Bussinuss Communication

Business Communication Relating Redundancies

Check your email for salary news." The initial "business" message on May 30, 2003 to approximately 2500 employees of the Accident Group (TAG) advising them: "Check your email for salary news." beeped onto the workers' company mobile phones. The second message related the words introducing this study to the workers: "Urgent...." (Goodway and Padgham, 2003) Later, staff of the Accident Group received a third message from insolvency practitioners at accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers, administrator of Amulet Group, the Luxembourg-controlled parent of TAG. This message advised these workers to phone the head office.

This final business communication from the Accident Group read: "Any staff who have not received an official briefing over the future of the company should ring 0161-605-5966." (Goodway and Padgham, 2003) This particular, poignant prime paradigm served as the first example of business communication relating mass redundancies by text message. The practice of utilizing alternative media to communicate bad news to employees, albeit is not unique. (Goodway and Padgham, 2003) Staff at Corus, a steelmaker, heard the news they had been made redundant on their radios. In Fort Worth, Texas, prior to the Labor Day holiday in 2006, Texas-based electronics retailer RadioShack Corp. utilized e-mail to fire 400 of its employees. Their message in workers' electronic in-boxes, relating to an earlier layoff announcement, stated: "The workforce reduction notification is currently in progress. Unfortunately, your position is one that has been eliminated."

RadioShack reported it felt the use of e-mail messages to deliver their bad news would soften its impact and consequently allow terminated workers to experience a semblance of privacy for the receipt of the news, as well as for gathering their personal belongings and clearing the premises. ("You've got mail," 2006) the Accident Group's texted, business communications on May 30, 2003, informing the majority of its staff they lost their jobs, albeit numerous business communication experts contend, constitutes a legendary act of crassness. In light of contemporary business communication practices, this business communication study, based on the Accident Group case, explores a number of business communication components and considerations. To effectively develop business communication skills and competencies, as well as adapt and effectively communicate in current and future communication environments, Du-Babcock (2006) contends, stress student development and training to empower students to:

interact in a multilingual and multicultural environment in which individuals possess various levels of language proficiency and use different professional genres, adjust to the varying linguistic and cultural competencies of their communication partners, and use communication technologies effectively to provide real-time information and message exchange with counterparts in remote locations and in virtual organizations. (Du-Babcock, 2006)

The Accident Insurance Group specialized in pursuing compensation claims for accident victims of accidents and, in turn, when successful, collected a percentage of the compensation award.

Due to the company success rates' demise in securing compensation for personal injury claims, along with a key financial backer's withdrawal from the company, the Accident Group, discontinued trading during May 2003.

Consequently, approximately 2,500 employees lost their jobs.

Rumours regarding the Accident Insurance Group's uncertain future started circulating amongst staff after some of them received text messages advising them to examine their bank accounts as the company was experiencing problems paying salaries. Later text messages advised these individuals the company had not paid their salaries. Ensuing stories related the fact the company notified staff of dismissal via text message. Mark Langford, the Chairman of the Accident Insurance Group claimed he did not make the decision to inform workers of their redundancy via text message. Langford blamed PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the Accident Insurance Group's administrators.

This Business Case Contends

This business communication study, based on the Accident Group case, explores numerous business communication components and considerations, along with the company's culminating text messages. This study effort proves significant, this researcher contends, as it not only presents an historical account of negative business communications, but relates information that could serve to enhance contemporary considerations on this vital subject. During the next section of this study, the literature relates as Hodgson and Bond (2007) note the Accident Group's text messages proclaimed: "Full details to follow later...."

PART II:

LITERATURE REVIEW

Communication in whatever environment virtual or otherwise is still communication."

Uber Grosse (Charles, 2004)

Section 1: Article Summaries

In Whatever Environment, Communication

Technology, per se, does not constitute the greatest challenge in virtual communication, Christine Uber Grosse, cited by Charles (2004) purports. "Communication," no matter the environment, whether virtual or in other arenas, as the quote introducing this section contends, constitutes communication. Virtuality, however, does not change communication, business or other types, Grosse contends.

