Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication Initiatives

8/17/2019 Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication Initiatives

1/304

Walden University

SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT

This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by

Cheryl M. Fliege

has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,and that any and all revisions required bythe review committee have been made.

Review CommitteeDr. Marcia Steinhauer, Committee Chairperson,

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Dr. Duane Tway, Committee Member,

Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Dr. Joseph Barbeau, Committee Member,Applied Management and Decision Sciences Faculty

Provost

Denise DeZolt, Ph.D.

Walden University2007


2/304

UMI Number: 3245318

3245318

2007

Copyright 2006 by

Fliege, Cheryl M.

UMI Microform

Copyright

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346

Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

All rights reserved.

by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.


3/304

2

ABSTRACT

Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication InitiativesUsed By Exemplary Middle Manager Communicators

by

Cheryl M. Fliege

M.A., The University of Iowa, 1981B.A., Valparaiso University, 1975

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillmentof the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of PhilosophyApplied Management and Decision Sciences

Leadership and Organizational Change

Walden University

February 2007


4/304

ii

ABSTRACT

Disasters such as the 1986 Challenger space shuttle explosion and the 2005 Hurricane

Katrina relief efforts demonstrated the negative results of organizational communication

failures. Few studies have investigated communication efforts that produced positive

results. This research was designed to investigate how managers communicate across

organizational layers to support effective organizational initiatives. Social constructivism

and appreciative inquiry formed the theoretical framework of the research. Senior

managers at a Fortune 500 company, effective middle managers, and key staff members

were interviewed on the communication processes contributing to the successful

deployment of a Six Sigma initiative. Data were analyzed using specialized software

allowing multidimensional coding. The results showed that successful communications

were heartfelt, aligned with organizational initiatives, formed as narratives, grounded in

leader commitment, and supportive of the staff. These findings suggest that enhancing

midlevel communication can be an important part of a successful organizational

initiative. In addition, the study demonstrated that appreciative inquiry offers a viable

alternative to traditional organizational problem-solving methods. Because appreciative

inquiry identifies positive activities, solutions are more likely to be affirming rather than

demeaning, creative rather than remedial, and rewarding rather than punitive.


5/304


6/304

iii

Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication Initiatives

Used By Exemplary Middle Manager Communicators

by

Cheryl M. Fliege

M.A., The University of Iowa, 1981B.A., Valparaiso University, 1975

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillmentof the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of PhilosophyApplied Management and Decision Sciences

Leadership and Organizational Change

Walden University

February 2007


7/304

iv

DEDICATION

In gratitude and deepest affection to my parents, Emily and William Miller, who

never told me that “girls can’t.”

To my soul mate and most vociferous supporter, my husband Tom Fliege, who

revels in the opportunity for us to be addressed as “Dr. and Mr. Fliege”, and who never

told me that “women can’t.”

To my daughter Abbey, who is the most courageous and caring person I know, in

the hopes that she knows that “she can, too.”

To my son, Andy, who deeply understands how words and writing create worlds,

in the hope that he will take his own gift and discover what a world created by his words,

writing, and wonder can do.

Non scholae sed vitae discimus.


8/304

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to acknowledge the invaluable help of my committee chair, Dr. Marcia

Steinhauer, who provided sage advice, humor and encouragement. I also thank committee

members Dr. Joseph Barbeau and Dr. Duane Tway who adjusted their schedules through

vacations, home floods, and illness to provide essential feedback and encouragement.

I am grateful to Timothy Elder, Alicia Johnson and Scott Johnson for their

assistance in securing the study site. I could not have completed this without the support

of my staff including Shirley Bowe, for her help with graphics, and especially Linda

Barth for her assistance and helping me maintain my composure. I especially thank Dr.

Vicky Stewart, friend and mentor. She provided an outstanding example to follow and

much-needed diversion. I am truly grateful to my friend and Walden colleague Kathy

Gronowick Johanson for sharing my angst and providing humor and encouragement.

Most important, I wish to thank my family. My husband Tom never complained

about the disruption our personal lives. My daughter Abbey, now a graduate student, and

my son Andy, an undergraduate student, made me do my homework!

Last, I would like to acknowledge Robert B. Cialdini, author of Influence: Science

and Practice; and Stephan Titscher, Michael Meyer, Ruth Wodak, and Eva Vetter,

authors of Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis for permission to use copyrighted

material in this text. I also would like to acknowledge the help of Dr. Sonia Ospina, for

advice on the appreciative inquiry and critical incident research methods. Full citations

for all appear in the text itself and the Reference section.

©2006 by Cheryl M. Fliege. All rights reserved.

ii


9/304

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... viiList of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDYOverview..............................................................................................................................1Problem Statement...............................................................................................................3Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................4 Nature of the Study ..............................................................................................................5Research Questions..............................................................................................................7Conceptual Framework........................................................................................................8Operational Definitions........................................................................................................8Assumptions, Limitations, and Scope................................................................................10Significance of Study.........................................................................................................12

Significant Literature .........................................................................................................13Summary............................................................................................................................14

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEWOverview............................................................................................................................16Substantive Literature Related to Research .......................................................................19

What is Organizational Communication?..............................................................19How is Organizational Communication Linked to Success?.................................25Who Are Middle Managers and What Is Their Role in Communication? ............29Communication Tools and Techniques .................................................................40Six Sigma as an Organizational Initiative..............................................................48

Summary of the Substantive Literature .................................................................50Literature Review of the Options and Choice of Research Methodology.........................51

Validation of the Methods and Potential for New Information to Emerge............58Summary............................................................................................................................64

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOverview............................................................................................................................68Research Questions............................................................................................................70Theoretical and Strategy Choices ......................................................................................70

Qualitative Study ...................................................................................................70Research Paradigm.................................................................................................71

Research Strategy...................................................................................................75Summary of Theoretical and Strategy Choices .....................................................82

Methods and Procedures....................................................................................................83Selection of Research Sites and Organizational Context.......................................83Selection of Research Participants.........................................................................85Criteria for Selecting Participants..........................................................................92Methods for Establishing a Researcher-Participant Working Relationship ..........93

iii


10/304

iii

Rules ..................................................................................................................................95The Role of the Researcher....................................................................................95Validity and Reliability..........................................................................................97Measures for Ethical Protection of Subjects........................................................100Instrument ............................................................................................................101

Data Collection and Analysis...........................................................................................105How and When Data Will Be Collected ..............................................................106Procedures for Dealing with Discrepant Cases....................................................107Data Analysis and Coding Procedures.................................................................108Software ...............................................................................................................112

Summary..........................................................................................................................113

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGSOverview..........................................................................................................................115Data Collection Process ...................................................................................................115

Data Tracking, Memo, and Catalog System....................................................................119Research Findings............................................................................................................122

Initial Coding .......................................................................................................122Patterns, Relationships, and Themes ...............................................................................123

