Communication Effectiveness Is Often Measured Directly

When it comes to a company assessing its own level of communication effectiveness, most managers go for the old-fashioned way, of simply and informally asking the employees what they think, most often over a cup of coffee, during breaks. But new studies say that this is not the most effective method of survey, and that, in addition, most employers know about the other methods. Yet, for one reason or another, they choose not to employ them, which means that the results of their analysis will rarely reflect the existing reality within the company.

However, simply because these assessments are done informally, they cannot be trusted, researchers share. When questioned about what they really think, employees will most likely keep their real thoughts to themselves, even if asked in an informal situation. Be it during break or over a cup of coffee, those working for a manager will always be very careful about what they say, for fear of not losing their jobs. And this attitude is bound to become more and more present in companies around the world, as the global economic crisis deepens.

“These barriers reflect the findings of similar international surveys. What they don't tell us is why these barriers persist. If measurement of internal communication is important, then time and budget should not stop measurement activity. Further research into the perceived lack of management support would be useful,” Kate McDavitt explains. She and colleague Bruce Faull have recently addressed the New Zealand chapter of the International Association of Business Communicators, with which they have shared the results of their study.

According to the team, the most often invoked reasons for not employing other methods of surveys are the lack of time, money and management. Of the over 100 businesses they have included in their research, more than 89 percent have realized the importance of measuring their own communication effectiveness, but have chosen to do so informally, a practice known as “anecdotal evidence.”

The two stress the importance of managers taking a more active role in assessing the way their employees perceive communication inside the company, in a bid to reduce economic espionage, or the number of people simply quitting their jobs because of a problem the management has had no idea about. Thus, businesses could avoid losing good individuals from their staff, on account of minor problems that are not voiced during informal discussions.