The Relationship between Organizational Structure and Support for Employee Communication Skill Improvement

Transcription

1 Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College The Relationship between Organizational Structure and Support for Employee Communication Skill Improvement Roberta M. Supnick Western Michigan University Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons Recommended Citation Supnick, Roberta M., "The Relationship between Organizational Structure and Support for Employee Communication Skill Improvement" (1982). Dissertations This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact

2 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND SUPPORT FOR EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION SKILL IMPROVEMENT by Roberta M. Supnick A D issertation Submitted to the Faculty o f the Graduate College in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t o f the requirements fo r the Degree o f Doctor o f Education Department o f Educational Leadership Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1982

3 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND SUPPORT FOR EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION SKILL IMPROVEMENT Roberta M. Supnick, Ed. D. Western Michigan U n iversity, 1982 In order to examine the re la tio n s h ip, i f any, between an organization's structure and the propensity o f th a t organization to support communication tra in in g fo r its employees, 16 small manufactu rin g firms located in southwestern Michigan were selected fo r study. Firms were determined to e xh ib it organic, mechanistic or mixed structures based on managers' perceptions o f c e n tra liz a tio n, fo rm alizatio n, impersonalization and task s p ecializa tio n w ithin the company. Each firm was also judged to e x is t in e ith e r an uncertain or stable environment. Support fo r communication tra in in g in each company was assessed from personnel d irecto rs ' responses to questions concerning programs o ffere d, employees involved, frequency o f o fferin g s and percentage of training budget devoted to communication s k ill improvement. A s ig n ific a n t co rrela tio n in the expected d irectio n was obtained between the variables "stru ctu re" and "support o f tra in in g." Organic firm s, characterized by decentralized decision making processes, in fo r mal communication rules and procedures, high regard fo r individuals and low task s p e c ia liza tio n, tended to strongly support communication tra in in g fo r employees. M u ltip le regression analysis indicated th at "structure" was a s ig n ific a n t predictor o f "support fo r tra in in g " at the.01 le v e l. Environment was not a fa c to r in predicting company support fo r tra in in g nor was i t shown to be associated w ith structural

4 type. Because organic structures tended to show strong support fo r programs which upgrade employee communication s k ills, the investigato r concluded th a t the perceived importance o f communication tra in in g was more evident in organic firm s than in mechanistic firm s.

5 INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or target for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is Missing Page(s). If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of sectioning the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microfilms International 300 N.Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

6

7 Supnick, Roberta Marie THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND SUPPORT FOR EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION SKILL IMPROVEMENT Western Michigan University Ed JD University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106

8

9 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V. 1. Glossy photographs or pages 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print 3. Photographs with dark background 4. Illustrations are poor copy 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirements 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print 11. Page(s) lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s) seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered. Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pages 15. Other University Microfilms International

10

11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I t is w ith sincere appreciation th a t I acknowledge the support, advice and encouragement provided by individuals who contributed to the execution o f th is study: my advisor Dr. Harold Boles, the "teacher's teacher," whose commitment to excellence, d is c ip lin e and precision proved invaluable; committee members Dr. John Rizzo and Dr. Charles W a rfie ld, whose a b ilit ie s to elucidate important study concerns were c ru c ia l; and Dr. Roger Wallace, whose insight concerning Michigan in d u s trial firm s made the study possible. F in a lly, my husband, Dr. Lonnie Supnick, and c h ild ren, Christopher and Thomas, have my g ratitu d e fo r th e ir enduring patience and w illingness to withstand the pressures ty p ic a lly sustained by fam ilies o f aspiring doctoral candidates. Roberta M. Supnick

12 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS... LIST OF TABLES... LIST OF FIG U R ES... i i v v ii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND... 1 Statement o f the Problem... 1 Rationale fo r the S tu d y... 2 Purpose o f the S t u d y... 5 Lim itations o f the Study... 6 Significance o f the Study Organization o f the S tu d y... 7 I I. REVIEW OF LITERATURE... 9 Communication Training... 9 Organizational Structure and Environment Summary I I I. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Hypotheses Population and Sample In stru m en tatio n Data C o lle c tio n Methods o f A n a ly s is IV. RESULTS OF THE S T U D Y The S a m p le i i i

13 TABLE OF CONTENTS, c o n 't. Page Support fo r Communication Training Programs S tr u c tu r e S tructural C la ss ifica tio n o f Organizations Environmental Uncertainty Testing o f the Hypotheses Summary V. DISCUSSION Summary o f the S t u d y C onclusions Recommendations and Suggestions fo r Further R e s e a r c h APPENDIX A - Manufacturing Firms Participating in Study.. 79 APPENDIX B - Transm ittal L e tte r Accompanying Survey to Personnel D irectors APPENDIX C - Survey Form to Personnel D irectors APPENDIX D - Transmittal Letter Accompanying Survey to M a n a g e rs APPENDIX E - Survey Form to M anagers APPENDIX F - Enclosure Accompanying Surveys to Managers.. 32 APPENDIX G - Follow-up Notes Sent to A ll P articip an ts... 31* APPENDIX H - C orrelation M atrix fo r A ll Structure Items.. 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY... 98

14 LIST OF TABLES TABLES Page 1. Level o f Support fo r Communication Training Among Sixteen Michigan Companies Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers of Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers of Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item * Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item v

15 LIST OF TABLES, Con t. Page 16. Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item k 17. Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item O rganizational Structure Scores Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item Means and Standard Deviations of Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to I tern Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 2 0 a k. Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 2 0 b Means and Standard Deviations of'responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 2 0 c Environmental Uncertainty Scores Analysis o f Structure and Environment as Predictors o f Training Summary of Findings Showing Structure and Support Designations fo r Each Manufacturing Firm v i

16 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURES Page 1. C orrelation M atrix fo r C entralizatio n Items 1, 2, 3, 9 and C orrelation M atrix fo r Formalization Items 5, 6, 7, 8 and C orrelation M atrix fo r Impersonalization Items 12, 14 and vi i

17 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND Statement o f the Problem A growing number o f organizations are designing and implementing tra in in g programs to develop employee communication s k ills. While some companies maintain in-house tra in in g programs aimed a t verbal communication s k ill improvement, others subsidize employee instructio n a t nearby colleges or other academic in s titu tio n s. Verbal s k ills have become the focus o f considerable atte n tio n as managers re a liz e the p ro fit potential o f e ffe c tiv e organizational communicatio n. Poor verbal s k ills are linked to problems ranging from low productivity to the failu re of subordinates to carry out responsibilit ie s. "Far too many o f our job market entrants are coming to us as functional illit e r a t e s," according to James Bere o f Borg-Warner Corporation, who believes th at the business community has l i t t l e choice but to take on the task o f basic s k ill improvement in verbal communication (Adkins, 1981, p. 48). Business organizations have indeed assumed resp o n s ib ility fo r th is tra in in g ; the p ro life ra tio n o f lite r a tu r e pertaining to the importance o f communication s k ills in a ll areas, at a ll lev e ls, o f business and industry a ttests to th is spreading concern. But because th is concern has emerged r e la tiv e ly recently, l i t t l e study has been devoted to organizational propensity fo r supporting tra in in g for 1

18 s ta ff members. Few would argue but th at improved communication s k ills f a c ilit a t e job e ffic ie n c y, but what kind o f organization is w illin g to invest in e ffo rts to improve those s k ills? This study attempted to address th a t question. Rationale fo r the Study in order to investigate the relatio n ship between organizations and communication tra in in g, two central issues were f ir s t studied. The fir s t concerned the status of training programs offered by organizatio ns to date. The second involved establishing a lin k between communication tra in in g and organizational s tru ctu re. Communication Training Sponsored by Organizations Denton (1979) conducted a study to determine the status of in-house communication tra in in g programs w ith respect to company s ize, program content and s ta ffin g. Of 316 companies responding to his survey instrument, 123 (38.8%) offered one or more programs. Companies employing between 5,000 and 50,000 individuals were more lik e ly to sponsor programs (51%)«Programs ty p ic a lly were characte rized by the use o f workshops, m in i-lectu res and group discussion. Class s ize ranged from 15 to 18 employees and contact hours varied enormously, w ith a range o f 4 to 35 hours per employee. Training s ta ff members, college fa c u lty or consultants were primary teaching personnel. When asked to provide a ra tio n ale fo r in s titu tin g tr a in ing programs, respondents frequently cited an increasing in te rest in continuing education, a rapidly accelerating pace o f technological

19 change and national concern fo r lite ra c y. Responses from top management about the success o f the programs were q u ite favorable: 72% o f the respondents indicated th at managers were pleased both w ith the programs and w ith th e ir re su lts. No s im ila r data are known to e xis t fo r companies which provide fin a n cia l support fo r communication tra in in g outside o f the organizatio n. Information is a v a ila b le, as i t appears in tra in in g related lite r a tu r e, w ith regard to sp ecific programs offered by various organizations; however, no estimate can be made o f the number o f companies offering out-of-house training opportunities to th eir employees. I t is cle a r that a need fo r such tra in in g has been expressed. In 1978, Dr. Harold T. Smith o f Brigham Young U niversity surveyed members o f the Academy of C e rtifie d A dm inistrative Managers'to determine 20 competencies c r it ic a l to th e ir jobs. Each item in the l i s t o f 20 was then rated by 457 members o f the Academy as e ith e r super c r it ic a l, highly c r it ic a l or c r it ic a l. Four rated as super c r it ic a l were a ll-related to communicating (Mundale, 1980). O rganizational Structure The view th a t organizations are information processing systems emerged as a lin k between systems theory and contingency theory (Luthans, 1981). Tushman and Nadler (1978) described the three major assumptions o f the information processing perspective as: (a) organizations must be structured to cope with environmental and task uncerta in ty ; (b) a basic function o f the structure is to create configurations of work units to fa c ilita te the flow of information; and

