Informal Communications Channels: We Heard it · Web viewInformal Communications Channels: We Heard it Through the Grapevine Nancy J. Campbell Lewis-Clark State College Table of Contents

Running head: INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS

Informal Communications Channels: We Heard it Through the Grapevine

Nancy J. Campbell

Lewis-Clark State College

INFORMAL COMMUNICATIONS cHANNELS 2

Table of Contents

Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………………i

Abstract................................................................................................................................ii

Introduction..........................................................................................................................4

Review of Literature............................................................................................................5

Methodology......................................................................................................................11

Participants.....................................................................................................................11

Instrument......................................................................................................................12

Analysis.............................................................................................................................13

Results................................................................................................................................13

Discussion..........................................................................................................................14

References..........................................................................................................................15

Appendix............................................................................................................................16

Table 1...........................................................................................................................16


Abstract

The grapevine is present in every organization and plays an important role in the

distribution and dissemination of information throughout the organization. This communication

channel operates at all levels of the hierarchy and travels horizontally, vertically and diagonally

throughout the organization. Prior studies have concluded that the grapevine exists in every

organization, information distributed is fairly accurate, and employees have a natural need to

send and receive information, whether formally or informally. This study sought to identify

whether or not employees derive communication satisfaction from participation in their

organizational grapevines. Downs and Hazen’s (1977) Communication Satisfaction

Questionnaire (CSQ) was used to survey a sample of employees and managers at one mid-size

health care facility. Although the study results were inconclusive, evidence along with prior

findings, encourages further research into the area of communication satisfaction in relationship

to grapevine activity.


Introduction

Throughout history, the informal communication network, commonly referred to as the

grapevine, has likely been instrumental in the distribution of information throughout

organizations and among employees at all levels in an organization’s hierarchy.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a grapevine is “… informal person-to-

person means of circulating information or gossip.” The term grapevine was coined during Civil

War times when telegraph wires were strung from tree-to-tree near battle sites, and information

coming through the wires was used by army intelligence (Mishra, 1990). According to Mishra’s

(1990) study, this informal and unsanctioned information network flows within every

organization. And, since unsanctioned, Newstrom, Monczka, and Reif (1974) found that it was

commonly misunderstood, misrepresented and often times ignored by managers who may opt to

have the organizations’ formal communications network utilized as the only source of internal

information.

Much of the early research on informal communications networks placed little emphasis

on communication satisfaction of those participating. These earlier studies placed more focus on

factors such as communication flow and role behavior. However, later research tended to place

more emphasis on the influences, perceptions and value of the grapevine, resulting in further

knowledge of the level of communication satisfaction derived from participation in grapevine

activities.

Further research into informal communication networks (the grapevine) and how

it effects employees’ communication satisfaction will help organizations better understand the

role of informal communication and why it may be on the rise within their organizations.


Review of Literature

Early studies of organizational communication networks were limited to location.

According to Sutton & Barrett (1968), prior studies completed by Bavelas & Barrett (1951),

Jacobsen & Seashore (1951), and Davis (1953a), did little to further progress in extending these

grapevine studies to real-life organizations (field studies). Thus, Sutton & Porters’ (1968) study

of the grapevine focused on adding knowledge to the studies of communications networks in

actual organizational settings.

Sutton & Porters’ (1968) study sought to partially replicate a prior study, Davis’ (1953a)

classic study of the grapevine, but also to “…extend the study further by obtaining personality

data on individuals” (Sutton & Porter, 1968, p.230). They wanted to know whether or not

communication role behavior was a function of the work situation only, as with the Davis

(1953a) study, or whether personality characteristics of the individuals played a part in this

behavior, as well (Sutton & Porter, 1968).

In a regional government tax office over a period of seven months, Sutton & Porter

(1968) sampled 79 employees, including the regional director, auditors, tax representatives and

support staff. Grapevine information was investigated using Davis’ (1953a) “Ecco analysis,”

but added Bass’ Orientation Inventory for obtaining personality data. Subjects in the study were

classified as isolates (didn’t receive the information); liaisons (received information and passed it

along); and dead-enders (received information, but never passed it along). “Of the non-

supervisory employees, 33% were isolates, 57% dead-enders, and 10% liaisons. “Those serving

in a supervisory capacity were liaisons 100% of the time” (Sutton & Porter, 1968, p.226).