The Contextual Communication Process Category.............................................126The Heartfelt Communication Process Category ................................................130The Aligned Communication Process Category..................................................132The Narrative Communication Process Category................................................134The Grounded Communication Process Category...............................................138The Elegant Communication Process Category ..................................................142The Supportive Communication Process Category.............................................145

The Process Outcomes Matrix.............................................................................147Methodology Findings.........................................................................................148

Discrepant and Nonconfirming Cases .............................................................................148Unanticipated Findings ....................................................................................................154

Unanticipated Findings in the Collected Data .....................................................154Unanticipated Methodology Findings..................................................................159

Evidence of Quality in the Study.....................................................................................160Summary..........................................................................................................................168

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONSOverview..........................................................................................................................170

Summary of the Study .....................................................................................................171Interpretation of the Research Findings...........................................................................173

Interpretation of Research Findings Related to Subquestion 1............................173Interpretation of Research Findings Related to Subquestion 2............................174Interpretation of Research Findings Related to Subquestion 3............................175The Seven Categories ..........................................................................................175Interpretation of the Findings on Appreciative Inquiry .......................................183

iv


11/304

iv

Boundaries of the Evidence .................................................................................185Social Change ..................................................................................................................185Recommendations for Action ..........................................................................................187

Recommendations for Specific Organizational Actions......................................188Recommendations for Further Study...................................................................192

Reflections on the Research Experience..........................................................................194Conclusion .......................................................................................................................196

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................199

APPENDIX A: Cover Letter Soliciting Participation .....................................................213

APPENDIX B: Explanation of Study..............................................................................215

APPENDIX C: Sample Letter of Cooperation ................................................................223

APPENDIX D: Letter to Study Subjects Inviting Participation ......................................225

APPENDIX E: Informed Consent Form..........................................................................227

APPENDIX F: Institutional Review Board Approval.....................................................230

APPENDIX G: Confidentiality Agreement.....................................................................233

APPENDIX H: Research Protocol for Senior Managers.................................................235

APPENDIX I: Research Protocol for Middle Managers: Individual Interview ..............241

APPENDIX J: Research Protocol for Staff: Individual Interview...................................247

APPENDIX K: Research Protocol for Middle Managers: Group Interview...................253

APPENDIX L: Research Protocol for Staff: Group Interview........................................258

APPENDIX M: Table M1: Relationship of Research Questions to Individual InterviewQuestions..........................................................................................................................263

APPENDIX N: Table N1:Relationship of Research Questions toGroup Interview Questions..............................................................................................267

APPENDIX O: Table O1: Coding Categories as Suggested by Questions.....................270

APPENDIX P: Excerpt from Interview Transcript .........................................................272

v


12/304

v

APPENDIX Q: Table Q1: Process Outcomes Matrix .....................................................276

APPENDIX R: Permission to Use Figure 2 ....................................................................282

APPENDIX S: Permission to Summarize Cialdini .........................................................285

APPENDIX T: Permission to Use MAXqda Screenshots...............................................287

CURRICULUM VITAE..................................................................................................289

vi


13/304

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Cialdini’s Sources of Influence ...........................................................................43

Table 2: Qualitative Research Approaches in the Interpretive Tradition ..........................57

Table 3: Criteria for Selecting Participants........................................................................93

Table 4: Interview Candidates by Division and Level.....................................................117

Table 5: Candidates by Gender and Locations ................................................................117

Table 6: Elements as Coded Segments ............................................................................123

Table 7: Contextual Category’s Activities and Communication Elements .....................127

Table 8: Heartfelt Category’s Activities and Communication Elements.........................130

Table 9: Aligned Category’s Activities and Communication Elements..........................132

Table 10: Narrative Category’s Activities and Communication Elements......................135

Table 11: Grounded Category’s Activities and Communication Elements.....................139

Table 12: Elegant Category’s Activities and Communication Elements.........................143

Table 13: Supportive Category’s Activities and Communication Elements ...................145

Table 14: Percent of Comments Showing Critical, Concerned, Slightly Concerned orPositive View...................................................................................................................152

vii


14/304

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Study sites.............................................................................................................6

Figure 2: Relationship of research question to literature review themes...........................17

Figure 3: From theory to the instruments of empirical research........................................68

Figure 4: Sampling methodology.......................................................................................92

Figure 5: MAXqda memo................................................................................................120

Figure 6: Code-Matrix Browser showing frequency of mention by code .......................121

Figure 7: Sorting process for coding comments ..............................................................125

Figure 8: Mentions by category.......................................................................................126

Figure 9: Negative comments by divisions......................................................................153

Figure 10: Sticky note logs ..............................................................................................167

Figure 11: Interrelationship diagraph...............................................................................177

Figure 12: Key drivers, means, and outputs in exemplary communication.................... 180

iv.viii


15/304

CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Overview

More than 15,000 evacuees from Hurricane Katrina subsisted without food, water,

power, medical attention, basic sanitation, or any kind of humanitarian help for 4 days in

sweltering conditions at the New Orleans Convention Center in late August of 2005.

They were surrounded by contaminated flood waters, looters, snipers, fallen power lines,

broken buildings, and decaying human and animal corpses. On September 1, 2005,

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) head Mike Brown blamed a total lack

of communication for the deplorable conditions the evacuees faced (CBS News,

September 2, 2005) and the New York Times reported that “Nearly every emergency

worker told agonizing stories of communications failures, some of them most likely fatal

to victims” (Shane, 2005, para. 22).

Almost 20 years earlier, in January of 1986, Morton Thiokol engineers presented

their managers with 13 charts and graphs documenting the likelihood of space shuttle O-

ring failure at cold temperature launches. The Morton Thiokol managers faxed NASA the

information and recommended a no launch for the upcoming mission, but NASA officials

argued that the information was inconclusive. In spite of the fact that Morton Thiokol

managers had been warned by their own staff about the O-rings, they changed their

recommendation and notified NASA that they approved the launch, even though

temperatures at liftoff were expected to be below freezing. Within moments after its

January 28, 1986 mission began, the space shuttle Challenger exploded, killing seven

astronauts and scrubbing space exploration for months to come (Tufte, 1997, pp. 38-39).


16/304

2

The commission that studied the Challenger disaster found that the event was directly

linked to communication failure (Jabs, 2005, p. 267). Others suggested that it was the

lack of face-to-face communication that caused NASA to underestimate the likelihood of

the failure of the O-rings (Weick & Sutcliffe, 2001, p. 168). The failures of the Hurricane

Katrina relief efforts and Challenger launch provide in stark relief the problems and pain

that occur when communication fails across the levels of command within organizations.