20 k (c) subunits w ith in an organization must be arranged to optim ize in fo r mation processing through integratio n and coordination. Organizational structure should re fle c t the flow of communication w ith in the organizatio n : its, d ire c tio n, complexity and amount. From an information processing perspective, organizations may also be characterized as mechanistic or organic in structure (Burns and S ta lk e r, 1961)- Mechanistic structures were characterized by c en tralized decision making processes, downward communication flow, re stric te d communication flow, specialized sub-units and reliance on formal rules and procedures. Organic structures exhibited decentralized decision making procedures, upward and la te ra l communication flow and less reliance on formal rules and regulations. The two forms o f structure represent p o la ritie s. An organization can be placed along a mechan istic-o rg an ic continuum; in fa c t, a single organization might o s c illa te between the two extremes over a period of tim e. The authors stressed, however, th at important stru ctu ral differences existed among organizations and that the mechanistic-organic distinction provided a useful framework fo r id en tifyin g those differences. O rganizational Environment Environmental s t a b ilit y must be considered as a v aria b le which a ffe cts organizational stru ctu re and function. As noted previously, one o f the reasons c ite d, by a company executive, fo r in s titu tin g a communication s k ills program was the rapid pace of technological change. Burns and S talker (1961) developed th e ir systemic d is tin c tio n in the context o f organizational adaptation to technical and

21 commercial change. Changing, dynamic environments w ith a high degree o f uncertainty characterize organic structures. Stable, predictable environments w ith low degrees o f uncertainty indicate mechanistic stru ctu res. Organic structures are linked w ith u n it technologies, w hile mechanistic structures are linked w ith process technologies (Stech, 1981). Purpose o f the Study Both mechanistic and organic systems require information processing c a p a b ilitie s ; however, those c a p a b ilitie s are thought to vary in scope and importance according to d iffe rin g degrees o f c e n tra liz a tio n, fo rm alizatio n and environmental uncertainty w ith in the organization. Because information processing depends ultim ately upon the communication s kills of organization members, a central question was: W ill organic or mechanistic organizations be more lik e ly to make s k ill improvement programs a vailab le to th e ir employees? As a u th o rity is d ilu te d and requirements fo r integrated a c t iv ity among sub-units increase, perhaps communication s k ills are perceived as more crucial in organic structures. Conversely, mechanistic structures may have no less a stake in upgrading employee verbal p roficiency; given th e ir reliance upon written modes of communication, in tandem with the widespread clamor fo r employee lite ra c y, tra d itio n a l bureaucratic organ izations may be s im ila rly inclined to promote communication tra in in g. The purpose o f th is study was to determine which organizational type organic, mechanistic or mixed is more lik e ly to fin a n c ia lly support employee communication s k ill development through iri- or out-

22 t 6 of-house tra in in g programs. Lim itations o f the Study Sample s iz e was n e c e s s a rily lim ite d because o f tim e and funding fa c to rs. W hile the sample s iz e was adequate f o r hypothesis te s tin g, a la rg e r sample would be d e s ira b le under more id eal research conditio n s. The lo c a tio n o f m anufacturing firm s included in the sample proved p ro ble m a tic in o b ta in in g uncontaminated p ercep tion s o f environm ental u n c e rta in ty. M ichigan's cu rre n t recessionary economy may have in f lu enced p a r tic ip a n ts ' responses to survey items concerning the market and tech n o lo g ic a l environm ents. Significance o f the Study While some studies re la tin g the importance o f communication processes to o rg a n iz a tio n a l s tru c tu re e x is t, no research re p o rt was found which s p e c ific a lly addressed organizational commitment to program development in communication s k i l l s. Most o f the tr a in in g and development lit e r a t u r e focuses on the need fo r s u p e rio r communication s k ill s o f members, but what kind o f o rg a n iz a tio n takes p ra c tic a l steps to upgrade those s k ill s is u n c le a r. The fin d in g s o f th is study should c o n trib u te to knowledge o f o rg a n iz a tio n a l s tru c tu re and it s re la tio n s h ip to in fo rm a tio n processing as w e ll as to awareness o f organizational promotion o f communication s k ills in the workplace.

23 7 Organization o f the Study Substantial literatu re exists concerning organizational structure and the function o f communication in organizations. Studies pertaining to communication as i t relates to s tru ctu ral considerations o f environmental uncertainty, fo rm alizatio n, c e n tra liz a tio n, functio n al s p e c ia liz a tio n, communication flow and employee o rien tatio n were found and are discussed, information concerning communication programs sponsored by a lim ited number of business firm s is presented in Chapter I I. Because the lite r a tu r e so fa r located was scanty, much o f the m a te ria l reported re fle c ts s p ec ific organizational attempts to redress d e fic ie n t communication s k ills o f employees. The emphasis upon need for such programs w ill be thrown into sharp re lie f. For the purpose o f th is study, both in - and out-of-house commun ication tra in in g e ffo rts were included. The study design described in Chapter I I I delineates c r it e r ia used to v e rify the presence of organizational commitment to communication tra in in g as w ell as the c r it e r ia used to c la s s ify organizations according to type, i. e., mechanistic, organic or mixed. Population and sample surveyed, instrumentation developed, methods o f data c o lle ctio n used, data sought, hypotheses investigated and methods o f data analysis f o l lowed are also specified in th a t chapter. The fin a l two chapters, Chapters IV and V, present findings from the data analysis and make recommendations fo r fu th er study. Conclusions drawn from th is research should provide p a rtia l response to Denton's plea for research in the fie ld of corporate training in

24 8 communication: "C ertain ly the time is here fo r close analysis o f th is important part o f our d is c ip lin e to appear in published form" (p. 14).

25 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE L ite ratu re is scanty in the area o f organizational e ffo rts to improve employee communication s k ills. Most o f the lite r a tu r e reviewed here concerns tra in in g tip s found in tra in in g and development p erio d icals. While lite r a tu r e in the area o f organizational structure is p le n tifu l, information s p e c ific a lly relevant to the stru ctu ral properties most closely associated w ith inform ation processing, or communication, is less abundant. Communication Training Employers have learned th at communication s k ills are c r it ic a l fo r organizational maintenance and growth. An increasing number of organizations are designing or purchasing reading and w ritin g programs. Mistakes and fa ilu re s caused by w ritte n reports, lo st sales resu ltin g from poorly w ritte n proposals and negative images o f the company reflected in poorly w ritte n documents have spurred the movement toward company communication tra in in g programs (Adkins, 1981). Both in-house and out-of-house programs receive fin a n cia l support from some companies. Training which takes place outside o f the organization ty p ic a lly consists o f coursework or workshops sponsored by nearby higher education in s titu tio n s. Denton (1979) reported that 7k% o f the 65 organizations he surveyed to determine the presence o f in-house programs send th e ir employees to short 9

26 10 courses offered by nearby u n iv e rs itie s. Of 132 responding organizatio n s, each having between 5,001 and 50,000 employees, 51% offered a t least one in-house w ritin g program. Whalen (1980) suggested four advantages o f implementing in-house communication tra in in g programs: 1. Scheduling sessions to the company's advantage 2. increased employee goodwill 3. S electivity over material k. Savings over seminars and accredited evening classes The in-house course often is re la tiv e ly inexpensive, as i t saves tra ve l fa res, fees to outside agencies and time taken out o f the work week. A responsible manager should be in charge o f the curriculum that includes such a course, so th a t s p ec ific organizational problems with regard to the flow o f communication, as w ell as the q u a lity o f the communication, can be attacked. Whalen also suggested th at a consu ltan t be hired i n i t i a l l y to diagnose problems in communication processes w ith in the organization. A lbert Joseph, President o f the In d u strial W riting In s titu te, Cleveland, Ohio, (see "Why i t Pays," 1978) suggested th at the f o l lowing factors be considered when in s titu tin g in-house programs: 1. O bjectives. Announcing worthwhile objectives a t the beginning o f a course in w ritte n communications, fo r example, helps overcome employee a n ticip a tio n o f boredom. 2. Content. A course must give s p ec ific a n a ly tic a l advice to employees. I t is not enough to say th a t reports and le tte rs must be clear and organized.

