Communication Scenario Situational Overview - The Situation

Communication Scenario

Situational Overview - The situation involves two individuals within a department inside a large industrial organization, Bing (employee) and Hart (supervisor). It appears that Bing is taking 2-3 electronic panels to his workbench, inspecting them together, and charging double or triple set-up time for his work. Hart has received a number of complaints about this and finally confronted Bing. Bing was upset about the confrontation, and brought in the Union representative.

Bing's view is that Hart is negatively focused on him directly, jealous because he has musical talent and works outside of the job. He portrayed Hart's comments as sarcastic and puerile, without anything constructive to say. Hart's view is that Bing is cheating and has been asked several times to stop the behaviors, but refuses to do so. Hart believes that he has the responsibility to the company to ensure honesty, and simply can no longer tolerate Bing's abuse of the position.

Analysis - Proper communications are an essential part of any organization. Communication comprises a number of ideas and modes, but to be effective it implies a two-way dialog in which regardless of agreement, both sides listen and at the very least, understand the position from the other side. We can use a very simply model to identify the breakdown in communication between Bing and Hart:

Purpose

Identification and change of a behavior unsupported by management.

Sender

Hart, Department Manager initiated communication

Receiver

Bing, Department employee

Message

Multiple set-up charging is not part of company personnel; excessive singing during working hours is disruptive and counterproductive to the working environment.

Environment

Professional business environment. Communication took place between Hart and Bing alone.

Technology

Verbal

Noise

Presuppositions on both sides; tendency towards sarcasm, inability to empathize with the other point-of-view.

Feedback

Rather than open and honest feedback, Bing went to Union representative which, in effect, shut down communications between both sides.

(Gregory, 2010)

Decision Making Traps- While Bing was clearly in violation of ethical company practices, there are several managerial errors apparent: 1) Was there a written policy that Bing should be following when inspecting boards? 2) Did Hart actually communicate "several" times with Bing, if so, is it documented? 3) Hart has decided Bing is a "bad egg," and seems bent upon looking for faux pas situations. 4) Rather than looking objectively at the work or work product, Hart is looking at personality issues. Both listening and hearing a message are cognitive functions. However, in the modern environment, we are besieged with so many messages that it is often difficult to separate messages. Body language can contribute a great deal, but often information is sent that is received incorrectly. Listening is not the same as hearing, and rather than a tirade of mutual accusations, it would be more strategic and professional for Hart to meet with Bing and do a written overview of performance issues, ensuring that adequate communication for all employees shows the manner in which functions should occur. Rather than coming down on Bing, Hart could also call a Department Meeting, designed to inform everyone of policy, expectations, and allow everyone to understand that from x day forward, these are the expectations (e.g. one panel at a time, do not leave early for lunch, clock out at quitting time, keep personal noise to a minimum, etc.). Given in a respectful and calm tone, conflict could be lessened and more productivity achieved. At present, both sides are spending more time antagonizing each other than getting work done (Shaw, 2003).