Case Study of One

The size of a case study, in a similar sense, does not change the fact that the study effort constitutes a case study. Regarding the size of this business case study relating to the Accident Group Hamel (Hamel et al., 1993; cited by Tellis, 1997) and Yin (1984, 1989a, 1989b, 1993, 1994; cited by Tellis, 1997) argued that the sample's relative size, no matter if one, two, 10, or 100 cases, "does not transform a multiple case into a macroscopic study. The goal of the study should establish the parameters, and then...applied to all research....a single case could be considered acceptable, provided it met the established objective." The following list, which evolved from the work of Stake (1995; cited by Tellis, 1997), and Yin (1994; cited by Tellis, 1997), identifies six sources of evidence in case studies:

Archival records

Interviews

Direct observation

Participant-observation

Physical artifacts

Yin (1994; cited by Tellis, 1997) purport that the following four principles enhance the production of a high quality analysis:

Show that the analysis relied on all the relevant evidence.

Include all major rival interpretations in the analysis.

Address the most significant aspect of the case study..

Use the researcher's prior, expert knowledge to further the analysis. (Yin 1994; cited by Tellis, 1997)

The biggest challenge a communicator, Grosse, cited by Charles (2004) consists of getting his/her audience strategy right. Even in a virtual environment, a communicator begins with his/her audience. Even though a communicator chooses his/her channel choice, an effective communicator analyses his/her audience analysis and takes these individuals into account.

Whether virtual or not, creating suitable audience strategies in intercultural teams proves particularly challenging. "Suitable strategies become the lifeline, the saving force that either makes or breaks an intercultural team. And all of that has to do with the interface between technology and human beings." (Charles, 2004) Currently, as global companies increasingly depend on virtual teams to construct short- and long-term projects, businesses need to be prepared to manage communication in intercultural teams. Along with securing responses from 90 graduate business students regarding their experiences of working on an intercultural team project, Grosse interviewed four global executives to enhance gain insights into best practices in virtual teamwork. From the responses she obtained, Grosse; cited by Charles (2004) reports the following seven main strategies for successful communication within virtual intercultural teams in her article, "Managing Communication Within Virtual Intercultural Teams:

build trust and understanding build relationships with teammates via technology understand the advantages and the limitations of technology know the strengths and the limitations of communication channels show intercultural sensitivity understand how diversity strengthens a team show respect for other languages and culture. (Grosse; cited by Charles, 2004)

Building "trust and understanding," and building "relationships with teammates via technology," the first two of the seven strategies Grosse; cited by Charles (2004) relates, deal with human relationships, trust, and understanding. Three deal with diversity, intercultural sensitivity, and other languages; only two out of seven deal directly with technology. Korn (2001, p. 96) relates the following top 10 lines from promoters of fraudulent investments, a number of which, this researcher contends, appear to aptly reflect some of the philosophy the Accident Group's purported:

We don't make money unless you make money." know you get offers everyday from people who tell you they're going to make you rich. I can make it easy for you to make your decision based on actual facts."

This opportunity is the best chance to make extra money for guys who work for a living... guys like you and me."

I've been in the business for 20 years, and I can tell you this: I know no other program that's legal, that's so easy to afford, and so easy to work that can bring in this kind of big money from such a small investment." know this can work for you. I personally guarantee your success, right down to the last penny."

Give me 1% of your trust I'll earn the other 99% when you see the return."

Of course, there's a risk. There's a risk in everything."

Sure, we could finance this venture ourselves. But we're trying to build a power base for the future with folks like you."

We're talking about a cash cow here. But it's going fast. I need your check tomorrow at the latest. " can't be lying. There are laws against that." (Source: Federal Trade Commission; cited by Korn (2001, p. 96)

Hollingshead, McGrath, and O'Connor (1993; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) found that "face-to-face groups outperformed computer-mediated groups for negotiation and intellective tasks but also discovered no significant differences on generative and decision-making tasks." According to Short, Williams, and Christie (1976; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005), Social Presence Theory notes that "communication media differ in the degree to which they can communicate (or simulate) the social presence of the communication partners through the use of social cues (both verbal and nonverbal cues)." This theory purports that if a medium can only communicate limited social cues, communication partners do not experience each other's social presence. In turn, they will likely not pay as much attention to each other in the interaction as they would if the interaction took place in a face-to-face setting. In light of this contention, Media Richness Theory (Daft & Lengel, 1984, 1986; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) proposes that not all communication media uniformly suit information requirements various tasks generate. Daft and Lengel (1984; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005), differentiate two different information requirements:

uncertainty, the lack of information, which creates the need for more information, and equivocality, the absence of clear definitions of situations."

