Question #3: Organizational Communication and Classical approaches

Discuss which approach or approaches to Organizational Communication seems most closely connected to the Classical approaches to management and discuss why this is so.

The classical management approaches “are represented by a collection of theories that share the underlying metaphor of organizations modeled after efficient machines” (Eisenberg, 64). This means that all the parts in the organization run smoothly and without any problems, similar to a well-oiled machine. Some factors included in this machine metaphor would be the employees, the tools needed to produce the desired product, and the management all working in harmony.

During the eighteenth century through the beginning of the twentieth century, organizations resembled empires. Positions of power were very evident and the workers relied on the industry to make a living. The workers were the lowest of the empire and the bosses ruled over them. Information was only sent to managers and supervisors, and the workers were controlled by the higher positions. The methods for production also ensured that the workers were passive in the workplace and only did what they were told. Employees felt controlled and began to experience resistance to domination. This is defined as any action on the part of oppressed individuals to lessen the constraints placed on them by those in power.

The Industrial Revolution brought about division of labor and hierarchy in industries. Division of labor is how the tasks are handed out among individuals and hierarchy is the vertical organization of power. However, scientific management was introduced in 1880 to 1920 and this was characterized management as a science. It was based on “clearly defined laws, rules, and principles” (Eisenberg, 72). It was based on planning, organizing, commanding, coordinating, and controlling of the employees. Everyone did a certain task that enabled products to be created and the company to be successful.

Bureaucracy was the term used to describe these early organizations. It entailed a division of labor, a hierarchy of offices, rules that guided performance, separation of personal life from work life, hiring employees based on technical qualifications, and employment as a career.

Overall, the classical management approach ignores the needs and creativity of the workers. Communication is only needed before the machine is used. An example of this would be communication that explains how to use a certain machine or discussing an employee’s tasks. Communication should not happen during production because it will slow down the process. Communication is only needed in the classical approach when giving orders and enforcing rules. This lack of communication forces a separation of power that can lead to employee unhappiness.

The approaches to Organization Communication are communication as information transfer, communication as transactional process, communication as strategic control, and communication as a balance of creativity and constraint. Communication as information transfer applies to the classical approaches to management because thoughts are transferred from the boss or supervisor to the employee. It is important because it allows for a central route to communicating with the entire system. Information and orders are sent out from a central source which is important. However, it is not the most fitting approach because very little communication happens in the classical approaches. Communication as transactional-process model says that clear communication is not made between senders and receivers. The roles happen at the same time. Information is always flowing between the sender and receiver. This also does not happen in classical approaches because little communication happens between the powerful boss and the employees. Communication as strategic control relates to the classical approaches the most because it is used to control the environment. In this approach, clarity is not always the most important factor in communication. Communication is mostly goal related and in order to reach a certain end, communication is taken as the receiver adapts it in his or her mind. This approach to organizational communication best fits the classical approach because industries are always trying to run like a well-oiled machine. The end is what is important, not the communication or emotions between people. Finally, communication as a balance of creativity and constraint means that people are always trying to figure out a balance between individual creativity and organizational constraint. In an industry that relies on scientific management and the classical approaches to management, there is very little room for creativity. Employees do what they are told and are not able to stray from their orders. This theory does not apply to organizational communication.

Organization communication relies heavily on communication as strategic control in order to have employees perform in the desired way. Messages are sent and received by the employer that tries to accomplish their task in the most efficient way. Creativity is limited and emotions are often disregarded. Classical approaches focus on efficiency and productivity and not the needs of the workers.