The importance of good communication in achieving organizational effectiveness

and the problems poor communication can create have been investigated and well

documented in the literature (Kanter, Stein, & Jick, 1992, p. 388; Larkin & Larkin, 1994,

p. 5; Peters, 1992, p. 388; Rogers & Agarwala-Rogers, 1976, p. 7). Often middle

managers, or those between the front lines and the executive leaders, have been blamed

for communication failures (DeWitt, Trevino, & Mollica, 2003, p. 38; Hallier & James,

1997, p. 727; Larkin & Larkin, 1994, p. 19; Thomas & Linstead, 2002, p. 78; Valentino,

2004, p. 397). The topic that has not received broad-based attention is what occurs when

successful communication takes place in organizations. The communication practices

middle managers employ to create effective communication that motivates subordinates

to embrace senior level initiatives are less clearly understood. This study explored and

described what middle managers do, what tools they choose, and what conditions support

communication across the levels of organizations that result in successful outcomes as

defined by senior level management.

In the following pages of this chapter, the focus of successful communication is

refined in a brief discussion of the problem statement. Following this discussion, the


17/304

3

purpose of the study is addressed. Next the nature of the study, including the specific

research questions that were asked and what objectives were sought to be achieved as a

result of this study, are described. The conceptual framework, which grounded the study

in the scholarly research, is detailed and operational definitions of relevant terminology

are given. Assumptions, limitations, and the scope of the study address unverified facts

that were assumed to be true for this study, weaknesses that might have been implicit in

the study, and questions or issues that were beyond the parameters of this study.

Problem Statement

As illustrated in the examples of the New Orleans relief delays and the

Challenger explosion, failures in communication across levels can result in disaster.

After the Challenger explosion, investigations were conducted regarding the

communications problems across organizational levels (Jabs, 2005; Tufte, 1997, pp. 39-

53). In a report issued by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental

Affairs, a lack of coordination of communication, failure to have a clear vision of how to

respond to the disaster, failure to establish or use existing rescue protocols, failure to

plan, and intentional failure to communicate with appropriate government agencies by

FEMA Director Michael Brown were blamed for the extensive difficulties that followed

in the wake of Hurricane Katrina (Senate Committee on Homeland Security and

Government Affairs, 2006). Rarely have such investigations primarily focused on

identifying what worked well and then used this information to build on successes rather

than failures. In fact, newscasters during the New Orleans hurricane crisis chided


18/304

4

government officials for focusing on efforts that had worked. Positive organizational

scholars have suggested that this predominantly negative means of inquiry limits problem

solving to remediation while ignoring the opportunity to create solutions by doing more

of the things that go well (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003, p. 5). Middle manager

communication problems have been attributed to causing failure in reaching

organizational goals and objectives, but less is known about specifically what middle

managers do when initiatives succeed. For this study then, the problem that was

addressed is how middle managers can avoid disaster and ensure organizational success

in implementing organizational initiatives through their communication processes.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to identify, explore, and describe exemplary

communication practices that middle managers used in creating successful organizational

initiatives. The central focus of the study was on how middle managers communicate to

produce the desired results. By identifying exemplary middle manager communicators

and documenting the stories of their successful communication efforts from their

superior’s point of view, their subordinates’ point of view, and their own point of view,

practices of middle managers in creating successful organizational initiatives were

expected to emerge. This study sought to describe the practices that middle managers use

in communicating organizational initiatives so that these initiatives result in expected

positive results rather than unexpected disaster or rationalized failures.


19/304

5

Nature of the Study

What causes failure in organizations has received attention in the literature. This

study sought to identify, explore, and describe how middle managers communicate to

achieve organizational goals or success. Specifically, the middle manager

communications role was investigated in the implementation of Six Sigma problem

solving techniques at three divisions of one umbrella organization, which is a Fortune

500 manufacturing company. Each of the divisions is located on a separate site, is led by

distinct management teams, and employs its own personnel. While all divisions are

distinct, they all successfully implemented the corporate-wide Six Sigma initiative, which

originated with the chief executive officer of the umbrella organization.

There were three study sites utilized for this research. The first site designs and

manufactures electric power-generating equipment. This study site is headquartered

locally, but has manufacturing locations world wide. This division is called Global

Manufacturing Division (GMD) for the purposes of this study. The second study site was

a sales and marketing division, which is headquartered in the same Midwestern

metropolitan statistical area, but provides sales, marketing, and dealer support to

locations across North America. While many of these employees reside in the local

metropolitan area, a good number of employees are scattered across the country, selling

equipment and financial services to clients in Canada, the United States, and Mexico.

This division is called the Regional Marketing Division (RMD). The third study site

provides global product support including new parts and product development, marketing

support, technical information, supporting training, and operational process improvement.


20/304

6

It is headquartered in the Midwestern metropolitan area like the other divisions, but

provides services internationally. It is called the Global Support Division (GSD) for this

study. Figure 1 illustrates the corporate structure of the sites.

Figure 1. Study sites.

This study explored what exemplary middle manager communicators do from

three viewpoints: senior managers, middle managers, and subordinates. An inside expert

in the umbrella organization who had responsibility for the continued deployment of Six

Sigma identified divisions that successfully implemented the initiative and senior

managers who oversaw this implementation. Senior managers were asked to identify

middle managers who have been highly successful in communicating the Six Sigma

approach to their direct reports and who have achieved the organizational goals in their

areas for Six Sigma. Senior managers were asked to describe how the middle managers

excelled in communicating and to what degree objectives were met. Next, those middle

managers themselves were interviewed regarding their communication practices in

implementing Six Sigma. The middle managers were asked to identify subordinates who

demonstrated the desired results from the Six Sigma program. The subordinates were

Umbrella Manufacturing

Organization

Study Site 1:Global

ManufacturingDivision

Study Site 2:Regional

MarketingDivision

Study Site 3:Global

SupportDivision

Not Included:27 Other

World WideDivisions


21/304

7

asked to describe the middle manager’s communication practices that led to the

successful implementation. The descriptions from all three levels and from the different

organizations were analyzed and compared to identify recurrent themes.

Research Questions

Overall, this study intended to answer the question: How do middle managers

communicate across organizational layers so that senior management initiatives succeed

in organizations? Subquestions include:

1. What are the approaches exemplary middle manager communicators use to

create successful outcomes and why?

2. What are the channels exemplary middle manager communicators employ to


3. What are the tools exemplary middle manager communicators employ to


Through the exploration of exemplary middle manager communication, this study

sought to meet the following objectives:

1. Help organizational leaders better understand the positive communication

roles of middle managers in implementation strategies.

2. Help organizational leaders better leverage middle managers in

communicating implementation plans and expectations.

3. Provide middle managers, as a result of this investigation, with a clearer

picture of what works in organizational communication.


22/304

8

4. Suggest foundations for middle manager training and development in the

communication of organizational imperatives.

5. Decrease the failure rate of implementation of organizational initiatives.

Conceptual Framework

The research was grounded in the broad framework of positive organizational

scholarship and employed specific techniques associated with appreciative inquiry. The

emerging practice of positive organizational scholarship encourages the study of practices

and processes in organizations that illustrate things going right in the organization. The

concept of positive organizational scholarship is more fully discussed in chapter 2.

Within this conceptual framework lies a method of inquiry called appreciative inquiry.