27 11 3- Resistance. Expect some resistance to the programs. Most courses addressing w ritte n communication fo r adults tend to be remed ia l; however, resistance indicates th at p articipants are thinking and caring about the program. 4. Format. I t is important th at instructio n be delivered in a class/group s itu a tio n so that others can react to communication e ffo rts o f one in d ivid u a l. 5. Managers. Train the managers in sp ecific communication s k ills f i r s t. The executives should enro ll in the program before th e ir subordinates. I f they cannot, a t least b r ie f them on course benefits and objectives. 6. Group mix. Try to schedule a mixture o f professional 's k ills. When a ll o f the particip ants are in the same department, they may have the tendency to say, "We have special problems th at nobody else understands." Honeywell This is sometimes an excuse fo r unclear communications. Corporation, which offers a number of courses through its continuing education program, conducts training in le tte r and report w riting, business English and writing for engineers. The program is open to any professional person w ithin the company. The evaluation o f the tra in in g program, assessed by pre-and post-test re su lts, indicated th a t length o f le tte rs and reports was reduced ks%, thus raisin g re a d a b ility 27%. Persuasiveness increased 76% and overall effectiveness was increased k6% (Mundale, 1980). Addams (1981) studied the effect that participating in intensive workshops fo r developing accountants' w ritte n and oral communication s k ills had on performance evaluations. He found th at w ritin g

28 12 a b ilit y and oral communication s k ill influenced performance appraisals o f accountants and thus affected th e ir salary and promotion. No reports lin kin g communication s k ill and organization function were found in the lite r a tu r e. Instead, most authors pointed to the necessity of e ffe c tiv e communication s k ills in gathering and processing information v ital to the organization's maintenance and growth. That individuals should possess adequate communication s k ills is posited on the known importance o f communication to a ll aspects o f o rganizational behavior and structure. Academic journal a rtic le s focus on program objectives and s p ecific a c tiv itie s or assignments th a t should be u tiliz e d by communication tra in in g in stru cto rs. Denton's study provided one o f the few clues located th a t a substantial number o f corporate communication tra in in g programs are in place. As he noted, no complete assemblage o f the names or numbers o f those businesses supporting such programs e x is ts. Other references cited here indicate that atte n tio n is being paid to employee communication s k ills, but the relationship between that a tte n tio n and organizational ch aracteristics is unstudied. Organizational Structure and Environment The determinant ro le th at structure plays in communication processes has been well substantiated. Organization structure refers to the patterned- arrangement o f relationships among units and components w ith in a system (Rogers and Rogers, 1976). Basic structure involves issues such as how the work o f the organization w ill be divided and assigned among those units and components, and how the coordination

29 necessary to accomplish organizational objectives w ill be achieved (Lorsch, 1970). Organizational structure lends p re d ic ta b ility to communication and thus fa c ilita te s goal accomplishment (Rogers and Rogers, 1976) March and Simon (1958) proposed th a t the capacity o f an organization to maintain an interdependent pattern o f a c tiv ity depend^ upon its capacity to handle the communication required fo r coordination. Deutsch (1963) linked the concept o f organization to information and communication by viewing the organizational system as a set o f elements joined by way o f communieating inform ation. Pugh, Hickson, Hinings, Macdonald, Turner and Lupton (1963) hypothesized s ix primary variables o f organizational structure: (a) s p e c ia liz a tio n, (b) standardization, (c) fo rm alizatio n, (d) c e n tra liz a tio n, (e) configuration, and (f ) f l e x i b i l i t y. The v a r i able "s p e cia liza tio n " refers to the divisio n o f labor w ith in an organiz a tio n, or degree o f functional d iffe re n tia tio n. "Form alization" refers to the degree to which communications and procedures in an organization are w ritte n down and f ile d, w hile "standardization" refers to the locus o f a u th o rity fo r making decisions a ffe ctin g the organization. A factor affecting centralization includes the leg itimate ava ila b ility of relevant information. VConfiguration" concerns the au th o rity s tru ctu re, commonly expressed in an organizatio n a l ch art. " F le x ib ility," as described by the authors,' expresses changes in the organization stru ctu re. This varia b le is apparently connected to environmental uncertainty; f l e x i b i l i t y refers to the org anizatio n 's a b ilit y to respond to a changing environment. The authors cited Burns and S ta lk e r's (1961) study o f the impact o f

30 14 electronics on tra d itio n a l Scottish firm s: The two ideal types o f organization, the organic (continuous change) and the mechanistic (no change), as described by Burns and S talker may be considered as examples o f the extreme end o f the f l e x i b i l i t y dimension, (p. 307) Burns and S talker characterized mechanistic systems as having a h ierarchic structure o f co n tro l, au th o rity and communication. Reinforcement o f the h ierarchic structure occurred as long as the location o f knowledge was exc lu siv ely -a t the top o f the hierarchy. The organic form, appropriate to changing conditions, was characte rized by a network stru ctu re o f c o n tro l, au th o rity and communicatio n. L a te ra l, rather than v e r tic a l, directions o f communication flow existed throughout the organization. Communication took place among people o f d iffe re n t ranks and consisted o f inform ation giving and advice rather than instructions and decisions. Hage and Aiken (1967) examined the relatio n ship between c en tralizatio n o f power and the degree o f fornfatization and complexity in organizational stru ctu re in a data-based research study. The degree o f c e n tra liz a tio n, or d is trib u tio n o f power, was found to be associated with both formalization (u tiliza tio n of rules) and comp le x ity (u t iliz a tio n o f knowledge). Centralized stru ctu res, having fewer loci o f decision making, tended to be more formal and less- complex than structures w ith d iffu se decision making lo c i. The strongest p o sitive relatio n ship id e n tifie d was th at between c e n tra l izatio n and complexity; a less strong, but s t i l l supported, positive relationship existed between centralization and form alization. Tushman and Nadler (1978) used the concepts o f information

31 processing and environmental uncertainty as variables which are determined by organizational or task unit stru ctu re. Five propositions, paraphrased below, were generated from a mass o f relevant lite r a tu r e extant in 1977: 1. The tasks o f organizational subunits vary in th e ir degree of c e rta in ty. 2. As work related uncertainty increases, so does the need fo r increased amounts o f inform ation, and thus the need fo r increased information processing capacity. '3- D iffe re n t organizational structures have d iffe re n t capacities fo r information processing. k. Organizations w ill be more e ffe c tiv e when there is a match between inform ation processing requirements facing the organization and information processing capacity o f the org anizatio n 's s tru ctu re. 5. I f organizations (or subunits) face d iffe re n t conditions over tim e, more e ffe c tiv e units w ill adapt th e ir structures to meet the changed inform ation processing requirements. Tushman and Nadler also referred to the mechanistic-organic distinction as a c ritic a l dimension of subunit structure affecting information processing: Organismic communication networks have a greater a b ilit y to deal w ith work related uncertainty than do more hierarchical or mechanistic communication networks.... Two dimensions of subunit structure a ffe c t its information processing capacity: the mechanistic-organismic nature o f the u n it's structu re, and the nature o f coordination and control mechanisms, (p. 617~18) S im ila ritie s and differences in structure from organization to

32 organization may re fle c t adaptation to the forces presented by th e ir environments. Degree o f change in the environment is one aspect a ffe ctin g structure and may be conceived as a continuum ranging from s ta b ility to v o la tility (Tosi and Carroll, 1976). Mechanistic organizatio ns appear to develop in response to stable market and technological environments; organic organizations appear to develop in response to changing, dynamic market and technological environments. Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) contrasted organizational characteristic s using the mechanistic/organic p o la rity. Their findings supported those o f Burns and S talker: E ffe c tive organizational units operating in stable environments are more highly structured, w hile those in more dynamic environments are less form al. Hage, Aiken and M arrett (1971) related communication patterns to organizational structure and arrived a t three major conclusions, paraphrased here: 1. Organization complexity, as measured by the number o f occupational s p ecialties and degree o f professional a c t iv ity, was found to be p o s itive ly associated w ith the in te n sity o f organization communications. 2. Correlations between communication and form alization in d i cated th at the presence o f job descriptions was negatively related to the frequency o f interactions and job s p e c ific ity tended to a ffe c t the frequency o f communications (except in the same status le v e l). 3. A strong positive relationship was found between the degree of p a rtic ip a tio n in decision making and the frequency o f scheduled and unscheduled communications.

33 17 To summarize, organizations w ith wide decision making p a rtic ip a tio n exhibited a higher degree o f interdepartmental communication, in decentralized organizations, there was greater interdepartmental communication in a ll directions. Duncan (1971) also viewed the communication o f information as an essential part o f organizational stru ctu re. In his study o f organizatio n decision making u n it structure and perceived environmental uncerta in ty, he found th a t dynamic, uncertain environments required extensive information gathering and processing c a p a b ilitie s. In decision making units w ith low perceived uncertainty ( l i t t l e change), in fo r mation needs were re la tiv e ly low. Duncan concluded th a t in order fo r an organization decision u n it to be e ffe c tiv e and react to its environment, i t must be able to gather and process information so th a t: (a) i t can become aware o f the state o f its internal and external environment; (b) i t can assess what a lte rn a tiv e courses o f action are a vaila b le in responding to a decision making s itu a tio n. Summary Organizational structure has been shown to both determine and re fle c t communication processes w ith in the organization. One o f the most important functions o f organizational structure is to control the flow o f information among system members, units and sub-units. Information flow can also determine and re fle c t the re la tio n ship between the organization and its environment. Less re stric te d information flows, coupled w ith intense need fo r inform ation, characterize organizations in vo la tile environments. More restricted

34 18 information flow s, associated with a reduced need fo r inform ation, characterize organizations in stable environments. Aspects o f organizational structure p e rtin en t to both communicatio n processes and d e fin itiv e c r it e r ia fo r the mechanistic/organic continuum are c e n tra liz a tio n of decision making, form alization of communication rules and procedures and functional s p ecializa tio n. Organic organizations are characterized by decentralized decision making processes, informal communication paths, and a low degree or functional s p e c ia liz a tio n. Mechanistic structures r e fle c t cen tralized decision making processes, formalized communication rules and procedures and a high degree o f functional s p e c ia liz a tio n. Members who f i l l positions w ith in the organization act as links in communication networks. The present in vestig ato r believes th at communication networks are u ltim ately dependent upon the s k ills o f individuals occupying linkage positions, and poor s k ills in communicating have been associated with a v a rie ty o f organizational problems. For th is reason, companies are beginning to a llo c a te resources to upgrade employee communication s k ills. While some data are a vaila b le which indicate th a t a growing number o f organizations are train in g employees in the area o f verbal communication, no information was found to date concerning organizational propensity to invest in such programs. In order to examine the relationship between an organization's structure and environment and the presence o f support fo r communicatio n s k ill tra in in g, the follow ing propositions were id e n tifie d fo r exploration.

