 online survey was anonymous and intended to identify

whether communication gaps exist between two groups of employees defined as veteran

and newly hired employees. Specifically, this research set out to understand how veteran

employees react to newly-hired employees. One survey question (question #10) further

asked how anxiety is managed, within the Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT)

framework. This online survey was conducted using the online eSurveysPro.com tool.

Respondents received an e-mail invitation from their organization‟s Human Resources

Officers on March 13, 2012. The survey closed at midnight on March 29, 2012 and

invited 12 Navy laboratories located throughout the United States and over 11,000

employees to participate voluntarily. Of those invited, only two organizations

participated: Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane Division, located in Crane, Indiana,

and Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division, located in Panama City,

Florida. One employee from Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, located in

Dahlgren, Virginia, participated in the survey. In total, 407 employees participated in this

38

organizational communication survey. Of the 407 surveys started, 100 percent were

completed. Panama City, Florida employees made up the majority of survey responses

with 220 responses, or 54.05 percent; Crane‟s responses totaled 186, or 45.70 percent and

Dahlgren‟s one survey totaled .25 percent and was not included in the final data analysis.

Of the 407 respondents, 65.76 percent self identified themselves as being an

employee with five or more years of service with their command which classifies them as

veteran employees, for purposes of this research; 84.52 percent, or 344 respondents were

non supervisors. Therefore, the perspectives in this survey are predominately non-

supervisory employees who either remember going through the new-hire processes, or

support newly hired employees as the new members join groups or teams within an

organization. The majority of these respondents served neither as a mentee nor do they

have a mentor, and over 74.14 percent agreed the best way to socialize information with a

new employee is to use a blended, communication approach. This set of results speaks to

the majority of non supervisors who may or may not demonstrate servant leadership

characteristics as they support organizational communication and new and veteran

employee uncertainty reduction tactics. While 77.37 percent of respondents denied

experiencing anxiety associated to a new employee‟s hiring, 22.63 percent admitted to

experiencing anxiety or made a comment. However, it is the comments offered by the

22.63 percent that offer insight into a minority representation of employees throughout

this organizational cross section.

Combined, 31.37 percent of respondents who managed their newly-hired

employee anxiety chose to reduce their anxiety in accordance with the Uncertainty

Reduction Theory (URT), whereas 51.79 percent selected „None.‟ Some of these anxiety-

39

reduction methods included considering retirement, seeking new employment elsewhere,

resenting the new employee or supervisor, or lengthening the time associated with team

acceptance. Pertinent comments included anxiety related to the new employee‟s lack of

qualifications or skills to perform the job, feelings of pity for the employee, rather than

because of the new employee, and anxiety related to mentoring new employees because

of the amount of time taken away from the veteran employee‟s tasks. One veteran

employee said they have over 35 years of experience, and they still feel anxious when

they have to mentor a new employee, whereas another employee with over 25 years

experience admitted feeling anxious when the new hire is the same grade yet still requires

training on new systems or work never previously performed. One employee with 8 years

experience said they would love to have had someone train them when they were a new

hire (Barker, 2012).

Analysis

Overall, survey respondents were clearly divided on their beliefs of multi-

generational impact on an organization‟s ability to meet mission goals and objectives:

56.20 percent did not see multi-generational organizations success impeded whereas

43.80 percent felt organization‟s success was impacted. Question #10‟s responses offer

insight on how to bridge organizational and communication gaps within an organization

and concurs with the Rational-World Paradigm philosophy that rational humans will seek

rational solutions to anxiety. Understanding the communication model, that clear

messages are clearly receives without noise in the channel, question #10 supports the idea

that each interpersonal situation must take into account leadership styles, worldviews and

present environments in order to reduce anxieties and effectively communicate.

40

Additionally, hiring the right person for the job, creating work environments that fosters

mutual respect among the new and veteran employees, requiring leadership development,

promote mentoring, and utilize more face to face communication tools and tactics, and

training as a team not as a group are also products of question #10. These actions may

help to bridge communication gaps not necessarily between generations, but also between

supervisor and non-supervisory groups.

In practical application, here‟s how this might work. The Rational-World

Paradigm communication philosophy considers real-world issues from which CDT and

URT consider the individual‟s behavioral, cognitive, humanistic communication actions,

anxieties and reactions. For this applied research, we evaluate the veteran employee, as

validated by the 2012 Naval Surface Warfare Center online, organizational

communication survey. Of the 406 employees who voluntarily participated in the survey,

249 said they had experienced a potentially negative or adverse action due to the new

employee being hired. Of the 249, 62 had to modify their workspace to prepare for the

new employee, 22 had to move to a new office, 113 learned a new employee was hired

on the employees first day of work and 40 had been assigned to serve as the new

employee‟s sponsor without advanced notice, and 12 selected „all of these.‟ Of the 406,

367 respondents answered this question, and 16 left comments further offering insight

into these types of actions as negatively impacting the new and veteran hires

interdependent socialization processes (Barker, 2012).

This research further discovered that among the 406 volunteer respondents,

85.52% were non supervisory. These non-supervisors served as mentors or trainers to the

new employee, and the non-supervisors were positive in their training efforts, despite the

41

fact that 229 of these employees identified themselves as neither a formal mentor nor

mentee. Overall, these 85.52 % of respondents chose a blended approach toward training

the new employee, to include surveillance, peer-to-peer and face-to-face communication,

and one-on-one instruction. The gaps between the new and veteran employee appeared in

the data when the veteran employee was told about the new employee the day the

employee reported for work. The data suggests that negative communication tactics, if

any are utilized at all, might be employed when the veteran employee is not

communicated with early in the hiring process. Additionally, communication gaps may

further appear when the new employee‟s need or knowledge, skills or abilities are

questioned by the veteran employee. Lastly, this research determined that of the 406

respondents, 56.2% said they do not believe communication gaps exist between multi-

generational employees (Barker, 2012).