Appreciative inquiry is a comprehensive approach to initiating change in organizations

that can be used as a method of organizational inquiry. It looks for abundance, positivity,

fullness, generosity, and other life-giving biases (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2003, p. 1).

The rationale for this decidedly positive bias is explained in greater detail in both

chapters 2 and 3.

Operational Definitions

Accretive is defined as the point in time when revenues and savings generated by

Six Sigma efforts exceed the costs of investing in and maintaining Six Sigma.

Appreciative inquiry (AI) is defined as a “cooperative search for the best in

people, their organizations, and the world around them. It involves systematic discovery


23/304

9

of what gives a system ‘life’ when it is most effective and capable in economic,

ecological, and human terms” (Cooperrider, Whitney, & Stavros, 2003, p. 415).

Approach to communication refers to the individual’s communication style and

preferences.

Channels are defined as intangible communication venues, such as meetings.

Equivocality refers to a lack of certainty or clarity about a program, situation, or

event that causes individuals in the organization to be confused, to ask questions, and/or

to seek meaning (Daft & Weick, 1984; Salmon & Joiner, 2005; Weick, 1979).

Equivocality cannot be solved by acquiring more information; it needs new

interpretations of old situations (van den Hooff, Groot, & de Jonge, 2005, p. 6).

Middle manager can incorporate a multitude of positions. For this study, however,

middle managers are defined as any “managers two levels below the CEO and one level

above line workers and professionals” (Huy, 2001, p. 73). The CEO is viewed as the

organization’s chief executive officer or the head of a stand-alone division of the

organization (such as a regional branch or strategic business unit) or members of the

senior management team. Middle managers, for the purpose of this study, also must

supervise at least three other people.

Organizational goals are defined as statements that measure positive change in at

least one of the following attributes: (a) speed/time, (b) cost, (c) at or above specification

or quality levels, or (d) positive returns for stakeholders. The goals also must be stated in

terms that are specific, measurable, achievable and reasonably aggressive, relevant, and

time-bound (Smith, 1999).


24/304

10

Organizational success is defined as meeting the organizational goals, particularly

becoming accretive, in the implementation of Six Sigma as set by senior management.

Positive organizational scholarship (POS) refers to research approaches that

“develop rigorous, systematic and theory-based foundations for phenomena” and have

“an emphasis on positive phenomena” (Cameron et al., 2003, p. 6).

Process refers to the sequence of steps involved in communicating. An example

of a process is the steps involved in setting up a meeting and conducting it. It may

describe the way that communication tools are used, for example.

Six Sigma “is fundamentally a quantitative and analytic approach to quality

improvement” (Does, van den Heuvel, de Mast, & Bisgaard, 2002, p. 177) that was

developed and originally marketed by Motorola (London, 2003).

Tools refer to concrete communication devices, such as memos, e-mails,

PowerPoint presentations, video clips, audio recordings and the like.

Uncertainty refers to problematic situations that can be solved by gaining more

information (van den Hooff et al., 2005, p. 6).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Scope

Several facts were assumed to be true but have not been proven in this study. It

was assumed that:

1. The implementation of Six Sigma according to organizational goals accurately

defined successful implementation of organizational goals.


25/304

11

2. The narratives that members of the organization share accurately represented

stories of successful communication.

3. Using positive organizational scholarship, specifically techniques from

appreciative inquiry, provides a richer evaluation of middle manager communication and

new knowledge than traditional communication assessment models, described later in

this dissertation.

4. Middle managers do indeed play the pivotal role in organizational success and

communication ascribed to them in the literature.

5. Senior management initiatives were consistent with the best interests of all

levels and groups within the organization.

The study also had several limitations. Although the study generated new insights

into middle manager communication and organizational success, the study employed a

relatively new form of inquiry, appreciative inquiry that has not yet been widely

accepted. Because of the method of inquiry, the number of organizations and people who

could have been interviewed was limited. Additionally, this study, by design, restricted

its focus to people within a single organization headquartered in the Midwest. Thus, the

ability to generalize to broader populations is limited.

The scope of the study was limited to the exploration and description of

exemplary communication practices of middle managers in the successful

implementation of Six Sigma programs in select divisions of a manufacturing

organization in the Midwest. It purposely selected successful Six Sigma outcomes. There

probably are unsuccessful Six Sigma outcomes. This is acknowledged, but was not


26/304

12

studied. The study does not provide an explanation or theory and does not attempt to

predict. The study also did not specifically explore the effects of organizational structure

or culture per se. The study did not specifically explore or define successful senior

manager or frontline worker communication, nor did it explore deficits or problems in

communication. Instead this investigation focused on only what works. Because the study

centered on communication during a deliberate organizational program initiative, it did

not address successful routine or emergency communication across layers of

management.

Significance of the Study

The knowledge generated has significance for the practice of middle managers.

These managers often have been seen as barriers to implementation of organizational

initiatives. The research addressed concerns about middle managers’ roles in these

initiatives and their ability to communicate. Ultimately, the practice of middle

management will be enhanced by describing new knowledge related to organizational

communication. The knowledge generated from this study may be applied by changing

the practice of middle management during implementation of initiatives. As a result of

this investigation, new ways of training middle managers for change, enhancing and

supporting their communication, and monitoring the implementation process are

suggested. Middle managers make up about 10% of the American workforce (United

States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004). Improving their management practice may


27/304

13

improve job satisfaction, retention rates, and other quality of life factors associated with

work.

But understanding exemplary communication techniques for middle managers

may result in even broader social change. Developing exemplary middle management

communication practices may help organizations stave off disasters like the Challenger

explosion or the New Orleans neglect. As new means for communicating emerge, like

text messaging and other Internet-based channels, the need to define how and when to

use these tools effectively will continue to increase. At the same time, the workforce

continues to become more diverse. This change may mean that a basic understanding of

what creates positive links between workers and executives will become even more vital

to American managers who will not only face the challenges of organizational

hierarchical differences, but most likely ethnic, racial, and cultural differences. Finally, if

the positive organizational scholars are right, learning to inquire using techniques like

appreciative inquiry may lead to a greater emphasis on what works well among people

with less attention to those things that divide them.

Significant Literature

The review of the scholarly literature, which is covered in depth in chapter 2,

covers two broad areas of interest. These are the substantive literature relating to the

research question and the literature associated with the research method. Within the

substantive literature associated with the research question, several more precise topics

are discussed. These include discussions of (a) what organizational communication is, (b)


28/304

14

how organizational communication is linked to organizational success, (c) the

philosophical foundations of organizational communication, (d) middle managers and

who they are and how they communicate in organizations, (e) communication tools

middle managers use, and (f) Six Sigma as an organizational initiative. In the review of

the research methodology literature, means of studying organizational communication are

investigated. Specifically, appreciative inquiry and critical incident technique are detailed

as methodologies. Last, the literature is summarized as the foundation for the research.

