· Communication is the process of communication and transmission of information between people or groups of people in the form of oral and written messages, body language and speech parameters.
· Regarding the organization of communications, they can be external and internal.
· External communication- These are communications between the organization and the external environment. The task of external communications is to satisfy the information needs of the organization, to establish connections with government agencies, the public, suppliers, and clients.
· Internal communications represent part of production and economic activities: communication between departments, reports from the sales department or inventory records, etc. Communication within an organization includes instruction, information, training, and management through conversation. The most important goal of internal communication in an organization is to create support among employees for the goals and policies pursued by the organization’s management. Through communication, employees receive necessary knowledge and motivation, become the best defenders and promoters of the company's plans.
· Communication network- this is a connection in a certain way participating in communication process individuals using information flows. Networks do not consider individuals as such, but the communication relationships between them. A communication network involves the flow of messages or signals between two or more individuals. It focuses on the patterns of these flows developed within the organization. However, the communication network can have the effect of narrowing or widening the gap between the sent and received values.
· The network created by the manager consists of vertical, horizontal and diagonal connections. The network of these connections creates the real structure of the organization. The purpose of a formal organizational structure is to channel communication flows in the right direction. The size of departments in an organization limits the ability to develop a communication network. If the size of the group increases in an arithmetic progression, then the number of possible communication relationships increases in a geometric progression. Depending on how communication networks are built, the group's activities may be more or less effective.
· The total number of communication channels in communication networks can be determined using the following formulas: for sequential and fan-shaped communication networks:
· L min = P - 1 ;
· for circular:
· L max = P*(P - 1)/2,
· where L is the number of channels in the communication network,
· P - number of employees (divisions).
· There are three types of communication networks: open, closed and combined.
Open ones are characterized by two features:
- firstly, the presence of “dead ends”, i.e. subjects for whom the chain of communications ceases, since they have no one else to interact with;
- secondly, “controllers” have the ability, due to their position, to impede communications (stop, distort content, change direction).
In closed networks, deadlocks and controllers are either absent or can be bypassed.
Combined networks combine various options elements of the previous ones.
Communication networks can be single-level, providing horizontal interaction, and multi-level, through which vertical contacts are made.
· Primary communication networks.
· Snake type network (chain).
It is characterized by the fact that the subjects at the ends of the chain, which it unites, are at dead ends, and the subjects in the middle not only act as intermediaries of communications, but can also control them.
In practice, such a structure rarely exists as an independent structure; more often it is an element of more complex formations, in which it serves as a tool for informal communications of subjects of the same level.
Star network.
Such a network allows, for example, subject A to quickly send the necessary orders to unrelated subjects B, C, D, regulate, coordinate and control their actions. It is easy to maintain order here, since there are no intermediaries or informal channels in communications, which often create various kinds of “disturbances.”
The advantages of the “star” are as follows:
1) there is a recognized leader who is responsible for the operation of the network. Here the bonds between superior and subordinate are strong;
2) the “star” is more stable than other networks, all official information comes from the center and goes to the center;
3) allows you to quickly begin completing tasks, since information and instructions from the center can be sent simultaneously to all group members;
4) there is more order and accuracy in completing tasks, since the center controls the entire network. But if there is an incompetent person at the center, the “star” becomes ineffective. Therefore, the main importance in the “star” is the choice of leader. The main disadvantage of a “star” is considered to be its rigidity and the inability of its subordinates to show initiative. In no other network is the system of subordination so clearly expressed, and in order for work to go smoothly here, it must be strictly observed. Therefore, the quality of such a network is determined in the center. It cannot be higher than the level of work of the manager.
"Star" is a centralized network and is most effective for solving simple, routine tasks. However, for larger organizations such a communication network is not suitable. Here, the central link A is no longer able to single-handedly develop and communicate all decisions to subjects B, D, E. He is helped by intermediary B, who specifies them. Such a network is called “spur”.
Spur type network.
Playing second roles, the subject (mediator) actually has enormous power, since he controls the interaction of all subjects and can quietly impose the will of the center.
In networks of the “star” and “spur” types, the number of communication channels converging to it cannot, in practice, exceed the controllability standards. This puts a natural limit on the development of management structures, and, consequently, the organizations themselves, and the growth of the scale of their activities.
Therefore, large multidisciplinary organizations require communication structures with horizontal channels at one or more levels (so-called secondary communication networks).