42

Chapter 5: Summaries and Conclusions

Limitations of the Study

The U.S. Navy requires all studies or online surveys to be approved at the

Department of Defense level. Demographic questions that ask age, gender, national

origin, or religion are prevented therefore this study could not ask volunteer respondents,

or evaluated personnel any demographic information. Therefore, it was difficult to

identify multi-generational gaps. However, asking respondents whether they were

supervisors or non supervisors and the length of time employed at their organization

helped to realize an important group of people in the new hire and veteran employee

socialization and communication processes.

The literature review and empirical research successfully conclude that veteran

employees experience anxiety when a new employee is hired. The level of their anxiety

was not measured in this research, but should be considered in future research using

Gallagher‟s 2010 anxiety measurement tools. Additionally, this study determined that not

only do veteran employees experience anxiety they have tools and tactics, learned or

inherent, utilized to manage their anxieties. These selected tools or tactics may determine

how long the newly-hired employee chooses to stay employed by the organization, the

amount of time and money the organization spends to train the new employee, and how

much production, training, or hiring funding is lost in the new-hiring process (Barker,

2012).

Further Study and Recommendations

To completely understand how to bridge communication gaps between

supervisory and non supervisory or new and veteran employees, one should also

43

understand where in the mentoring, socialization, and training processes fluid level of

interdependence and interconnectivity is achieved in either group or team environments,

specifically within the Constructive Development Theory or Uncertainty Reduction

Theories. From the civilian Navy perspective, Navy communicators, such as public

affairs officers, should conduct communication audits at the field activity levels to fully

understand the cultures in which they operate. Once those cultures and generations are

identified, further comparative data and analysis can be commissioned to later

recommend communication tools and tactics that bridge existing gaps that prohibit fluid

processes and mission success.

Hierarchy of employees‟ communication needs is D‟Aprix‟s theoretical approach

and was not rooted in empirical results. In a science-based organization, such as Navy

laboratories, hierarchical organizations can foster creativity and innovation by adopting

select internal communication tools associated with interpersonal, intercultural and lateral

communication tools (Pelz, 1952), however it is recommended that a full survey be

commissioned and the results evaluated to then commission policy recommendations.

Additional research should be commissioned to further explore why non- supervisory

employees they did not experience anxiety when a new employee was hired. Perhaps the

answers will offer insight that will benefit organizational communication values, policies

or procedures if the research is framed under the communication method theory and

evaluated transactional and transitional communication methods between supervisor and

non supervisor, and veteran and new hires. Findings from the two groups could then be

compared and analyzed to determine best practices for communication methods in a

science and technology based organization within the federal workforce. The

44

fundamental, dyadic communication or discussion between leadership or supervisor and

employee did not occur on a consistent or wide-spread basis. Therefore, the socialization

of information and ability to reduce anxiety may not have occurred perhaps as quickly as

an organization might require. This socialization also applies to analysis of effective

dyadic communication within the communication model. Further research should be

conducted to determine whether or not the majority‟s non-supervisory status had bearing

on the veteran employee‟s admitted non-anxiety levels. As message credibility may

trigger anxiety in either a new or veteran employee, this research might be furthered

through additional evaluation of data sent and received to determine when veteran

employees experience and anxiety and at what point message credibility triggers the need

for anxiety reduction.

Research could also evaluate civil servants within the scope of the Social

Penetration Theory to determine the most effective means of communication for this type

of unique workforce.

45

Conclusion Veteran employees, either supervisory or non supervisory, play a tremendous role

in the overall success of an organization and understanding how their attitudes and

communication habits may impact a new employee will benefit both the teams and the

organization at large. This research expanded on Gallagher and Sias 2009 research, and

Gallagher‟s 2010 dissertation, and delivers data which prove veteran employees, whether

large or small groups, experience newly hired employee associated anxiety.

Understanding how to manage these anxieties under the Uncertainty Reduction Theory

and Constructive Development Theory, as well as applying a fundamental understanding

of multi-generational communication behaviors, will allow organizational leaders at all

levels a clearer framework from which to revisit their socialization processes for newly-

hired employees.

46

REFERENCES

American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American

Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC

Baldoni, J. (2003). Great communication secrets of great leaders. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Baker, K. (June 2002). Organizational communication. Chapter 13. June 2002.

Barker, J. (2009) New hires communication audit: Naval surface warfare center panama

city division fiscal year 2009. Gonzaga University. October 9, 2009.

Barker, J. (2012) Warfare Center Veteran employee workforce online survey. March 23,

2012. Panama City, FL.

Berger, C.R. & Calabrese, R.J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and

beyond: Toward a development theory of interpersonal communication. Human

Communication Research. Vol. 1, 99-112.

Booz, Allen, Hamilton. (January 2011). Keeping talent: Strategies for retaining valued

federal employees. Partnership for Public Service.

Booz, Allen & Hamilton. (November 2010). Beneath the surface: Understanding

attrition at your agency and why it matters. Partnership for Public Service.

Cameron, E. & Green, M. (2004) Making sense of change management: A complete

guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page

Limited: London. Pgs 55-72.