35 19 1. Organizations e xh ib itin g p rim arily organic c h ara cteris tics, as evidenced by d e centra liza tio n, low form alization and low functional s p e c ia liz a tio n, operate in uncertain environments. 2. Organizations e xh ib itin g p rim arily organic c h aracteristics are lik e ly to support communication s k ill tra in in g programs fo r th e ir employees. D escription o f the study design and methodology used to in ve s tigate these propositions follows in Chapter I I I.

36 CHAPTER I I I DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Hypotheses investigated, population and sample surveyed, in stru mentation developed, methods o f data c o lle ctio n used and methods o f data analysis applied are presented in th is chapter. C rite ria used to c la s s ify organizations as organic, mechanistic or mixed, as w ell as c riteria used to determine company support for communication training, are o u tlin ed. The study design delineated here was intended to tra n s la te the preceding propositions into hypotheses w ith operationalized v aria b le s. These hypotheses are stated below. Hypotheses The f ir s t proposition stated a t the close o f Chapter II concerned the likelih o o d th a t organic organizations are characterized by uncertain environments. The follow ing hypothesis was formulated in order to explore th is proposition: H^: An organic organization (measured by employee perceptions of c e n tra liz a tio n, form alization, s p ecializa tio n and impersonal izatio n on a 4-point scale) w ill be characterized by an uncertain environment (measured by employee perceptions o f environment on a 4-point s cale). The second proposition, and the main concern o f the present in vestig ato r, concerned the likelihood th a t organic organizations tend to support communication tra in in g programs. An operationalized 20

37 21 statement was developed to explore th is proposition: 1^: An organic organization (measured by employee perceptions o f c e n tra liz a tio n, form alization, s p ec ializa tio n and impersonalization on a 4-point scale) w ill show s ig n ific a n tly more support fo r communication tra in in g than a mechanistic organization. Population and Sample Manufacturing organizations in southwestern Michigan, each employing between 100 and 500 individuals a t one s it e, constituted the population under study. A sample o f 16 companies (see Appendix A) was selected from 33 firm s targeted fo r possible selectio n. A ll 33 companies met the c r it e r ia fo r s electio n, which fo llo w, but 16 o f those each supplied a s u ffic ie n tly complete set o f data necessary fo r inclusion in the study (see The Sample, p. 3 0). C rite ria fo r sample selection were size (number o f employees), proximity fo r the purpose o f interview ing, and the presence o f a personnel divisio n within the company. Each was also required to be operating in a suffic ie n tly sound s tate o f fin a n cia l health. The allo catio n o f a tra in in g and development budget was assumed to be an indicator o f organizational health. Data c o lle ctio n techniques used in th is study required a sample o f organizations th at could be reached w ithin a reasonable period o f tim e. For th a t reason, a ll companies chosen are located in the southwestern portion o f Michigan's lower peninsula; th is includes Kent, Ottawa, Barry, Allegan, Berrien, Cass, S t. Joseph and

38 22 Kalamazoo counties. The Michigan Index o f Manufacturers 1980 served as a reference guide in choosing companies th a t f i t sample selection c ri te r ia. Instrumentation Measures fo r determining organizational stru c tu re, environmental uncertainty and company support fo r communication tra in in g were obtained fo r each manufacturing firm. A ra tio n ale is provided fo r each aspect o f the "organizational structure" v aria b le presented below. S pecific survey items developed fo r aspects o f the "structure" v a ria b le, "environmental uncertainty" varia b le and "company support" varia b le are also discussed. Organizational Structure C haracteristics Structure measures were obtained fo r each company re la tin g to cen tra liz a tio n o f decision making processes, form alizatio n o f communication rules and procedures, degree o f im personalization and functional s p e c ia liza tio n. Measures used fo r determining c e n tra liz a tio n, form alization and impersonalization were those o f Duncan (1971), who used these items in his study o f environmental uncertainty and decision u n it s tru ctu re, and o f House and Rizzo (1972), who developed an organizational practices questionnaire for testing construct v a lid ity o f organization description scales. The present study incorporated selected items from both sources which were deemed most appropriate to structure considerations. Functional sp ecializa tio n measures were obtained from Stech (1981), who developed items fo r

39 23 assessing organizational communication practices. Spearman-Brown r e lia b ilit y c o e ffic ie n ts fo r structure and environment measures were.66 and.75 resp ectively. C e n tralizatio n o f decision making processes. The locus of decision making w ith in an organization w ill indicate organic or mechanistic propensity. Burns and S talker stated: A mechanistic management system is characterized by... a tendency fo r operations and working behaviour to be governed by the instructions and decisions issued by superiors. (1961, p. 122) The degree o f c e n tra liz a tio n fo r each organization was assessed from employee responses, using a 4-p o in t L ikert-ty p e scale, to the follow ing items. Item numbers agree w ith those o f the instrument in Appendix E. Response choices on the 4-point scale fo r each item are also shown in Appendix E. 1. Supervisors have enough au th o rity to handle the problems th a t come up in th e ir work groups. 2. Supervisors must get approval fo r c erta in decisions which they should be able to make alone. 3. In th is work group, most people have a voice in making decisions a ffe c tin g our work. 4. We are encouraged by top management to make suggestions about the work we do. 9. There is usually a mix, in terms o f job levels and functio n s, o f employees present at a regular meeting o f our work group. 21. To what extent are ad hoc study groups formed to consider possible innovations which might benefit the firm?

40 24 Form alization o f rules and procedures. Pugh et a l. (1963) defined form alizatio n as a s tru ctu ral varia b le which they in te r preted as re fle c tin g points o f Weber's d e fin itio n o f bureaucracy. Form alization includes (a) statements o f procedures, rules and roles and (b) w ritte n procedures fo r operations, including the conveying o f decisions and feedback. Burns and S talker found th at in mechanist ic organizations there was more reliance on formal rules and procedures than in organic organizations. The degree o f form alization fo r each company in the present study was determined from employee responses, again using a 4-point L ik e rt-ty p e scale, fo r responses to the follow ing items (again numbered as in Appendix E ). 5. Rules and procedures fo r communicating are developed as we go along. 6. There are rules and procedures fo r handling any kind o f problem which might a ris e in our work. 7. To obtain the information needed to do our jobs, i t is usually necessary to go through the proper channels. 8. The same rules and procedures are usually followed when problems a ris e from lack o f information needed to do our jobs. 10. The organization works to a w ritte n law. Functional s p e c ia liz a tio n. Burns and S talker also distinguished mechanistic organizations from organic by ascertaining the degree o f task s p e c ia liz a tio n. A mechanistic company, according to them, is characterized by: the specialized d iffe re n tia tio n o f functional tasks into which the problems and tasks facing the concern as a whole are broken down. (p. 119)

41 25 Organic companies are characterized by: the contrib u tive nature o f special knowledge arid experience to the whole o f the concern; the adjustment and re d e fin itio n of individual tasks through in teractio n w ith others, (p. 121) Two items relevant to task s p ecializatio n were incorporated into the structure measures, w ith response options and item numbers again as shown in Appendix E. 11. How much v a rie ty in tasks, assignments or things to do is there generally in a normal working week in your group? 13- To what extent do people in your work u n it dp about the same job in about the s&me way most of the time? Impersonalization and employee o rie n ta tio n. The degree o f im personalization, or lack o f regard fo r the individual working w ithin an organization, was incorporated as an aspect o f structure because Burns and S talker found th at mechamistic organizations tended to " in s is t on lo yalty to the concern and obedience to superiors as a condition o f membership" (p. 119). The organic form stressed in d iv i dual commitment to the "technological ethos" o f m aterial progress and individual a f f ilia t io n w ith expertise external to the firm. Responses to the follow ing items were recorded as measures o f impersonal iz a tio n, w ith response options and item numbers again as shown in Appendix E. 12. Employees feel fre e to discuss company a ffa ir s w ith co-workers. 14. We are encouraged to speak our minds, even when diasagreeing w ith top management.

42 Our careers are regarded as important as the w ell-being of the firm. Environmental Uncertainty Measures Environmental uncertainty measures were obtained from Stech ( 1981), who used these items in his organizational communication practices questionnaire. In addition to c itin g stru ctu ral chara c te ris tic s o f organizations belonging to mechanistic and organic categories, Burns and S talker described the environments associated w ith each stru c tu ral type. They found th a t stable environments were appropriate to mechanistic organizations, w hile uncertain environments characterized organic organizations. To assess the external environment in which the selected companies function, responses to the follow ing items were obtained (once again, item numbers agree w ith those o f the instrument in Appendix E and response choices are shown th e re ). Tosi and C arroll (1976) emphasized the need fo r distinguishing between internal and external environments when ascertaining the degree o f environmental s ta b ilit y. Both market and technological conditions must be considered; fo r th at reason, three of the items concerned these fa c to rs. 16. To what extent does your organization have to take a lo t o f information about competitors into account in making decisions? 17- To what extent is i t d if f ic u lt to assess the effectiveness o f plans and decisions before they are implemented?

