Communication breakdown between competing departments in organizations

Organizational Management:

Communication in the Workplace

Communication is an essential component of "maintaining and sustaining relationships" (McCroskey & McCroskey, 2005, p. 16). This includes not only verbal but also nonverbal communication. But within complex organizations, communication does not happen organically without a great deal of work. Appropriate structures must also be set up so communication takes place in an effective fashion. Even if a department is functional as an enclosed entity, it must still be able to relate effectively to other units that may be managed differently. The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts, particularly in the case of a professional organization.

At my current organization, employees have reporting obligations to two lead departments that frequently issue competing instructions and subordinates become involved in a power struggle between these units and their managers. The essential components of the communication process are that there must be a source, message, channel, and receiver (McCroskey & McCroskey 2005, p. 21). When any of these are unclear or there is interference, conflicts inevitably arise. This lack of attention to the details of the communication process also can be seen reflected in communication between different team members and rather than addressing organizational goals there is wasted time and wasted emotional energy in determining who is in charge or particular aspects of a project. "Individuals within the same unit, team, or department tend to influence one another ... creating their own ... views about the tasks to be done" (Gelfand, Leslie, Keller & Drew, 2013, p. 1131). When these views are in conflict with other aspects of the organization, there will inevitably be losses in productivity.

Communication can take place in several ways in all organizations: there is "downward communication, upward communication, horizontal communication, and diagonal communication" (Spaho 2013 103). Downward communication involves leaders communicating with employees. At my organization, frequently this results in a mixed message to subordinates, sometimes with something as simple as the deadline for a particular project or who should be the primary leader of a team. Employees must take the time to clarify this (upward communication), resulting in an unnecessary delay and uncomfortable feelings between the two managers issuing the conflicting directives. Or, in some instances, employees may be loath to bring to light such issues at all for fear of being blamed which in the long-run results in even more communication snafus. "One of the major functions of the communication process in an organization is effective coordination," which "must be complete, accurate, and timely. When decisions are made, they must be transmitted to all concerned groups within the organization" ("Communication within the organization," 2015).

The critical weak link in the chain is clearly the horizontal communication process, i.e., communication between individuals of the same levels in different departments. Subordinates have no ultimate authority to take control and to issue directives to provide clarity, they can only fight amongst themselves. Even subordinates from the different departments who would otherwise get along on an interpersonal level may find themselves at odds because they are coming from different communication cultures or simply because they have been told to do different things. Diagonal communication, when subordinates or managers from another department must work with members of another level of the organizational hierarchy in a cross-functional or multidisciplinary team, is even more difficult because of a clash of styles and leadership (i.e. it is not clear who is in charge, either the department leader of the subordinate's department or the individual with more authority, regardless of his or her department).

In such an instance, top level management must take control and make improving communication and a clearer chain of command a priority. Unfortunately, the current leadership has a highly avoidant conflict style and often uses the need for managers and their subordinates to sort things out by themselves independently is used as excuse not to engage in serious soul-searching about how to reestablish a chain of authority (Gelfand, Leslie, Keller & Drew, 2013, p. 1141). Further complicating the communications process is that different leaders view communication as a zero-sum game and focus on their point-of-view prevailing as a source of personal pride, versus what is best for the organization.