Summary

In this section, the impact of two failed organizational communication efforts has

been demonstrated. The plan for reviewing the successful outcomes included addressing

research that answered three conceptual questions and two definitional questions. The

three conceptual questions are: (a) What is organizational communication? (b) How has

effective communication been linked to organizational success? and (c) Who are middle

managers and what is their communication role in implementation of organizational

initiatives? The two definitional questions are: (a) What is Six Sigma? and (b) What is

appreciative inquiry? The methods literature review was developed around the

appreciative inquiry as a method of research.

The problem that was addressed, how middle managers can avoid disaster and

ensure organizational success in implementing organizational initiatives through their

communication processes, provided the guiding direction for identifying exemplary

middle manager communicators. Their stories, and the stories of their superiors and


29/304

15

subordinates, provided the data needed to explore and describe communication practices

of middle managers supporting successful organizational initiatives. The execution of this

study was based in the theoretical framework of the appreciative inquiry methodology.

This research is significant because it adds to the emerging body of knowledge associated

with positive organizational scholarship, enhances the practice of middle management,

offers new insights into middle management, and provides the groundwork for building

new techniques of communication to bridge diverse populations across the typical layers

found in organizations.

In chapter 2, the five topic clusters of the substantive research and research

associated with positive organizational scholarship and appreciative inquiry are explored.

Chapter 3 provides information on the methodology, including the overall research

strategy, rationale, study population, researcher’s role, data collection, management and

analysis methods, and the ethical protection of participants. Chapter 4 presents the

findings from the research and summarizes data collection and analysis. Chapter 5

interprets the findings and makes recommendations for further study, specific actions,

and social change.


30/304

16

CHAPTER 2:

LITERATURE REVIEW

Overview

In developing any research project, the investigation should link to the scholarly

literature by showing how the work closes gaps in previous works, expands on theoretical

frameworks or paradigms, reconfigures current thinking, and ultimately contributes to the

existing body of knowledge on a topic (Marshall & Rossman, 1999, p. 35). The content

and organization of this review were built around the research question: How do middle

managers communicate across organizational layers so that organizational initiatives

succeed? This chapter has three major sections: (a) a review of the substantive literature,

(b) a review of the methodology literature, and (c) a summary of the chapter. In the

review of the substantive literature, four clusters are reviewed: (a) what organizational

communication is, (b) who middle managers are and what their roles are, (c)

communication tools and techniques, and (d) Six Sigma as an organizational initiative.

Once the substantive literature has been explored, literature regarding the

methodology for this study is considered. This part of the review validated the theoretical

framework for the study, discussed the options for and choice of methodology for the

investigation, and explored potential themes through the literature that might have

emerged during the course of the study. Finally, a summary of the substantive literature

review and the methods review is given, setting the stage for the discussion of the

methodology in chapter 3.


31/304

17

In creating a literature review strategy for this project, the research question was

used to frame the review approach. The researcher diagrammed the research question to

provide a way to visually identify key components of the question that needed

exploration. This diagram appears as Figure 2. The literature review had to link to the

research question in five separate but related areas, four of these deal with the substantive

literature, one with the methodology literature. The first theme, what organizational

communication is, provided the broad-based view of the research question. The second

theme, how organizational communication links to success, served to validate the

relationship between communication and organizational success.

The third theme, who middle managers are and what their role is, explored what

has been previously discovered about this group of people in the implementation of

Figure 2. Relationship of research question to literature review themes.


32/304

18

successful organizational initiatives. The fourth theme defined the organizational

initiative chosen for this study and how successful implementation is defined. These four

themes comprised the substantive literature review. The last theme, appreciative inquiry,

placed the research question within the context of the methodology literature.

The research strategies employed for this study included enlisting the help of the

Walden University and Illinois Central College research librarians. Searches of the

literature using the EBSCOhost, CSA, and ProQuest electronic search databases, and

relevant library book catalogs, were conducted using key terms that included

organizational communication, organizational discourse, organizational effectiveness,

middle managers, Six Sigma, and appreciative inquiry. Journals from the disciplines of

management, psychology, communications and linguistics, sociology, technology, health

care, and education were included, providing a broad view of the literature. Classic works

were chosen based on mentions in the reviewed literature and on texts used within the

Walden University curriculum. Online bookstores’ databases were scanned to find any

practitioner books that have been written exclusively about or for middle managers.

Finally, the dissertation author contacted Steven Floyd, one of the authors who had

written multiple works about middle managers, for supplemental advice on other sources

to review and used a bibliography on positive organizational scholarship provided by

University of Michigan faculty member Kim Cameron at a presentation he made for the

Consortium of Community Colleges. Ellen Schall, of New York University, also was

contacted about using an appreciative inquiry methodology.


33/304

19

In the following pages, four substantive literature themes are explored: (a) what

organizational communication is, (b) how organizational communication links to success,

(c) who middle managers are and what their communication role is, and (d) what Six

Sigma is and how it is successfully implemented. Following that exploration, the

literature regarding methodology is reviewed. Key points of the literature review are

highlighted at the end of this chapter.

Substantive Literature Related to Research Question

What is Organizational Communication?

In this section, the definition of organizational communication is explored. First,

the history of the study of organizational communication is briefly overviewed. Then

several current theoretical frameworks of organizational communication are considered

and critiqued, leading to the description of the overarching communication theoretical

framework for this study. This discussion set the stage for a discussion on how

organizational communication is linked to success.

History of Organizational Communication

The importance of organizational communication in achieving desired

organizational outcomes is well documented in the literature (Clampitt, DeKoch, &

Cashman, 2000; Duck, 2001; Gilsdorf, 1999; Kanter, 1983; Kotter, 1996; Tourish &

Robson, 2003). Yet how organizational communication is defined has changed since

early organizational investigators like Henri Fayol and Mary Parker Follet first noted its


34/304

20

importance in the 1920s (Pietri, 1974). Early communication theorists believed that

organizational communication was necessary only for the exchange of information and

the clarification of ideas (Hay, 1974). As behavioral theory took hold in the 1950s,

human motivation, particularly on the part of managers, became part of the analyses of

organizational communication (Tomkins & Wanca-Thibault, 2001; Van Voorhis, 1974).

With the advent of systems theory and cybernetics, beginning in the 1960s, models such

as the Shannon-Weaver mathematical model of communication (Porterfield, 1974)

defined communication as a process with an information source, message, transmitter,

receiver, and destination. Noise, or interruptions or distortions, could interfere with the

fidelity of the message (Shannon & Weaver, 1972, p. 7). As organizations and

communication became more complex, greater emphasis was placed on the philosophical

underpinnings of communication (Tomkins & Wanca-Thibault, 2001).