Equivocality does not mandate that more information be communicated, but that richer, more relevant information be related. Daft and Lengel (1986, p. 560; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) explain that richer information possess a higher capacity "to change understanding within a time interval." Daft and Lengel (Ibid.) further contend that "communication transactions that can overcome different frames of reference or clarify ambiguous issues to change understanding in a timely interval are considered rich." Media prove more appropriate for equivocal information tasks, or possess a greater measure of media richness, if/when they score higher on the following four criteria:

the possibility of instant feedback, the medium's ability to convey multiple cues, such as body language, facial expressions, tone of voice, and so on, the use of natural language to convey subtleties and nuances, and the personal focus of the medium.

Daft and Lengel (Ibid.) argue that the best possible fit between task and medium may be achieved and that individuals whose media choice corresponds with this optimum perform better. Richer media better suits for tasks which possess a high degree of equivocality.

When a low degree of equivocality exits, albeit, a lean medium will likely prove more effective. In light of these contentions, communication technologies such as e-mail generally denote relatively "lean" media. Consequently, according to contingency theories, these types' media serve best for delivering noncomplex, information lean tasks. (Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) Media richness theory spawned a number of studies investigating its central premises. McGrath and Hollingshead (1993; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005), for example, "proposed explicit task media fit hypotheses and found support for the importance of the fit between task and medium for communication performance." From their study, Rice, Hughes, and Love (1987; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) determined parallel results. Rice, Grant, Schmitz, and Torobin (1990; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005), also confirmed the degree a person perceives a medium to be appropriate to his/her task consequently impacts his/her evaluation of that particular medium and, in turn, his/her adoption and use of it.

Consistent with media richness theory, Kraut, Rice, Cool, and Fish (1998; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) purported that people completing work deficient in routine utilized video telephony more than individuals performing more routine tasks. Contrary to media richness theory, however these researchers found that managers, filling "people management" positions utilized lean media more frequently than they used rich media.

At best, the exploration of existing research reveals only partial support for the central premises of media richness theory. Hollingshead, McGrath, and O'Connor (1993; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) discovered that for negotiation and intellective tasks, face-to-face groups outperformed computer-mediated groups. They did not find, albeit any significant differences on generative and decision-making tasks. Each of the laboratory experiments by a number of researchers (e.g. Kinney and Watson (1992; Kinney and Dennis 1994; Valacich, Mennecke, Wachter, and Wheeler, 1994; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) conducted failed to support assumptions relating to task equivocality's influence and media richness of a variety of communication and decision-making tasks' completion. When Suh (1999; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) conducted a similar experiment, he noted that none of the considered task-medium interaction revealed any effects on decision time or decision quality. The media richness theory's primary premise purports an optimal possible fit exists between task and medium and that users aim to achieve this goal. Trevino, Daft, and Lengel (1990; cited by Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) argue, however that media characteristics relating to media richness theory do not always prove to be absolutely objective, as media possess a symbolic value. This symbolic value may stimulate less than optimal media choices in regard between task and medium connection. Face-to-face communication, for example, depicts commitment and personal interest. "The symbolic value is believed to be an important reason for face-to-face interaction in circumstances where another medium would have been a more optimal fit." (Van Den Hooff, Groot & De Jonge, 2005) Munter, Rogers and Rymer (2003) point out that e-mail, like writing, provides a record. So do, as in the case of the Accident Insurance Group, the text messages the company sent May 30, 2008. The following suggestions by these authors relate ways to enhance e-mail communications. Some of these suggestions, this researcher purports, also aptly apply to text messages, albeit perhaps in an abbreviated sense.

Use a "talking" subject line to inform recipient what the message concerns how this specific information concerns them. In this introductory phrase, relate as much as possible about the message and its intent. For example, instead of "Scope statement," "Revised scope statement" or "Scope stmt/2nd draft" better conveys the message. (Munter, Rogers and Rymer, 2003)

When reader action is needed, use a verb, for example:

Comment on attached" or "Need input re. slides." (Munter, Rogers and Rymer, 2003)

Place the most vital important words at the start of the message, as readers initially see this text in their in-box display.

Unless it constitutes the most appropriate identification of the topic, when "reply" subject lines no longer fit the message - modify them instead of merely leaving this line unchanged in a series of messages

As readers frequently will only look at the first screen of message, apply the "top of the screen" test will let the writer know if the reader will likely see his/her request. Questions for the writer to consider include: Will the reader get the information they need most? Will they realize at the onset of the message whether it includes important information later in the message? The writer needs to inform the reader at the start of a message what the concerns, and then explicitly referring to the people, products, or issues involved.