Caywood, C. (1997) The handbook of strategic public relations and integrated

communications. New York: McGraw-Hill

Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office. (March 2007). A CBO Study:

Characteristics and Pay of Federal Civilian Employees.

Conrad, C. & Pool, M. (2002) Strategic organizational communication in a global

economy, (5th

edition). Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers.

Connell, R. & Mack, W. (2004) Naval ceremonies, customs and traditions,(6th

edition).

Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press.

Covey, F. (2005). The seven habits of highly effective people: Achieving personal and

interpersonal effectiveness from the inside out (3rd

edition). Franklin Covey:

China.

47

D‟Aprix, R. (1996). Communicating for change: Connecting the workplace with the

marketplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers

Deetz, S.A, Tracy, S.J. & Simpson, J.L. (2000) Leading organizations through transition:

Communication and cultural change. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage

Publications.

Ewing, M.E. (March 6, 2007) Changing with the times: Leveraging the web to enhance

your employee communications program. PRTactics Magazine.

Finzil, H. (1994). The top ten mistakes leaders make. Colorado Springs, CO: Victor Cook

Communications.

Gallagher, E. B (August 2010). The flip side of organizational encounter: Developing

and testing a model of veteran employee uncertainty and information seeking

about new employees. Washington State University: Edward R. Murrow College

of Communication.

Gallagher, E.B. & Sias, P.M. (2009). The new employee as a source of uncertainty:

Veteran employee information about seeking new hires. Western Journal of

Communication, 73, 23-26.

Gitlin, T. (2002). How the torrent of images and sounds overwhelm our lives. New York:

Owl Books.

Griffin, E. (2009). A first look at communication theory. (pp. 49). New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Gootnick, M.M. & Gootnick, D. (2000) Action tools for effective managers. New York:

Amacom.

Greenleaf, R. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power

and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.

He, W., Sengupta M., Velkoff, V.A. & DeBarros, K.A. (December 2005) 65+ in the

United States 2005: Current population reports special studies

HR Magazine. Effective organizational communication: A competitive advantage.

December 2008. Retrieved on February 7, 2010 from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_12_53/ai_n31160712/?tag=content

;col1

Hofstede, G. Attitudes, values and organizational culture: Disentangling the concepts.

Organization Studies. May 1998 vol. 19 no. 3 477-493

48

Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (2001). The strategy focused-organization: How balanced

scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Boston, MA:

Harvard Business School.

Kegan, R. (1982) The evolving self: Problem and process in human development.

Harvard: Boston, MA.

Kuhner, K.W. & Lewis, P. (October 1987). Transactional and transformational

leadership: A constructive/developmental analysis. The Academy of Management

Review. Vol. 12, No. 4. pp. 648-657

Lancaster, D. (2010). Naval surface warfare center panama city division equal

employment opportunity report.

Lancaster, L. & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Who they are, why they

clash. How to solve the generational puzzle at work. Harper Collins Publishers

Inc.: New York.

Lichtenstein, B.M., Smith, B.A., & Torbert, W.R. (1995). Leadership and ethical

development: Balancing light and shadow. Business Ethics Quarterly. Volume 5,

Issue 1.

Lukaszewski, J. (July 15, 2009) Rethinking employee communication: Whose information

do employees value most? Public Relations Society of America.

Miller, K. (2006) Organizational communication: Approaches and processes. Fifth

edition. Wadsworth : Boston, MA

Miller, V.D. & Jablin, F.M. (January 1991). Information seeking during organizational

entry: Influences, tactics, and a model of the process. The Academy of

Management Review. Vol. 16, No. 1. pp. 92-120.

Melkote, S.R. & Liu, D.J. The Role of the internet in forging a pluralistic integration

International Communication Gazette December 2000 vol. 62 no. 6 495-504.

Olson, E. Federal jobs fast becoming an endangered species. March 10, 2011.

Retrieved from http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/03/10/federal-jobs-fast-

becoming-an-endangered-species/. CNNmoney.com

Parcells, B. The tough working of turning around a team. Harvard Business Review.

November –December 2000. Pp 179-88.

Pelz, Donald C. (1952). Influence: A key to effective leadership in the first-line

supervisor. Personnel 29:209-17.

49

Rubin, R.B, Rubin,A.M & Piele, L.J. (2005) Communication research: Strategies and

sources (6th

edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Salamon, M. (2011, January 11) For college students, praise may trump sex and money.

Health Day News. Retrieved from

http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=13822216 on February 5, 2011.

Samovar, L., Porter, R. & McDaniel, E. (2009) Intercultural communication: A reader.

Boston, MA: Wadsworth.

Schell, R. (February 23, 2009) How a culture audit can help you position your

organization for success. Public Relations Society of America website:

http://www.prsa.org

Spencer-Oatey, H. Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore

the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations. Journal of

Pragmatics. Volume 34, Issue 5. May 2002, Pages 529-545.

Strauss, William & Howe, Neil. (1992) Generations: The history of America's future,

1584 to 2069. pp. 31, 327

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social

interaction and the internet. London: Sage Publications.

U.S. OPM. (January 2007). Annual report to the congress: Federal equal opportunity

recruitment program FY2006. Retrieved April 2, 2011 from

http://www.opm.gov/About_OPM/Reports/FEORP/2006/feorp2006.pdf

U.S. Securities Exchange Commission. Oldest baby boomers turn 60. Retrieved March

15, 2011 from http://www.sec.gov/news/press/extra/seniors/agingboomers.htm

Van Der Walt, S. & Du Plessis, T. (2010, November 12) Leveraging multi-generational

workforce values in interactive information societies. South African Journal of

Information Management, North America. Retrieved from

http://www.sajim.co.za/index/pho/SAJIM/article/view/441/436 on February 9,

2011.