Philosophical Foundations of Organizational Communication

Recent scholars have broadened the philosophical scope of organizational

communication investigation to include theory from the areas of sociology, linguistics,

semiotics, and psychology (Thatchkenkery, 2001; Wodilla, 1998). This represents what

has been called the interpretive turn in communication research, which began in the early

1980s (Lindlof & Taylor, 2002). To describe all of the philosophical approaches

associated with the interpretive turn is well beyond the scope of this investigation, but a

brief overview of some of the key traditions is helpful. Deetz (2001) suggested that the

appropriate means to understanding organizational communication was not to try to


35/304

21

provide a definition of organizational communication but to ask, “What do we see or

what are we able to do if we think of organizational communication in one way versus

another?” (p. 4). To help answer this question, Deetz categorized the main conceptual

frameworks of communication research into four broad categories: (a) normative, (b)

critical, (c) interpretive, and (d) dialogic traditions.

Applying Deetz’s own question, each category can be seen as supporting a unique

goal in understanding what organizational communication is. The normative tradition

defined organizational communication in terms of causal relationships among

communication variables, patterns of actions or behaviors in organizational interchanges,

and how organizational members can best learn communication skills (Deetz, 2001, pp.

19-23). Critical studies viewed organizational communication as the interaction of

conflicting or oppressive organizational ideologies or as pathologies in the process of

communication. This view is based in the belief that Western hegemonic traditions often

oppress, subjugate, and invalidate ideas, peoples, and cultures (Deetz, pp. 25-31; Ogbor,

2001). Interpretive studies characterized communication as an influencer of cultures and

social groups (Deetz, p. 25) while dialogic studies defined organizational communication

as a manifestation of conflicts and struggles among groups. Dialogic communication

studies assumed that individuals have conflicted identities, that reality is constructed

through language, that no universal understanding of the world or master hegemony

exists, and that knowledge, as expressed through language, often grants power (Deetz,

pp. 30-36). Within all of these traditions, language and its use play a fundamental role.


36/304

22

Other ways of categorizing the traditions of understanding organizational

communication also have been suggested. Rooted in Aristotelian traditions, the rhetorical

school characterized organizational communication as premised in the act of persuasion

(Cheney, 2005). Postmodern communication theorists rejected the rigid empiricism that

defined the world only through direct observation, hierarchical ordering, and

predictability and saw language and communication as essential in framing what is real

(Taylor, 2005, p. 115). Structuration theory asserts that reality is determined by existing

social practices, assumed identities, and how language either supports or changes these

practices and identities (Heracleous & Hendry, 2000; Poole & McPhee, 2005), while

domain theory described communication as the means that allowed people with similar

interests or concerns to evolve into collectivities (Selsky & Spicer, 2003).

Like those described by Deetz (2001), these traditions also incorporate the

concept of the use of language as integral to communication. Normative and rhetorical

traditions focused more intently on how to use language to communicate, while traditions

like structuration, dialogic, and critical investigated how language is used to oppress or

marginalize people in organizations. Recently, scholars have conceptualized this use of

language as organizational discourse (Grant, Keenoy, & Oswick, 2001; Hardy, 2001).

According to Hardy (2001), discourse “refers to the practices of talking and writing” (p.

26). Other definitions of discourse also have been offered. Gee (1999) for example, saw

discourse as the gatherings of thoughts, verbiage, and values that make up social

identities (p. 13). For this study on organizational communication, however, Hardy’s


37/304

23

more restrictive view of discourse is used simply because the psychological analysis

associated with individual identities is well beyond the abilities of this researcher.

Any of these communication research traditions would have provided an

interesting and worthwhile frame for the study of organizational communication or

discourse, but none fit particularly well with the focus of this study. The traditions that

revolve around causality, building communicative skills, or developing rhetorical

excellence failed to provide a foundation that determines what occurs when

communication across layers in organizations works. Interpretive, critical, dialogic,

structuration, and even domain traditions concentrated too heavily on pathologies,

oppressions, conflicts, and communication as a negative state. The predisposition to look

for communication problems necessarily excluded these frameworks from use in this

investigation, which employed an appreciative inquiry approach. Appreciative inquiry

“focuses on what is working in an organization or group” (Thatchkenkery, 2001, p. 120).

There were components of some of the traditions that were compatible with the

direction of this study. The concept that discourse creates reality (social constructionism;

Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Searle, 1995), which is found in the dialogic, structuration,

critical, and some interpretive studies, coincided with the appreciative inquiry approach

considered for this study. Appreciative inquirers assert that discourse, through words, has

the ability to create reality within organizations and characterize this assertion as a central

premise of appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider & Avital, 2004; Cooperrider et al., 2003;

Hammond, 1998). Thus for this study, organizational communication was construed as

discourse that creates a social reality.


38/304


39/304

25

The concept that discourse creates organizational reality changes how

organizational communication is viewed. Typically the word organizational acts as an

adjective that describes communication that occurs in a specific entity—the adjective is

derived from a noun, organization. However, if communication as discourse creates

reality, then organizational communication can be defined in terms of how discourse

organizes reality. Thus, the adjective derives not from a noun (organization), but from the

verb, organize. In this sense organizational communication assumes a more active role in

organizational life. Weick (1995) applied a similar view of organizational sensemaking.

The focus of inquiry thus narrowed on how people within the organization

communicate to organize new realities. This focus was especially important in

understanding what middle managers do in communicating organizational initiatives to

create a socially constructed reality that allows the initiative to succeed. But before

exploring what middle managers do, first it is necessary to understand how

communication results in success for organizations.

How Is Organizational Communication Linked to Success?

Organizational studies describe a number of instances in which effective

organizational communication produced organizational success. Organizational

researchers have demonstrated the role of effective communication in increasing

organizational productivity and efficiency, lowering costs, improving morale, and

decreasing turnover (Clampitt et al., 2000). Effective communication has been found to

enhance accuracy in financial statements, reduce plant shutdowns, and stave off loss of


40/304

26

business (Gilsdorf, 1999). Upward feedback in organizations has been described as

essential for good managerial decision making (Tourish & Robson, 2003) while

communication with outside groups has been shown to improve quality, turnaround time,

and operation within budget and intragroup communication was found to develop trust

and cohesiveness (Keller, 2001). Evidence clearly supports the concept that good

communication links to success in certain organizations. What is less clear is exactly

what happens in communication that leads to success.

When communication is assumed to generate organizational reality, success can

be defined as the creation of realities consistent with an organizational initiative that

become embedded in the company (Phillips et al., 2004). In other words, through

organizational discourse the anticipated outcome occurs. How this reality is created has

been characterized in a number of ways by organizational discourse theorists.

Communicative rules or mental models between groups or layers need to be the same for

successful outcomes (Bronn & Bronn, 2003; Jabs, 2005). When different groups use

different communicative rules, for example managers communicate in writing but

employees prefer verbal communication, only those with authority or influence can

mitigate these differences (Maitlis & Lawrence, 2003). The study by Phillips et al. noted

that embeddedness occurs under three conditions: (a) the person communicating has the

authority or power to enforce the new reality (discursive legitimacy), (b) the person

occupies a position in the organization where there are many opportunities to contact and

communicate with others, and (c) the person can make messages memorable. The

location in the midst of a network as a means for effective communication has been noted


41/304

27

in both the scholarly and practitioner literature (Duck, 2001; Gladwell, 2002; Rogers,

1995; Rogers & Argarwala-Rogers, 1976). The concept of developing sticky or

memorable messages as a means for effective communication has been noted in

practitioner literature (Gladwell, 2002; Richardson & Thayer, 1993).

