Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Submitted December 6th, 2012
Communication Audit of
Mortar Board
Christi Kapinos
Callee Early
David Clipp
Kasey Moore
Devontia Talley
2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 3
Introduction 4-5
Organization Strengths 6-12
Opportunities for Improvement 13-19
Recommendations 20-23
Conclusion 24
References 25
Appendix 26-36
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose
The purpose of the audit report is to recognize strengths and areas for improvement
through observations, interviews, and survey questions, all in hopes of reaching the highest
level of success for the organization. Mortar Board will benefit from the recommendations for-
mulated that concentrate on identified strengths and opportunities for improvement.
Strengths
Mortar Board has many strengths that are important in maintaining effective communi-
cation within this organization. Among these strengths, we found that the organization gets
tasks assigned and completed in a timely and efficient manner. There are appropriate levels of
communication between the executive board and advisor to the other members. The line of
communication is very well structured, starting with the advisor and moving down through the
executive board and then to committee heads and their respective members. The advisor is
viewed as a primary resource and go-to asset for members of the organization, especially when
it comes to amount of information.
Opportunities for Improvement The organization has various areas of improvement that we have recognized through
observations, interviews, and the survey. We noticed that there appears to be too much infor-
mation being relayed back and forth during meetings, prominently off-topic conversations and
distractions. Interviews revealed that members also feel that they rarely are heard and their
opinion is often disregarded. Members tend to follow the lead of the executive board and advi-
sor, so distractive and unprofessional behavior is mimicked. Personable relationships between
committees is minimal; committees stay within themselves. There is an impersonal quality of
relationships because all members come in new and don’t have the chance to get to know each
other very well.
Recommendations Based on the results gathered from the audit, we feel Mortar Board would benefit most
from improved relationship quality. We propose a retreat once the new members are chosen,
prior to the election process. Everest believes that an organizational retreat would promote a
more cohesive and successful team. Another recommendation to be implemented is a formal
communication system. We suggest a formal recognition policy to monitor who speaks and
regulate the line of communication. The third recommendation that Everest has developed is to
hold strong committee meetings. Committee heads would be more involved and in charge
within their designated committee members and take on new and regulatory responsibilities.
4
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Everest has performed a communication audit of Longwood University’s Mortar
Board during the fall semester of 2012. The primary purpose of the audit is to assist the or-
ganization in determining their particular strengths and working on areas of improvement so
that they may become a more unified and collaborative group.
Authorization
Authorization was given to Everest by Mortar Board to complete this communica-
tion audit during the fall semester of 2012. The contract of agreement in order to conduct the
audit was signed by the client on September 10th, 2012. After performing the audit with the
cooperation of Mortar Board, Everest will present the results of the audit on Thursday, De-
cember 6th, 2012 at 12:00pm.
Scope
Everest chose to focus on three aspects of communication when performing this au-
dit. We centered on relationships among the organization, adequacy of information, and the
various lines of communication flow. Through observations, interviews, and a survey, Ev-
erest evaluated every member of this organization including the advisor, executive mem-
bers, and general members. Improved relationship quality and group unification is what Ev-
erest hopes to accomplish through this audit process.
Research Methods
Through the communication audit, Everest gathered information through conducted
interviews, observations, and survey questions.
Observations
Observations were completed on September 24th, 2012 and October 1st, 2012 in the
Lankford Student Union, more specifically the ABC rooms. Everest conducted two different
observations, focusing primarily on verbal and nonverbal communication. Communication
patterns and behaviors of the organization were identified in a natural setting.
Surveys
Surveys were performed to determine particular models of communication within
the organization. There was an average of 65% of members who took the survey. The advi-
sor, executive members, and other members were asked to complete the survey that was cre-
ated and sent out by Everest’s survey coordinator. Participants were not selected individu-
ally, but the entire organization was asked to participate so that Everest could attain the
highest possible number of responses. (See Appendix B for a list of survey questions.)
5
INTRODUCTION
Interviews
Interviews were conducted with different members of Mortar Board that fulfill vari-
ous positions throughout the organization. We selected the advisor, two executive board
members, one committee head, and one general member to be interviewed. Everest chose
these specific positions in order to get enough information and opinion from the levels
within the organization. We inquired about overall satisfaction with the organization, rela-
tionships, and the amount and types of information that relate to Mortar Board personally.