If a writer has any requests for action and information the readers must see and wants a reply, he/she needs to ask for it up front. Whatever the reader needs to do, needs to be stated at the beginning. The writer needs to relate information most relevant for the reader at the message's beginning.

The writer needs to "forecast and number multiple points, requests, or steps" (Munter, Rogers and Rymer, 2003) that the reader needs to take. If this is not included in the message, the reader made neglect to scroll down and read that part of the message. For example, stating: "This e-mail explains the six-point process you need to follow to install the virus protection program in your computer," or "Here are three reasons in support of this recommendation," helps ensure the reader will get the entire message.

Readers comprehend messages better that were written in short chunks, as they tend to glance over email/[text] messages quickly. A writer can help the reader grasp his/her messages better when he/she utilizes "short lines, relatively short sentences, and short paragraphs." (Munter, Rogers and Rymer, 2003)scare me

To make the reader's job easier, divide material into normal paragraphs and avoid sending information and huge blocks of text.

Each new paragraph will likely catch the reader's attention. Place the primary point of each paragraph at its star, so the reader will get the message.

Conclude the message in a straightforward manner. Routine e-mails do not need a conclusion; however non-routine e-mails may require a brief statement, perhaps something interpersonal. Dragging out the end and/or repeating cliches implies the reader should confirm receipt of the message.

As readers may only glance at their e-mail, designing the message for "high skim value" helps ensure that the reader will notice the writer's most important points.

Adding headings also helps ensure the reader understands the main points of the message.

Avoid using solid caps as they prove difficult to read and the reader may interpret these as "shouting" at him/her. (Munter, Rogers and Rymer, 2003)

Section 2B: Case Scenario

Let me dispel a few rumors so they don't fester into facts."

Tom Schulman, U.S. screenwriter (Columbia, 1996)

Mark Langford trained as a solicitor, however, after he failed to qualify, he started Motorlaw, a claims company. In1999, Langford founded the Accident Group (TAG).

In 2002, TAG was known as "the standard bearer for Britain's burgeoning compensation culture," ("Mark Langford," 2007) according to the Daily Telegraph. Businesses, councils and even prisons and condom manufacturers learned that for TAC, " No grumble was too trivial, no claim too bizarre. A group of safari park visitors sued because they drove into a llama and suffered 'whiplash', for example." ("Mark Langford," 2007)

Fundamental to the "no win, no fee" promise was the sale of insurance taken out by punters to cover the costs of losing. The Accident Group would advance loans of £1,000 to £2,000 to them to pay for the policy and the legal costs of the claim, taking an average £250 cut in "administration fees." If the case was lost, the insurance would kick in to pay the legal and insurance costs, leaving the punter evens, but TAG £250 better off. Those fees "soon built up." By 2002, Langford's wealth was put at £40m and he was hobnobbing with world leaders at charity events. "Shy, quiet and awkward" on the one hand, "he was also staggeringly arrogant," a colleague told the Sunday Telegraph, "seduced by his own success." He was also tough. "Give in now or we'll *****ing squeeze the life out of you," he allegedly told one insurer who questioned his methods.

By 2003, the model had become overstretched. More and more claims were needed to pay for the empire of call centres and they became "ever more spurious." With more being lost, insurers needed higher premiums, and in May TAG collapsed, leaving debts of £100m as its parent company, Amulet, was put into administration. It owed its employees £5m. The Langfords, however, were covered: in the previous two years, they'd paid themselves £11.1m and they had access to a £8.8m offshore "Employee Benefits Trust." Meanwhile, Amulet's complex share ownership seemed dense enough to deter the investigators.

But not everything in the pool was cool, clear and shimmering." As the Langfords wiled away the weeks starting up new businesses (including a Botox import operation), "the stones of British bureaucracy were grinding." Mark Langford has been ordered to attend a bankruptcy hearing in the High Court in March. Just desserts, at last, for Britain's most notorious "insurance pirate."

In 2000,...[Langford] got off with just a £1,000 fine when he struck and killed a 73-year-old pensioner while at the wheel of his Ferrari (driving, said the judge, like a "frustrated teenager"), on the grounds that the man had crossed a wet road at twilight. Langford ran his business with similar single-mindedness. The pressure he put on sales staff to bring in claims was relentless. "He told us: 'If it walks, talks, farts or breathes, write it up as a claim'," says one former employee. An investigation following the group's collapse revealed that one in two of the claims it signed up were without substance.