Other theorists suggested that the laws of influence (Cialdini, 2001b),

organizational story telling, (Denning, 2001; Gabriel, 2000; Luhman & Boje, 2001) or

specific speech acts (Ford & Ford, 1995; Kezar & Eckel, 2002) create organizational

realties. Cooren (2004) noted that speech acts can assert, guarantee or promise, direct, or

express (pp. 380-385) and in doing so create different actions, responses, and realities.

Some scholars suggested the very questions that are asked result in new social

constructions (Adams, Schiller, & Cooperrider, 2004), while others (Duck, 2001; Kotter,

1996; Williams, 2001) found that planned organizational campaigns can manipulate

people into accepting a new reality. Shocks to the organization (Morrison, 2002) may

force people into a new reality or freeze them in disbelief. Positive emotions, like hope,

also can influence what organizational realities are created (Luthans, 2002). Finally the

communication channel and how it is used and the physical location of people also

impact how organizational realities are socially constructed (Salmon & Joiner, 2005).

Hamel (2000) suggested that middle managers have a unique opportunity to

create new organizational realities. While senior managers are invested in maintaining the

operational status quo, middle managers are positioned to offer different and sometimes

opposing views of the senior level hegemony. However, middle managers must become

activists primarily through using both innovative and revolutionary communication


42/304

28

approaches (Hamel, 2000, p. 187). Key to innovation and revolution is the ability to

communicate rapidly and widely. Hamel offered several tactics to developing these

abilities, including (a) coalescing an individual point of view, (b) developing a case

statement or manifesto that includes a course of action and appeals to emotions as well as

reason, (c) creating loyalty among the masses, (d) capitalizing on opportunities to

evangelize or sell the middle manager point of view, (e) identifying common interests

that will overcome objections, (f) speaking in understandable language, (g) achieving

early and quick wins that support the point of view, and (h) diffusing ideas as soon as

they are formed through proof (pp.188-203). Hamel noted that middle managers must be

honest, compassionate, humble, pragmatic, and fearless to be effective as activists (pp.

204-5).

Given the definition of organizational success used for this study (meeting

organizational goals), there is support in the literature for the link between this success

and effective communication. Clampitt et al. (2000), Gilsdorf (1999), Keller (2001), and

Tourish and Robson (2003) all reported findings linking strong communication to a

variety of organizational goals as described in the preceding paragraphs. Conversation

and social interaction appear to be crucial. Networks, how messages are crafted, physical

proximity and the shock value of the message also seem to come into play. Even the

choice of the medium appears to affect whether communication efforts will be successful.

While the literature provides a general idea of how communication links to successful

outcomes through the social construction of reality, how middle managers contribute to


43/304

29

that social construction required investigation. To understand their contribution, it is

necessary to understand who middle managers are.

Who Are Middle Managers and What is Their Role in Communication?

In this section, middle managers are described and defined. The impact of their

presence in organizations is analyzed and the general functions they provide for the

organization are discussed. These discussions provide the grounding for a more specific

discussion on their role in organizational communication. The challenges and

opportunities of middle manager communication roles also are discussed.

Who are middle managers?

One layer that many organizations have consists of midlevel leaders. Often called

middle management, these individuals are located hierarchically between the senior level

decision-makers and those who perform frontline operational activities (Hallier & James,

1997, p. 706). For this study, the definition of middle managers provided by Huy (2001)

is used. Huy (2001) described middle managers as “managers two levels below the CEO

and one level above line workers and professionals” (p. 73). Regardless of the precise

definition, middle managers exist in a unique world that requires them to balance the

wants and needs of those in charge with the wants and needs of those who do the

organization’s work (Currie, 1999; Floyd & Lane, 2000; Oshry, 1994; Sims, 2003;

Thomas & Linstead, 2002; Turnbull, 2001).


44/304

30

Middle managers are a large organizational force in American business and

industry. According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, managers and

supervisors who were not chief executive officers comprised about 9.46% or 6.7 million

members of the total workforce as of May, 2004 (United States Bureau of Labor

Statistics, 2004), while chief executive officers numbered only 346,590 or 0.27% (United

States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004) of the 128 million workers in the United States

(United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2004). That means that managers and

supervisors outnumber chief executive officers by a ratio of 35:1 and all other employees

outnumber chief executive officers by a ratio of 334:1. At the same time, the ratio of

managers and supervisors to all other employees is roughly 1:10. While these numbers

are aggregate estimates, they support Huy’s (2002) contention that middle managers and

supervisors enjoy a much smaller workforce with whom to communicate than CEOs

(Huy, 2002). Huy (2002) also asserted that in most organizational hierarchies, middle

managers are closer to frontline workers than senior leaders. Besides the sheer number of

middle managers, Statt (2000) suggested that executive leadership explains only 10% of

organizational performance (p. 115), which leaves most influence in organizations within

the hands of others. Consequently it seems likely that middle managers, because of their

large numbers, also must wield influence within the organization. Yet Williams (2001)

noted that middle management “represents one of the most overlooked, ignored resources

in most organizations’ strategic change efforts” (p. i).

Depending on the organization, middle managers’ specific duties will vary.

Traditional schools of thought categorized the work of managers around Henri Fayol’s


45/304

31

interpretation of managerial work as planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating,

and controlling (Carroll & Gillen, 1987, p. 38). Current management theorists also have

identified a number of broad-based duties for which middle managers are typically

responsible. Mintzberg (2004), for example, noted that managers need to demonstrate the

ability to deal with the stresses of their personal life, be able to work well with people in

directing and organizing work, transmit and analyze information, and be able to

troubleshoot, delegate, and plan (p. 260). Like Mintzberg, Whetton and Cameron (2002)

found that managers need skills in prioritizing work and time, leading, motivating, and

influencing others, solving problems on the run, encouraging creativity and innovation,

team building, and communicating effectively (p. 16). Van der Velde, Jansen, and

Vinckenburg (1999) characterized middle management work as “communication,

traditional management, networking behavior, and human resource management” (p.

162) and Floyd and Lane (2000) defined middle managers as “a nexus for information

flows within the organization” (p. 157). Whether implicit in the classic role of

commanding or more explicitly stated as a duty by modern theorists, communication

remains as a key middle manager responsibility. Within the framework of this study,

middle managers thus occupy a central role in managing organizational discourse and in

helping organizations implement new initiatives. (Balogun, 2003; Valentino, 2004).