Werhane, P.H. (June 2002) Moral imagination and systems thinking. Journal of Business

Ethics: June 2002; Vol. 38: 33-42.

Wheatley, M. (2006) Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic

world. Berrett-Koehler: San Francisco, CA.

Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations. New York: Pearson.

50

Appendix A 2012 Naval Surface Warfare Center Workforce Online Survey

March 23, 2012 (Jacqui Barker) Panama City, Florida

Page 1. WFC Organizational Communication Survey 2012

1.

How long have you been employed at your present location? % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. 1-4 years

31.53% 128

b. 4-5 years

2.71% 11

c. 5 years or more

65.76% 267

Number of respondents 406

Number of respondents who skipped this question 1

2. Are you:

% of Respondents

Number of Respondents

a. Non-Supervisor

84.52% 344

b. Supervisor

15.48% 63

Number of respondents 407

Number of respondents who skipped this question 0

3. Do you have a:

% of Respondents

Number of Respondents

a. Mentor

12.54% 44

b. Mentee

11.11% 39

c. Both

11.11% 39

d. Neither

65.24% 229

Number of respondents 351

Number of respondents who skipped this question 56

51

4.

In your opinion, what is the best way to socialize new information with newly hired employees: % of Respondents

Number of Respondents

a. Formal indoctrination process

8.13% 33

b. Between the supervisor and new employee only

0.49% 2

c. Peer to Peer

6.16% 25

d. Learn by doing

4.19% 17

e. All of these

74.14% 301

ALL OF THESE, PLUS... QTRLY TRG/SOCIALIZATION SESSIONS FOR THE FIRTS YEAR

0.25% 1

All of these and clearly written, comprehensive instructions on the processes of the organization

0.25% 1

a, c and d

0.25% 1

All of these, but also being taught how to do the basics of their new job and learning the appropriate POCs that can help them do their job.

0.25% 1

I believe all above are important, but communication between a supervisor and his employees in incredibly important.

0.25% 1

Pairing up a new hire with a veteren is a good idea, too bad it isn't done at my location

0.25% 1

Having specific guidlines to follow for daily work and the tools available to do so.

0.25% 1

a & c

0.25% 1

All the above except b) (except for administrative issues). Better use of formalized mentoring.

0.25% 1

Peer to Peer & Learn by Doing

0.25% 1

Both peer to peer and learn by doing with some formal

0.25% 1

e. is not a valid choice if b. has "only" on the end of it. But my answer would be a combination of all of these options.

0.25% 1

depends on the type of information being conveyed. Typically Peer-to-Peer for most.

0.25% 1

Learn by doing and peer to peer as I have helped new hires more than once.

0.25% 1

All of the above and rotational assignments in different codes/branches/units

0.25% 1

face to face meetings

0.25% 1

Having a mentor is best, but there are a lot of things learned from peers. Having a decent searchable website would be great.

0.25% 1

Veterans allowing juniors to learn by doing, but that is not done here at Crane. They do not train their reliefs when they retire.

0.25% 1

There no "1 size fits all". Different employees have different needs to be successful.

0.25% 1

My opinion is not to use stupid phrases like "socialize new information"...REALLY? did someone just get a new degree in

communication?

0.25% 1

(No other answer provided)

0.49% 2

Also to follow-up once individiual has been onboard for 1 year. Monitor their performance/deficiences

0.25% 1

Items (a), (c), and (d). Ensure new employee becomes part

of the team.

0.25% 1

All of the above plus have a Web page that has information on it.

0.25% 1

Peer to peer and learn by doing. Leave the supervisors out of

it.

0.25% 1

a supervisor must be a strong supervisor and not a weak supervisor to get a new hired person to be strong and dont mind stepping in when one need help. key

word..."supervisor".

0.25% 1

C and D

0.25% 1

Number of respondents 406

Number of respondents who skipped this question 1

52

5. If you are an employee with five (5) or more years of experience at your present location, do you experience anxiety when a

new employee is hired? % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. Yes

7.95% 26

b. No

77.37% 253

I feel their pain because their supervisors are not properly trained to care for a new employee. Example, there is a new

hire from NY, NY that has no car. No one from teh division takes her to get groceries, or to ensure she makes it to work and back home.

0.31% 1

N/A

3.06% 10

Not Applicable

0.31% 1

I'm new to NAVSEA but been in the same field for over 25 years. Sometimes I experience anxiety when a new hire is the same grade as myself and still has to be trained as a new hire

because they don't know what to do or never really used the system.

0.31% 1

Only if they are obviously not qualified

0.31% 1

Not onboard for more than six or seven months.

0.31% 1

Depends on where the new hire originated.

0.31% 1

I am a former officer in our new hirer organization, So I help them to try to fully utlize the resorces avalable to new hires here at Crane.

0.31% 1

Feel like some new hires don't fully appreciate the "big" picture when they are hired. To some it is just a job. They don't understand how their job could be protecting the

warfighter on the front lines.

0.31% 1

I have not been employed at my present location for 5 or

more years.

0.31% 1

Not applicable

0.31% 1

I don't know. I am new.

0.31% 1

I am a retired Military Vet and we have a different view of new hires. Civilian Vets treat new subordinates who are smart as threats.

0.31% 1

na

0.31% 1

some what, when a supervisor dont know himself what is

going on.

0.31% 1

My anxiety would only be associated with the time required to train new personnel.