Sutton & Porter (1968) found that individuals higher in the organization hierarchy

were more informed of information passing through the grapevine than those lower in the


hierarchy and the flow of information took place predominantly within functions (departments),

rather than between them, which contradicted Davis’ (1953a) findings. Personality data showed

only a slight relationship to role behavior. Knowing who participates in grapevine

communication will aid in determining communication satisfaction.

Rudolphs’ (1973) study attempted to add general knowledge of grapevine communication

patterns and compare similarities and provide insights into the operation of grapevine

communications within a multi-shift setting vs. a single shift setting. The organization studied in

Rudolphs’ (1973) study allowed the investigator to trace the flow of information through the

work day and through multiple work shifts. Among other things, Rudolph’s (1973) study found

that informal information was found to be inaccurate less than six percent of the time, which

assumes a 94% accuracy rating overall and is similar to previous study findings. This high level

of accuracy may contribute to greater communication satisfaction among grapevine participants,

but most important to this particular study, was the finding that some shifts receive less

information than others.

Newstrom, et al.’s (1974) study reviewed what was previously known about the

grapevine and summarized common assumptions held by managers. After surveying a sample of

both managers and non-managers, it was concluded that the grapevine is present and either

functional or dysfunctional in all organizations, and, according to Newstrom, et al. (1974), if not

recognized and managed, the grapevine has the potential to undermine management authority. It

was also found that grapevines form when certain conditions are present in the organization.

According to Newstrom, et al. (1974), when formal networks are too rigid or narrow, managers

withhold critical information from employees, employees have too much free time, or they feel

insecure in their job, grapevines are likely to emerge. And, “…these conditions create an


overwhelming need in employees to receive and relay information” (Newstrom, et al., 1974, p.

12). When these conditions exist, says Newstrom, et al. (1974), employees have an

overpowering need for information. This overpowering need may lead employees to seek

information through informal channels, most likely the grapevine, to satisfy their communication

needs.

Mishras’ (1991) article focused on developing a conceptual model of the grapevine for

later testing. According to the article, grapevine networks supplement formal networks, and,

while formal networks are sanctioned, documented, and unchangeable, grapevines are dynamic

and the information that flows through them is continuous. As was found in Newstrom, et al.

(1974), Mishra (1991) found that grapevine networks satisfy a natural need for information.

Therefore, it may be reasonable to conclude that, in satisfying a need for information, grapevine

networks likely create communication satisfaction or dissatisfaction among participants. Mishra

(1974) goes on to suggest that grapevine information moves through the organization in all

directions; up, down, horizontally and diagonally and in a short period of time. And, as

communication, this informal network compares with formal communication channels. There

are positive aspects of grapevine communications. According to Mishras’ (1974) article, the

grapevine is a stress release for employees and it creates a spirit of teamwork within the

organization. Information travels quickly through the grapevine, enabling employees to prepare

for changes and adjustments in advance of formal communication (Mishra, 1974). Another

important aspect, according to Mishra (1974), is that grapevine networks indicate the health of

the organization, as well as company morale, trends and productivity of employees. Included in

the article were recommendations to management for controlling potentially harmful rumors.

Smiths’ (1996) article gives an account of an American Management Association


(AMA) conference where speaker, Elaine Re’, President of Re’ Associates Inc., a New York and

London based communications and human resources consulting firm, spoke to an audience about

the organizational grapevine. As told by Smith (1996), Re’ defined grapevine as “…that

unofficial communication network that weaves its way through every organization” and claimed

grapevine networks can be both a positive and negative tool. According to Smiths’ (1996)

account, Re’ warned the audience not to try stopping grapevine activity and referred to it as

being a natural part of life.

According to Re’, the pervasiveness of grapevine communications has much to do with

organizations not supplying real, or meaningful information, which is similar to the previous

findings of Newstrom, et al. (1974).

Crampton, Hodge and Mishra (1998) researched the factors influencing grapevine

activity with the purpose of measuring managers’ perceptions of and ability to monitor/control

grapevine communications and finding whether or not the perceptions differed among

management levels.

