Restructuring Within a Large Organization, or Any

Restructuring within a large organization, or any organization, can be a very sensitive and often ambiguous process. One of the most important and vital aspects of restructuring is communication and how information throughout the entire process is relayed. It is also important for management or Human Resources to address all of the components pertaining to the restructuring and how it is going to affect all of the employees.

Some of these components to be addressed may include a timeline of the restructuring; who it is going to effect and to what degree; are there going to be layoffs or demotions involved; changes in job descriptions; changes in higher management and direct reports; changes in benefits. If the basic aspects regarding the restructuring are not properly and accurately communicated, a sense of mistrust and disloyalty may develop.

In order to maintain this trust and loyalty to an organization, restructuring should be communicated from an employee's direct report or manager and followed as a chain of command. In addition, it is key that the information is communicated face-to-face and not through a telephone call, email or even letter. A face-to-face meeting will lessen the possibility of miscommunications or misinterpretations arising.

Face-to-face communication has often been considered the richest form of communication because there is room for immediate feedback and a natural tone in the language and therefore, has the ability to decrease any possibility of ambiguity much more quickly compared to other sources of media (Trevino, Lengel and Daft, 1987).

Receiving such information via electronic mail may be the least desirable way of communicating in this situation because there is a strong lack of "cues such as voice inflection, pitch and tone, even though it may at times provide rapid feedback and even portray natural language (Trevino, Lengel and Daft, 1987). The format of presenting such information is also crucial. Ideally, face-to-face meetings could be scheduled individually for the employee and his or her direct supervisor; however, this may pose a problem if employees prematurely disclose the information to other employees.

As a result, it may be in the organization's best interest to inform its employees in small groups based on department, division or even manager. Depending on the size of the organization individual meetings with direct supervisors may not even be a feasible option, yet small group meetings would still maintain a fairly high level of richness. Daft, Lengel, and Trevino have also made a claim that "face-to-face communications have been found more suitable for non-routine tasks such as bargaining, negotiating, complex problem solving, and getting to know someone (1987).

As a manager of change, I would take the time and extra caution in developing a proper strategy to inform my fellow colleagues of the restructuring and changes to come. I would evaluate the time-sensitivity of the information and how quickly it is expected to not only inform other employees but to also implement the changes, the size of the company and the number of people whom need to be informed. Based on.