The centre of the Accident Group's activities was Liverpool, which soon became "the pavement-tripping capital of Britain," says the Sunday Telegraph: by 2003, the City council had set aside £6m to deal with claims. Langford's representatives established niche areas of expertise. There was "The Carpet Stretcher," who majored on "badly fitted" carpets and "Pothole Bill," who turned driving into potholes into a cottage industry. The queue of clients was soon as endless as the inventiveness of the salesmen. When a Liverpool bus, seating 72, crashed in 2002, hundreds filed claims. One representative, briefed to bring in four claims a day from a council estate, had usually done so by 10am. The most lucrative time was summer holidays, otherwise known as "McDonald's Season," when claims for burnt mouths from hot apple pies soared. McDonald's was also the unofficial headquarters for Accident Group managers. "The stream of apple pie claims did not seem to cause them any embarrassment." ("Mark Langford," 2007)

The following newspaper account relates the result of the Accident Group's negative internal communication.

The Accident Group collapsed after HBOS pulled out of a joint venture agreement with the personal injury compensation company and refused to forward it a [pounds sterling]4.5m payment, according to the chairman and founder Mark Langford.Langford claims that HBOS was drafted in as a last-minute replacement for Morgan Stanley in the entrepreneur Hugh Osmond's plan for a new-look Accident Group (TAG). He said HBOS confirmed its involvement as late as May 23 but just five days later announced 'a reversal of intention'.

At the same time, HBOS decided not to hand over [pounds sterling]4.5m of 'outstanding monies due the company' that would have 'enabled us to meet staff salaries for May', Mr. Langford said. He added that HBOS provided no explanation for either decision. ("Accident Group chief," 2003)

Peter Taylforth, a former employee of the Accident Group, recounts meetings at the Accident Group as basically an opportunity for managers to browbeat the employees into a kind of desperate ruthlessness, which Peter claims anyone working for the Accident Group had to demonstrate. Securing a claim, any claim, he remembers, became all-consuming for him and the other employees who were later texted of their termination from the Accident Group.

In the following newspaper report, Lusher (2003) relates Peter's perceptions about the company that fuelled a compensation culture in Britain. (Lusher, 2003)

The sales reps were only kids. They'd be told to get four claims a day, or they'd be stuck out on the street until 8pm. If you asked whether it was right to put a claim through, they'd say: 'You are not the solicitor, just sign him up and the solicitor will judge it. Fill your boots.' "

He does, though, recognise another set of "victims": the disappointed claimants. His gleeful pride about his ability to get a claim out of anybody is forgotten now. The anger seems genuine. Langford bought his villa, and his yacht, says Peter. The "punters" stayed in their council flats.

In all my time I only knew one winner and he only got about pounds 449 for whiplash. He thought he would get pounds 1,500 minimum." (Lusher, 2003)

Internal Business Communications

The primary objective of the Breakfast Club, a communication program at the Chicago-based investment management company, according to Toni Vollmers, cited by Clemons (2003, p. 46) Ariel's director of training, education, and development, this aim of this effort "is to have everyone learn as much as possible about the firm, work as a team, and act as Ariel ambassadors -- with current clients or anybody working with the firm."

Through its internal business communications, this company developed and nurtured a knowledge-sharing environment for its 67 employees. Today, similar to Like Ariel, more businesses embrace internal communications as a way to inform employees and increase their understanding of the company's goals and objectives. All sizes of companies may benefit from such practices. Mirian Graddick-Weir, cited by Clemons (2003, p. 46), another business leader stresses that a businesses' "Internal communication is more important today than in previous years partly because the business and market conditions are more complex, particularly in the telecom industry." Along with phones, the Internet enhances the ability for businesses to relate information. Different individuals can easily post Messages at various sites around the Web, supposedly by a number of different people. One does not know, however, who actually posts information. (Korn, 2001, p. 96) Nevertheless, as Grosse; cited by Charles (2004) points out, in the professional, as well as in the personal arena: "Communication," no matter the environment, whether on or offline, in person on via text messages on the phone, still constitutes communication. During the next section, this study, the communicates an analysis and conclusion regarding communications the Accident Group neglected to implement.