An asset and a hindrance all in one. That is one way to describe the General Manager of my company. For years, the communication process and style he has used has created chaos at times and swift resolution on other occasions. Does he read his audience? Sometimes, but in high-pressure situations, the actions seem more instinctive and bias. In the stressful times, the encoding-decoding where “an idea is generated by one person, shaped into a message, and sent by the person to another person, who then receives the message, and then generates his or her own idea” (University, 2018), falls short of success. Raised voice, negative body language, and information voids all exist. All at a time when clear communication matters most. The most obvious is recognized, there is a problem, but uncertainty rests on the question of resolution. There is noise on both sides (unclear message, fear, disappointment) of the encoding and decoding process. As a result, positive feedback does not exist.
Throughout the lessons, one word is continually present, egocentrism. The inability to take on other people’s perspectives (University, 2018). When the company is faced with a schedule that requires full participation from the employees, and one or a few employees call off, this puts a strain on the GM’s ability to meet the demands of the customers. In turn, stress levels rise and the review of how new actions will be necessary to make-up for lost time is only known by one person, the GM. Often the employees are unaware of all upcoming work and are given the days tasks in brief description. Ambiguous at best, the GM is not considering the needs of the employees and their desire to want to perform well if they knew what was all involved.
Surprisingly, he appears to have traits of Monochronic and Polychronic people. For example, according to Moran (pg.49), under Monochronic there is an intent focus on work, committed to the job, use to short-term relationships (i.e., the one time customers, employees) and under Polychronic, does many things at once, constantly interrupted, schedules are kept if possible, high-context, and plans change. The GM is someone who wears many different hats within the organization. Fittingly, his varying styles do aid; they just are not polished. That responsibility falls directly on my failure as the owner.
My silence to some extent can be viewed as a sign of approval of his actions. It is not. Attempts have been made to open the communication up to constructive criticism, but that rarely works between him and myself. There is a message being sent, it is being heard, and feedback is given. The problem seems to be the noise. The interference that occurs when challenging situations are present and plentiful. The challenges in communication are overwhelming but solvable. We have been blessed with fifteen years of success. Fifteen years of learning and growing too. He is a hindrance at times, but an asset that has made our success possible.
References:
Moran, Robert, Abramson, Neil, & Moran, Sarah. (2014). Managing Cultural Differences. Oxford: Routledge.
University, P. S. (2018). OLEAD 410: Leadership in a Global Context Lesson 04: Global Communication. The Pennsylvania State University.
Hi Bdj5038,
It’s always a challenge when we are dealing with leaders of companies and organizations that are both difficult to work with but are highly capable of leading a company successfully. Many leaders do great individually and work within companies as if they are working for themselves. Communication needs to be at the center of every leader regardless of his or her work style. It is detrimental to the employees and team to know where they are and get a constant form of communication from there leader. Leaders must be aware and have a sense of discernment to know the emotions of there employees and not deal with things in an egocentric manner. Communication gives direction and correction when needed because a company is always moving incrementally and making micro changes. Thank you for the insight on your experience!