0.31% 1

n/a - I am the new employee

0.31% 1

I feel anxiety FOR the employee, not because of. I know how tough it is to get started - no one takes time to teach you/train you/mentor you. I'd do that if they were working with me, but no new hires work in my area at the moment.

I've been here 8 yrs and would love for someone to take time with me - no one has yet.

0.31% 1

n/a

1.22% 4

Sometimes because they believe that if their manager has not told them to do something then they do not believe they need

to, and aren't interested in learning the foundational reasons for some of the tasks they have been assigned to do by their manager.

0.31% 1

Not at all. I like to get to know new employees and make them welcome. Now if we can get the politicians to understand these guys are entitled to a balanced federal

budget.

0.31% 1

less than 5 years

0.31% 1

Not anxiety, really, but a bit of envy at times as new

employees are often presented with opportunities (sometimes couched as "deputy") not made available to veteran employees.

0.31% 1

SOMETIME

0.31% 1

In my case; 35+ years experience. If I'm requred to mentor a "fresh out" employee I get anxious.

0.31% 1

Do not have 5 years at present location

0.31% 1

When a new employee is hired, generally there is a lull until what their talents are really come out. Moving into the

ordnance world can be a long process before new employees run anything meaningful, with good reason.

0.31% 1

less then 3 years

0.31% 1

Mostly no, but it depends on the individual. Mostly experience anxiety when a new hire lacks the capability/work ethic (this

is NOT the norm) and management refuses to let them go during the probationary period.

0.31% 1

I am a new employee

0.31% 1

wonder how much they know relative to real life/operations/technology/responsibility/truth/how soon they get promoted over the rest of us.

0.31% 1

Depneds on the new hire and their skill set.

0.31% 1

N/A should be an option

0.31% 1

I welcome new hires and offer to help

0.31% 1

53

6. If you experience anxiety, how do you manage that anxiety during the new employee’s socialization or immersion process?

(Please check all that apply.) % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. Working or training the new employee

13.62% 44

b. Avoiding the new employee

2.48% 8

c. Constant contact with the new employee

3.10% 10

d. Observing the new employee

10.22% 33

e. Talking to peers or other veteran employees about the new

employees performance

6.50% 21

f. Asking others to train or inform the new employee

8.36% 27

g. Invite the new employee to group or team events

10.84% 35

h. Some of these

8.98% 29

i. None of these

24.46% 79

Do not experience anxiety.

0.31% 1

N/A, doesn't apply because I'm not a veteran.

0.31% 1

n/a

1.24% 4

not applicable

0.31% 1

I am the new employee

0.31% 1

Inform the manager so they can address the issue with the new employee if they believe the new employee needs to

change something about their performance.

0.31% 1

Invite them to learn and hope they take everthing seriously,

which can often be a challange in itself!

0.31% 1

Have no anxiety and try and assure the new employee's anxiety is minimized.

0.31% 1

Immersion of new employee in appropriate mission and

activities of organization.

0.31% 1

Thru 1 on 1 interaction and observation try to learn what motivates new employee, determine inherent talents, interests, drive. Find common ground.

0.31% 1

I don't experience anxiety.

0.31% 1

Not applicable

0.31% 1

Do not experience anxiety

0.31% 1

Talk with new employee, invite to lunch, etc.

0.31% 1

I don"t experience any anxiety.

0.31% 1

I do not experience anxiety due to the arrival of new

employees.

0.31% 1

na

0.31% 1

Not onboard long enough to answer this however as a veteran in the military we had PQS sheets to allow training to

be done and once trained the new person could feel confident he learned the way the shop worked and the information he needed to do his job well, it also allowed the veteran

employees to provide the knowledge they felt the new employee needed to succeed in their new found responsibilities.

0.31% 1

NA

0.31% 1

New hires need to be socialized into the office -- not only with their work, but as person and make them a team player.

0.31% 1

Medication

0.31% 1

I am non-supervisory. I have however provided feedback to management with no improvements noted other than a

longer indoctrination process.

0.31% 1

The question doesn't seem posed correctly, I don't experence anxiety, however I do all that are checked in the intrest of the

new employee.

0.31% 1

Not in a program that sees many new employees so

experience is based on being on the "outside looking in"

0.31% 1

Answered NO to 5.

0.31% 1

N/A

2.17% 7

i will step in to help where i can.

0.31% 1

Not Applicable

0.31% 1

Number of respondents 193

Number of respondents who skipped this question 214

54

7. When a new employee was hired and joined your work group or team, have you experienced any of the following? (Please

check all that apply). % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. Had to move to a new office

4.87% 22

b. Had to modify office or cubicle space to make room for the new employee

13.72% 62

c. Learned a new employee was hired to your work group or

team when the employee reported for the first day of work

25.00% 113

d. Been assigned to serve as the new employee’s sponsor without advanced notice

8.85% 40

e. None of these

40.04% 181

f. All of these

2.65% 12

I've additionally had interns moved into my split office space without my prior knowledge or approval (I didn't care but

that's beside the point)

0.22% 1

not applicable

0.22% 1

not involved as the direct supervisor with choosing the employee

0.22% 1

Found the new employee was given better/more prestigious assignments and treated more "special" than existing

employees.

0.22% 1

While under tremendous work pressure and great workload was suddenly assigned to train new employee while barely

able to keep up with work myself.

0.22% 1

None of these as I have not been close to a new hire for

years.

0.22% 1

n/a - I am the "new employee"

0.22% 1

Not applicable

0.22% 1

Left out of the Loop. New Employee informed of current state, current employee in the dark.