(See Appendix A for a list of interview questions.)
Limitations
There are always going to be limitations in a research process, and one limitation
was that not all members were interviewed during the interviewing process. Only five inter-
views were conducted, and that was a small portion of the whole organization. During the
interview process, there was one member that did not seem comfortable during their inter-
view and offered minimal feedback to questions asked.
Report Organization
Everest analyzed the communication functions of Mortar Board and identified the
strengths and areas for improvement within the organization. The goal of conducting this
audit is to improve the communication and function of Mortar Board in its duties and goals.
This report contains Mortar Board’s organizational strengths, areas for improvement, and
recommendations for growth.
6
7
Information Adequacy: Information Effectively Being Distributed Within
Organization
For instance, if an organization needs to meet a deadline on the 15th, it would be unaccept-
able and not timely for the organization to give the members information necessary for com-
pleting their tasks on the 14th.
Information is received in a timely manner and Mortar Board members are happy with the
amount of guidance and direction received from the executive board and the advisor. There-
fore, Mortar Boards strengths lie within information load and timeliness These findings are
drawn from observations during meetings, interviews with members, and a survey given to
members.
In observations during meetings, Mortar Board members reviewed past meetings and future
deadlines to ensure that their objectives were met on time. Executive members stayed fo-
cused on the topic at hand and offered complete information for their committee members.
In interviews conducted with selected members, each spoke that deadlines were regularly
met and that there was never a lag in sending or receiving information. An ideal amount of
information is communicated during meetings.
“Every committee chairman speaks at every meeting, informing the committee of
what they need to know.”
“We have deadlines; we meet with exec. at 8:30 and meet with general members at
9; information/deadlines are relayed in a timely manner.”
In surveys, Mortar Board members reported that they were satisfied with the timeliness of
the functions within the organization. “Timeliness in which I receive the information needed
to do my job.” 1.43 is our average response rating, on the same scale as stated above. 65%
of members were satisfied with the time it took to receive information they needed. Overall,
96% of members were at least somewhat satisfied with the timeliness of receiving necessary
information.
8
Information Adequacy: Information Effectively Being Distributed Within
Organization
It is apparent that the members of Mortar Board are satisfied with the load and timeliness of
the information received from other members. These are great aspects you all possess be-
cause when dealing with information adequacy, it is very important that the load a member
in an organization receives is optimal and that the member receives and sends information in
a timely manner.
9
Directionality: Communicating With Different Levels Within Organization
Directionality is the construct used when explaining how an organization talks amongst its
members, with its superiors, and with its subordinates. These different methods of commu-
nication are known as downward communication (superior to subordinate), horizontal
(members amongst each other), and upward (subordinate to superior). “Horizontal commu-
nication which is communication between peers and coworkers, introduces flexibility into
an organization” (Papa et al, 2008). This is relevant to our findings because it is important
that Mortar Board’s members feel comfortable communicating with one another, regardless
of rank. Effective downward and upward communication occurs when members are com-
fortable with their leaders.
Mortar Board members are very satisfied with the communication in terms of upward and
downward. There is a strong level of comfort when speaking with superiors or speaking
down to subordinates. This not only relates to directionality, but relationship quality as well
(to be discussed later).
From observations, it was noted that the executive board and advisor had great control over
the meetings and that the other members were attentive and respectful when superiors
spoke. This shows that the executive board is effective when communicating to everyone
else.
During interviews, the members stressed that the communication between superiors and
subordinates was stellar. The members stated that since the organization was effective dur-
ing meetings, the communication followed in its effectiveness.
“It’s organized because it has a set order: advisor to exec. to committee heads to
general members.”
“Everyone communicates well no matter there position and that’s why it is so
good.”
From the surveys distributed, members were satisfied with the way their superiors commu-
nicated with them. “I am satisfied with the amount of upward communication I receive.”
1.86 is our average response rating for this question; it is closest to 1, which represents satis-
fied. This continues the theme of effective downward and upward communication and
shows that the Mortar Board members value the communication they experience.