The Role of Middle Managers in Communication

The need for middle managers to participate in organizational communication to

effect changes that lead to the implementation of successful organizational initiatives is


46/304

32

well documented in the literature (Balogun, 2003; Duck, 2001; Floyd & Lane, 2000;

Kanter, 1983; Kotter, 1996; Mills, 2002; Neelankavil, Mathur, & Zhang, 2000; Piderit,

2000; Valentino, 2004; Weenig, 1999). In spite of this recognition, middle managers have

been demonized as barriers to change, recalcitrant members of the organization, self-

serving and devious, and as the ultimate problem for all organizational ills (Balogun;

Huy, 2002; Peters, 1992; Thomas & Linstead, 2002). According to Peters, “Middle

management has not added value to most firms in recent times. Middle management

layers are worse than useless: they destroy value” (p. 154). The disenchantment with

middle management was well expressed by Gosling and Mintzberg (2003) who noted,

“Nobody aspires to be a good manager anymore; everyone wants to be a great leader” (p.

54). Although the need for good communication is recognized while the need for middle

managers may not be, the literature regarding middle management, their roles, and their

future in organizations has been characterized as “thin” (Beckwith, Glenzer, & Fowler,

2002, p. 412), “mixed” (Nair, 2003, p. 389), “contradictory,” “confusing” and

“inconclusive” (Thomas & Linstead, p. 72). Thus the further study of middle managers

and their roles seemed warranted.

Four broad-based themes emerged in the literature regarding the communicative

role middle managers take. Middle managers are seen as interpreters of organizational

imperatives, as lone leaders who are isolated between two camps with distinct

communication needs, as arbitrators between multiple audiences and two distinct sides,

and as a network hub or nexus in the organization. Huy (2001) used similar categories for

classifying middle management functions, but lumped all communication work into one


47/304

33

category called communicator. However, within each of Huy’s categories,

communication functions can be found. In the entrepreneur role, middle managers must

build support through persuasion and lobbying (Huy, 2001, p. 74); in the therapist role,

middle managers coach and counsel staff who are experiencing difficulties with the stress

of new initiatives (Huy, 2001, p. 78); and in the tightrope artist role middle managers

used discussion, championing behaviors and even pressure to help staff work between old

and new ways of doing things (Huy, 2001, p. 79). Huy (2001) characterized the

communicator role as creating messages, brokering ideas, leveraging social networks,

and linking new ideas to staff skills (p. 76). The categories used for this discussion

incorporate the functions of Huy’s (2001) noncommunicator roles, but provide a richer

look into communicator activities. In this section the four communicator functions are

reviewed. The section concludes with a brief discussion on the communicator tools that

middle managers may use in these roles.

Interpreters of organizational imperatives. Middle managers face multiple

audiences as they communicate with senior managers, their own peers (who also may be

their competitors), and frontline managers (Sims, 2003). Middle managers incorporate a

variety of communication roles for various audiences, including acting as “emissaries of

others, extensions of others, negotiators for others, and buffers for others (Oshry, 1994, p.

15). The fact that middle managers communicate across various levels complicates these

roles. As Williams (2001) noted, different groups in organizations use different words,

have different practices in using language, and emphasize different concepts and ideas.

The middle manager acts almost in the same manner as a translator between two


48/304

34

countries. Middle managers must speak both languages well enough to help senior level

and frontline employees understand each other (Williams, p. 149).

This role of translator is tenuous. In crafting organizational stories, middle

managers face the real possibility that stories that are crafted to convey senior

management initiatives may be negated or preempted by senior level staff (Sims, 2003).

In such cases, middle managers often loose their credibility (Sims). To be effective as a

translator, middle managers need to understand stakeholder needs (Bronn & Bronn,

2003), as well as partake in day-to-day interaction with stakeholders (Balogun, 2003).

Floyd and Lane (2000) noted that all middle management functions require

“communicating between operating and top levels of management” (p. 158). Operating

between the levels also means that middle managers must reconcile differences in both

the message and its interpretation by frontline and senior level employees (Valentino,

2004). In executing both the interpretation of messages and reconciling conflicting

interests, middle managers as translators of organizational initiatives hold significant

influence (Rotemberg & Saloner, 2000).

Good communicators know that messages are best received when tailored to the

audience (Kounalakis, Banks, & Daus, 1999). Maxham and Netemeyer (2003) noted that

even the behaviors middle managers exhibit send a message to subordinates and that

subordinates’ actions will mirror those of their supervisor. Huy (2001) suggested that

middle managers not only communicate basic information to subordinates, but also

provide entrepreneurial messages and therapeutic messages to staff during change (p. 72).


49/304

35

As translators, middle managers must assume multiple roles that require different

identities (Thomas & Linstead, 2002). Middle managers may be told by senior managers

to instigate change, but frontline workers may expect their middle managers to act as a

predictable force in the face of change (Floyd & Lane, 2000). At the same time, middle

managers may be sought out by peers as a sounding board to help make sense of an

impending change (Huy, 2002; Pappas & Wooldridge, 2002). Middle managers also may

be the target of change themselves and have the same emotional and communication

needs as others (Balogun, 2003) or may feel open to change, aloof from change, opposed

to change, or indifferent about the change effort (Turnbull, 2001). In each of these cases,

the middle manager must assume a different position with the organizational message.

During change, middle managers may be expected to initiate it, interpret its impact,

provide leadership, help people learn needed new skills, execute change plans, or adapt

new technologies (Higgs & Rowland, 2001).

Lone leaders between two camps. Middle managers often feel isolated in

organizations, not part of senior management and not part of frontline workers (Oshry,

1994). Middle managers straddle the worlds of technical competence on the operational

side of the business and in-depth understanding of broad-based goals on the policy and

strategic side of the business (Floyd & Lane, 2000). Because middle managers often

occupy functional roles, they may identify more with professionals outside of the

organization who share the same duties than with peers within the organization who have

different functional duties (Daniels, Johnson, & de Chernatony, 2002). Valentino (2004)

noted that this separation can create problems synthesizing senior level messages into


50/304

36

operational information for frontline workers. The isolation does not merely exist on

hierarchical lines. The level of knowledge and skill of subordinates can exacerbate this

isolation. For example, in areas where the middle manager supervises expert workers, the

middle manager’s own expertise will be less impressive to subordinates than in situations

where frontline workers are not required to have expert knowledge (Yagil, 2002).

Middle managers, as leaders, also must adapt senior level initiatives, even when

those initiatives will not work well in their areas (Rotemberg & Saloner, 2000). To accept

initiatives, middle managers may have to change their own mental models (Farrell, 2000)

or may need to resort to issue-selling techniques (Dutton, Ashford, O’Neill, & Lawrence,

2001) to convince senior managers of needed changes in implementation of strategic

objectives. Hamel (2000) asserted that middle managers may have to use activist

techniques to get senior level managers to notice different perspectives in the

implementation of new ideas or different perspectives that may support disruption of the

status quo.

As organizational initiatives are implemented, middle managers are faced with the

need to lead the change on behalf of their supe

Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication Initiatives

Documents

Transcript of Positive Organizational Results and Successful Communication Initiatives