New Leader versus a Revolutionary

The web poster "Building Corporations through Leadership" by Kristle made an interesting point that many leaders are chosen for their organizational compliance rather than revolutionary visions. This of course rings true, because the statement refers to "choosing a leader" - implying that the individual who has been "chosen" is probably just stepping into his or her position as a leader, and employees do not want their organization to change drastically under new leadership. Hence the choice of a new leader as more of a conformist rather than a revolutionary.

Besides, the word "revolutionary" gives a negative impression of leader who with a brazen attitude wants to change everything just because he or she has the power to authorize change. It also has connotations of someone who has not studied the history of the organization sufficiently thoroughly and has not thought through all the repercussions before making a serious decision.

Considering Employee Viewpoints for Change

Cathy's web poster on "Communicating Change Effectively" was very useful to me because my company is now going through a great deal of change, and the employees are apprehensive about the changes because the economy is not doing well at the moment.

One point in the poster that I believe most people will recognize is about how resistance to organizational change is expressed by employees who may not like a particular change, and therefore respond with anger and revenge. The web poster quotes a research study that estimates that almost half of unsuccessful implementation of change is due to employee resistance to change. I wonder if the paper dealt with deeper causes than just "blaming" the lack of success on employee resistance - perhaps the resistance was justified and that management ought to have taken better note and care of employee viewpoints?

Communicating Many Levels Above

In a large organization, it is difficult, to communicate to someone who is much above one's level. Even meeting up with one's manager's manager is rare, and meeting up with someone who is higher up than that is almost impossible.

I've heard in many companies the "Open door policy" that CEO's have with all their employees, and wonder if anyone has actually used the policy with any efficacy. It would seem strange, if not downright weird, for an average employee to walk over to the CEO's office, even if the matter is relevant. The "standard" procedure is to talk to one's manager and never higher up than that. But apparently, IBM's Open Door Policy was indeed used by several workers who were dissatisfied with their immediate manager for some reason or another.

More than Friends at Work

Is it possible to be "more than friends" with a co-worker in a company? I've heard and read about couples who met each other at the workplace, and then converted that friendship into marriage.

To socialize at work is a doube-edged sword: it is good if the relationship works, but can lead to dangerous conflicts if it doesn't. In one situation, a lady at work apparently spread false rumors about the man she broke up with. The guy discovered this quite late, and his reputation was ruined before he knew what was happening. He had to leave the company for this reason. Some employees saw this as a reason to never seek a relationship at work.

Organizational Hierarchy

One of the most difficult things to get a feel for in a democratic organization is that of Hierarchy. By definition, a Democracy is where all members are treated as equal. However, hardly any organization, including a democratic one, is sans Hierarchy. What does it mean to say that everyone is equal, but the leader is higher up than others? In my opinion, true Democracy will work if and only if the leader fully understands that he or she is in the role of serving the organization, instead of living under the illusion that the leader is "superior" to the rest of the organization.

Trivia on President-elect Barack Obama

(A small break from the regular weekly blog to bring you some trivia)

Question: Who was the single most influential person to help elect Obama the President of the USA?

Scroll down for the answer.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Answer: George W. Bush.

Why else would "Change" resonate so well with Obama's presidential campaign?

Better Than Democracy

The democratic election tomorrow got me thinking about whether democracy is really the best form of Government. There is now an apparent consensus in the world that Democracy is indeed the "best" form of Government, because most countries have adopted a democratic government. There are undoubtedly problems with democracy - one oft-quoted flaw is the rule of the majority over the oppressed minority.

The philosopher Plato considered all the forms of Government - Democracy, Oligarchy, Monarchy - and rejected all of them as less than ideal. His disciple Aristotle actually believed that Aristocracy - Rule of the Best People - is the best form of Government.
There are other ways around these, such as Mixed Government, which consists of all the different forms of Government in different measures.

Party On!

One way towards team-building in companies is to permit and even encourage parties at work. A Seinfeld episode pokes fun at how regular partying drives some people nuts (due to what Elaine calls "Forced Socializing" or "acting like friends"), but occasional partying may be necessary for employee team-building and morale.

It is quite amazing that companies will pay little towards small parties that go a long way into essential employee team-building, but a lot towards executive parties that cost hundreds of thousands. The incident I have in mind is the recent scandal involving AIG executives partying after an $85 Billion bailout by the Feds. The executives were so exhausted after they received the $85 Billion that they decided they needed a $440,000 party, $23,380 of which was just for spa treatments! Talk about partying in style!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081008/ap_on_bi_ge/meltdown_aig

AIG execs' retreat after bailout angers lawmakers
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer – Tue Oct 7, 11:15 pm ET

Anand wins World Chess Championship!

Viswanathan Anand has won the World Chess Championship 2008 match over Vladimir Kramnik of Russia by drawing the final game!