0.22% 1

Found out that he had 15 relatives already working on base.

0.22% 1

Not properly introduced; therefore, did not have an idea of their background or career path.

0.22% 1

Learned in advance that a new employee was going to be

assigned to my work group.

0.22% 1

On more than one occassion was not even informed there was a new employee for several days.

0.22% 1

I have not been hired very long so it doesn't apply. still on

probationary employment

0.22% 1

Loss of project funding to support new hires.

0.22% 1

(b) was only for a short time until the new employee received

their building security badge

0.22% 1

I am the newest employee

0.22% 1

N/A

0.66% 3

Didn't even know there was an open position until new person showed up.

0.22% 1

Not Applicable

0.22% 1

Number of respondents 367

Number of respondents who skipped this question 40

55

8. If you experienced any of the actions in question #7, please share on your reaction. Did those actions make you (Please

check all that apply) % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. Want to avoid sharing information to ease the new

employee’s socialization process

0.60% 2

b. Wonder why a new employee was needed

9.82% 33

c. Resent your supervisor for miscommunication

11.01% 37

e. Resent the new employee

2.08% 7

f. Lengthen the time it took to accept the new employee into

your work group or team

5.36% 18

g. Think about finding alternative employment opportunities

5.06% 17

h. If eligible, consider retiring from civil service

1.79% 6

i. All of these

0.89% 3

j. None of these

51.79% 174

Made me want to make that person feel welcome - organized a luncheon to introduce her to others; talked with her about the various projects and opportunities

0.30% 1

n/a

0.89% 3

not applicable

0.30% 1

Can't say due to being onboard less than a year and just trying to get through the required training, while attending college and doing/learninig my job. Just trying to work and fit in the established ofice and work assignment.

0.30% 1

I've been a Navy employee both in California (Pt Mugu) and Florida (NSWC PCD). It was much easier for new employees to adapt to the workplace in California. I attribute most of this

to the cultural tendencies of the South: traditional, insular, hierarchical, suspicious of new ideas and people. I don't have any answers on how to change these attitudes. But I can

sympathize with how difficult it is for outsiders in the South.

0.30% 1

Feel sorry for the new employee

0.30% 1

Not Applicable

0.30% 1

Accept the situation and move on

0.30% 1

Wondered why I wasn't told that I was receiving a new employee until the day that they reported

0.30% 1

work harder to determine what I can do to assist them

0.30% 1

Sometimes I have known. Where I am at now, usually know.

0.30% 1

I had to shift my priorities and dedicate more time to training the new employee, finding tasks for them to complete and

lengthening the time my project was waiting on task completion - instead of just doing it myself. Also I had to take on some "budget" type of stress when having to give away

my hours for a project to a new employee.

0.30% 1

It took longer to incorporate the new employee into our working family, due to the unknowns. Eventually we settled in

to a good working relationship.

0.30% 1

Not applicable

0.30% 1

made efforts to make the new employee feel welcome, helped with orientation and introductions

0.30% 1

I hoped for better communication but didn't resent my

supervisor for the lack of communication.

0.30% 1

Confused as to what the employee was here for and therefore did not know how to communicate with them.

0.30% 1

Wonder why it is we do not have a formal training program in place if we are constantly hiring new employees. The new

employees themselves are miserable trying to learn. They ask us "how do we learn?" Who is supposed to teach us?" None of us have the answers. Especially the supervisors.

0.30% 1

Would like to be in the loop so to speak. management needs to do a better job of letting us know when a new hire is going to be added

0.30% 1

na

0.30% 1

Most resented the new Contractor employee when the supervisor only hired the person to score points with the

employee's family member who worked in Building One.

0.30% 1

Pain for teh individual as they are coming into a new

environment unannounced.

0.30% 1

The new hires and veteran employees did not understand why the supervisor separated the veteran employees from the new hires when it was requested that we remain together

0.30% 1

Wonder what impact new person's work assignments have on

mine, if any. Wonder why management didn't announce vacancy before new person arrived. Wonder why management didn't consider promotion within current

employees if applicable.

0.30% 1

None, I enjoy facilitating learning but others see them as a threat.

0.30% 1

Frustration on the lack of planning ahead and communication. Not the new hires fault by any means!

0.30% 1

determine appropriate tasks for that employee so they could start becoming part of the team.

0.30% 1

Work with new employee as any other new hire.

0.30% 1

N/A

1.49% 5

56

9.

Do you feel generational differences impact a multi-generational organization’s ability to meet mission goals and objectives? % of Respondents

Number of Respondents

a. Yes

43.80% 173

b. No

56.20% 222

Number of respondents 395

Number of respondents who skipped this question 12

57

10. In your opinion, what is the best way federal civil servants can bridge generational gaps in order to form successful, high-

functioning teams? (Check all that apply) % of

Respondents

Number of

Respondents

a. Require communication model training or instruction in both new hire indoctrination and leadership development

training

7.53% 54

b. Require generational information or briefs be included in

leadership development training

6.56% 47

c. Learn how each generation communicates and consumes information

17.57% 126

d. Understand each other’s worldviews, or socioeconomic

status

10.74% 77

e. Train together as a team

32.36% 232

f. All of these

15.62% 112

g. None of these

4.18% 30

better mgt planning

0.14% 1

I believe it is a possitive impact.

0.14% 1

Work together as team.

0.14% 1

work together not just train together. too often younger people are not put with older to learn what they know.