10
Directionality: Communicating With Different Levels Within Organization
Gathering from these results, Mortar Board members communicate very well in terms of
upward and downward communication methods. This is a strength that this organization
has because when superiors and subordinates can communicate comfortably and effectively,
essentially all tasks can be understood and completed.
11
Relationship Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses in Relationships
According to Sias (2005), “Superior-subordinate relationships serve as a channel for infor-
mation to transfer, as well as a place to grow and learn with the support of a superior. This
type of relationship impacts the decision of employees to display their opposition or dis-
agreement.” It is important for a superior to be relatable with their subordinates not only so
that their relationship has a higher quality, but also so that the subordinates can feel comfort-
able approaching their superior. Organizations that have strong relationships across levels
have a high level of productivity and employee satisfaction. In terms of everyone function-
ing well together, teamwork makes the dream work.
The unit as a whole works well with their advisor and executive board. The relationship that
the advisor has with all of Mortar Board members is one of respect and guidance. The mem-
bers feel that their advisor is their best asset and share a strong bond with her.
In observations, it was seen that the organization works well as a whole. The committees
appeared to cooperate well with one another and all had great advice when reviewing one
another’s plans and goals for the future. Throughout the meeting, executive members would
give compliments or shout outs to certain members that had done a good job, which helps in
encouraging other members.
In the interviews conducted, members unanimously agreed that the advisor was personable
and easy to talk to. She acts as a mentor and leader for the entire organization. Another
member explained. The relationships within an organization help the organization function
well.
“Sully is one of our best assets; she is always there. She helps us make the agenda.”
“One of the exec. members has a strong personality and most everyone feels com-
fortable talking with them.”
Drawing from the survey conducted, Mortar Board members agree that they can trust their
advisor, their advisor is honest with them, and they can tell their advisor when something
goes wrong. This shows that the advisor plays a large role in the life of the organization and
acts as a catalyst to keep the organization going.
12
Relationship Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses in Relationships
Mortar Board has great relationships within the organization and especially with their advi-
sor. These relationships are a plus to Mortar Board because when an organization has posi-
tive relationships within, their functionality increases because the group is happy. When an
organization is happy with one another, they are more likely to be honest and just when
dealing with their basic duties and accomplishing goals.
13
14
Adequacy of Information: Information Effectively Being Distributed Within
Organization
Adequacy of Information can be defined as information being received by organizational
members effectively. It is composed of three components: load, timeliness, and type of in-
formation. According to Downs & Adrian (2004), load refers to the frequency and amount
of communication that takes place. Underload occurs when people think they need or could
use more information. Overload occurs when people have more information than they can
possibly process (p.52-53). Type of information refers to communicating relevant informa-
tion to the appropriate organizational member.
It was discovered through observations, interviews, and surveys that organizational
members give an overload of information to each other. The majority of members also feel
as though they receive an underload of information from the committee.
During observations it was revealed that general members give an overload of informa-
tion to each other. There is not lot of structure in meetings due to side talk and interjections,
causing numerous amounts of information to be distributed from member to member. Or-
ganizational members sometimes do not speak specifically about the organization resulting,
therefore getting off topic; resulting in an ineffective type of information being dispersed.
In the interview process it was concluded that the organization has difficulty with the
amount of information discussed during meetings. Due to the fact that the organization is
composed of forty members, the majority of members felt that there are a lot of opinions;
which make it difficult to make everyone happy. This results in an underload of information
because they did not always voice their opinions.
-“There are too many cooks in the kitchen”.
- “Sometimes I don’t feel like my opinion matters”
In the surveys it was concluded that not all of the organizational members felt that
they received enough information regarding specific problems faced by the executive board.
3.04 is the average rating for this question; this number is closest to 4 on our scale, which
represents “very great”. Overall, Mortar Board members feel they receive some information
regarding specific problems faced by the executive board. On average, 45% of members re-
ceive little amounts of information regarding specific problems faced by the executive
board.
15
Adequacy of Information: Information Effectively Being Distributed Within
Organization
This information is important because the quality of information can affect the per-
formance and satisfaction of the organization. According to the communication professor,
Patricia M. Sias experiment results, “the quality of information employees received from
their supervisors and co-workers was positively related to their job satisfaction and commit-
ment to the organization” This gives insight on how to help establish Mortar Boards mis-
sion, “to form a national society whose purpose shall be to facilitate cooperation among
these societies, to contribute to the self-awareness of its members, [and] to promote equal
opportunities among all peoples.”
