Organizational communication

Roles of formal and informal communication in governmental organization 1.0 In

troduction
Organizational communication is an area of study that examines the complex commu
nicative behaviors which occur in organizational settings. Organizational commun
ication occurs when a group of people working together and communicate to each o
ther in order to achieve individual or collective goals. Communication is been c
onsidered a functional part of an organizational system and in interpersonal con
text. The purpose of organization communication ranges from completing a task o
r mission to creating and maintaining satisfying human relationships within the
organization. The structure of an organization is determined in part by the netw
ork of channels or paths along which information must flow between members or su
b-units within the organization.
2.0 Communication networks in government organization
In the past, the concern of management of large bureaucratic structure such as g
overnment organization, in which the major focus of the organizational communica
tion literature, was formal and top-down communication. The government needs sys
tems for controlling the flow of information in order to balance the structure.
Today, informal communication in which is generally associated with interperso
nal, horizontal communication is primarily seen as a potential contribution to e
ffective organizational performance. On-going, dynamic, and non-formal, if not i
nformal, communication has become more important to ensuring the effective condu
ct of work in modern government organizations.

3.0 Creating a climate of formal and informal communication

Communication climate can be defined as the internal environment of information
exchange among people through an organization's formal and informal networks. Co
mmunication climate is open when information flows freely and closed when inform
ation is blocked. Open communication is characterized by supportive, participati
ve, and trusting behaviors. While open communication climate may make formidable
personal demands, such openness ultimately rewards both the individual and the
organization in providing an environment where people thrive and enterprise flou
rishes. To create a climate of formal and informal communication, government of
ficers must ensure that they and their staff have the skills and knowledge to co
mmunicate effectively. In some cases, this may require formal training. However,
the most important aspect of staff training should come on a daily basis from o
fficers who lead through example while making communication issues a priority. I
nvolving the staff in decisions about the goals and methods of communication wil
l also help create a climate of communication. Government officers and their st
aff should develop a consensus on how disagreements should be handled, how commu
nication should flow between them and staff and between staff members, and what
information should be available and when. Communication must become a habit for
government department officers and their staff members, with systems in place t
o support it. It can be done through a) Regularly scheduled group meetings. b)
Regularly scheduled one-on-one meetings. c) Newsletters. d) Staff briefings. e)
Informal social gatherings. f) Team lunches and other activities.
Effective communication through communication network either it is a formal or i
nformal approaches in government organization is an intentional effort made by a
ll personnel within it. It flourishes only in an environment where positive inte
raction is valued, fostered and nurtured by all concerned. Effective management
knows that frequent interaction and communication with staff provides insight in
to their talents, skills, goals and day to day work issues. This can help the ma
nagement to foster staff growth, achieve departmental target and manage work pro
ductively. Positive interaction inspires loyalty and helps develop improved work
relationships.
4.0 Study of informal and formal communication in government organization
In government organization, formal and informal communication systems seem best
suited to different types of activities in terms of functional characteristics.
Formal communication tends to be used for coordinating relatively routine transa
ctions within the management levels and working groups. For example, an officer
in the procurement department might go through a procedure process simply by fol
lowing the steps specified in the department purchasing guide. The departmental
procedure guideline will include material specification, purchase requisition fo
rms, bidding procedures, desiderata for selecting one vendor over another and st
ages in the approval process would all be specified in advance. The procedure gu
ideline could so totally describe the conditions under which certain actions sho
uld occur and the precise ways of executing them with. There is reason to think
that informal and formal communication is particularly useful in supporting the
social functions of groups. This is because government organizations are less e
xplicit in regulating social relationships than they are in regulating other asp
ects of work procedures. For example, a government personnel frequently describe
the bureaucratic procedures for annual performance appraisals, but he neither a
ttempts to nor could he regulate the ad hoc personal judgments that his superior
make of the people reporting to him. There are both structural and functional
characteristics of communication occasions that cause the communication to be mo
re or less formal. Among structural characteristics, the nature of the relations
hip among the participants and their social roles influences its formality. For
example, conversations among office staff or among those with highly unequal sta
tus will be more formal than conversations among close friends or among peers. S
imilarly, conversation among people acting in their official roles will be more
formal than conversation among the same people out of role. The frequency of com
munication also influences its formality which is common in government organizat
ion. In government organization, the nature of the communication setting alway
s influences the formality of communication. A discussion in a meeting room is l
ikely to be more formal than one in the cafe. Finally, the communication channel
itself may partially determine the formality of a communication event. By their
nature, for example, with the emerging of information and communication technol
ogy (ICT) approaches set by the government, telephone and face-to-face discussio
n are more interactive and richer than are computer mail systems and as a conseq
uence becoming more informal. Computer generated information systems reports and
human generated memoranda are more formal than are scheduled meetings and elect
ronic bulletin boards, which in turn are more formal than telephone calls or hal
lway chats.
4.1 Formal communication networks
Formal communication networks define who should talk to whom or who reports to w
hom. Formal communication may be downward or upward and sometimes referred to as
vertical or horizontal. Downward communication refers to communications from