· Rice. 1. Types of communication networks: circle; chain; "V" (multi-channel network); wheel.
· Circle type network.
· The communication network in the form of a circle is active, leaderless, disorganized, unstable.
· The advantages of the “circle” are that it:
· 1) creates a more favorable moral and psychological climate in the group and ensures higher motivation and activity of its participants;
· 2) develops leaders, since the abilities of each person are visible, and he is interested in showing his best side;
· 3) limits the “sifting” of information;
· 4) favors creative work;
· 5) has more control points, since information comes from all network participants.
· Disadvantages of the “circle”:
· 1) the phenomenon of “groupthink” may arise;
· 2) the possible gain in flexibility may threaten stability and order;
· 3) possible gains from incomplete sifting of information and a larger number of control points can be achieved by reducing the control functions of channels.
· “Circle” is most effective for solving complex creative problems.
· Wheel type network.
· In large organizations, creative groups can be connected to each other, and then the communication network takes the form of a “honeycomb”, representing the unity of an open “snake” and a closed “wheel” and “circle”.
· Cell type network.
· This structure assumes that one subject simultaneously participates in two groups, and therefore performs the functions of a “connecting link” in relation to them. The communication process can have its dead ends here, and liaison officers can easily turn into controllers.
· Secondary communication networks.
· Rice. 2. Secondary communication networks: “awning”, “tent” and “house”.
· "Tent" type network.
· “Tent” is a very widespread, strong and stable, like a “star”, communication network. Has a minimum number of informal employee interactions.
· Tent type network.
· A “tent” emerges from a “tent” when the B-C channel is established. A “tent” is formed when manager A decides that his senior subordinates need to coordinate their actions and matters of mutual interest before passing them on to him above. Such a network can be a very effective and efficient structure if the rights and responsibilities of B and C are clearly defined.
· Home type network.
· When a new official channel b – c appears in the “tent”, it turns out to be a “house”. This is a completely closed system where everyone can communicate with any other point through multiple channels, without having to follow the usual established chain of command. There are three circles of communications: a large one, uniting all members of the network, and two small ones.
· From an organizational point of view, "home" can be the most dangerous of all information networks due to the many official channels through which information is transmitted from one to another. Information overload can occur. Difficulties arise from the false idea that the larger the amount of information transmitted and the easier it is to process it directly, the better.
·Knowledge of the types of communication networks is especially important for understanding power and control relationships in organizations. Hiding or centralizing information is known to maintain power relations.
· The nature of the interdependence of jobs and people in a group or organization determines the type of more effective communication network. Simple interdependence allows for the use of centralized networks. Complex interdependence requires a “team” approach to building communication networks. However, a complex network may not solve a simple problem.
The object of our analysis in this topic will be communication relationships between individuals, and not the communications themselves. We will consider the results of two main types of network research: laboratory experiments with artificially constructed networks and sociometric surveys of communication networks in organizations. It turns out that laboratory studies are less useful in studying communication in organizations than sociometric studies.
Net is a structured group that occupies an intermediate position in size between an individual and an organization. If the number of individuals in an organization is large enough that it is difficult for them to communicate with everyone else at the same time, then communication networks will soon form. There is a natural tendency to form subsystems, within one of which individuals come into contact with each other more often than with individuals in other subsystems. Needless to say, in a large organization of thousands of individuals, there are many, many networks. In practice, an organization's communications system can be considered as a collection of a large number of networks, partially overlapping and interconnected. The organizational communication system is then a network consisting of smaller networks.
Network analysis takes an approach that does not make a clear distinction between the source and recipient of messages. Flows of information move through intermediaries, who are both sources and recipients of messages.
The term “network” is a communication analogue of the sociological concept of “group”. However, a network differs from a group in that it comprises a number of individuals who consistently interact with each other in accordance with established communication patterns. Networks are not always visually observable, yet numerous communication studies provide compelling evidence that sociometric network models are real.
A network consists of individuals connected by ordered message flows. When it comes to networks, the study is of orderly informal groups of individuals within a formal system. Each network is a small group of people intensively communicating with each other, or many such groups connected by streams of messages transmitted to each other.
The term "network" is actually used by organizational scholars to refer to three different concepts:
1. A network of a complete system, covering stable communication patterns of all individuals in the system, for example in an organization. In a large organization, this network may include thousands of individuals.