Final score: Anand 6.5 - Kramnik 4.5

This marks the first time that an Indian, or a non-Russian since Bobby Fischer in 1972 has won the undisputed World Chess Championship over a match!

When Anand won the World Chess Championship 2007 in a tournament, people were hesitant to call him THE World Chess Champion because he had won it in a tournament instead of in a match like it is usually done.

When He won the World Chess Championship 2000 in a match sponsored by FIDE (the International Chess Federation), there was a rival World Chess Champion in PCA (Professional Chess Association), who was Kramnik.

But now, there is no doubt:

ANAND IS THE UNDISPUTED, NON-CONTROVERSIAL, WORLD CHESS CHAMPION !!

Personal Adaptation to Organizational Change

One of the important aspects of change in a company is that of an employee's adaptation to the change. There are people whose personality is such that they thrive on change, and welcome almost any kind of change in the company - they like the fact that nothing stays still. These people are the ones who adapt most easily to change.

On the other hand, there are people who would prefer if things remain the same so that they don't have the hassle of adapting to the change. They probably believe in the idiom "A known devil is better than an unknown angel - a known defect in the organization is better than the unknown benefits of change." These people have a hard time adapting to change.

What is Change?

The section on "What is Change?" in the textbook (page 315) talks about the multiple meanings of the word "Change". One definition that is proposed in the textbook is: "the difference(s) between two (or more) successive conditions, states, or moments of time."

In the context of an organization, I would also add the word "significant" to describe the kind of difference(s) that constitute change. For example, there may be insignificant changes in an organization that may be "change" as per the above definition, but that may not be very relevant to the organization as a whole - for example, a corner cubicle in the corner may carry a new painting on its wall, or there may be a coffee machine that has run out of coffee, or a document that no one reads may be corrected for spelling mistakes. These could be labeled "change" according to the above definition, but they aren't very relevant to understanding an organization.

Hence the alternative definition in the textbook that is more apt in the context of an organization is: "the process by which alteration occurs in the structure and function of a social system". This definition makes it clear that a modification needs to occur in the STRUCTURE and FUNCTION of a social system (like an organization) for change to be relevant.

Compromise

The textbook discusses the various options available to manage conflict in the workplace starting on Page 290. One subject that was covered was compromise, which is fundamental to conflict resolution and management. It is reasonable that when the parties involved in a conflict are open to compromise, there is generally an easy resolution to the conflict.

This is true of all organizations, including at the highest level of conflict between nations. It is only when nations give up trying to compromise for whatever reason that wars brew between them. One problem that nations face that companies usually don't face is religious conflict. It seems that religious conflict is one area where people don't usually compromise and generally stick to their belief system adamantly.

Conflict Without a Process

Page 287 of the textbook says that conflict is a process rather than an isolated event - Conflict usually arises over the course of time instead of being focussed on a single occurrence.

The textbook may be correct for a majority of the cases when conflict arises, but I feel that there certainly may exist cases when a conflict arises due to one event. I don't have a concrete instance that I can quote from my personal experience, but can conjure up a hypothetical example to support my view:

In an organization, most employees have customers who are also part of the organization. If an employee does not satisfy a customer's demand that was perceived as vital by the customer but not the employee, then a conflict may brew based on that one occurrence. The implicit understanding made by the customer is that the person serving him or her will satisfy the demands, but when that tacit promise is broken, then that could sow the seeds of the conflict - and may be based on a single event.

What is Conflict?

The definition given for "Conflict" at the beginning of the tenth chapter is, "the interaction of interdependent people who perceive incompatible goals and interference from one another in achieving those goals".

The textbook elaborates that "interaction" refers to communication, "interdependent" is for people who are close to each other in an organization, and conflict primarily stems from perceptions.

The most important part of the definition appears to be "perception", because from my experience, it is difficult to have two people share the exact same perceptions on any topic though they attend the same meetings and listen in on the same discussions. Even if the communication process is the same, there is a difference in perception of the same issue because no two people share the same history or the same sense of risk-taking, which is difficult to communicate to another person.

For example, presented with an identical project, one team-member may see the project as "doable" because 90% of the time the work yields good results. However, another team-member may feel that this project is important enough that 90% is not a good enough sense of certainty. This may result in a conflict with the first person voting for the project and the second voting against it, even though they both agree on all the basic data and theory that goes into the project.

Hegemony

Page 260 of the textbook refers to one group dominating others, so that this group first takes over and then maintains power over one or more groups.

Hegemony in the marketplace refers to what is more popularly known as a Monopoly. For example, Microsoft is also called a Hegemony because it has the dominant operating system that is used in personal computers across the world, having snatched the lead position from Apple, and then maintaining the lead in the market for several decades.

Hegemony in politics could refer to one country dominating another for a long time, such as imperialism. The British Empire which colonialized several other countries could be thought of as a political hegemony.

Who is to Blame?

