The control of environment

I've been wondering how an organisation controls its communications environment to the maximum efficiency and I'm beginning to think that the key is in the amount of leakage from the external environment that is encouraged. There are various stories about businesses that sell their culture so completely that everything from socks to vocabulary is standardised, ensuring complete compliance with corporate goals - however, those corporate goals are likely to become the wrong targets and increasingly inappropriate in a changing environment.

So the need to get the message across is countered by the need to ensure that it is the right message. That second point is a cauldron of trouble - does it suggest that the direction is the wrong one? Does it threaten the ego of the senior directors? Does it give too much encouragement to the Change Freaks who believe, like Shiva, in development through destruction, without appreciating that systems work and that there are people whose identity is bound up in those systems?

I've seen organisations with no real message to communicate; and organisations where their message fails to appreciate the local culture, so that it is filtered and flattened to comply with local beliefs and objectives; and organisations where the message is so heavy-handed that criticism is traitorous and feedback is carefully controlled ... and ignored.

The consistent observation is that organisations do not understand the factors involved, I suppose, and are ill-equipped to deal with them on a personal and systematic level. The key gaps are usually in organisational intelligence functions and the related field of internal communications.

The worst thing is, from my point of view as a communications consultant, is that so few organisations seem to care!

Controlling communications

Controlling the effectiveness of communications requires some understanding of the communications environment. This is beyond the interests of most people or organisations - isn't it easier if people simply appreciate what we say? As organisations grow in functional complexity, so the backgrounds of staff become more diverse (particularly due to technical attitudes, job history, local language, aspirations etc.); and, as an office grows in size, so it is no longer possible for even the most inclusive manager to juggle the needs of staff (the limit is about 200).

So either an organisation and its management undertaken to understand the communications needs of staff ... or they manage the environment so that only people likely to appreciate the existing communications structures will thrive.

I have seen a number of organisations around the world where the communications environment is fixed and the staff have to fit in, so that only certain types of people succeed. This leads to a self-perpetuating cult of management, without the essential criticism of its communications, without the obvious conflicts that would indicate its own short-comings, and with a simplistic satisfaction at the perceived efficacy of its actions.

Is that so bad? Yes, it is. If the environment is not understood, then the organisation does not know what threats it faces, nor what ideas exist within the organisation to counter or exploit those changes. Control of the communications environment can only last so long before reality chomps through. If the objective remains control rather than understanding, then the organisational management fight their corner like a cult, claiming to be misunderstood, shouting their message ever louder ...

It's all about communication. It's always about communication. But what sort of communication is a blog? When I train people in communications, I teach them that effective communication requires an understanding of the communication needs of the audience - but what are the needs of a blogging audience? I have recommended the format for certain corporate clients to make public the CEOs thoughts and travails, suitably edited to be consistent with corporate values and standards, of course! Otherwise, isn't it all ego and a existential plea for confirmation of existence?

I have used other people's blogs for an on-the-spot report on certain world events, or to see what former friends are up to, but I am uncomfortable with the format of a public diary. So I shall persevere and try and find a use for a blog in an effort to improve my understanding of communications.