43 18. To what extent does your organization seem to face rapid changes in factors which influence plans? 19. To what extent have changes in market conditions been s ig n ific a n t over the past 5 years? 20. How s ig n ific a n t have changes in technology been in the past fiv e years fo r product design? Production? Marketing? Measures of Support for S kill Improvement The follow ing data were gathered from personnel d irectors to determine company support fo r tra in in g programs in communication s kill development for employees (see Appendix C ). 1. Do you o ffe r tra in in g programs in w ritte n communication s k ills to employees? Oral? 2. Do you o ffe r tu itio n subsidies to employees fo r tra in in g in communication s k ills a t educational in stitu tio n s? 3. I f you o ffe r tra in in g and/or fin a n cia l support to employees receiving tra in in g in o ra l/w ritte n communication s k ills, please describe the follow ing program ch ara cteris tics: (a) in - or o u t-o f- house? (b) number of employees involved yearly? (c) job level o f employees involved? (d) frequency o f offerings? (e) estim ate o f contact hours per employee? (f) estimate o f tra in in g and development budget percentage devoted to communication trainin g? (g) estim ate. of company budget percentage devoted to a ll training and development? Data Collection The measures for a ll aspects of the independent variables and

44 28 the dependent v aria b le involved employee s e lf-re p o rts. Perceptual measures were used because they were most appropriate to the v a ria bles under study. A ll instrument items focused on the organization as the u n it o f an alysis. O bjective measures, such as company organizatio n al charts and manuals, have been used in other studies o f organizational structure (Woodward, 1958; Evan, 1963; Pugh et a l., 1968); however, stru c tu ral c h ara cteris tics associated w ith informatio n processing are best suited to perceptual measures (Duncan, 1971). Duncan defended the use o f perceptual measures on the grounds th at no p ra c tic a l, o b jective measures had been developed which reflected organization decision stru ctu res. Also, according to A llen (1976), purely o b jective charting a c t iv itie s as a means o f gathering v a lid data do not accurately re fle c t organizational s tru ctu re. Walton (1981) addresses the problems o f measuring organizational structure using survey (perceptual) and in s titu tio n a l (ra tio s, charts) data. Unless the focus o f measures used in e ith e r method is c le a rly stated, the likelih o o d o f obtaining convergent relationships between a lte rn a tiv e measures o f the same concept is su b stan tia lly reduced. Because the data collected in th is study involved employee perceptions o f structure v aria b le s, the lim itatio n s Walton suggests have been acknowledged. Structure measures used here were not assumed to be interchangeable w ith charting measures which might have been obtained. Survey instruments were d istrib u te d to no fewer than three employees a t the upper managerial levels a t each company s it e. Most personnel directo rs were interviewed; however, i f a d irec to r was not

45 29 a vaila b le fo r interviewing, the survey was mailed. Job occupants at the upper managerial levels were selected because they were most closely associated w ith decision making, a key determinant o f organizational stru c tu re. Hage (197*0 chose th is level o f job occupancy in his study o f organizational communication fo r th is reason. Each company in the sample provided a complete set" o f data fo r analysis comprised o f (a) three to fiv e completed organizational structure survey instruments and (b) information concerning tra in in g in communicatio n. Methods o f Analysis Analyzing the data obtained from interviews and survey instruments f ir s t involved the creation o f data banks containing information regarding company support fo r communication, organizational structure and degree o f environmental uncertainty. Methods o f analysis fo r communication tra in in g support, structure and environment follow. Support Measures Responses to survey items with reference to organizational support o f communication tra in in g programs were c la s s ifie d as indicating e ith e r "no n -existen t," "minimum," "moderate," or "strong" support, according to 'the following c riteria. Non-existent support fo r communication tra in in g was determined to e xis t i f no resources were allocated to upgrading employee communication ski 11s. Minimum support fo r communication tra in in g was considered to

46 exis t i f the company sponsored a t least one program devoted to e ith e r w ritte n or oral communication s k ill improvement involving no fewer than 10 contact hours per employee and being offered a t least once a year. No re s tric tio n s were placed on the nature o f the program as an indicator o f minimum support; in other words, a seminar, workshop or tu itio n subsidy fo r one course taken outside o f the company indicated minimum support for communication s k ill improvement. Moderate support fo r communication s k ill tra in in g was considered to e x is t i f more than one program was offered to employees during the year, involving a minimum o f 10 contact hours per employee, arjd i f the programs were allocated less than.5% o f the tra in in g and development budget. Strong support fo r communication s k ill tra in in g was considered to exis t i f more than one program was offered to*employees during the year, involving a minimum o f 15 contact hours per employee and i f the programs were allocated more than.5% o f the tra in in g and development budget. Structure and Environment Measures Responses to survey items w ith reference to organizational structure and environmental uncertainty were ta llie d for each organiz a tio n. Means o f response values and standard deviations o f those means were calculated fo r a ll items and fo r each company, using the L ikert-ty p e scale values. Organizational means o f the pooled in d i vidual response scores were calculated fo r both structure and environmental uncertainty v aria b le s. Each organization was then labeled

47 31 as m echanistic, organic or mixed and as e xh ib itin g non-existent, minimum, moderate or strong support o f communication tra in in g fo r employees. Correlations and m u ltip le regression analysis were computed to determine whether s ig n ific a n t relationships existed between (a) structure and environment and (b) structure and support fo r tra in in g.- Summary Hypotheses were introduced to te s t whether organic structures operate in uncertain environments as well as support communication tra in in g fo r company employees. The sample, 16 manufacturing firms located in southwestern Michigan, and instrumentation were then specified. Methods o f data c o lle ctio n and analysis fo r s tru ctu re, environment and support measures followed..results o f the study are discussed in Chapter IV.

48 CHAPTER IV RESULTS OF THE STUDY C haracteristics o f sample organizations, organizational responses w ith respect to the variables under study, an analysis o f responses and results o f hypothesis te s tin g are presented in th is chapter. The Sample T h irty -th re e companies were o rig in a lly targeted fo r possible inclusion in the study, each meeting the c r it e r ia lis te d in Chapter III, but only 16 were fin a lly selected on the basis o f completeness o f data. Those 16 are lis te d a lp h ab etically in Appendix A, but only numbers are used fo r id e n tific a tio n in th is chapter, since anonymity was guaranteed to a ll study p a rticip a n ts. The numbers do not correspond to the Appendix listin g. Once a complete set o f data was received from a company, the company was included in the sample. Complete sets o f responses from these 16 firms were obtained w ith in one month a fte r the o rig in al contacts were made. E ig h ty -fiv e managers were o rig in a lly contacted at 33 companies; 5^ managers from 16 companies comprised the fin a l samp le. data. Personnel directo rs from a ll firm s in the fin a l sample furnished Each company data set included three to fiv e managers' responses to the organizational structure survey form and a completed survey/in terview form from the personnel d ire c to r. 32

49 33 Support fo r Communication Training Programs Personnel d irectors were queried as to the nature and extent o f company-supported programs in communication s k ill development. The survey form to which they responded is shown in Appendix C, and the le t te r accompanying i t in Appendix B. Using the c r it e r ia established in Chapter III, a level o f support was designated fo r each company in the sample. Table 1 displays th is information. Of the sixteen manufacturing firms studied, only three reported o fferin g absolutely no support. Minimum support was ty p ic a lly demonstrated by a tu itio n subsidy provided to employees enrolled in nearby u n iv e rs itie s ; i f employees requested reimbursement fo r coursework in communication, provision was granted i f the courses were considered relevant to th e ir positions. Eight of the 16 organizations were characterized as providing minimum support. One o f the sixteen organizations reported e ffo rts th a t were classifie d as moderate support. This company reported conducting one in-house seminar, on the average, fo r between 26 and 50 employees per year. The company also grants a 50% tu itio n subsidy to employees e n ro llin g in communication courses at nearby u n iv e rs itie s, but spends less than.5% o f its tra in in g and development budget on communication tra in in g. Strong support was indicated by responses from four o f the organizatio n s. These companies reported o fferin g in-house tra in in g to employees and tu itio n subsidies to employees more than fiv e times a year, and spending between.5% and 1% o f th e ir tra in in g budgets on

50 Table 1 Level o f Support fo r Communication Training Among Sixteen Michigan Companies Company Number n* % Training Budget Contact Hours Per Employee Level o f Support 1 k none none none 2 3 less than. 5% 1-9 minimum 3 3 between.5 and 1% 15+ strong k 5 between.5 and \% 15+ strong 5 3 less than. 5% 1-9 minimum 6 3 1% or more 15+ strong 7 3 less than 5% 1-9 minimum 8 3 less than. 5% 15+ minimum 9 5 between.5 and \% 15+. strong 10 4 less than. 5% 1-9 minimum 11 3 less than.$% 1-9 minimum 12 3 less than. 5% 15+ moderate 13 3 less than. 5% 1-9 minimum \k 3 none none none 15 3 less than.5% 1-9 minimum 16 3 none none none *n corresponding to each company number is the same fo r a ll tables which follow (Tables 2-28)

51 35 communication tra in in g. Programs in a ll four companies c la s s ifie d as showing strong support were open to a ll employees. Employees p a rticipating in communication tra in in g programs having strong company support include top management, middle management, sales, c le ric a l and production personnel. Contact hours o f 15 or more per employee were reported fo r combined in - and out-of-house programs. Instructio n of in-house seminars or workshops was ty p ic a lly conducted by paid consu ltan ts.' E ith er fa c u lty from nearby u n iv ers ities or independent consultants were reported to be hired as seminar leaders. Basic w ritin g s k ills, le t t e r and report w ritin g and technical w ritin g were most frequently addressed in w ritin g programs. One company sponsored a workshop in oral communication s kills for its employees. Structure Three to fiv e employees from top management in each o f the 16 companies completed and returned the survey form re la tin g to structure (see Appendix E) which had been sent to them along w ith a transm ittal le t t e r (Appendix D) and information about communication tra in in g (Appendix F ). Responses to the survey items indicating mechanistic, organic or mixed organizational structures were ta llie d? C e n tra liza tio n, fo rm a liza tio n, impersonalization and s p ec ializa tio n components were combined into a single score. F ir s t, the individual score was recorded fo r each respondent; then individual scores were pooled fo r each item and the mean fo r each was then calculated. The means o f responses for a ll structure items were then pooled to arrive at a