0.14% 1

Beleive it or not most of us do quite well without training. This is one problem with Federal Govt and why we have so

much debt. Guys, we are not complete inable here. Give us the benefit of the doubt.

0.14% 1

Clear distinction to the new employee that they are the

trainee. If further clarification is needed then I think it should openly be discussed with the manager.

0.14% 1

To be a team you train as one.

0.14% 1

The culture needs to change to promote more of a mentor

spirit.

0.14% 1

Just talk to each other.

0.14% 1

required training on this topic creates resentment and is considered a waste of valuable time and money by senior employees.

0.14% 1

I have an observation. The younger generation tend to have a since of entitlement, not all but most. I would like to emphasize that the corporate knowledge acquired from years

of experience is just as valuable and in some cases even more valuable than an engineering degree to the service members being served.

0.14% 1

It's new technology that they old generation doesn't comperhend to move forward with.

0.14% 1

The civil service personnel at this location receive no leadership training.

0.14% 1

Don't know

0.14% 1

accept differences

0.14% 1

Each generation brings strengths to the organization. Communication is KEY.

0.14% 1

Immerse the new employee in meaningful, rewarding work with oversight on an "as needed" basis.

0.14% 1

Stop treating the new hires as if they know more and are more valuable than the old hires.

0.14% 1

I don't know if you can "train" this type of behavior into

people. As someone in the "middle" with 20 years of experience I struggle with trying to connect with those who are about to retire who have been on the base for 35+ years and hang onto their knowledge and experience like it is all

they have left. My biggest fear is that these experts will retire and take that information with them. Most are helpful and open to sharing, others are just too busy and a few are

belligerent about holding their life's work close to the vest and refuse to share.

0.14% 1

Respect all generations, not just the new employees

0.14% 1

Have older generation work directly with younger generation

on tasks/projects

0.14% 1

I don't think there is a problem

0.14% 1

Instill the sense of legacy and tradition of the facility.

0.14% 1

mentoring

0.14% 1

Training is useless

0.14% 1

Encourage socialization with the newly hired individual (such as lunches out of the office).

0.14% 1

Pair an older and new employee is the same physical space.

0.14% 1

Apporpriate documentaion of the sytem/programs past and current status

0.14% 1

make damn sure the skill levels are within the new employee to conduct themselves in the core subject area and work ethic

that makes for team support

0.14% 1

Help if possible, Ignore as required for sanity.

0.14% 1

work together

0.14% 1

Have supervision include the team in the indoctrination rather than communicate a message they have a new super-star

58

11. Please select the command where you are presently employed. % of Respondents

Number of Respondents

1. NSWC Carderock Division

0.00% 0

2. NSWC Corona Division

0.00% 0

3. NSWC Crane Division

45.70% 186

4. NSWC Dahlgren Division

0.25% 1

5. NSWC EOD Technology Division

0.00% 0

6. NSWC Indian Head Division

0.00% 0

7. NSWC Panama City Division

54.05% 220

8. NSWC Port Hueneme Division

0.00% 0

9. Combat Systems Direction Activity Dam Neck

0.00% 0

10. Ships System Engineering Station Philadelphia

0.00% 0

11. NUWC Keyport

0.00% 0

12. NUWC Newport

0.00% 0

Number of respondents 407

Number of respondents who skipped this question 0

59

Appendix B – NSWC PCD 2009 New Hire Two-Way Communication Audit Survey

Results October 16, 2009/Jacqui Barker, Public Affairs (Code B08)

NSWC PCD New Hires Internal Communication Audit

Q1. As an employee with les than one year at NSWC Panama City Division, do you feel you received adequate information to prepare you to serve as a federal civil servant at NSWC PCD?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 85.2% 46

b. No 14.8% 8

answered question 54

skipped question 1

Q2. When you checked onboard, what information was the most important to you?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Human Resources 85.5% 47

b. Meeting with Commander or Technical Director 25.5% 14

c. Public Affairs Overview 18.2% 10

d. Safety 7.3% 4

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q3. Did you have a sponsor to assist you with your check in?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 56.6% 30

b. No 43.4% 23

answered question 53

skipped question 2

Q4. Please select all forms of internal Two-Way Communications you are presently aware of use at NSWC PCD:

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Written Reports 65.5% 36

b. Making suggestions through the CO’s Suggestion Box 20.0% 11

c. Making comments to The Lab Review editor 5.5% 3

d. Telephone calls 94.5% 52

e. Well timed and quickly responded to E-Mails 89.1% 49

f. Face-to-Face Conversations 90.9% 50

g. All Hands Calls 56.4% 31

h. Department meetings 78.2% 43

60

i. Social mediums, such as wikis, blogs or chat functions (i.e., Jabbermouth) 9.1% 5

j. Shared drives 56.4% 31

k. Intranet 50.9% 28

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q5. How do you learn about command or base events?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Bldg. 110 Lobby posters, billboard in various buildings 18.2% 10

b. Lobby displays 9.1% 5

c. Quarterdeck television monitor 0.0% 0

d. The Lab Review 9.1% 5

e. All Hands emails 92.7% 51

f. Base marquee 32.7% 18

g. Galley video screens 0.0% 0

h. Hallway flyers 25.5% 14

i. Word of Mouth 69.1% 38

j. Leadership passdown 34.5% 19

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q6. How effective was your check-in experience?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Very Effective 33.3% 18

b. Somewhat Effective 31.5% 17

c. Effective 33.3% 18

d. Not Effective at all 1.9% 1

answered question 54

skipped question 1

Q7. Do you feel NSWC PCD enables effective communications internally?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 90.9% 50

b. No 9.1% 5

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q8. If you answered 'No' to number 7, please explain:

