Introduction
“Communication is exchange of words and meanings, a two - way process of sending and receiving messages (Beckham, King, 1992). Also communication is transfer of information from sender to receiver with condition that receiver understands the message (Weihrich, Koontz, 1993). For efficient communication it is necessary that receiver understands meaning of message and show it to sender through some expected reactions (Ivancevich, Matteson, 2002).” Spaho, K., M.A. (2010) page 2. Throughout research one thing is clear, organizational communication is key to organizational success. This case study evaluates a communication issue within a cross functional/hybrid fraud team within a large direct selling company. Poor communication has …show more content…
“Critical theory focuses our attention on studying privilege, control, and power with specific attention to abuses of power through communication and organization.” Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (06/2014) page 53. Many of the issues faced surround control and power. Each manager expects to solely control the cross functioning team. The other theory of conflict in this issue is known as groupthink. “Groups in danger of groupthink overestimate their own capabilities, seek information that supports their point of view, and avoid or discount contradictory ideas.” Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (06/2014) page 300. Each side of the hybrid team is guilty of focusing solely on their own perspective and continuing on without further research and development or information from the other side. The team and the management of this group jumps to decisions before critically thinking out the issue and how it affects the other side. Groups guilty of groupthink often look fine on the surface, but this behavior can be detrimental to a team such as this one who is specifically put together to work cohesively. If each member of the group focuses on their own departments agenda, all previous action taken to make a cross functioning hybrid team happen become …show more content…
Before the creation of this hybrid team these workers rarely worked alongside each other on such a day to day basis. Their jobs were done in such a way that was appropriate for their own manager and department. Each one of the members only has a small understanding of each other’s full job function in their own department. Without a better understanding of each other and further information, they have a difficult time coming together. One article describes this issue perfectly, “achieving effective knowledge sharing in cross-functional project teams is proved to be problematic ([50] Sethi et al. , 2001). For example, broad organizational perspectives and social identities in cross-functional contexts exacerbate challenges in achieving effective knowledge sharing. The extant literature states that cross-functional team members could be identified more strongly with their functional unit, both socially and psychologically, than with their cross-functional group ([48] Pinto et al. , 1993; [32] Keller, 2001; [49] Randel and Jaussi, 2003). Allegiance to functional units often lead to the implications of treating knowledge as a private good, rather than the public good of the group ([56] Wasko and Faraj, 2000). This along with different functional objectives, priorities, and agendas that could be in conflict, make team members from different functional areas unable to exploit their diverse knowledge and expertise ([45]
“Communication is exchange of words and meanings, a two - way process of sending and receiving messages (Beckham, King, 1992). Also communication is transfer of information from sender to receiver with condition that receiver understands the message (Weihrich, Koontz, 1993). For efficient communication it is necessary that receiver understands meaning of message and show it to sender through some expected reactions (Ivancevich, Matteson, 2002).” Spaho, K., M.A. (2010) page 2. Throughout research one thing is clear, organizational communication is key to organizational success. This case study evaluates a communication issue within a cross functional/hybrid fraud team within a large direct selling company. Poor communication has …show more content…
“Critical theory focuses our attention on studying privilege, control, and power with specific attention to abuses of power through communication and organization.” Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (06/2014) page 53. Many of the issues faced surround control and power. Each manager expects to solely control the cross functioning team. The other theory of conflict in this issue is known as groupthink. “Groups in danger of groupthink overestimate their own capabilities, seek information that supports their point of view, and avoid or discount contradictory ideas.” Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (06/2014) page 300. Each side of the hybrid team is guilty of focusing solely on their own perspective and continuing on without further research and development or information from the other side. The team and the management of this group jumps to decisions before critically thinking out the issue and how it affects the other side. Groups guilty of groupthink often look fine on the surface, but this behavior can be detrimental to a team such as this one who is specifically put together to work cohesively. If each member of the group focuses on their own departments agenda, all previous action taken to make a cross functioning hybrid team happen become …show more content…
Before the creation of this hybrid team these workers rarely worked alongside each other on such a day to day basis. Their jobs were done in such a way that was appropriate for their own manager and department. Each one of the members only has a small understanding of each other’s full job function in their own department. Without a better understanding of each other and further information, they have a difficult time coming together. One article describes this issue perfectly, “achieving effective knowledge sharing in cross-functional project teams is proved to be problematic ([50] Sethi et al. , 2001). For example, broad organizational perspectives and social identities in cross-functional contexts exacerbate challenges in achieving effective knowledge sharing. The extant literature states that cross-functional team members could be identified more strongly with their functional unit, both socially and psychologically, than with their cross-functional group ([48] Pinto et al. , 1993; [32] Keller, 2001; [49] Randel and Jaussi, 2003). Allegiance to functional units often lead to the implications of treating knowledge as a private good, rather than the public good of the group ([56] Wasko and Faraj, 2000). This along with different functional objectives, priorities, and agendas that could be in conflict, make team members from different functional areas unable to exploit their diverse knowledge and expertise ([45]