2. A group network, defined as a subsystem whose elements interact with each other more often than with other elements of the communication system. Most groups typically have between 5 and 25 people.
3. Personal network, which is a stable pattern of communication flows of a given individual with any other individuals. Each person has a personal network that connects him with those with whom he is constantly in contact on certain issues. The personality network partially explains an individual's behavior.
It is necessary to distinguish between two types of personal networks: radial and interconnected. A radial personal network is a network in which an individual interacts with individuals who are not in contact with each other. An interconnected personal network is a network in which those who are connected to an individual also interact with each other. Most personality networks are partly radial and partly interconnected (Figure 1).
Rice. 1, which depicts the interconnected personal network of individual 1 on the left side, and the radial one on the right.
Established stable communication connections in an interconnected personal network contribute to the effective exchange of information between its members, but they can form barriers , preventing the entry of new information into this network. Close friends rarely tell each other anything fundamentally new. Therefore, not much new information enters the interconnected personal network.
Communication between people usually leads to a balance between novelty and similarity of messages transmitted to each other. Interpersonal network researchers face a problem called "the strength of weak ties." The results of their research can be expressed as follows: the information strength of communication relationships between two individuals is inversely proportional to proximity social status between the source and recipient of information (Fig. 2).
Rice. 2,
which demonstrates that new idea is communicated more individuals and overcomes greater social distance if it passes through weak ties in radial personal networks (right) rather than through strong ties in interconnected networks (left).
Interconnected personal networks thus have little informational power. At first glance, weak connections in radial personal networks allow new information to spread widely from group to group through “connectors” and “bridges.”
Studying a group's communication network in a laboratory setting was a common approach in the 1950s-60s. The questions were posed: how does the group structure affect the effectiveness of communication, how does the individual’s position in the group structure affect his behavior and job satisfaction?
The study of the group's communication network in laboratory conditions was carried out in a room separated by partitions with windows through which communication was carried out. Group members were asked to contact each other only through written messages. Each person in the group was provided with certain information that had to be passed on to others to complete the assigned task. According to the conditions of the experiment, each participant had to eventually know the solution, otherwise the task was considered uncompleted. The experiment parameters were: time spent searching for the correct solution; number of messages exchanged between participants; number of mistakes made; leader selection; job satisfaction. The interaction of members of these groups was studied in the context of such communication structures as “circle”, “steering wheel”, “chain” and “strongly connected graph”.
Rice. 3,
which sequentially depicts a “circle”,
"steering wheel", "chain" and "strongly connected graph".
The researchers concluded that highly centralized helm networks are preferable for routine tasks where errors are possible; a decentralized circle network is more efficient when performing tasks that require creativity. When running such a job, if only the centered network was allowed, the job would rarely complete successfully. The results improved when using structures without a “circle” center. However, the "strongly connected graph" was less effective. Further, in the “steering wheel” structure, tasks were completed significantly faster than in the “circle” structure. At the helm, however, more errors were made, since only the participant was able to decipher the information and correct the error. 1 , whereas in the “circle” all five participants could correctly decipher the information and, therefore, check a specific decision.
During the experiments, the researchers introduced new parameters: “independence” and “saturation”. Independence - the degree of freedom of an individual in a group - turned out to be higher in networks without a center such as a “circle” or “strongly connected graph” for any type of problem being solved. Independence was positively correlated with task satisfaction. The “saturation” indicator characterized the degree of information overload among group members. The overload was greatest for the individual 1 at the helm.
The experiments revealed the following features of these communication structures:
1. The communication network in the form of a circle is active, leaderless, disorganized, unstable. It is effective when performing non-routine tasks that require a creative approach.
2. The network in the form of a steering wheel is less active, has a specific leader, is well and steadily organized, and is more orderly. It is preferable when performing routine tasks in which errors are possible. With this network structure, tasks are completed much faster than with a circle structure, but more errors are made.
3. A network in the form of a chain is characterized by high accuracy of information transmission, but a fairly average speed of such transmission, as well as average job satisfaction indicators.
4. A network in the form of a strongly connected graph, on the contrary, is characterized by average accuracy and high speed of information transfer.