52 36 company structure score. Transformations were computed fo r values recorded fo r survey items (2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 13) so th at a ll L ikert-ty p e values were in the same d irec tio n fo r organic and mechanistic characteristic s. Organic values were toward 1 and 2 on the L ik e rt-ty p e scale, w hile mechanistic values were toward 3 and 4. C e n tra liza tio n o f decision making, form alization o f communicatio n rules and procedures, impersonalization and task s p ec ializa tio n were a ll treated as aspects o f the independent v aria b le "s tru c tu re." S pecific items addressing each aspect are shown in Tables 2 through 17 which disp lay the company means and standard deviations fo r each item. A complete c o rrela tio n m atrix fo r a ll structure items appears in Appendix H. C e n tralizatio n The degree o f c e n tra liz a tio n o f decision making processes was determined by tabulatin g the means of responses to items 1, 2, 3» 4, 9 and 21 o f the survey instrument. Tables 2 through 7 disp lay mean responses and standard deviations to c e n tra liz a tio n items 1-4, 9 and 21, by company, along w ith the response scale possible fo r each item. Items showing the lea s t variance fo r a ll companies were numbers 1 and 4. Item 1 stated th a t supervisors have enough au th o rity to handle problems and Item 4 stated that employees were encouraged to make suggestions to top management. The weakest relationships found among c e n tra liz a tio n measures were between Item 9 and other c en tralizatio n items. The complete co rrelatio n m atrix, n=54, fo r

53 37 Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 1 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale:. 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 - Strongly Disagree

54 38 Table 3 Means and Standard D e via tions o f Responses by Managers o f S ixtee n Companies to Item 2 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

55 39 Table 4 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f S ixteen Companies to Item 3 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

56 4o Table 5 Means and Standard D e via tions o f Responses by Managers o f S ixteen Companies to Item 4 Company Mean Standard Deviation A Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

57 41 Table 6 Means and Standard D e via tion s o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 9 Company Mean Standard Deviation * Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

58 42 Table 7 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 21 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L ittle Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent

59 43 c e n tra liz a tio n items appears below in Figure 1. Item Item Item Item Item Item Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 Item 9 Figure 1 C orrelatio n -M atrix fo r C e n tralizatio n Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 9 and 21 Form alization Measures fo r determining form alizatio n o f communication rules and procedures were obtained from responses to items 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10. Tables 8 through 12 display means and standard deviations o f responses to these items fo r each company. When form alization items were c o rrelated, no s ig n ific a n tly strong relationships were indicated. Items 6 (concerning rules fo r problems which might a rise) and 10 (organization works to a w ritte n law) showed a low p o sitive relatio n ship (r =.4 8 ). Responses to Item 7 ( i t is usually necessary to go through channels to obtain inform ation) exhibited the lowest incidence o f inter-company v a riance. The item w ith the greatest inter-company variance was 6: Rules and procedures e xis t fo r any kind o f problem which might a rise in our work. The complete co rrela tio n m atrix fo r form alization

60 44 Table 8 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 5 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

61 45 Table 9 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 6 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

62 46 Table 10 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f S ixteen Companies to Item 7 Company Mean Standard Deviation * Response scale: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L it t le Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent

63 47 Table 11 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 8 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

64 48 Table 12 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 10 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = Strongly Agree 3 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Disagree

65 49 Items, n=54, appears below In Figure 2. Item Item Item I tem tern Item 5 Item 6 Item 7 Item 8 Figure 2 Correlation M atrix fo r Form alization Items 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 Impersonalization The degree o f im personalization perceived by employees in each company was determined by responses to Items 12, 14 and 15. Information about company responses to these items is located in Tables 13, 14 and 15. Impersonalization items 14 and 15, stating th at employees are encouraged to speak th e ir minds and careers are regarded as important as the well being of the firm, showed a moderately strong, positiv e relationship (r=.6 3 ). The co rrelatio n m atrix appears in Figure 3- Item Item Item Item 12 Item 14 Figure 3 Correlation M atrix fo r Impersonalization Items 12, 14 and 15

66 50 Table 13 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 12 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L it t le Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent

67 T able 14 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f S ixteen Companies to Item 14 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L it t le Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent

68 Table 15 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 15 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L it t le Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent

69 53 Task S pecializatio n The.degree o f task s p ecializatio n fo r each company was measured by employee responses to Items 11 and 13. Means responses and standard deviations fo r each company appear in Tables 16 and 17- Corre la tio n o f Items 11 and 13 showed a low positive relationship (r=.4 0 ). Structural C la ssificatio n o f Organizations C la ss ifica tio n o f the 16 manufacturing firm s into organic, mechanistic or mixed categories was based upon the mean o f pooled responses to a ll structure items. The minimum possible score fo r 16 structure items is 16 and the maximum possible score is 64. A company's structure score was established by computing the sum of the means o f responses fo r a ll structure itmes. Transformations were computed fo r c ertain item values, as mentioned e a r lie r, before the structure scores were computed. Organic organizations exhibited lower scores than did mechanistic organizations. Company structure scores and c la s s ific a tio n appear in Table 18. The 33rd and 67th percentiles o f organizational structure scores were calculated fo r the purpose o f sorting organizations into mechanistic, organic and mixed categories. This decision was reached because organic responses seem to project more s o c ia lly desirable values, thus producing a response bias in an organic d ire c tio n. This response bias would tend to in fla te scores o f organizations w ith mechanistic propensity. Therefore, scores a t the 67th p e rcentile, or 34 and above, were considered in d icative o f structures th a t tended

70 Table 16 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 11 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = A Great Deal 3 = Very L ittle 2 = Some 4 = None

71 55 Table 17 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 13 Company Mean Standard Deviation Response scale: 1 = To No Extent 3 = To Some Extent 2 = To L it t le Extent 4 = To a Great Extent

72 Table 18 Organizational Structure Scores Company Score C la ssificatio n Mixed Mixed Organic Organic Mechanistic Mixed Mechanistic Mechanistic Organic Mechanistic Mixed Organic Mechanistic Mechanistic Mechanistic Mixed

73 57 to be organic. Scores fa llin g in the middle, or 32-33, were considered in d icativ e of mixed structures. Envi ronmental Uncertai nty Responses to Items 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 comprised the measure o f environmental uncertainty. L ikert-ty p e scale values, ranging from 1 (To a Great Extent) to k (To No Extent) were pooled in the same fashion as were structure responses. A ll company responses were considered in d icative o f uncertain environments. Scores ranged from 9-33 to 16.25, w ell w ith in absolute numerical lim its of in stab ility values. It was not necessary to compute percentiles fo r th is v aria b le ; no companies displayed means above 2.0. In fa c t, very few individual respondents disagreed with survey items indicating uncertain environments. Further discussion o f the lack o f d iffe r e n tia l data appears in the next chapter. Mean responses to environmental uncertainty items appear in Tables 19 through 25. The response scale fo r each item in these tables appears below: 1 = To a Great Extent 3 = To L ittle Extent 2 = To Some Extent 4 = To No Extent Testing o f the Hypotheses I t was hypothesized th a t organic structures would operate in uncertain environments and mechanistic structures in stable environments. Since a ll firms were judged to e xis t in uncertain environments, th is hypothesis was obviously not supported.

74 58 Table 19 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 16 Company Mean Standard Deviation

75 59 Table 20 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 17 Company Mean Standard Deviation

76 60 Table 21 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 18 Company Mean Standard Deviation

77 Table 22 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 19 Company Mean Standard Deviation '

78 62 Table 23 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 20a Company Mean Standard Deviation

79 63 Table 24 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f Sixteen Companies to Item 20b Company Mean Standard Deviation

80 64 T able 25 Means and Standard Deviations o f Responses by Managers o f S ixteen Companies to Item 20c Company Means Standard Deviation

81 65 Table 26 Environmental Uncertainty Scores Company Score C la ssificatio n Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain U ncertain, Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain

82 66 The central purpose o f th is study was to determine whether a relationship existed between organizational structure and support fo r employee communication tra in in g programs. I t was hypothesized th a t: An organic organization (measured by employee perceptions o f c e n tra liz a tio n, form alization, s p ecializatio n and impersonalization on a 4-point scale) w ill show s ig n ific a n tly more support fo r communication tra in in g than a mechanistic organization. This hypothesis was supported. A co rrelatio n c o e ffic ie n t o f.67 in the expected d irectio n was obtained between the variables level o f support" and s tru c tu re." M u ltip le regression analysis, as shown in Table 27, computed w ith both "structure" and "environment" as independent variables and "support for tra in in g " as the dependent v aria b le, showed structure as a s ig n ific a n t predictor a t the.01 level (F=10.61, df=1, 13). Summary F ifty -fo u r managers representing 16 manufacturing firms provided responses to the organizational structure survey. Sixteen personnel directo rs furnished information concerning communication tra in in g programs at these firm s, each supplying information about his or her firm. Of the 16 firm s, four were characterized as organic, fiv e as mixed and seven as mechanistic. Three o f the organizations offered no programs in communication tra in in g fo r th e ir employees. Eight were judged to o ffe r minimum support, one

83 67 Table 27 Analysis o f Structure and Environment as Predictors o f Training Sample Size 16 Dependent V ariable: COMM Independent Variables: STR ENV C o efficien t o f Determination C orrelation C o efficien t Estimated Constant Term E+39 Analysis o f Variance fo r the Regression Source o f V ariatio n DF s. so. M.S. F PR0B Regression Residuals Total Regression VAR. C o efficien t STR S. E. o f REG. C0EF F-Value OF (1, 13) PR0B C0RR.C0EF. WITH COMM ENV E E E was judged to o ffe r moderate support and four were judged to 'o f fe r strong support. Regression analysis was computed w ith "structure" and "environment" as independent variables and "support fo r tra in in g " as the dependent v aria b le. "Structure" was shown to be a s ig n ific a n t pred ic to r at the.01 le v e l, w hile "environment" was shown to have no e ffe c t. A c o rrelatio n c o e ffic ie n t o f.67 between "stru ctu re" and "support fo r tra in in g " was obtained.