superiors to those who report to them. Formal communications in government organ
ization are commonly used as to communicate the following such as job instructio
ns, job rationale, procedures and practices, performance feedback, and departmen
t missions. Another way in formal communication network which is practiced in g
overnment organization is the upward communication. Upward communication refers
to messages going from subordinates to superiors and is used to convey the follo
wing: updates of what subordinates are doing, unsolved work problems, suggestion
s for improvement, and how subordinates feel about each other and their jobs. Up
per and middle management position in government department such as director and
their officers are responsible for improving and encouraging upward communicati
on. Some helpful methods been widely practiced such as open-door policies, estab
lishment of grievance procedures, periodic interviews, group meetings and a sugg
estion box. However, these methods are only effective when only if the upper and
middle management are sincerely interested in hearing from their staff and trul
y value their ideas.
Another approach in formal communication in government organization is horizonta
l communication. Horizontal communication consists of messages between colleague
s at the same level of position in the organization. For example, communication
between assistant district officers from the different districts or between depa
rtment directors from different states. In government organization, horizontal
communication are commonly used for purposes such as task coordination, problem
solving, sharing information, conflict resolution or building rapport. For exam
ple, coordination meeting between the same government departments heads in diffe
rent state which is held every three months. It a chance for all department dire
ctors to meet and discuss in a formal fashion about common issues and create res
olutions.
In formal communication, downward, upward and horizontal communication work as
a network which can be combined to the full circle of feedback received from pe
ople above, below and around an individual. In fact, formal communication networ
king is the process of strategically meeting people in the same position and mai
ntaining contacts to get information, advice and leads. This has been recognized
as a key skill in the development of government officers. Normally, those who f
ormally network connected tend to be successful and progress more in their caree
rs compared with those who do not.
4.2 Informal communication networks
Informal communication networks are patterns of interaction based on friendship,
shared interests and proximity. Informal networks in government organization ar
e to be the most important means of communication and widely practiced in all le
vel of organization personnel. Functions of informal networks within the gover
nment organizations may include: a) Confirming a formal communication b) Expandi
ng on information conveyed formally c) Expediting messages that arrive more slow
ly via formal channels. d) Contradicting formal messages (for example, an office
r in accounting department
may disclose that the deadline for report on this year s budget is not as firm as
what
was con
veyed in the procurement department s recent memo).
e) Circumventing official channels f) Supplementing formal communications. Inf
ormal networks are faster and sometimes more dependable than formal channels. I
nformal communication happens every day in the government office and between the
staff. For example, try look around their places of work and we will noticed th
at informal communication seems to be a dominant activity. Clerks work at their
desks or busy typing something at their computer, suddenly are interrupted by te
lephone calls. Officer leave to attend a department meeting but stop on the way
to discuss a matter with a colleague. To answer questions about office procedure
, they call to the person at the next desk rather than consult the appropriate m
anual. The conversations seem fluid and undersigned and yet, clearly, work is be
ing accomplished.
In looking at the informal communication, it occurred that the more spontaneous
and informal communications was, the less well it was supported by formal approa
ch such as procedures for scheduling meetings and writing reports. Communication
that leads to work solution usually happens in the hall way or during a cup of
tea rather than in the meeting room. Hence, the interest is drawn toward underst
anding more about the nature and value of informal communication networks and sp
ontaneous communicative activities which are happened daily in government organi
zation.
5.0 Formal and informal channels as paths of communication
Communication, through both formal and informal channels, is the lifeblood of an
y organization especially in government departments. But when discussing both fo
rmal and informal communication in public service, environments, channels, proce
sses, systems, and hierarchies, we sometimes lose sight of the essence of the co
mmunication act, which it is profoundly the human. At the center of every organi
zation are people held together by slender threads of cooperation. In government
service, they are known as public servant. These threads are maintained by peop
le sharing information with each other. The result is a delicate network of huma
n relationships linked through communication. In government organization, infor
mation is a commodity. It has value, can be exchanged and is crucial to the succ
ess of work and services. Unfortunately, public servants
sometimes refuse to exchange this crucial information. They often erect barriers
to shut out others in situations they consider hostile. Most communication misha
ps in these organizations can be traced to these barriers. They impede informati
on exchange and thereby disrupt the orderly flow of activity. Because of barrier
s, they fail to inform others of a meeting or a project deadline. They neglect t
o compliment co-workers on a job well-done. They even lash out at others for lit
tle or no reason. It is known that the most appropriate paths of communication
depend on the importance of the information being communicated and the size of t
he organization. For example, if information relates to a significant change aff
ecting the department as whole, the message should not be delivered directly fro
m the director of the department to frontline staff.
It is advisable that when communicating important changes, specially in governme
nt machinery which involving day to day operations, the usual path of communicat
ion is from the director as upper management to middle management (assistant dir
ector) to his officers who responsible to convey instructions or orders to rest
of staff. It is because by establishing a direct communication line to staff onl
y results in weakening the ties between the staff and their upper management. Re
sults of research have shown that employees want to hear about major organizatio
n changes from the officers closest to them. However, this is not always an effe
ctive path if middle management has weak communication skills.