The textbook says that one of the biggest issues with power in organizations is whom to blame (page 245). The textbook also refers to the novels of Franz Kafka, where the person who has taken the decision is "fuzzy", even though the decision itself is of serious consequence.

I've read Kafka's novel "The Trial", which takes us through the life of a man who is arrested, but does not have any idea why! He does ask questions about the reason for his arrest, but his questions are met with ignorance ("We are just constables, better ask your lawyer"), incredulity ("You don't know why! Come on!"), haste ("I really have to be some place, no time to explain now"), etc. It can be quite a frightful thing not knowing the reason for one being blamed!

Inequality in a Democratic Organization

Page 231 talks about the problem of dealing with Inequality in Democratic Organizations, where members of the organizations are considered to be equal in the eyes of the organization. One way to prevent an entrenchment of power by one person is by offering the role of director or other high position to people on a rotational basis.

The problem of inequality in a democracy is not likely to disappear if there is a free market associated with the democracy, since capitalism always results in an unequal distribution of wealth among the citizens. Most of the nations of the world are turning towards capitalism for their economic structure (over 95% of the world's countries have a capitalist economy now, including Russia and China), and in every country with a capitalist economy, the gap between the rich and poor is steadily increasing, which does not brood well for equality between citizens.

Teamwork

Teamwork can be easy when there is a good rapport and understanding between people in the team, but can suffer when one or more persons in the team do not interact harmoniously with the rest of the team. One reason for this can be that one team-member joined the team at a time when the rest of the team-members already developed a small "team culture", and bonded with each other deeply, and resist the idea of a new member becoming a part of the team. In this case, the new member has no option but to "bow" before the "team culture" to become accepted as a team player. Hazing in college campuses are a ritual that a new entrant must endure before becoming accepted as a part of the existing culture.

Team-building activities such as picnics and outings are invaluable in getting various members of the team to bond with one another.

Participation in a Democracy

Page 215 of the Textbook talks about how although the USA is technically a Democracy, voter turnout for presidential elections hovers around 50% in recent elections. This means that the president of the USA is sometimes elected by less than half the population - which is a poor measure of democracy, where the elected representatives are supposed to be "by the people" and not "by about half the people" :-) For instance, the 1996 election in which Bill Clinton was elected president saw a voter turnout of only 49%.

I believe that voter turnout in Australia is often higher than 90% because the country has a policy of compulsory voting - the voter who does not have a legitimate reason for not casting a ballot may be fined or imprisoned! That is a fine incentive to vote :-)

The Human Touch

The textbook refers to how employees respond to "The Human Touch" - feeling that they matter and are bringing something valuable to the organization. If the employees feel that they are important in the management's eyes, they are more motivated to do their job and the organization benefits as whole. The example given in the book is that of a hospital that greatly improved after the CEO treated people with a more human touch.

Treating people as valuable is an important part of leadership, and it stretches beyond only the employees to one's customers and colleagues - and in fact any human being (!). I remember reading about the patient who left everything in his will to only one doctor among many who treated him - because that doctor not only treated and cured his patients, but he also comforted them with compassionate words.

LMX Theory

Pages 192-3 in the textbook talks about the LMX (Leader-Member eXchange) theory, and how the leader may interact with one member of a group more than the rest, causing an imbalance in the manner of interaction the leader has with the members of the group.

This may be the case when one member a group brings more value to the team compared to others. The manager may therefore spend more time with that member, and place greater emphasis on that member's opinions compared to others in the same group. Although this is the natural response of the manager, it may not brood well for a group where other team-members may feel resentment because only one among them gets specialized treatment.

Leadership Skills and Experience

The beginning of the chapter 7 on Leadership in the textbook talks about the thousands of available textual materials (books, articles, etc.) on the topic, but there still exists a great difficulty in translating the essence of leadership purely by means of language to a beginner. This is probably an inherent problem with communicating leadership principles without giving the student the experience of what it means to be in the leadership role.

To clarify what I mean: I once attended a talk on managing in a leadership role, and asked the speaker a question about how one can understand the "boundaries" of what it means to be authoritative as a leader. The leader must be willing to let go of his/her authority in certain contexts - how does the leader know when to be authoritative and when to relax it? After a lot of hand-waving, the speaker finally said, "It comes from experience". Evidently, it is not easy to explain what it means to be a leader to a student who has no practical experience on the subject.

It's like the old catch-22: you need experience to get the job, but you need the job to gain experience!

Dyads

Page 157 of the textbooks refers to the building blocks of communication networks - Dyads - which constitutes the relationship between two people in the network. The reason for this being the fundamental unit is obvious - one person without any links to others cannot be a part of a network, and any network can be considered to be a collection of two-person dyads.

I find that some examples of dyads at my workplace that spans across teams is actually stronger than a relationship within either team. That is, two people who belong to different teams actually have a closer relationship to each other than they have to their own team. The reason for this is sometimes personal (two people in different teams are buddies from college) or professional (the two people have a similar work in different teams).