Of particular interest to the researchers, was to what extent, if any, managers’ positions,

affected their perceptions of the grapevine. The methodology used in Crampton, et al.’s (1998)

study was a fifty-three item questionnaire, designed to obtain information on managers’

perceptions and attitudes toward grapevine communications in organizations. The questionnaire

included the following areas: 1) intensity and importance to employees, 2) ambiguity and lack of

clarity to employees, 3) an insecure or threatening environment, and 4) a lack of trust among

employees toward formal communications. The questions used a five-point Likert-type rating

scale, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. A random sample was sent via mail to

416 diverse, profit and non-profit organizations with at least fifty employees. One hundred and


fifty-eight of those organizations responded with completed questionnaires giving a response rate

of 38 percent. Of the 38 percent, the highest percentage of completed questionnaires came from

top management.

Crampton, et al.’s (1998) study resulted in a majority indicating there was, indeed, an

informal communication network (grapevine) operating in their organizations, and most

managers indicated grapevine activity increased when information was perceived to be

important. The sample also indicated activity increased when a threatening or insecure

environment existed and the organizational climate created a lack of trust among employees.

Accuracy of the information was examined, as well, with 62 percent of managers perceiving the

information to be partially accurate. An 82 percent majority considered the grapevine to be

useful to employees in times of stress and ambiguity. Managers were also asked if grapevine

activity should be monitored and if so, to what extent, and 86 percent believed it should be

influenced indirectly by improving formal communications channels. Ninety-two percent of

managers indicated they had no formal policies in place for dealing with grapevine activity.

Crampton, et al.’s (1998) study concludes that grapevine activity increases when four

conditions are present: uncertainty, importance of the information, insecure environments where

formal communication is lacking, and ambiguous subject matter, which is similar to previous

studies that also indicate a need for communication satisfaction amongst those participating in

grapevine activity. Crampton, et al.’s (1998) position is in agreement with experts who suggest

that management should influence, rather than control grapevine activity and make

recommendations to management based on this position.

Harcourt, Richerson, and Wattiers’ (1991) study attempted to determine the quality of

communication within organizations and to compare one company’s data findings to that of


national findings. The study focused on middle managers, who were assumed to play a central

role in the operational success in organizations. According to Pearce & Robinson, (1989),

middle managers are in a position to communicate up, down and diagonally, which puts them in

a good position to evaluate communication quality.

Harcourt, et al.’s (1991) study used a survey instrument designed to gather data on the

quality of information managers receive in organizations. Frequency distributions, cross

tabulations, and Chi-square tests were used to analyze the data. The questionnaire covered 14

information topics (e.g., company objectives) and 3 sources of information (formal, grapevine,

and network communication). The survey was mailed to 3,602 middle managers across the

United States and 36 middle managers from a small marketing organization. Participants were

randomly selected from an American Management Association mailing list of 83,867 middle

managers. Estimated error rate for this sample was approximately 3.3 percent with a 95 percent

confidence level. Of the managers surveyed, 871 responded (24.2 percent). Findings were

presented in three parts: quality of information, sources of information, and a comparison of a

company’s assessment to the national assessment. Over 62 percent of the managers surveyed

disagreed or strongly disagreed that the quality of information they receive is good, company

information was rated good by only 19.2 percent, and departmental information was rated even

lower. Over four-fifths of the managers reported overall poor communication received in their

organizations. In rating sources of information, managers used three different modes of

communication: formal communication, grapevine communication, and other informal network

communication. Formal communication was ranked lowest, 49.1 percent ranked the grapevine

higher than that of formal communication and the grapevine, but on average, 61 percent of

managers ranked other network communications as the best out of the three.


Findings from Harcourt, et al.’s (1991) study found that the grapevine and informal

network communications were frequently ranked higher than that of formal communication

channels, which encourages further study of communication satisfaction associated with

informal communication networks in organizations.

Numerous studies have been conducted on the topic of informal communication networks

in the workplace, resulting in similarities in the findings. These findings suggest that people

have a natural need to send and receive information, and have further suggested that when

certain conditions exist within an organization, grapevine activity increases. Most studies in this

literature review concur; grapevine activity is present in every organization. Thus, it is important

for organizations to understand the level of communication satisfaction employees derive from

informal communication channels. Further studies can help organizations better understand the

grapevine and its significance in the workplace.

H: Employees who report greater participation in an informal communication network

such as the grapevine, also report greater communication satisfaction than employees who report

little or no participation in grapevine activity.