16
Directionality: Communicating With Different Levels Within Organization
Directionality can be defined as the construct used when explaining how an organization
talks amongst its members, with its superiors, and with its subordinates. These different
methods of communication are known as downward communication (superior to subordi-
nate), horizontal (members amongst each other), and upward (subordinate to superior).
“Horizontal communication which is communication between peers and coworkers, intro-
duces flexibility into an organization” (Papa et al, 2008).
Some members are not attentive during meetings when the executive members and gen-
eral members are speaking. Some executive members get distracted by technology when
general members are speaking at meetings. Committees do not communicate well with each
other to resolve problems.
During observations it was examined that general members as well as committee mem-
bers are not as attentive when a non-executive member is speaking .This weakens the hori-
zontal communication between members. When committee heads speak, they are not given
much attention affecting upward communication.
In the interview process it was concluded that the organization would benefit from more
communication between members and peers as opposed to just communicating to superiors.
The majority of members felt that whoever speaks up the most receives the most say in
meetings. It was concluded that the organization would benefit from more communication
between members and peers as opposed to just communicating to superiors. The majority of
members felt that whoever speaks up the most receives the most say in meetings. Utilizing
the time more effectively in meetings could improve the horizontal communication.
-“Some committees don’t communicate well between each other in order to get is-
sues settled.”
- “There are quick committee meetings after the Mortar Board meetings, but they
should be more effective considering the amount of time they have.”
During survey process it was concluded that the majority of members were not satisfied
with the extent to which they thought their opinion mattered within horizontal communica-
tion. 2.41 is the average response rating for this survey question; it is closest to 4 which
represents dissatisfaction. On average, 48% of members were satisfied with the extent to
which their opinion matters within horizontal communication.
17
Directionality: Communicating With Different Levels Within Organization
It is important that Mortar Board’s members feel comfortable communicating with one
another, regardless of rank. Effective downward and upward communication occurs when
members are comfortable with their leaders. According to communication studies research-
ers, Downs and Adrian, "Many people remain with a particular organization because they
enjoy interactions with the people who work there."This gives insight on how positive inter-
actions within an organization can benefit directionality in an organization as well.
18
Relationship Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses in Relationships
Relationship quality can be defined as strengths and weaknesses in relationships within
an organization. According to Sias (2005), “Superior-subordinate relationships serve as a
channel for information to transfer, as well as a place to grow and learn with the support of a
superior. This type of relationship impacts the decision of employees to display their opposi-
tion or disagreement.” It is important for a superior to be relatable with their subordinates
not only so that their relationship has a higher quality, but also so that the subordinates can
feel comfortable approaching their superior.
There is not a lot of communication distributed between all members on a social level. It
is hard to get to know everyone due to the large number of members and lack of time. Some
members don’t feel comfortable speaking up and some member do not feel comfortable dis-
agreeing with their advisor.
During observations it examined that committees stay within their own committees and
don’t really get to know other people well. Executive members sit at the front of the room
and seem to be a separate part of the group. The separation appears to divide the group and
weaken relationship quality.
In the interview process it was concluded that the organization could improve on relation-
ship between the members themselves. Improving relationship quality could make members
feel more comfortable to voice their opinions. The majority members felt that the amount of
people in the organization make is hard to get to know the organizational members in a per-
sonal level.
-“Some people don’t like to speak up about whether or not they like an event mostly
because they are worried about hurting another committee’s feelings.”
According to the survey not all organizational members feel comfortable disagreeing
with their advisor. 2.18 is our average response rating for this question; it is close to 4,
which represents disagree. On average 35% of members feel comfortable disagreeing with
the advisor.