Stress at Home and Work

The textbook discusses the report of Arlie Hochschild that sometimes people actually use work as a way to relieve themselves of stresses at home (page 143). This seems like the twist to the common view that most people relieve their work-related stress by going home!

I believe that the two ways of stress relief operate due to different reasons. It is obvious why going home from work offers relief - because employees work in a competitive environment with tough deadlines, and are glad to be in a place where their work is not constantly evaluated. The converse happens when people might have a personal family related stress (e.g. death in the family) so work offers an outlet from home where one doesn't have to deal with stress at home.

One way to get away from it all is to take a vacation - a very long vacation. I heartily recommend Maui, Hawaii!

Risks of Over-identification

The textbook warns about the risks of high levels of identification of employees (page 115) to the organization. This may manifest itself in over-conformity, a lack of creativity, and the risk of lack of risk-taking!

I believe the case of employees staying with one organization over the course of several years, perhaps decades or even a lifetime falls under this scenario. They grow so attached to the organization that they become mypoic and fail to realize that there exist various different cultural norms and that their organization represents only one among many such norms.

This shows the hazards of managers who stay with one company for such a long time that they begin to expect unopposed acceptance by employees of everything that management says, instead of encouraging their employees to challenge existing theories in the light of new facts. This has the unfortunate potential to hinder the improvement of an organization. As we saw in Chapter two of the textbook, it is only by constantly rising up to challenges that an organization evolves in a healthy manner.

What is Identity?

Page 109 of the textbook provides a historical account of identity - in ancient Greece, the etymological root of the term actually meant SIMILARITY rather than INDIVIDUALITY. The word referred to in the ancient context was that which connected various people, such as the people of Athens identifying themselves with the "Athenian Identity". Under this ancient definition of the term, as an MBA student at San Jose state University, I would identify myself with other students at San Jose State University (we share the same University) or as an MBA student, I would identify myself with MBA students in other universities (we are in the same discipline).

It is interesting that the term Identity when used in late eighteenth century Europe, started being referred to an individual self exhibiting Uniqueness rather than Similarity. This is the meaning of IDENTITY that we generally know and use today.

Socialization of New Members

As a new member of an organization, I usually observe how the organization functions, and the working style of the my colleagues before I begin to socialize. It therefore takes some time for me to get accustomed to the organization before the socialization process begins. I guess I'm a bit cautious in my socialization style.

I do know of some new colleagues who begin the socialization process right away. They feel comfortable chatting in their new workplace as soon as they join the company or organization. They probably assume certain social realities as generally valid across all organizations in that particular field or geographical area, and are able to get a feel of the place quickly.

Organizational Culture

Organizations can be considered to have a culture of their own, depending upon what the goals of the organization are and how the various divisions function in relation to one another. An organization is in fact a small community of sorts where people interact with each other and spend a significant portion of their lives.

I used to work as a volunteer at a pro-literacy organization, whose members tutored illiterate people to read and write. Those who worked and volunteered there treated each other with respect and openness, since they were accustomed to do the same with their students who needed to be treated in this manner. The culture here may be described as "gentle and easy-going".

Contrast this with my internship experience at a company that manufactured chips that went into mobile phones. The people here had to be on top of the competition, were stressed out with their work, and rarely even said hello to each other. The culture here could be best described as "hectic".

What is Culture?

Page 76 of the Textbook defines culture first as a certain kind of opposite of nature, and then as a system of meaning that guides in the construction of reality in a social community.

I think that one merit of this definition is that it helps one understand that culture is not only in the conduct of people belonging to a community, but especially in the meaning that one may ascribe to that conduct. For example, it was considered good manners a few centuries ago in the Middle East for a guest to belch after eating his food, indicating satisfaction with the meal offered. But the same conduct in the West might be seen as offensive, indicating a lack of self-restraint on the part of the guest. Hence the same conduct (belching) is seen as good in one culture and bad in another, since the meaning ascribed to the conduct varies with the perception of the community.

Project Direction 2 (Cross-cultural Communication)

I arrived in the USA over a decade ago from India, and am quite familiar with the lifestyles and cultures of both countries. In my travels, I've visited England, Germany, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Maldives, learning that each culture has something unique about it that gave it a special place in the world.

The Buddhist culture in Thailand was impressive - it was awe-inspiring to see the Temple of the Golden Buddha, which has a 10-foot tall statue of the Buddha in Gold.

I expected the people in England to be cold and aloof (not merely because Hollywood villians usually have a British accent!) but was pleasantly surprised to find that they were quite warm and friendly. I mentioned this to an Englishman at Heathrow airport when I was waiting for my flight out of the country, and he gently corrected me and said that I was suffering from a misconception and that English people aren't friendly at all - they were only being nice to me because they saw my camera and knew I was a tourist!