Answer Options Response Count

61

6

answered question 6

skipped question 49

Q9. How important are Two-Way Communications to you as an employee?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Extremely important 61.8% 34

b. Important 38.2% 21

c. Not Important 0.0% 0

d. N/A 0.0% 0

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q10. Do you believe you will maintain a career with the federal civil service at NSWC PCD?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 96.4% 53

b. No 3.6% 2

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q11. Do you feel you are heard when you engage in Two-Way Communications?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 94.5% 52

b. No 5.5% 3

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q12. Do you feel empowered by your immediate chain of command to engage in Two-Way Communications openly and freely?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 96.4% 53

b. No 3.6% 2

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q13. If you answered ‘No’ to question number 12, please explain:

Answer Options Response Count

1

62

answered question 1

skipped question 54

Q14. In your opinion, does regular use of Two-Way Communication improve your morale at work?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 80.0% 44

b. No 3.6% 2

c. Do not know 16.4% 9

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q15. Do you believe that effective Two-Way Communications will affect your willingness to stay employed with NSWC PCD?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 92.7% 51

b. No 7.3% 4

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q16. Do you believe that effective Two-Way Communications fosters collaborative environments in the workspace?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Yes 100.0% 55

b. No 0.0% 0

answered question 55

skipped question 0

Q17. How often do you receive feedback on your work using any mode of Two-Way Communication?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Always 14.8% 8

b. Most of the time 48.1% 26

c. Sometimes 33.3% 18

d. Never 3.7% 2

answered question 54

skipped question 1

63

Q18. If you do not normally receive a response on your work using a mode of Two-Way Communications, how does that make you feel?

Answer Options Response Percent

Response Count

a. Doesn’t bother me 38.0% 19

b. I wonder what leadership thinks about my work 50.0% 25

c. I wonder why I bother 8.0% 4

d. I do not feel valued in the workspace 4.0% 2

answered question 50

skipped question 5

Q19. In your opinion, how can Two-Way Communication within NSWC PCD be improved?

Answer Options Response Count

20

answered question 20

skipped question 35

64

APPENDIX C – New Hire Survey Comments If you answered 'No' to number 7, please explain:

1 Yes, once you can learn what the effective communication paths are.

2

A lot of the long-term employees here expect new hires to know more than what we do. A lot of

direction is "matter of fact", and the exasperation on both parties is evident. We were given a general overview of many things, but very little specific information on necessary items.

3

The medium (internet, NMCI) at which most communication takes place is painfully slow. It really

makes you wonder about the governments capabilities compared to the private sector. I thought our IT systems were more robust than anything else out there. I guess i've fallen into the trap of believing

what I see on tv.

4

Communications within my department are very open and excellent, as well as communications with the command chain above me. However, it is very difficult to learn about other opportunities on base

or get in contact with people in other divisions.

5

Security and bureaucracy add much more overhead to communications than necessary. There is no central repository for all information. What would be great would be if the NSWC-PCD website could be

set as everyone's homepage and have easy-to-find communications categorized well. For instance, if I wanted to explain to someone what I could do, I could get on, find something approved for public

release, and print it for them.

6

I selected 'No', because there seems to be a flaw in getting your CAC and Computer in a timely

mannor. This is definitely a communication problem.

Q19: In your opinion, how can Two-Way Communication within NSWC PCD be improved?

1 Not sure

2

By actually recieving the return. Not a problem when contacting the people i interaact with daily, but i almost always have to use one of them to help me contact someone outside of our group because they do not respond to me in an effective or timely manner.

3 The failing comes, not with the systems, but with the individuals whom are slow / lazy with their responses.

4 Help new hires find an effective way to communicate easily and more frequently

5

I appreciated the Technical Director and Commanding Officer speaking to "A" department recently about career opportunities and diversity. Their face to face communication with their employees was genuine, open, and engaging. I would like to know more concretely the expectations for my work and also meet more often as a branch to maintain morale and unity but also to share information and standardize work processes. I am interested in knowing how other people's jobs integrate into my own and as a new hire the sharing of experiences from more senior employees would help me grow and adjust.

6 with effective communication

7

Better IT. NMCI needs to step it up. I go crazy with how slow the servers are. There are constantly issues with dropped data causing failed save attempts, loss of work, loss of network connection, wasted time, and lots of rework to name a few.

8

Some form of basewide directory would be helpful, which would indicate generally what people are capable of and who to contact for what type of expertise.

9

For new hires it would be nice to have an employee guide that actually has a table of contents, and then a procedures step by step reference on how to go about performing that task and who would be your POC from anything from getting your CAC card, to payroll, to where buildings are and a list of all of the main websites that you can use without having to find out from someone that has been here for 20 years.

10 Make it a little more important on everyones list of things to do!

65

11

I have no idea! Cavaet: I've only been here a couple weeks, so I'm probably not the best person to answer these questions.

12 An internal only instant chat would help, rather than having to pick up the phone all the time.

13 Weekly group meetings to keep new hires involved with prospective jobs.

14

Stop sending out surveys and wasting our time with pointless training requirements. I think that the best way to handle it would be a normal chain of command like in the private sector.

15 .

16 Make sure people know about all the things listed in No. 4 and 5 on this survey.

17 Increased use of Blackberry's and other hand portable electronic communication devices.

18 faster response time to emails

19

Management needs to communicate with their employees more. Maybe they are unaware and/or need to have periodic workshops.

20 It can't.