Methodology

Participants

This study used a survey methodology and quantitative analysis. The population of

interest in the study was managers and subordinates of U.S. businesses. Due to time constraints,

this study was limited to one organization, a for-profit health care facility comprised of 150-200

employees and included employees from all levels of the organization’s hierarchy. The sample

included all employees of the organization to better generalize findings to the population of

interest. Obtaining data from those higher up in the organization was thought to determine


whether or not managers in the organization feel that informal communication channels are or

can be beneficial to the organization and more specifically, to its employees.

Instrument

The instrument used in the study was Downs & Hazens’ (1977) Communication

Satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ), which utilized a five point Likert-type rating scale with 45

closed-ended questions ranging from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. Test-retest (2-week

interval) reliability of the CSQ was reported at .94 (Downs & Hazen, 1977). Coefficient alpha

reliabilities have been consistently high, ranging from .72 to .96 for studies in the United States.

The study was used in an attempt to discover a relationship between communication satisfaction

and participation in grapevine communication. Three of the 45 questions included categorical

questions that were demographic in nature and included questions of position level (manager,

supervisor, subordinate, etc.), gender, and length of employment.

Procedure

An invitation to participate was distributed to all employees through the company’s email

system, and a hyperlink to the on-line survey via electronic survey software, Survey Monkey,

was included. Using closed questions was helpful in capturing employees’ attitudes and

perceptions of the grapevine, which produced data that can be linked to the level of

communication satisfaction derived from participation in the grapevine. The survey was

anonymous, so that employees could feel free to respond openly and honestly about their

communication behaviors as they relate to participation in the company grapevine.

The framework for this research is firmly grounded in organizational communication

theory. The goals of the study are: 1) to help organizations better understand the grapevine and

the level of communication satisfaction derived from it, 2) to further research in the area of


informal communication channels in the workplace, and 3) to gather findings to test the

hypothesis.

Analysis

Statistical tests used to analyze data were the ANOVA (one-way) to determine

differences in the mean communication scores between satisfaction levels with an active

grapevine and with an active and accurate grapevine, independent sample t-tests were used to

determine whether differences existed between two different groups such as males/females and

managers/supervisors/subordinates, and a Pearson Chi Square (one-way) was performed to test

for differences in responses between job satisfaction and communication satisfaction.

Results

Of 150 employees invited to participate in the communication satisfaction survey, sixty-

nine (N=69) responded, which resulted in a 46% response rate, of which 80% were subordinates;

sixty surveys were complete and usable. Of the sixty employees who participated, fifty-eight

(87%) were female and eight (13%) were male. The mean overall score was one hundred

twenty-eight with a minimum score of seventy-five, a maximum score of two hundred and a

range of one hundred twenty-five. Averaged scores in each category were calculated and

indicated overall response ratings of 51% satisfaction, 3% dissatisfaction and 46% neutral

ratings. Results of statistical testing showed a statistical significance of p<.001 for mean

communication scores and satisfaction levels with an active and accurate grapevine. While other

tests resulted in high communication satisfaction levels among responses, they failed to show

statistical significance.

Appendix, Table 1


Discussion

Study findings have concluded that the research hypothesis is not supported and the null

hypothesis, which suggests that participation in the grapevine has no effect on communication

satisfaction, is assumed to be true. However, evidence does indicate a trend towards higher

satisfaction levels in relationship to employee participation in the grapevine, which encourages

further research in the area.

46% of the overall responses were rated as neutral and included the majority of questions

considered to be directly related to the hypothesis. There is speculation as to the reason why

46% of employees surveyed would respond with this high rate of neutral responses. It could be

that the survey questions were not understood or ambiguous in some way, which is unlikely

given the CSQ questionnaire shows consistently high reliability; the questionnaire is considered

to be valid and reliable. It more likely means that employees were apprehensive about

responding truthfully due to a lack of confidence in their anonymity. Also, question number six

on the survey asked: “If the communication associated with your job could be changed in any

way, would you change it?” Overall response rate to this question was 78% “yes,” which may

indicate that employees are not completely satisfied with their organization’s communication. It

would be beneficial to future research to ask how employees would like to change the

communication associated with their jobs. Statistical testing also found that less satisfaction with

the grapevine also produced lower satisfaction scores, but was not statistically significant.

Although the evidence is not conclusive, the trend towards higher communication

satisfaction levels with participation in the grapevine, along with reasonable assumptions and

prior research findings, there is likely enough evidence to encourage further research into

organizational grapevines with regards to employee communication satisfaction.