Germany was very interesting, because the people were so logical in their thinking - not only the fellow engineers I met with as part of my job, but also those who worked in the grocery stores and the restaurants!

I believe that in the modern era where people from diverse cultures are working with each other in the same company, cross-cultural is not only inevitable, but also to be celebrated. I'm therefore interested in cross-cultural communication in the organizational context.

Project Direction - 1 (Globalization)

As an MBA student, I'm very interested in the area of Globalization and its effects on the business and economics. This is an area that was not taught in business schools as recently as a decade ago, and has only lately become a required course in many MBA curricula, including San Jose State University (the class is "Global Business Environment"). I consider myself well-read in the area having followed the news for the past few years on how the businesses in the USA and especially Asia have been impacted by the global free market.

This is related to the field of Organizational Communication because Organizations are no more limited by geographical barriers. I've used audio and video conferencing with my colleagues in Germany and other parts of the world. I've interacted with teams in other companies located on the other side of the globe - I dial into the meeting at 6am California time they attend the same meeting at 10pm local time!

Limitations of Linguistic Analysis

There are some limitations to linguistic analysis to arrive at conclusions that may make assumptions that are probabilistic rather than deterministic. This is touched upon briefly in the textbook under the section "Data Analysis" under the discussion on Centering Resonance Analysis (CRA, page 461), but the caveats seem to be missing.

One example I can think of where linguistic analysis gave wrong results that did not agree with the rest of the evidence is in the case of "Forensic Linguistics" that was used in the aftermath of the Anthrax attacks. Donald Foster was a forensic linguist who used the written messages in the Anthrax letters to identify the perpetrator of the attacks. Foster claimed that a virologist, Dr. Steven Hatfill, was a possible suspect after noting some similarities in language used by Hatfill to the words in the Anthrax letters. After an exhaustive investigation, Hatfill was declared to be innocent, and even successfully sued the Government for millions of dollars. This was a case where a large amount of linguistic evidence suggested a conclusion (Hatfill's guilt) that was later proven to be false.

Problems with Data Gathering from Surveys

In the section on "Data Gathering" (page 448 of textbook), one of the methods recommended for gathering data is from Surveys. The textbook however warns that the method may not be accurate for various reasons, such as explaining the cause of perceptions, the social context under which a person holds an opinion, and the problem of quantifying an experience that may not be quantifiable.

One limitation of Surveys that was not discussed is that the wording of the question posed to participants may be interpreted in multiple ways, causing respondents to give answers that may not be the true intention of the questioner. For example, the survey question, "Do you own your home?" may be answered "yes" by a person because he/she does "own" the place, but that omits the fact that there is a mortgage on the house that will most likely not be repaid, and the person is likely to lose the house any moment. So the question is ambiguous - it does not distinguish between: (1) those who own their home after all the mortgage has been paid, (2) those who own their home but mortgage is likely to be paid in a few years, and (3) those who own their home now but are likely to have it foreclosed.

(Mis)Labeling creating (Mis)Perceptions

Pages 445-6 of the textbook discuss how the perception of an event changes when the event is given a different label. The example in the textbook is how the terrorist act of September 11, 2001 would be viewed quite differently if described as "a crime against humanity".

This is a useful insight to guard oneself against misperceptions perpetrated by people who want to portray some acts or events in a different vein from what it really is, creating a "spin" on the event which may not agree with known facts.

Only recently, a fifth grader in Aurora, Colorado, was suspended for wearing a t-shirt saying, "Obama is a terrorist's best friend". While neither condemning nor condoning the actions of the school in suspending the fifth grader, I must say that it is quite a convenient untruth to say that Barack Obama, the presidential candidate, is the "best friend" of a terrorist. Are there real facts to support Obama being THE BEST FRIEND - a better friend than anyone else in the world, for at least one terrorist? It is quite obvious that the quote is hardly defensible as being true, and was written with the chief aim of being provocative in an irrational way.

Syntax and Semantics

The textbook (pages 441-2) talks about language being used in the sense of SYNTAX as well as SEMANTICS. The former refers to the string of letters, characters or words that are used to designate a statement in any language, and the grammar rules governing the way in which the characters interact. For example, "I like doughnuts, but they can be fattening." is a syntactically accurate statement in the English language.

However, the same statement when rewritten slightly differently as, "Me like doughnuts, but they fattening." is syntactically incorrect. The use of the first-person singular accusative pronoun ("Me") being used in place of the first-person singular nominative pronoun ("I"); and also the lack of a modal verb ("can") or a regular verb ("be") rendering the second phrase of the rewritten statement without a verb are both reasons why the second statement is syntactically incorrect.

Semantics can be identical between two statements even though their syntaxes are different. For example, the statements, "At this point in time, we do not offer that service" and "At this time, we do not offer that service" have the same meaning and hence the same semantics, because "at this point in time" means the same thing as "at this time" ("point in" is redundant in this case).