Experiments with small groups led to the following conclusions:
1. Centralization in the network, characteristic of a “steering wheel” type structure, contributes to the rapid completion of tasks (especially simple ones), but at the same time the percentage of errors is high. This occurs due to weak communication in the feedback loop. The stronger the interconnection in a network, the more likely it is that a problem that requires combining the information held by each of the network elements will be solved.
2. Low centralization, high independence (in “circle” type structures) contribute to greater satisfaction of individuals.
3. Network structure affects status in the group. Thus, the researchers did not appoint a leader in laboratory experiments, but the individual 1 in the “steering wheel” he always turned out to be a leader (according to the participants). In the circle, participants rarely named the leader during the experiment, and when asked to name the leader, they were less likely to name any member of the group.
4. The leader's key position in the network leads to information overload, since all messages must pass through him.
Disadvantages of small group experiments:
1. Individuals were placed in experimental conditions as complete strangers to perform tasks that were far from life. The experimental conditions did not reflect true life situations in organizations.
2. The use of an extremely small number of independent variables during the experiments. The main variables were size, network structure, and task ease. And it was also necessary to study the influence of other variables, for example, personality traits of group members, noise and distortion of messages, spatial distribution of organization members, etc.
Sociometric method for analyzing communication networks is a method by which sociometric data on message flows or persistent patterns of communication are analyzed by considering interpersonal relationships as the subject of analysis. It is used to identify the communication structure in a system. It can be used to recreate message flows in a system and to superimpose the social structure of an organization onto these flows. Network analysis provides insight into the dynamics of organizational structure as it determines the flow of communications between departments and positions in the organizational hierarchy.
How is sociometric analysis carried out? All respondents are asked to indicate how often they speak with each other member of their organization about work-related matters. These data are then analyzed using matrix algebra. In accordance with this technique, the names of all members of the organization are placed in the rows of the matrix (who reports) and them in the same sequence in the columns of the matrix (who reports). This communication matrix is further rearranged so that individuals who interact with each other more often are located closer to each other in the matrix. Thus, subgroups are gradually formed in the matrix, which make up the informal structure of the organization. The “cement” that connects these subgroups are people who act as “liaisons” or “bridges.”
The main significance of the use of sociometric analysis is that such studies of interpersonal contacts in organizations led to a gradual awareness of the important function of communication in organizations, which was the basis for the transition from conventional analysis focused on isolated individuals to the study of relationships between them, including communication
The specificity of sociometric analysis as a research method is that network analysis requires a new data collection procedure. Thus, it is assumed that data will be collected from all respondents of interest to the researcher, in contrast to previously used random sampling methods based on the analysis of data on individuals as elements of a more representative general population. This reduced the generalizability of the results provided by probabilistic methods, but allowed for a better understanding of the relationships between organizational structure and communication.
The analysis of communication networks is associated with a number of difficulties. One of them is that the process of exchanging messages between system elements can be so dynamic that it is impossible to accurately graphically depict communication networks. Imagine trying to map, using arrows and numbers, all the human interactions that occur in even a small organization in a day. This is extremely difficult. In a system of 100 people, each of the 100 can communicate with the other 99, so that 9,900 communication relationships are possible. In a system of two hundred people there are 39,800 possible communication dyads, and in a system of five thousand individuals there are almost 25 million. Sociometric data actually reflects only the most obvious communication behavior, the main lines of communication used most frequently and intensively. The weak ties that exist in an organization, the underused message flows, are rarely reported by respondents in organizational studies, and consequently these ties and flows are rarely analyzed in network studies.
The general approach to network analysis contains the following steps:
1. Sociometric data concerning interpersonal flows of messages related to production activities is collected about each member of the organization. This data can be obtained through analysis of questionnaires, interviews, and observation.
2. Identify groups in which individuals communicate primarily with each other. To do this, they draw communication schemes, build sociograms and identify individuals who interact most often.
3. The identified groups are compared with the organizational chart to determine their degree of compliance. It is assumed that the formal structure diagram reflects expected communication patterns, while sociometric data characterizes the true state of affairs.
4. Assess the adequacy of the formal organizational structure to the communication system to develop recommendations for changes in the scheme (that is, reorganizations). For example, network analysis may reveal that an organization contains “isolators” who have no contact with anyone in their organization. It may turn out that in certain departments there are no “liaisons” and “bridges” and that such communication roles may be advisable to introduce.