References

Bavelas, A., & Barrett, D. (1951). An experimental approach to organizational communication. Personnel, 27(1), 366-371.

Davis, K. (1972). Grapevine analysis for organizational communication. Arizona Business Bulletin Aug.-Sept., 10-14

Davis, K. (1953). A method of studying communication patterns in organizations. Personnel Psychology, 6(1), 301-312. (a)

Downs, C. W., & Hazen, M. D. (1977). A factor analytic study of communication satisfaction

[Abstract]. In Palmgreen, Rubin & Sypher (Eds.), Communication research measures: A

source book (pp. 114 - 119). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum, L. Associates, Inc.

Crampton, S. M., Hodge, J. W., & Mishra, J. M. (1998). The informal communication network: Factors influencing grapevine activity. Public Personnel Management, 2(4), 569.

Harcourt, J., Richerson, V., & Wattier, M.J. (1991). A national study of

middlemanagers’ assessment of organization communication

quality. Journal of Business Communication, 28 (4), 348-365.

Jacobson, E., & Seashore, S. (1951). Communication practices in complex organizations. Journal of Social Issues, 7(1), 28-40.

Mishra, J. (1990). Managing the grapevine. Public Personnel Management, 19(2), 213.

Newstrom, J. W., Monczka, R. E., & Reif, W. E. (1974). Perceptions of the

grapevine: Its value and influence. Journal of Business Communication, 11(3),

12-20.

Pearce III, J.A., & Robinson, R.B. (1989). Management. New York, NY: Random House, Inc.

Rudolph, E. E. (1973). Informal human communication systems in a large organization. Journal of Applied Communications Research, 1(1), 7.

Smith, B. (1996). Care and feeding of the office grapevine. Management Review, 85(2), 6.

Sutton, H., & Porter, L. W. (1968). A study of the grapevine in a governmental organization. Personnel Psychology, 21(2), 223-2


Appendix

Table 1Averaged Response RatesDissatisfied: 3% In the past 6 months, what has happened to your level of satisfaction?Neutral: 46% Information about organizational policies and goalsInformation about how my job compares with othersInformation about how I am being judgedRecognition of my effortsInformation about government action affecting my organizationInformation about changes in our organizationReports on how problems in my job are being handledInformation about accomplishments and/or failures of the organizationExtent to which my superiors know and understand the problems faced by subordinatesExtent to which the people in my organization have great ability as communicatorsExtent to which my supervisor offers guidance for solving job related problemsExtent to which the organization’s communication makes me identify with it or feel a vital part of itExtent to which the organization’s communications are interesting and helpfulExtent to which conflicts are handled appropriately through proper communication channelsExtent to which the grapevine is active in our organizationExtent to which horizontal communication with other organizational members is accurate and free flowingExtent to which the attitudes toward communication in the organization are basically healthyExtent to which informal communication (grapevine) is active and accurateExtent to which the amount of communication in the organization is about rightSatisfied: 51% How satisfied are you with your job? Information about my progress in my jobPersonal newsInformation about departmental policies and goalsInformation about the requirements of my jobInformation about benefits and payInformation about our organization’s financial standingExtent to which my supervisor listens and pays attention to meExtent to which my supervisor trusts meExtent to which I receive in time the information needed to do my jobExtent to which my supervisor is open to ideasExtent to which communication practices are adaptable to emergenciesExtent to which my work group is compatibleExtent to which our meetings are well organizedExtent to which the amount of supervision given me is about rightExtent to which written directives and reports are clear and conciseExtent to which my subordinates feel responsible for initiating accurate upward CommunicationExtent to which my subordinates anticipate my needs for informationExtent to which I do not have a communication overloadExtent to which my subordinates are receptive to evaluation, suggestions, and criticismsExtent to which my subordinates are responsive to downward directive communication

Table 1


Nancy,

Do add your table(s), and in the Results and Discussion, change the text of percentages to

numbers with %. I’ve made some minor corrections, so use this copy. See the yellow

highlighting.

This is good overall.

Content = 39/40

Writing = 9/10

48/50

Late -10

38

Documents

Informal Communications Channels: We Heard it · Web viewInformal Communications Channels: We Heard it Through the Grapevine Nancy J. Campbell Lewis-Clark State College Table of Contents