ORGANIZATIONAL INTERNAL COMMUNICATION AS A MEANS OF IMPROVING EFFICIENCY

July edition ORGANIZATIONAL INTERNAL COMMUNICATION AS A MEANS OF IMPROVING EFFICIENCY Eva Tariszka- Semegine 0 0 Associate professor, College of Szolnok, Department of Economics- Finance and Management , Hungary Representatives of organizational theories have already dealt with the question of organizational communication. However there has not been any distinction from other features of organizations (size, structure, work sharing, efficient functioning, leadership theory). Nowadays it is a prerequisite towards the staff even in the simplest position to have certain level of communication skills. It is regarded as even more essential with managers. Organizations have recognized that the level of communication within the organization determines the efficiency of the organization. The attention has turned towards the study of different fields of organizational communication. Most of the studies deal with the effects on performance determined by how well the staff is provided with information, and the level of satisfaction with the direction of communication (horizontal, vertical). Organizational communication; internal communication; informal communication; efficiency 2. Organizational Communication Organizational internal communication according to Scott Cutlips (1985) definition should identify, create and maintain mutually beneficial connection between the organization and its staff whom its success and failure depends on. According to another definition (Bevan and Bailey, 1991) internal communication is such a process, in which an organization shares its information, builds commitments and manages the changes. As the main factor in the motivation and performance of staff, communication plays an important part in the competitiveness of the organization. In the practice of organizations internal communication is understood as part of the leadership function. Internal communication as a field of the work of the organization is made and changed in the work connection among the members of the organization. International eras of Organizational internal communication: Dover (1964) identified three eras of internal communication. The first is Dealing with the employee which was popular in the 1940s. The 50s were characterized by informing the employee and 60s by persuading the employee. Grunig and Hunt named the 70s and 80s the era as the symmetrical internal communication or in other words starting a communication with the staff. 2.1. - between organizations - mass communication Many authors classify micro, mezzo and macro levels. The micro level corresponds to the interpersonal level, the mezzo corresponds to the levels between groups or organizations, the macro corresponds to mass communication. Communication on the interpersonal and group level are on lower level than the one on the level of organization, yet they are the most important forms of communication within an organization, which is confirmed by the rich bibliography of organizational communication. Communication on the level of the organization focuses on the mezzo level. This view obviously suggests the opposition between the mezzo and micro. Proceeding from the micro to the mezzo we can introduce another level of differentiation, the formal-informal or verticalhorizontal level. 2.2. Formal Versus Informal In recent years the most important aspect of examining organizational communication for managers of big organizations has been the formal upward and downward communication. Informal communication has a connection to interpersonal, horizontal communication, mainly as a potential obstacle to efficient organizational production. It still cannot be identified clearly. The continuous, dynamic and not formal but informal communication is getting more and more important providing efficient management work in the modern organization. Papers written on informal communication emphasize that the management culture and atmosphere inhibits the confrontation of formal and informal communication. Adapted from DAprix(1996) DAprix(1996) developed a SAY/DO matrix as a key explanation of how informal/formal communication issues can arise. According to the latest studies the growing number of dynamically improving communication technology makes communication easier which is neither formal nor informal regarding communication within a group or a community. It can be formal/informal which is difficult to distinguish such as many new communication channels, which already exist in an organization and are neither formal nor informal but both at the same time. 2.3. Vertical, Horizontal Diagonal Communication Communication can be characterized as vertical, horizontal, or diagonal. Initially greater emphasis was directed at vertical organizational communication as compared to lateral communication. Diagonal communication is an even more recent emphasis in the organizational communication literature. 2.3.1. Vertical Communication Vertical communication occurs between hierarchically positioned persons and can involve both downward and upward communication flows. Downward communication is more prevalent than upward communication. Larkin and Larkin (1994) suggest that downward communication is most effective if top managers communicate directly with immediate supervisors and immediate supervisors communicate with their staff. A wealth of evidence shows that increasing the power of immediate supervisors increases both satisfaction and performance among employees. This was first discovered by Donald Pelz (1952) and is commonly referred to as the Pelz effect. Pelz was attempting to find out what types of leadership styles led to employee satisfaction (informal/formal, autocratic/participative, management oriented/front line-oriented). He found that what matters most is not the supervisors leadership style but whether the supervisor has power. One way to give supervisors power is to communicate directly with them and to have them provide input to decisions. Ensuring that supervisors are informed about organizational issues/changes before staff in general, and then allowing them to communicate these issues/changes to their staff, helps reinforce their position of power. When the supervisor is perceived as having power, employees have greater trust in the supervisor, greater desire for communication with the supervisor, and are more likely to believe that the information coming from the supervisor is accurate. Jablin (1980), after reviewing almost 30 years of research, pronounced the Pelz effect to be one of the most widely accepted propositions about organizational communication. Downwards communication According to Morgan and Shiemans (1983) research in which 30,000 employee were asked, the majority of the employees felt that productivity was not better because of downward communication. The level of satisfaction got lower as we went down the organizational hierarchy. Foehrenbach and Rosenberg (1982) with the su (...truncated)