19
Relationship Quality: Strengths and Weaknesses in Relationships
Organizations that have strong relationships across levels have a high level of productiv-
ity and employee satisfaction. According to Jeffrey W. Kassing, an Assistant Professor in
the Department, “subordinates who perceived having high-quality relationships with their
supervisors reported using significantly more articulated dissent than subordinates who per-
ceived having low-quality relationships with their supervisors.”We can distinguish whether
there is a high-quality or low-quality relationship based on the amount of input and opinions
that people are willing to share, even if they are opposing. This also gives insight to the ef-
fect that high-quality supervisor relationships can have on organizations.
20
21
Recommendations
The following recommendations suggested by Everest are intended to improve com-
munication and offer ideas to help promote growth within Mortar Board. Our recommenda-
tions are based on observations, interviews and survey results gathered from this audit. Ev-
erest’s recommendations are not intended to be prescriptive, but instead should be viewed as
an outline for improving communication.
Retreat
Through our results, Everest feels this organization would benefit from improved
relationship quality. Members expressed in interviews that they do not get to know each
other on a personal level before elections. This makes the election process difficult because
members are unsure of other member’s strengths and weaknesses. Based on observations,
this unfamiliarity continues throughout most of their time in the organization, with a few
exceptions. Members also expressed that this lack of familiarity creates a dysfunctional unit-
to-unit relationship with committees. In order to combat these issues, our recommendation
is for this organization to partake in a retreat. This retreat would take place once the new
members are chosen but before the elections. Based on the flexibility of the members, this
event could last from one day to an entire weekend. The location of this retreat could possi-
bly take place at Longwood University’s rope course. We suggest the low ropes course be-
cause the course offers team building, leadership, and fellowship activities. This will bene-
fit Mortar Board because it will allow the new members to learn each other’s strengths and
weaknesses as leaders as well as allow them to get to know each other better. The cost of
the course is $5 per person for a two to three hour session. The use of ice breakers and team
building activities would foster communication and eventually relationships among mem-
bers. According to Downs and Adrian, “...Relationships are among the most important
communication phenomena to be audited,” and as such deserve special attention. The rela-
tionship climate in any organization will determine who is happy and stays a member of that
organization. It affects everyone’s productivity, satisfaction, and comfort ability. If this
group utilized a retreat, their relationships would improve and ultimately create a more co-
hesive and successful team.
22
Recommendations
The following recommendations suggested by Everest are intended to improve com-
munication and offer ideas to help promote growth within Mortar Board. Our recommenda-
tions are based on observations, interviews and survey results gathered from this audit. Ev-
erest’s recommendations are not intended to be prescriptive, but instead should be viewed as
an outline for improving communication.
Formal Parliamentarian Procedure
In order to enhance effectiveness during Mortar Board’s weekly meetings, Everest
recommends that there be a more effective structure of meetings. One specific recommenda-
tion is that the executive board members implement a more formal parliamentarian proce-
dure during Mortar Board meetings. Through observations there seems to be too much in-
formation exchange occurring between members during these formal meetings. Everest wit-
nessed a reoccurring issue where members continually interjected and interrupted conversa-
tion while others were speaking. When this occurs, it is difficult for meetings to run
smoothly. It also makes speaking and voicing opinions challenging for all members. During
one interview, a Mortar Board member stated that there are often “too many cooks in the
kitchen” and “at times too many opinions”. When there are too many opinions being dis-
cussed, this can create confusion within an organization and sometimes even an uncomfort-
able working environment. Everest recommends that in order to eliminate the issue, the ex-
ecutive board should apply a more formal flow of communication. One way to implement a
more formal flow of communication would be to practice Robert’s Rule of Order. This type
of parliamentarian procedure may seem extreme, however Mortar Board would be able to
customize the rules in order to best fit the organization. Robert’s Rules of Order suggest
that in order to speak or voice opinion during meetings, members should raise their hand
until called on by the President. This will ensure that the meetings are productive and stay
on track to reach the highest level of efficiency.
23
Recommendations
The following recommendations suggested by Everest are intended to improve com-
munication and offer ideas to help promote growth within Mortar Board. Our recommenda-
tions are based on observations, interviews and survey results gathered from this audit. Ev-
erest’s recommendations are not intended to be prescriptive, but instead should be viewed as
an outline for improving communication.
