Executives have five general methods for communicating both up and down the line. None of these is inherently better or worse than others. Each has advantages and disadvantages. You may have to compare two or more to select the most effective. Here are the media available to you and their respective pros and cons- two or more to select the most effective. Here are the media available to you and their respective pros and cons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Advantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n You can develop a two-way flow; also permits use of visuals charts,\nfilms, etc. you can show and explain. Permits discussion and better meeting of\nthe minds. And you reach several minds at once.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disadvantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Time-consuming, possibly inconvenient, and sometimes\ndifficult to keep a meeting on track.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Can be a field day for the long-winded individual.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Advantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Speed. Permits\nquestions and answers. Can be done from your desk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disadvantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Man, at the other end might be interrupted with something\nmore important. Also, generally there is no record of the conversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Advantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Personal contact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You can set a mood by a show of friendliness and relaxation.\nYou can show, discuss visual material. Conversation is two-way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disadvantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n One or the other individual may be subject to pressure by a\npowerful personality or other persons of high status. May not be easy to\nterminate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Advantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Brief. A tangible record can be filed. You can rethink your\nmessage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disadvantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n One way. No control over its respondent at the other end. A\nrigid form, limited by permanent words on paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Formal Report<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Advantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Can be comprehensive. Material may be organized at your\nleisure. Can be disseminated widely by means of copying. Provides you or a\nsubordinate with an opportunity to show his stuff. Indexing and other summary\ndevices help reader grasp scope of piece, locate specific subsections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Disadbantages<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n May require considerable time in reading. Problem of actual\nwriting may be discouraging to a time-hungry executive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The five methods above are not mutually exclusive. For\nspecial purposes, executives may use two or more methods to get a reinforcement\neffect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n All the material in an executive’s out-box represents an\ninvestment of thought, time, and energy. It is an investment that requires\nperiodic evaluation. One way of evaluating your adequacy as a communicator is\nto test key memos, reports, letters by questions such as these:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Does this communication have a purpose?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Is the purpose well-served?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Is the communication needed and used by the person receiving\nit? If the communication is a request for information-<\/p>\n\n\n\n have you set a time\nlimitation, that is, when you need what you asked for?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Are you communicating too frequently about the same things?\n(If the answer is yes, face to face meetings may be indicated.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Could a form\u2014for example, a checklist form\u2014simplify a\nmessage or report?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Would you understand the communication if you received it?\n(As a matter of fact, put yourself in the place of the respondent. How do you\nfeel about your communication now?)<\/p>\n\n\n\n For many executives, their in-box is a terminal of a lifeline\nessential to keep them functioning effectively in their organizations. An occasional\nreview of the communications that are dropped into your in-box can both improve\nyour contacts and save you time. Questions like these should be raised about\nyour mail:<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you tend to receive any amount of unnecessary or junk\nmail, should your secretary or assistant be screening your in-box?<\/p>\n\n\n\n With reference to material received periodically, do you\nreally need it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Do items with “perishable” material get to you on\ntime?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Do regular communications contain all the information you\nneed? If a periodic report contains more material than you need, can you have\nthe sender streamline it? Should you pass a particular report on to\nothers? <\/p>\n\n\n\n Generally, you will find that your information needs tend to\nchange. Responsibilities and job content tend to vary even when job title or\nstatus do not. Accordingly, it is a good idea to make an assessment of your\nin-box a periodic affair to maintain a maximum level of effectiveness<\/p>\n\n\n\n Executives sometimes have a basic communications question to\nanswer: is it always best to level with your subordinates\u2014to tell it like it\nis, regardless of consequences? The problem arises in situations like these:<\/p>\n\n\n\n it’s difficult to set down exact guidelines in this\nexplosive communications area. But here are some preliminary considerations\nthat can shape what you eventually say:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Your own sense of integrity. Do you believe that you must always\ntell the truth, even when it hurts? Or do you think that conditions sometimes\njustify the “little white lie,” modifying the truth?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Your reputation. If you stretch the truth often, and without\ngood reason, your employees will learn that they can’t rely on you as a source\nof information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Where your loyalties lie. There is to be a personnel cutback\nbut management is keeping quiet: it doesn’t want to cause wholesale upsets, and\nto have people quitting before they’re ready to lose them. Do you say something\nor don’t you? You have been entrusted with a certain amount of responsibility\nand are expected to handle that responsibility wisely. What do you do?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bypassing is a traditional communications problem in which a\nmanager is, in effect, dropped out of a communications chain. It can happen in\none or two ways:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Bypassing represents an undesirable shortcutting of channels\nbecause it has destructive consequences: it weakens the bypassed manager’s\nauthority; it deprives him of information that sometimes he should have; if\nprocedures or operations are started as a result of the bypassing, the manager\nmany remain in ignorance of operations which he should be controlling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you’re a victim of bypassing, the first thing to remember\nis, don’t show resentment, particularly if it’s a first. Constructive action is\nmuch more possible if it begins on a factual, rather than emotional basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Don’t dismiss the possibility that an employee may be\nexpecting more of you than he should. Within the limits of a normal\nrelationship with your superior, you may be going at full power. If that’s the\ncase, explain the facts to your subordinate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But where there’s definitely something lacking, you’ll have\nto look for an opportunity to discuss it with your boss. You should have\nspecific information to pass along to him rather than a vague feeling that you\nneed “more authority.” Go into the facts of the matter with him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Next, if the bypassing is by a superior who goes to one of\nyour subordinates without your knowledge:<\/p>\n\n\n\n For example, your boss needs some information which your subordinate has and you’re not around. In this type of situation, the only requirement is that either your boss or the subordinate lets you know what has happened after the fact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For the forgetful manager, or the one who procrastinates, the answer to this question must be, “Yes, I’ve been guilty in the past, but it won’t happen again.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n It may be an unpleasant fact to face up to, but in some cases, bypassing from the top down is the failure of disinclination by the superior to recognize the authority of the manager. In this case, what’s called for is a tactful discussion with a superior that emphasizes: a. the manager’s willingness to act as a communications link\u2014get the desired information, or convey it; b. emphasis by the manager that his authority role, vis-a-vis the employee, will be undermined if the bypassing continues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You might be involved in one for which none of the above points is the sole answer. But you’ll be able to uncover the reasons and be guided accordingly if you ask yourself:<\/p>\n\n\n\nPhone<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
FACE TO FACE<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Note or Memo<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Evaluating Your Outgoing Communications<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Evaluating Your Incoming Communications<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Should You Tell It Like It Is?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Bypassing <\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
To handle this problem, you should first know some of its possible causes. Here they are:<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
\n
The manager who is bypassed must consider some tough\nquestions. Here they are; first, if it’s a subordinate who goes over your head:<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
\n
Is it just a one-time emergency occurrence?<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Have there been instances where you’ve failed to respond to a superior’s request for information?<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Is the boss at fault?<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Bypassing situations sometimes are complicated.<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n