Emotional versus Professional

The textbook distinguishes between emotional and professional behavior (page 66), with the implication that professionalism is necessarily unemotional, especially in the organizational context.

This principle does not generalize to ALL organizations - for there certainly exist organizations where being emotional is actually encouraged rather than disparaged. Religious organizations such as Churches, for instance, encourage their members to display emotions in a constructive manner rather than be detached to their fellow members. I once volunteered at a pro-literacy organization, and many of my colleagues there openly displayed empathy, and even actively encouraged it. This includes those who actually professionally worked there (i.e. they were paid for their contributions to managing the organization), not only the volunteers.

The film industry requires its actors to be emotional when the situation demands it, and actors are considered mature only when they are able to display strong emotions in a realistic manner.

My guess is that those organizations that value humanity above all (such as religious and charitable organizations) will respect emotions, but those that value money above all (such as business organizations) will not do so.

Span of Control

On page 51 of the textbook, there is a discussion of "Span of Control", which refers to the number of people that can be supervised by one manager without causing the manager to become over-worked or over-stressed. The upper limit to the Span of Control is estimated to be 7-9 persons.

I think that this number is actually an underestimate, and that improvements in information technology have probably increased the Span of Control to about 20. When I was in graduate school, there were some professors who supervised over 20 graduate students primarily by communicating with them through email, and saw their students in person only when it was absolutely necessary. This helped the students to utilize the professor's time in a more effective manner, and it was not difficult for the professor to maintain good communication with 20 students on a routine basis.

Self-organization and Chaos

The concept of Self-organization (textbook, page 37) is fascinating, where the organization develops by adapting to the changes in environment by altering key areas of itself (in a process similar to Evolution). One chief way - if not the only way - for an organization to develop is for it to be close to Chaos (page 38). The reason for this is obvious - change in an organization occurs only as a result of, and in an answer to, challenges provided by the environment.

This idea of Chaos providing the thrust for Self-organization can probably also be applied to childhood development. It is by providing a child with appropriate challenges on the road to adulthood that a child learns how to apply pre-existing learning in the right manner, or modify what has been learned to fit the context.

Bureaucracy

Organizational bureaucracy or "Red Tape" (page 28 of textbook), although essential for the proper functioning of an organization, often places hurdles on getting the job done if followed to the letter. I once mailed a single-page letter by FedEx, and remember the manager telling the lady at the counter that she had to weigh the envelope to make sure that it was less than a pound. After the manager left, the lady smiled at me and said, "This is so light that anyone could tell that this doesn't weigh more than a pound, but I still have to follow the guidelines!" She weighed the envelope with a sigh; I understood her pain.

In 1960's India, bureaucracy was an art form raised to new heights. Although technically a capitalist country, several coils of red tape had to be endured before one could get a "license" to start a business in the country. After the business became functional, one had to file tons of paperwork with the Government to ensure a "properly" functioning business. It is only after this mindless bureaucracy was lifted that the Indian economy has been growing steadily.

Enabling and Constraining

The textbook speaks of the positive and negative aspects of organizational structure as sometimes enabling and at other times constraining (page 20). The structure helps us accomplish things and at other times, gets in our way. I believe this is an important caveat to most organizational structures - the rules and regulations that are designed to aid people achieve their goals also inhibits certain tasks that are important to the organization.

A historic example of how an entire system that was apparently designed to help people but really inhibited all freedom is Communism. The system of Socialism was believed to be essentially good because it helped people to "work according to their ability, and take according to their necessity". The practical result of this system, however, was that the Government took virtually full control of people's daily lives, and thus the system became an impediment to freedom.

Information Drought

"Water, water, every where, Nor any drop to drink."
- Samuel Coolidge, 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner'

(The above verse is a sailor's lament that on the oceans, there is water all around, but none of it is drinkable).

In this post, I will argue that nowadays, one often experiences difficulty in obtaining useful and required information. This might seem contradictory to a previous post that argued on an overload of information, but I will explain why the ideas are complementary and not contradictory.

The problem lies not so much in a lack of information as to know exactly where to look for the information that is useful and reliable. For example, many a time I have waited for a colleague to send me important information on a new product, but am told, to my surprise, that he or she has already sent it to me - the information was buried in a long email, which I only scarcely glanced at, since 90% of the email was not in my job scope. So the information exists - but is only difficult to find. This is one of the reasons that search engines have begun to rule the internet. Google is the leading website on the web for a good reason - they provide web SEARCH, which is crucial to accurately locating the information that one requires.

"Data mining" is one of the fastest growing fields in software. As the name suggests, there is so much data recorded and available in organizations that relevant data needs to be "mined", much like gold being mined from deep within the earth!

Miscommunication with New Communication Technologies

I believe that the possibilities for miscommunication with new communication technologies is more than ever before, and may get progressively worse in the future.