84 The hypothesis f i r s t stated, th at organic structures would tend to function in uncertain environments, was not supported. Both mechanistic and organic structures were judged to be characterized by uncertain environments. The second hypothesis, statin g th at organic structures would tend to support communication tra in in g, was supported. Table 28 summarizes the results o f th is study. The im plications o f these findings and suggestions fo r fu rth e r research are discussed in Chapter V.

85 69 Table 28 Summary o f Findings Showing Structure and Support Designations fo r Each Manufacturing Firm Company Structure Score Structure Level o f Support Mixed Non-existent Mixed Minimum Organic Strong Organic Strong Mechanistic Minimum Mixed Strong Mechanistic Minimum Mechanistic Minimum Organic Strong Mechanistic Minimum Mixed Minimum Organic Moderate Mechanistic Minimum Mechanistic None Mechanistic Minimum Mixed None

86 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION This chapter presents a summary o f the study, conclusions reached as a resu lt o f the fin d in g s, and suggestions fo r fu rth er research. Summary o f the Study Research conducted a t the 16 small manufacturing firms included in th is sample supported a hypothesis stating th at organizational structures characterized by decentralized decision making processes, informal communication ru les, presonalized climates and low 'task s p ec ializa tio n are more lik e ly to support communication tra in in g. No support was found fo r the hypothesis stating th at organic structures are more lik e ly to operate in uncertain environments. Conclusions The importance o f communication s k ill development has been voiced by high ranking managers in large corporations; since th is research was conducted in small corporations, evidence that shared concern exists among managers o f d iffe re n t-s iz e d corporations is. apparent. One o f the most pleasing results o f th is research is that communication s k ill improvement received a ttentio n in sm all, regional businesses.. Company size and v is ib ilit y seemed to play no part in determining the likelihood of management providing resources fo r 70

87 programs. The lite r a tu r e reviewed in Chapter II concerning programs in communication tra in in g focused on in d u strial giants w ith verbal tra in in g programs in place. Communication Training Strongly supported programs were devoted p rim arily to improving employees' w ritte n communication s k ills. Technical and business forms o f report w ritin g and le t te r composition were mentioned most often by personnel directo rs overseeing these programs. Basic sentence structure and paragraph formation were also reported as topics o f w ritin g s k ills workshops. In discussing program content w ith s ix o f the training/personnel d irecto rs, two issues emerged o ften. F ir s t, the importance o f needs assessment p rio r to workshop a c tiv itie s was stressed. Individual and group w ritin g err speaking s k ill deficiencies should be diagnosed p rio r to workshop preparation. Two directo rs commented th at canned, pre-packaged w ritin g programs were often too general to be o f use. When considering proposals fo r seminars in s k ill improvement, needs assessment must be incorporated into the program. Secondly, d irecto rs expressed a need fo r communication workshop m aterials w ith s p e c ific applications fo r the type o f industry or in d u strial d ivis io n involved in tra in in g. One d irecto r responsible for arranging a one-day seminar in report w riting for selected supervisors remarked th a t choosing a program leader p ro fic ie n t in "recommendation report" design was the key to his program's success. A point emphasized by a ll directors was that training programs of all

88 72 kinds were chosen w ith care and concern fo r value. P ro d u ctivity and Communication Training The concern fo r value generates another question: Is there proof th a t communication tra in in g increases employee productivity? No research exists to date confirming th a t formal tra in in g in communication increases or improves p ro d u c tiv ity. L itte r s t and Eyo (1982) cite evidence that information dissemination and goal c la rific a tio n increase p ro d u ctivity; the authors suggest th at these provide in d ire c t support fo r the ju s t ific a tio n o f communication tra in in g. But as Gibb (1973) declared: Although in the most global sense i t is f a ir ly obvious th a t communication is related to p ro d u c tiv ity, i t is very d i f f ic u lt to fin d s a tis fy in g evidence o f c le a r relationships between s p e c ific communicative programs or acts, on the one hand, and measures of p ro d u c tiv ity, p r o fit, or corporate v it a l i t y on the o th er, (p. 151) A meaningful and accurate means o f measuring the e ffe c ts tra in in g has on productivity has s t i ll not been introduced. Despite the lack o f a q u a n tifia b le relatio n ship between tra in in g and company h ealth, d irecto rs o f personnel in companies showing strong support fo r communication tra in in g indicated personal commitment to the importance o f refined communication s k ills. Concern was often expressed th at such s k ills received inadequate atte n tio n in colleges and u n iv e rs itie s. The general decline in new graduates' w ritin g s k ills, fo r instance, was frequently mentioned. One d irec to r asserted, th a t college instructors themselves could use tra in in g in w ritten communication s kills.

89 73 Organizational Structure and Support fo r Communication Training The structure-support lin k demonstrated in th is research provides insight in to propositions o f Tushman and Nadler (1978) and Hage, et a l. (1971)* Tushman and Nadler proposed that the mechan is t i c/organ ismic character o f an organization's structure a ffects its inform ation processing capacity. Presumably then, given the results o f the present study, organic organizations are more cognizant o f the importance o f information processing capacities and take steps to improve them. Although the relationship between information capacity*and communication s k ills o f employees is in d i re ct, i t seems probable th a t managers representing organic firm s are more aware o f the lin k e xistin g between communication tra n s fer and communication s k i l l. Mechanistic organizations, on the other hand, may have l i t t l e need to improve upon existin g information processing capacities because they require less. The p o s s ib ility also exists that managers representing mechanistic organizations are less aware o f the lin k between information processing and communication s k i l l. The results o f th is study tend to support the notion th at mechanistic organizations simply experience less need fo r extended information processing capacities; most decisions are made by top management and travel downward. According to Burns and S ta lk e r's research (1961), mechanistic organizations have more tig h tly controlled communication pathways, ty p ic a lly v e rtic a l and downward; subordinates' communication s k ills

90 lh are not only less v is ib le but less important to superiors. Hage e t a l. (1967) found th a t a strong, p o s itive relationship existed between the degree o f p a rticip a tio n in decision making and the frequency o f scheduled and unscheduled communications: The less c entralized the decision making processes, the more frequent the communications. The results o f the present study provide additional support. Decentralized organizations were characterized by communication clim ates in which employees were encouraged to make suggestions to supervisors, discuss company a ffa irs w ith co-workers and disagree w ith superiors. That communication tra in in g programs were strongly supported by these organic organizations lends fu rth e r credence to the idea th a t decentralized structures r e fle c t a greater awareness of communication as an important and integral part of company operatio n s. The companies are w illin g to spend valuable resources developing and improving th e ir employees' individual information processing capabi1itie s. Envi ronmental Uncertai nty The most obvious explanation fo r lack o f support fo r the f i r s t hypothesis, th a t structure would be associated w ith environmental s t a b ilit y, is th at o f depressed economic conditions. Michigan, in p a rtic u la r, has suffered from a sagging national economy a ffe ctin g automobile and tandem industries considerably. However, Tost and C arroll (1976) suggested a p rin cip le which could also give p a rtia l explanation: that smaller firms face vo la tile environments by v irtue o f th e ir s ize. As firms become la rg e r, according to Tosi and

91 and C a rro ll, they move toward stable markets and technologies. Thus, perceptions o f environmental uncertainty decrease in proportio n to company growth. The manufacturing firm s p a rtic ip a tin g in th is study each employed fewer than 1,000 individuals and could be designated "sm all." However, only one o f the sixteen could be termed an " in fa n t." organizations studied were a ll w ell established, but small. The Tosi and C a rro ll's proposition cited above implied that small companies evolving to large companies experience v o latile markets and technologies. While s ize may a ffe c t employee perceptions o f environmental uncertainty in d ire c tly, i t seems u n likely th a t th is v ariable could s ig n ific a n tly shape the perceptions o f respondents in th is study. A more plausible explanation remains the contamination by a recessionary economy o f the independent v aria b le "environment." S t i l l another p o s s ib ility fo r the lack o f a s ig n ific a n t spread in environmental uncertainty scores is the s e n s itiv ity o f measures used in th is study. Measures were judged r e lia b le, yet they may have been in sensitive to environmental conditions. Because the measures suggested s o c ia lly desirable responses, the face v a lid ity o f these measures deserves to be reexamined. Another point worthy o f consideration concerns rapid technological change irrespective o f economic conditions. Recent surges in the use o f computer technology and information processing systems are a ffe ctin g the sm allest organizations. Just as the development o f the tra n s is to r revolutionized ele c tro n ics, the development o f m icrocircuitry has made computers affordable to the smallest

92 76 businesses. The Impact o f technological innovation and change must be f e l t by the most s ta b le, bureaucratic, mechanistic organizations. The results o f th is study could provide fu rth e r support to the idea th a t no organization is immune to fa s t paced technological change. Stable, c erta in environments may become increasingly d if f ic u lt to locate. Recommendations and Suggestions fo r Further Research Studies devoted to the follow ing questions, a ris in g from the results o f th is study, might contribute to both organizational and communication related lite ra tu re s. 1. Can the environmental c e rta in ty -u n c e rtain ty continuum be considered a tenable, testab le dimension in em pirical research in lig h t o f the technological explosion occurring in our time? 2. What, i f any, is the relatio n ship between form alizatio n indicators and indices o f c e n tra liz a tio n in an organization? L ite ra ture extant in th is area reports c o n flic tin g research re su lts : the results o f c o rrelatio n s computed in the present study suggested no clear re latio n ship e ith e r. Perhaps the two variables require re fin e ment or re d e fin itio n through fu rth e r te s tin g. 3. Can communication tra in in g be linked d ire c tly to improved productivity? Communication errors can produce measurable costs. Lost sales, fo r example, could be c le a rly a ttrib u te d to fa u lty communication: a poorly w ritten report, poor oral presentation to a potential c lie n t, or an impersonal business le tte r rife with grammatic a l mistakes. But ascertaining gains in sales due to clear