Main provisions of the topic:
1. Compared to the formal communication system in an organization, informal communication networks are less orderly and, therefore, less predictable.
2. The information value of paired communication relationships is inversely proportional to the proximity of social status and the strength of interaction between the sources and recipients of messages.
3. Open systems theory has led to a shift in the attention of organizational communication researchers from the individual as the unit of analysis to dyad or other types of relationships in which communication ties are the main object of study, and to systemic phenomena, often involving network analysis.
4. Centralization of communication networks in small groups (as, for example, in “steering wheel” networks, as opposed to “circle”) leads to an increase in the effectiveness of group activities, but at the same time increases the number of errors in the communication process and reduces the satisfaction of participants with the task.
5. Laboratory experiments on small group communication networks have provided some information about the influence of structure on flows in communication networks, but the precise nature of the relationship between the variables studied has remained largely unclear.
6. Most members of informal groups in the organization’s communication network are located relatively close to each other in the formal hierarchy, which indicates a partial overlap between the formal and informal communication systems in the organization.
LITERATURE
Kordonsky M. B., Lanzberg V. I. Group technology. Mozyr, 1999.
Rogers E., Agarwala-Rogers R. Communications in organizations. M., 1980. P. 110-142.
A communication network is a connection of individuals participating in the communication process in a certain way using information flows (Fig. 5). In this case, we are not considering individuals as such, but communication relations between individuals. A communication network involves the flow of messages or signals between two or more individuals. The communication network focuses on the patterns of these flows developed in the organization, and not on whether the meaning or meaning of the message was successfully conveyed. However, the communication network can influence the gap between the sent and the received value to shorten or widen.
Rice. 5.
The network created by the leader consists of vertical, horizontal and diagonal connections. Vertical connections are built along the line of leadership from superior to subordinates. Horizontal connections carried out between individuals or parts of an organization of equal levels: between deputies, between heads of departments, between subordinates . Diagonal connections are connections with other superiors and with other subordinates. The network of these connections creates the real structure of the organization. The purpose of a formal organizational structure is to channel communication flows in the right direction. The size of departments in an organization limits the ability to develop a communication network. If the size of the group increases in arithmetic progression, then the number of possible communication relationships increases exponentially. Hence, the communication network in a group of 12 people is more diverse and complex than in a group of three people. Depending on how communication networks are built, the group's activities may be more or less effective.
There are well-established patterns of communication networks for groups of the same or different sizes (Fig. 6). In circle networks, group members can only communicate with those located near them. Wheel networks feature a formal, centralized hierarchy of power in which subordinates communicate with each other through their superior. The objective basis of such a situation is that the person who is ъ center of the “wheel”, has more communication connections than other members of the group. He receives more messages, is more often recognized by other group members as a person performing leadership functions, has more social influence on other group members, usually bears greater responsibility for transmitting information, and is expected to be the final solution to the problem more than others.
Rice. 6.
A similar picture is observed in “Y” type networks. Such networks are called centralized and can be effective if they are solved simple problems. Another type of power hierarchy is represented by networks of the “chain” type, in which horizontal connections appear - an element of decentralization. “Omnichannel” networks represent completely decentralized groups. This is usually required when everyone needs to be involved in solving complex problems. This approach is also called open communications.
Knowledge of the types of communication networks is especially important for understanding the relationships of power and control in an organization. Hiding or centralizing information is known to maintain power relations.
The nature of the interdependence of jobs and people in a group or organization will determine the type of communication network that is more effective. Simple interdependence allows for the use of centralized networks. Complex interdependence requires a “team” approach to building communication networks. However, a complex network may not solve a simple problem.
When organizing communication networks at an enterprise, it is necessary to take into account the specifics various types and communication channels at each stage of the communication process.
A very important characteristic of any form of communication is its susceptibility to all kinds of interference. Interference refers to obstacles and barriers that arise during the formation, transmission and reception of information and disrupt communication.
The main communication barriers are interference related to the content of the message, the form of the message, the means of communication, and the organization of the message.
Interference related to message content:
- 1. Language verbal (related to speech, words). These are primarily semantic interference caused by incorrect understanding of the meaning of words (for example, due to poor translation), insufficient professional training (lack of understanding of special terms), poor pronunciation, etc.