Most of us use mobile phones, and it is quite common to experience dropped calls. In the ad campaign for Cingular cell phones, commercials illustrated just how devastating a dropped call can be. In one particularly strong commercial, a person calls the suicide hotline from the top of a building, and while the counselor at the other end is trying to convince him that taking his own life is not a good option, the line goes dead, and the screen turns black, hinting at disastrous consequences. The slogan is "Fewer dropped calls". (View the commercial online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRNkHugEu6w)

There are also problems with emails. Sometimes, one misunderstands the "tone" of an email because one cannot actually hear the voice behind it. I've heard complaints from friends about how their emotions are constantly misinterpreted if they do not explicitly use emoticons [:-) :-( etc.]. In cases where emoticons are not appropriate (e.g. a semi-professional setting such as being a club-member), it is difficult to correctly interpret a person's tone under many circumstances.

Communication Skills in a Changing Technology Landscape

In the discussion on Contemporary Communication Technologies, The textbook says on page 350 that "...communication knowledge and skills also count as communication technology." The implication being that it is not only the engineering and science behind the "hardware" side of internet and email functionality, but also the "soft" skills of using the internet and email as means of communicating that constitutes "Communication Technology".

I find this to be an important take on communication technology, because buying pieces of hardware and giving it for people's daily use is simple, but getting them to use it productively and constructively for the sake of organizational interests and development is difficult. For example, although the technology for Online Shared Folders has existed in our organization for several years, it is only recently that people began using it fruitfully as a communication vehicle. The reason for this lapse is because it took people some time to figure out exactly how to make most of the new technology to work for them.

Information Overload

(I had earlier posted this as "Information Overdose", but after doing a little research, I discovered that other researchers have given it the name "Information Overload". Hence I'm reposting this with a new title. More at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_overload)

The modern and post-modern world have increased several-fold the number of ways we can communicate with each other. The telephone, facsimile, email, etc. were unavailable as recently as a few decades ago to most of the world's population, and while they have been useful as a communication tool, this has resulted in an unfortunate side-effect of what I would call "Information Overdose". I would argue that most people in the post-modern world have a problem processing more information than they can handle, and this problem is likely to get worse in the coming decades.

For example, emails have brought us closer by facilitating communication between continents at the click of a mouse, but unfortunately, we also get a large amount of "junk" in our Inbox everyday. I'm not only referring to the problem of "spam" emails, but also to those emails that are irrelevant to our lives that we receive since we're part of a mailing list, or work-related emails that are really not our immediate responsibility. I had been away on vacation for 4 weeks, and when I returned, I found 281 unanswered emails in my Inbox! Only a small number of those emails were directly related to my job function (I would estimate about a third), while some were only to "keep me in the loop", and many were quite irrelevant to my job function or even my interests. I'm quite sure that I'm not unusual in this situation, and that most people feel overwhelmed with the number of emails they have to respond to on a daily basis, and dealing with emails that are unrelated to their work and interests.

Technology and Impersonal Information

The textbook talks about new technologies becoming "impersonal" vehicles of communication. For example, page 362 discusses personal, impersonal and hyperpersonal communication. Page 357 states: "Thus, the so-called 'cues-filtered-out' model has promoted an image of electronic media as impersonal, impoverishing interpersonal relations and reducing the quality of organizational life. Think of examples that support this view."

One example I can think of is in the area of doctor-patient communication. In the distant past, doctors used to visit their patients in the patient's own home, and communicate with them face-to-face on a very personal basis. In the mid-twentieth century, doctors might even converse with their patients over the phone, thus dispensing the face-to-face meeting altogether. But with the advent of emails, the doctor-patient interaction does not happen with immediate effect - it may take the doctor hours if not days to reply to a patient's email. I believe that much of the personal communication with one's doctor has diminished due to reliance upon emails in the medical field. It is no doubt convenient, but lacks the personal comfort that face-to-face communication brings to the patient.

Some doctors also ask the patient to "google" (has happened to me!) in order to learn more about their medical condition. The patient finds out about his or her illness via a medium that has no empathy for their personal situation, which is certainly hard on the emotions of people with serious medical conditions.

Employees First in an Organization

The textbook refers to the views of the great Moral Philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle (page 427), and how their views are still relevant to this day. The book also touches upon the views of Immanual Kant, whose ideas I respect.

Kant was of the opinion that Moral action ought to have Man as the end and never as the means to the end. In other words, the ultimate goal of all Moral action is to aid or improve Man, and an action that treats Man as merely the means to an end, but not the end itself, cannot be called moral at all.

I believe that this principle goes to the very foundation of the Ethics of an organization. First and foremost, People are the most valuable entities in any organization. So an organization ought to place its own employees ahead of everything else. Hence the first moral principle of any organization is "Employees First".

Organizations ought to place human values above the other insentient aspects of the organization. In some sense, Employees ARE the Organization!

