Bureacratic Organizations and Electronic Communication

Intelligence Systems in Corrections

In a bureaucratic organization, communication typically flows from the top down. One of the problems is that when a decision has to work its way up the hierarchy, a lot of knowledge and passion gets lost along the way. This occurs frequently when there are complex or big decisions that need to be made (Police Chief, 2010). This points to a couple of ways that communication in such organizations can be improved. First, decision-making can be pushed lower down. The fewer layers between the decision maker and the decision stakeholders, the less likely there is to be gaps in the information that is utilized to make the decision. Higher-ups can be informed of decisions, but a greater level of empowerment for lower-level leaders to make decisions would allow for more information to be communicated to the decision-maker, thereby improving the quality of decision-making. The second issue is with respect to bypassing layers. Normally, lower-level officers do not have direct access to senior people within the department, only their immediate supervisor. However, when communication flows either up or down there will be things lost in communication. To reduce this problem, organizational design can allow for more channels to be created that eliminate the amount of hierarchy that information must go through to reach decision-makers. In both of these instances, the objective is to bring the people who have the most information and the most passion closer to the people who are responsible for making the decision. This eliminates some of the layers that decisions must pass through. The role of a senior officer is not just to act as a go-between from lower levels to senior management so reducing the need for them to act as such might also free up more time on the part of middle layers to perform other useful functions. Hierarchy should not exist just to support itself.

2. Computerized communication is highly efficient, and has the capability to break down barriers. There are a couple of ways in which this works. One could be the use of email to allow people to send information directly to those who are the intended receivers, rather than to work through hierarchical channels. Superior officers can use mass emails to send out their messages directly, and lower officers can email superior officers directly to convey information. There are many instances in the corporate world where the CEO takes emails from anybody within the organization, as a means of breaking down the formal barriers that inhibit the flow of communication in the company. Officers in middle layers can be CC'ed into the communication, so that they are not being bypassed specifically.

Another means by which computerized communication can serve to improve the effectiveness of communications in bureaucratic organizations is that there is a record of communication, so that nobody's words are taken out of context. Meaning is relatively easy to determine, and questions can be asked. Computer-mediated communication often has a higher level of clarity, especially when the information is passing through multiple layers. For example, if a senior officer issues a directive, and it passes through three layers on its way to patrolmen, in electronic form the message can be copied word-for-word, which would not be the case in non-computerized communication. Speed, clarity and breaking down of formal barriers all assist in creating a better communication flow throughout the organization, highlighting the effectiveness of computers. With better flow across the organization's subgroups, communication will be more effective (Stojkovic, Chapter 4).