Effective Committee Meetings
Based on results collected from member interviews, Mortar Board would benefit if
committee meetings held after formal Mortar Board meetings were effective and function-
ing. According to one interview, a member stated that “There are quick committee meetings
after the Mortar Board meetings, but they should be more effective considering the amount
of time they have.” Everest suggests that in order to hold effective committee meetings,
committee heads should exercise the following: work hard during the designated time, be
sure to ask for and listen to all committee members’ opinions and lastly, inform committee
members about information regarding the committee. Everest recommends that during the
designated time for committee meetings, committee heads should always stay on topic, get
as much work done as possible, and discuss important issues faced by the committee.
In another interview, a Mortar Board member stated that “sometimes committee
members feel like their opinions don’t matter,” In order to fix this issue, committee heads
should to listen to all of their committee members and take their opinions into account when
making decisions concerning their committee. Also, committee heads should be sure to in-
form their members about all information regarding the committee. According to Jiaying &
Schiller (2010) “Several studies have emphasized the importance of open communication
between superiors and subordinates, thereby indicating that the free and open environment
for communication establishes a constructive relationship between the superior and subordi-
nate, which in turn increases job satisfaction and overall job success”. By sharing more in-
formation with committee members and creating a more open communication environment,
members will feel more important within the organization and may be willing to get more
involved.
24
SUMMARY
Everest acknowledges that Mortar Board has many strengths that are currently guid-
ing the organization and being utilized effectively. The main strengths we found dealt with
effective use of timeliness and the amount of information given and received. Mortar Board
should continue to maintain these strengths as they move forward in the organization. With
that in mind, Everest has also discovered areas that could benefit from various levels of im-
provement.
After reviewing areas that need to be addressed, Everest has compiled several rec-
ommendations that we feel will better Mortar Board as a whole. Although some recommen-
dations, such as raising hands before speaking may seem trivial, sometimes recalling the ba-
sics is what helps any organization run more smoothly. Focusing on the intended recom-
mendations will allow members to improve the formal structure and organizational environ-
ment. We realize that implementing any changes will take time and patience among all
members of this organization. However, we believe that by utilizing their hard work and
dedication Mortar Board will succeed in turning these areas for improvement into strengths.
Mortar Board is a respectable and dedicated organization. Therefore, Everest feels
that the organization will consider our recommendations and utilize them in order to reach
its full potential and continue to grow.
25
WORKS CITED
Downs, C. W., & Adrian, A. D. (2004). Assessing organizational communication: Strategic
audits. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Jiaying, C., & Schiller, S. Z. (2010). Communication openness in the workplace: the effects of
medium (F2F and IM) and culture (U.S. and China). Journal of Global Information
Technology Management, 13(2), 37-75. Retrieved from http://www.uncg.edu/bae/jgitm/
Papa, M. J., Daniels, T. D., & Spiker, B. K. (2008). Organizational communication perspectives
and trends. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc.
Sias, Patricia M. (2005). Workplace relationship quality and employee information experi-
ences. Communication Studies, 56, 375-395. Doi: 10.1080/10510970500319450.
Kassing, J. (2000). Investigating the relationship between superior-subordinate relationship quality
and employee dissent. Communication research reports, 17(1), 58-70.
26
27
APPENDIX A
Complete List of Interview Questions:
1. Identify name and position of the interviewee.
2. Describe your position in the organization.
3. What are the major communication strengths of the organization? Be specific.
4. What are the major communication weaknesses of the organization? Be specific.
5. If you were to advise me as to what to look for to get the greatest insight into this organiza-
tion, what would that be?
6. Describe the chain of command in this organization and how it operates.
7. What do you see as the greatest unresolved problem of this organization?
8. When conflict occurs, how is it resolved? What normally causes conflict here? Give exam-
ples.
9. In terms of downward communication, to what extent do you share complete information
with other members?
10. What happens when you send upward communication to your:
11. What would you like to see done to improve communication here?
12. How would you evaluate your advisor as a communicator?
13. How timely is the information exchanged between members and committees?
a. What, if anything, could be done to alleviate any particular problems in this
regard?
14. How much input do you have in decisions made by the executive board?
15. What motivates people in the organization now?
a. What are their principal concerns?
b. How is the communication here relating to and perhaps satisfying these con-
cerns and needs?
28
APPENDIX B
Complete List of Survey Questions:
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36