- 2. Language non-verbal (related to body language, body movements, facial expressions). These are obstacles that arise during negotiations, when different parties give different meanings to the same gestures (for example, a nod of the head among Bulgarians does not mean agreement, as with us, but denial).
- 3. Logical interference . Here it becomes a barrier different system evidence accepted by the parties, different visions of the same circumstances, different principles and attitudes. Thus, the logic of the rich differs from the logic of the poor, the logic of the brave differs from the logic of the cautious, the logic of the buyer differs from the logic of the seller, etc.
- 4. Perceptual interference . A barrier may be the environment in which the information is received (for example, an unfriendly atmosphere), a biased attitude towards the information received, a lack of trust, contradictions with previous messages, an unpreparedness for perception (for example, due to neglect of the necessary preparatory work).
Message content interference can be largely mitigated by:
- - thorough preparation for the generation, transmission and reception of information;
- - involving specialists in the creation of the message and its reception;
- - training the organization’s personnel in communication processes;
- - creating an environment conducive to communication activities.
Interference related to the message form:
- 1. Complexity of the form . Here, interference arises due to the difficulty of understanding the message (for example, due to the abuse of special terms, the abundance of digital data, etc.).
- 2. Unusual shape. Interference occurs, for example, when an order is given in an unconventional way (for example, in an unusual wording).
- 3. Inconsistency between the form and the content of the information . For example, a distress signal must be sent in a short message, and financial information must be comprehensive.
- 4. Unjustified mediation in the transmission and interpretation of information. Interference occurs due to inevitable distortions at each stage of message reception and transmission (the “broken phone” effect).
Interference due to message form can be overcome by:
- - giving the message a clear form and accessible form;
- - compliance with established and agreed rules for the presentation of information;
- - ensuring compliance of the form of the message with its content;
- - exclusion of unjustified intermediate authorities in the transmission and reception of information.
Interference associated with communication media:
- 1. Low efficiency of information transfer . For example, the encoding of information required by this tool causes a delay in its transmission.
- 2. Low capacity . This causes information overload, for example, when an organization lacks the office equipment necessary for processing and transmitting a message.
- 3. Inconsistency of the means with the nature of the information being transmitted. For example, the lack of video equipment forces us to limit ourselves only to audio equipment, the capabilities of which are significantly lower.
- 4. Poor noise immunity and low quality of communication tools. This leads to disruption of the communication process and sharply reduces its quality. Interference associated with communication means can be significantly reduced by allocating additional funds to equip communications with modern technology.
Interference associated with message organization:
- 1. Bad Feedback or lack thereof. This increases the chances of information distortion and deprives the organization of the ability to control the management process.
- 2. Information delay . This dramatically reduces the value of information and the efficiency of its use.
- 3. Unsuccessful selection of partners in the communication process. This increases the possibility of message distortion, and in some cases can lead to a breakdown in communication.
- 4. Poor choice of timing and communication environment. This reduces the value of the message and the effectiveness of its implementation.
Interference associated with the organization of communication can be significantly reduced by:
- - mandatory establishment of constant and sustainable feedback;
- - ensuring timely transmission of information;
- - careful selection of participants in the communication process;
- - thoughtful choice of time and communication environment.
A communication network is a connection of individuals participating in the communication process in a certain way using information flows. In this case, it is not individuals as such that are considered, but communication relations between individuals. A communication network involves the flow of messages or signals between two or more individuals. The communication network concentrates on the patterns of these flows developed in the organization. And not on whether it was possible to convey the meaning or meaning of the message.
At enterprises, communication channels are combined into networks that connect elements of the management structure into a single whole. They combine formal and informal communication channels, both duplicating and complementing each other.
Based on domestic and foreign experience, we can distinguish three
type of communication networks:
open, in these networks the movement of a command or information can be stopped because it reaches a dead end, i.e. to the control structure element located at the end of the channel. At the same time, the movement may encounter an obstacle in the form of an intermediary or controller, but who, for some reason, impedes this movement (stops, distorts, directs it in the other direction) and who cannot be bypassed.
closed, in which dead ends and controllers are either absent or can be bypassed.
combined networks combine both construction principles and are characteristic of large multi-level enterprises.
Let us consider in more detail each type of network, their advantages and disadvantages, remembering that we are talking about their basic diagrams, and not about “portraits” of certain real organizations or divisions.