93 reports, persuasive presentations, and well w ritte n le tte rs is a d iffe re n t m atter. Separating the communication component from a plethora o f intervening v a ria b le s -is, or has been, d if f ic u lt indeed. While managers in firm s which strongly support communication tr a in ing appear to bank on the fa c t th at improved s k ills w ill increase p ro d u c tiv ity, no research was found confirming th is. k. What a ttitu d e s are shared by managers in d iffe re n t organizatio n a l structures regarding the introduction o f basic communication tra in in g into the company? Is there a relationship between manageria l a ttitu d e s and c ertain aspects o f organizational structure? 5. What impact w ill advanced telecommunications hardware and software have on the importance attached to tra d itio n a l w ritin g s k ills? W ill the w ritte n word, and thus need fo r basic w ritin g tra in in g, become less c r it ic a l to organizational maintenance? W ill oral communication s k ills increase in importance? The questions generated by this study may provide answers c r it i cal to the future o f communications tra in in g in in d u strial organizatio n s. Communication tra in in g d irec to rs, in developing programs fo r business consumption, must be able to a n ticip a te the character o f the market as w ell as the relevance o f th e ir product. Recognizing that differences in approach to communication e xis t among various organizational structures is a good place to begin. Understanding the ro le th a t communication plays in an organization must fo llo w. F in a lly, addressing sp ecific organizational needs fo r communication tra in in g w ill depend upon careful analysis o f information processing systems in place a t company s ite s.

94 Research p o s s ib ilitie s stim ulated by th is study include exploring the usefulness o f the variables "environmental uncertainty" and " fo r m alization." Establishing a causal link between communication training and productivity would also provide tra in in g directors w ith the justificatio n they often need to pay for programs. Assessing manageria l a ttitu d e s toward communication tra in in g could aid the personnel d ire c to r as well as the communication tra in in g program consultant.

95 APPENDIX A MANUFACTURING FIRMS PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY 79

96 A llen Extruders Zeeland, Ml Herman Mi H e r, I nc. Zeeland, Ml A llie d Paper, Inc. Kalamazoo, MI Mead Products Kalamazoo, Ml E. W. Bliss Company Hastings, Ml Michigan Wheel Grand Rapids, MI Brundage Company Kalamazoo, MI Parker Hannifin Otsego, MI Clausing Corporation Kalamazoo, Ml PRAB Kalamazoo, Ml Fabri-Kal Corporation Kalamazoo, Ml Rockwell Corporation Allegan, Ml Hastings Aluminum Products Hastings, Mi Stryker Corporation Kalamazoo, MI Hastings Manufacturing Hastings, Ml Viking Corporation Hastings, Ml

97 APPENDIX B TRANSMITTAL LETTER ACCOMPANYING SURVEY TO PERSONNEL DIRECTORS

98 W /M Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan College of Business Department of Business Education and Administrative Services Dear Employee w ritin g and reading s k ill improvement is a growing concern. As a professor o f business communication and doctoral candidate in educational leadership, I am studying industry's response to communication s k ill deficiencies in these areas. Your company was one o f 30 organizations I selected in southern Michigan to determine the relatio n ship between organizational structure and company support fo r communication tra in in g. Since my sample is re la tiv e ly sm all, your p a rtic ip a tio n would be extremely h e lp fu l. Because I re a liz e th at your time is lim ite d, the enclosed one-page instrument should not take more than a few minutes to complete. In return fo r your tim e, I would be happy to share both the results o f th is important study and information about communication s k ill development fo r employees w ith you, e ith e r personally or by le t te r. Responses w ill be kept in the s tr ic te s t confidence; in fa c t, these instruments w ill be destroyed once data is gathered and coded fo r analysis. My telephone num Please w rite or call if you have any questions. ber a t Western is (616) 383"1S07» Thank you very much fo r your time and assistance. S incerely, Roberta M. Supnick 312B West Hall College o f Business ENCL

99 APPENDIX C SURVEY FORM TO PERSONNEL DIRECTORS 83

100 1. Do you o ffe r tra in in g in w ritte n and/or oral communication s k ills to company employees in any way? Yes No 2. Do you offer tuition subsidies to employees for training in communication s kills at educational institutions? Yes No 3. Please describe the tra in in g programs in communication th a t you support: a. Employees p a rtic ip a tin g : Top management Middle management Sales personnel C lerical personnel Production personnel Other (Please s p e c ify ) b. Approximate number o f employees p a rtic ip a tin g yearly in these programs: Over 100 c. Number o f contact hours per employee engaged in these programs: 1-9 hrs hrs. 15 or above hrs. d. How frequently are programs offered to employees? once a year between 2-5 times a year more than 5 times a year 4. Could you estim ate the percentage o f the company's to ta l budget devoted to personnel tra in in g and development? less than.5% between.5 and 1% \% or more

101 85 5. Could you estim ate the percentage o f your tra in in g and development budget devoted to in - and/or out-of-house communication instruction? less than.5% between.5 and 1% \% or more

102 APPENDIX D TRANSMITTAL LETTER ACCOMPANYING SURVEY TO MANAGERS 86

103 Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan College of Business Department of Business Education and Administrative Services 1 June 1982 Dear Employee communication s k ill improvement is a growing concern fo r both businesses and colleges. As an in stru cto r o f business communication and doctoral candidate in educational leadership, I am studying industry's response to employee s k ill d eficiencies in communication, p a rtic u la rly reading and w ritin g s k ills. Your company was one o f 30 healthy organizations I selected from southern Michigan to answer th is question: What kind o f organization o ffers tra in in g opportunities in communication to its employees? Because! realize that your time is lim ited, the enclosed instrument designed to determine your company's organizational structure should not take more than a few minutes to complete. I'v e enclosed an additional instrument which may be completed by another manager o f s im ilar rank, should you decide th a t the study is worthy o f your additional support. Your p a rtic ip a tio n would be extremely h e lp fu l. In return fo r your tim e, I would be happy to share both the results o f th is important study and information about communication s k ill development fo r employees w ith you, e ith e r personally or by le t te r. Responses w ill be kept in s tr ic te s t confidence; in fa c t, these instruments w ill be destroyed once data is gathered and coded. My telephone num Please w rite or call if you have any questions. ber at Western is (616) S incerely, Roberta M. Supnick ENCL

104 APPENDIX E SURVEY FORM TO MANAGERS

105 Organizational Structure Survey Form Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree w ith the follow ing statements as they re la te to your organization. 1. Supervisors have enough a u th o rity to handle the problems th at come up in th e ir work groups. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 2. Supervisors must get approval fo r c ertain decisions which they should be able to make alone. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 3. In th is work group, most people have a voice in.making decisions a ffe c tin g our work. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 4. We are encouraged by top management to make suggestions about the work we do. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 5. Rules and procedures fo r communicating are developed as we go along. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 6. There are rules and procedures fo r handling any kind o f problem which might aris e in our work. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 7. To obtain the information needed to do our jobs, i t is usually necessary to go through the proper channels. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree 8. The same rules and procedures are usually followed when problems a ris e from lack o f information needed to do our jobs. Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree

106 90 9. There is usually a mix, in terms o f job levels and functions, o f employees present at a regular meeting o f our work group. Strongly Agree ^ Strongly Disagree 10. The organization works to a w ritte n law. Strongly Agree ^ Strongly Disagree 11. How much v a rie ty in tasks, assignments or things to do is there generally in a normal working week in your work group? none very lit t le some a great deal 12. Employees feel fre e to discuss company a ffa ir s w ith co-workers. To a great extent ^ To no extent 13. To what extent do people in your work u n it do about the same job in about the same way most of the time? To a great extent k To no extent 14. We are encouraged to speak our minds, even when disagreeing w ith top management. To a great extent A To no extent 15- Our careers are regarded as important as the well being.of the firm. To a great extent A To no extent Every organization is surrounded by other organizations, a community, changes in market and technological conditions. These represent the environment. Please indicate the extent to which the follow ing s ta te ments are tru e fo r your organization and its environment. 16. To what extent does your organization have to take a lo t of information about competitors into account in making decisions? To a great extent ^ To no extent

107 To what extent is i t d if f ic u lt to assess the effectiveness of plans and decisions before they are implemented? To a great extent To no extent 18. To what extent does your organization seem to face rapid changes in factors which influence plans? To a great extent To no extent 19. To what extent have changes in market conditions been s ig n ificant over the past 5 years? To a great extent To no extent How s ig n ific a n t have changes in technology been in the past 5 years fo r Product Design? _very s ig n ific a n t _somewhat s ig n ific a n t _ o f l i t t l e significance _ o f no significance _very s ig n ific a n t _somewhat s ig n ific a n t _ o f l i t t l e significance _ o f no significance Marketing? very s ig n ific a n t _somewhat s i gn i f i cant _ o f l i t t l e significance _ o f no significance 21. To what extent are ad hoc study groups formed to consider poss ib le innovations which might b enefit the firm? To a great extent To no extent Thank you fo r devoting your time as a p a rticip a n t in th is research. Your responses are g re atly appreciated and w i ll, o f course, be t reated conf i dent i a11y.

108 APPENDIX F ENCLOSURE ACCOMPANYING SURVEYS TO MANAGERS 92

109 93