Ethics and Morality

The textbook does not distinguish between "Ethics" and "Morality", as for instance, page 411 states, "To many people, ethics or morality is an automatic response". The two words seem to be clubbed together as one, when in fact there is a subtle distinction. The difference between the two is: Ethics is a subject which studies the object called Morality.
In other words, Ethics is a field of study, whereas Morality is what is "out there". It is like the difference between Medicine, which is a field of study, and the human body, which is the object of study.

This is clearly brought out by the Professor of Philosophy at the University of California at San Diego, Lawrence M. Hinman in his Glossary on Ethics (http://ethics.sandiego.edu/Glossary.html), where he writes:
"Ethics. The explicit, philosophical reflection on moral beliefs and practices. The difference between ethics and morality is similar to the difference between musicology and music. Ethics is a conscious stepping back and reflecting on morality, just as musicology is a conscious reflection on music."

A Critique of Globalization

I only partially agree with the textbook's section on the criticism of Globalization. I respect the view that globalization has mostly ignored the social and political concerns, and concentrates on the economic aspect to cater to the profit-mongering multinational companies. My uncle who lives in India still complains about the local McDonald's and Pizza Huts and feels that they are trying to "take over" the traditional and rich cuisine of India. He sincerely believes that there is a conspiracy to "convert" Indians to American cuisine. My uncle's feeling may seem funny, but that sentiment is likely shared by a large number of people in India.

I do not fully agree with the textbook's criticism of globalization, because I believe that social and political issues can be addressed only in the context of economic issues. The global free market has lifted many millions of people from poverty, and will continue to do so for some decades in the future, and hand in hand with economic development comes education with its socio-political ramifications. Presently, economic issues are taking center-stage, but there will certainly be a time for political and social discussions and development.

Globalization, Communication and the Internet

I enjoyed reading the book "The World is Flat" by Thomas Friedman, which is about the business world becoming increasingly globalized. In this book, Friedman makes the bold assertion that the economic world of today is now "flat" in the sense that the business playing field has been leveled, and that all countries can now compete with one another in the global market-place on almost equal footing.

One of the major reasons for this leveling is due to the invention of the internet. Companies in the USA can now easily transfer work - especially software-based work - to other parts of the world via the medium of the internet, and people across the globe can communicate and work as though they are across each others' desks. This medium of communication was unavailable a few decades ago, and has since revolutionized communication and job functionality. Whether it is by emails or web-based software applications or online shared folders, there are innumerable ways that the internet has changed the way we communicate in the workplace.

According to Friedman, in the future, it is not going to matter whether someone is born in America or China or Australia, but whether that person is able to deliver value-added goods to any part of the world. The internet is one of the chief inventions that is responsible for this change.

Communication in the Multicultural Context

Having arrived in the United States from India, I can say with experience that communication across cultural boundaries has its own challenges. I was schooled in "British English" that uses several words that may seem strage or alien to Americans, and this has caused some occasional confusions.

To give an example: I was once waiting, along with several others, at a theme park in California, and innocently remarked to the person standing in front of me, "Long queue, huh!" and he asked, "What?" and I said in a clear tone, "IT IS A LONG QUEUE!" and he looked at me puzzled and then turned away. I wasn't sure why this happened till I had a long conversation with an American friend who told me that the "proper" word to use in the American context is "line" and not "queue"!

Theory and Practice

The Introduction chapter of the textbook distinguishes between theory and practice, adding an insightful quote that there's nothing as practical as a good theory. Theory is then explained as being a generalization of known facts. Towards the end of the discussions on theory and practice, the textbook challenges us, "How do you define theory?" I will try to answer this question in this blog.

The philosopher Karl Popper proposed that a scientific theory was a well-tested Hypothesis that has withstood all attempts at falsification. I believe this idea can also be used in the business and organizational context. The cornerstone of a good theory is not only the generalization of facts, but also the absence of a factual counter-example that disproves it.

Hence the definition of (a good) theory would be:"An ideal theory consists of a Generalized Hypothesis or set of Hypotheses that captures the essential nature of an aspect of the universe, which does not suffer from any significant counter-examples."

What are "Organization" and "Communication"?

The textbook gives the definition of organization in terms of communication. An organization is not merely the brick-and-mortar entity that goes by the name of the organization. For example, the San Jose State University is not merely the set of buildings located in San Jose near One Washington Avenue, but it's essence is that of messages, teaching, learning and other activities that give it the "life-breath" of an organization.

The textbook doesn't quite provide us with a precise definition of "Communication" though. The section "What Is Communication" discusses messages and information, and does point out that they are merely accessories to the communication process, but the definition of communication is lacking.

One definition of "Communication" what I've come across is that "Communication is a transactional process to arive at SHARED MEANING".

Kartik's First Blog

This is my first Blog! Thanks for reading!

:-)