The simplest type of open communication network is linear, called a snake (Fig. 2). It characterizes the elements of the control structure A and B, which, when connected, are at dead ends, and B plays the role of not only an intermediary of communications, but can control them. Such a network connects workers of the same management level, most often having an informal nature, or is an element of a more complex network.
Figure.2
If the number of links belonging to the lower level of the hierarchy of the management structure does not go beyond the control range, the most suitable for it is a communication network called a star that allows you to quickly receive information, concentrate it in the central link A and send it to performers B, C in the shortest possible time, G (Fig. 3). It is easy for Link A to maintain order in management, since there are no intermediaries and informal channels in communications, which makes it impossible for various kinds of “disturbances” to arise. However, such a communication network is unsuitable for large management structures. Central link A is no longer able to independently develop all decisions and communicate them to the executors. In this case, assistant (mediator) B appears, specifying commands and distributing information between performers C, D, E. Being a representative of the middle level of management and playing second roles, in fact he receives enormous power, since he controls information and can impose his will on the first face. Such a network is called a spur (Fig. 4).
Figure.3
Figure.4
In star and spur networks, the number of communication channels converging on a central element can, in practice, grow indefinitely and eventually exceed the ability of an individual to control them. This circumstance puts a natural limit on the development of management structures and, therefore, prevents the expansion of the enterprises themselves, due to the growth in the scale of production.
Therefore, large multidisciplinary functional structures are characterized by other communication networks, for example, an awning and its modifications.
The essence of these modifications, called the tent (Fig. 5) and the house (Fig. 6), is the official assumption, along with vertical, horizontal communication channels, through which subordinates can directly independently solve many secondary problems, which allows management not to be distracted by them and concentrate on the main thing.
Figure.5
In the “tent” one level of horizontal communication is allowed - between second parties; in the “house”, such channels are possible at all levels of the management structure, which gives it the character of a closed network. Practice shows, however, that due to the relatively free use of communication channels, certain targeted deformations can arise here, with the help of which individual subjects of the management structure can first be excluded from the communication system and then removed from it.
For example, on the basis of a preliminary agreement, subject D can send information to A through B and D, bypassing C, which he must do in accordance with formal regulations. After some time, it will not be difficult to prove the fundamental uselessness of B and the possibility of excluding him from the management structure.
In general, open communication structures are inherent in bureaucratic structures, where there is a strict subordination of some links to others and formal connections predominate. However, within the framework of such enterprises, there may also be flexible structures - consulting and advisory (committees, commissions, special creative groups), which are based primarily on informal or semi-formal internal connections and the principles of self-government. Communications here are carried out through closed networks in which there are intermediaries.
In large enterprises it can be complex, involving additional communication channels connecting everyone to everyone. The “circle” is characteristic of structures with a favorable moral and psychological climate (Fig. 7). It helps unite people, facilitate the exchange of information and ideas, and stimulates creative processes.
Figure.7
Figure 9
In large enterprises, creative groups can be connected to each other, and then the communication structure takes the form of a “honeycomb” (Fig. 8). This is a combined network, representing the unity of an open “snake” and a closed “wheel” (Fig. 9) or “circle”. The communication process already has its dead ends here, and liaison officers easily turn into controllers. If necessary, these dead ends can be overcome by closing the “snake” itself using the “connecting link” principle.
Figure.8
An organization's communications network determines who communicates with whom.
The formal structure of an organization, on the other hand, defines the division of responsibilities and levels of authority. Thus, the formal structure of an organization provides only part of the information about how interaction processes occur in the organization and, in particular, does not explain intra-level interaction. Therefore, additional research is needed.
If, based on the results of the research, we draw up a certain scheme of interaction within the organization, then we can notice some interesting features. Firstly, interaction is much more intense within departments than between them. Secondly, this interaction takes place differently in all departments.
In some departments all individuals initiate and accept interactions, while in some there are individuals who neither initiate nor receive interactions (isolated) or those through whom virtually all information flows (“gatekeepers”);
they are usually heads of departments, although they are not the only ones.