6.0 Conclusion
In government organization, formal and informal communication will encourage the
employees to work better. It is done through supporting and allowing them to pa
rticipate in decision making and trusting them. This will assures the integrity
of information channels within the organization. The openness of any communicati
on climate whether in the form of formal and informal communication depends upon
the character of the participants. Openness both in formal and informal communi
cation often demands courage because the communicator operates with lowered or e
liminated defensive barriers. Because open communicators have to articulate thei
r positions in meetings, public arenas, and in print, they must be secure indivi
duals, confident in their own positions, ability and authority. Yet, while in op
en formal and informal communication climate may make formidable personal demand
s, such openness ultimately rewards both the individual and the organization in
providing an environment where people will thrive and organization flourishes.
REFERENCES
David, Werner. (1995).
Managing Company-Wide Communication
. London: Chapman & Hall, 1995. Desanctis, Gerardine and Janet Fulk (eds.). (19
99).
Shaping Organizational Form:Communication, Connection, and Community
. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Fredric M. Jablin, Linda Putnam. (1987)
.
Handbook of Organizational Communication
. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage J. David Johnson, William A. Donohue, Charles K. Atki
n and Sally Johnson. (1994). Association for Business Communication.
Journal of Business Communication
, Vol. 31, No. 2, 111-122 Johnson et al. (1994) Differences Between Formal and
Informal Communication Channels.
Journal of Business Communication
. 31: 111-122 Johnson, J. David. (1993).
Organizational Communication Structure
. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing. Karl Erik Rosengren. (2004).
Communication: An Introduction.
 London: Sage Poertner, Shirley and Karen Massetti Miller. (1996).
The Art of Giving and Receiving Feedback
. Ma: Amer Media. Richmond, V.P., and J.C. McCroskey. (1992).
Organizational Communication for Survival
. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Rogers, Everett M, and Rekha Agarwala Ro
gers. (1976).
Communication in Organizations.
New York: Free Press. Witherspoon, P.D. (1997).
Communicating Leadership
An Organizational Perspective
. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.