Particularly interesting were studies in R&D laboratories, which are less formalized than other parts of the organization and, therefore, in which informal communication networks have a particularly strong impact on performance. It was found that workers with the highest communication activity were also the most productive workers. However, it remains unclear whether high communication activity was a cause or a consequence of high productivity. Another fact noted by the researchers is that a very large part of the interaction occurred between employees not of the same, but of different departments, but part of the same organization. vertical communications, while in less centralized ones horizontal ones predominate. The nature of communications is influenced by the task being performed by distributing roles within the group associated with its implementation. Communications within a group are more intense the more cohesive the group is, and the status of each member determines its place in the communication process in such a way that the member with the highest status participates in it to the greatest extent, and the member with the lowest status participates to the least. Finally, the purely physical relative position of workers (for example, the proximity of their offices) affects the intensity of communication. It has been observed that open offices (with low partitions instead of walls) reduce the level of communication.
This is all the more surprising because open offices were introduced specifically to stimulate communication.
Implications of communication networks. The real importance of communication networks lies not in the factors that determine their form, but in the consequences that each of these forms brings to the organization.
For example, research has distinguished between centralized and decentralized communication networks. In the case of centralized networks, the person who held the central position received more messages from his colleagues, received more satisfaction from his work, was more likely to be chosen by the rest of the group members as a group leader, and had more social influence over the rest of the group members. Performance different types
networks depends on the type of job being performed. Thus, for complex tasks, decentralized networks are preferable, since they allow the task to be completed faster and with fewer errors; at the same time, for simpler tasks, centralized networks are preferable. The disadvantages of a centralized network in solving complex problems arise because the leader becomes overwhelmed and the rest of the group cannot contribute sufficiently to solving the problem. Communication networks consist of communication channels, the configuration of which determines the typology of the network. Communication channels differ in their: technical characteristics throughput (volume and speed of communication actions carried out per unit of time), the magnitude and failures. An important characteristic of communication channels is the direction of communications. In addition, communication channels within the organization can be formal And informal.
If communication channels connect elements of the management structure belonging to its various levels, then they are vertical, and if to one, then horizontal. Communication channels connecting elements related not only to different levels, but also to different parts of the structure are called diagonal.
Communication channels are combined into networks that connect elements of the management structure into a single whole. Networks combine formal and informal communication channels, both duplicating and complementing each other.
There are three types of communication networks: open, closed and combined. IN open networks, the movement of information can be stopped by reaching a dead end, that is, to an element of the control structure located at the end of the channel, or by bumping into a “mediator” (“controller”) - an intermediate link in the network that cannot be bypassed (it has the ability to prevent this movement : stop, distort or direct in another direction). IN closed networks do not have dead ends or controllers or can be bypassed. Combined networks combine both principles of construction and are more characteristic of large multi-level organizations.
The simplest type of open communication network is linear (Fig. 15.4). Elements A and B of this control structure are at dead ends, and B plays the role of not only an intermediary of communications, but can control them. This type of network is sometimes called a "Snake".
A network of the type "(d U> (p(5 r.5) (3) is quickly received by the central link in the shortest possible time and sent to performers B, C and D. It is easy for Link A to maintain order in management, since there are no intermediaries and informality in communications. 1/^> channels.
Rice. 15.4. Linear network
Rice. 15.5. Star network
Not always the central link A is able to independently develop all the decisions and bring them to the executors, so an intermediary B appears, who specifies the commands and shares information between executors C, D and D. A representative of the middle level of management and playing second roles, in fact, he receives a huge power, since it controls information and can impose its power on the first person. This network was called "Spur".
Rice. 15.6. Spur type network
Large multidisciplinary functional structures are characterized by different communication networks (Fig. 15.7). The main type of such a network is the “Tent” type, and its modifications “Tent” and “House” are distinguished by the fact that, along with vertical ones, the presence of horizontal communication channels is also allowed, through which subordinates can directly independently solve many secondary problems, which allows management not to be distracted on them, and focus on the main thing. Note that the communication network of the “Home” type is closed.
In general, open communication networks are inherent in bureaucratic organizations with strict subordination of links and a predominance of formal connections. However
Rice. 15.7. Network type:A - "Tent"; b - "Tent"; V - "House"
The basis of closed networks is a “circle” type network (Fig. 15.8). This type in large organizations can be complex, involving additional communication channels connecting everyone to everyone. Note that this type of communication network is typical for structures with a favorable moral and psychological climate,
Fig. 15.10.
The communication process has its dead ends, and communicators easily turn into controllers. If necessary, these dead ends can be overcome by closing the “Snake” itself using the “Connecting Link” principle.
Loading...