Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus

Ch. 7 p. 204 address gender differences at work and the differences in communication styles between many men and women. “Report talk” vs. “rapport talk” is a great illustration of some fundamental differences in the way in which men and women communicate. What really struck me about this section however is the book’s premise that much of these communication styles are learned behaviors – gendered socialization- shaped by society.

There is certainly a lot to be said about the different ways in which men and women tend to communicate. I have worked with women who take on a more aggressive communication style (“report style”) and get unfairly labeled as being a “hard-ass” or other such terms (use your imagination!). Reciprocally, I have also seen men who may take on more “rapport styles” of communication and get labeled a push-over.

While there are undeniable differences between the sexes, what is learned behavior vs. “natural” is still very much up for debate.

Organizational Culture (Wk 3, Lecture, Blog 4)

I like that this lecture continued the book’s discuss of organizations as cultures. (p. 2) I know that many people have been blogging about this topic (as have I), and I think that it is a really important one. As a break from traditional approaches to explaining organizational communication, the culture metaphor allows us to think about organization differently. I like the additional examples of looking at external cultural influences on an organization as well.

In our modern, globalized world (especially here in Silicon Valley), we are increasingly seeing a shift in the work force as it becomes more and more diverse. We are truly reaping the benefits of the world’s educated, hard-working and committed immigrants who have decided to work here. With them, come different cultural norms and practices. I would guess that the way people operate a business in India, Spain, Japan, and the US differ greatly from one another. We stand to benefit from a world-wide (informal) “best-practices” session, in which organizations located in the valley are being exposed to such a wide variety of different cultures and their approaches to work. The hurdle, of course, is that we also run the risk of increased misunderstanding poor communication, and employer/employee abuse.

Pinky and The Brain: Hegemony (Wk 3, Lecture, Blog 3)

"Gee Brain, what do you want to do tonight?"
"The same thing we do every night, Pinky- try to take over the world."

Sometimes, those bent on world domination are easy to spot. But for every one person trying to get the upper hand, there seems to be another person willing to turn over his/her freedom, resources, etc. and participate in his/her own oppression. In the critical theory approach to organization, the example given of how oppressors can partake in their own oppression is fascinating to think about. (p. 4) It is hard to comprehend in this day and age that women could have ever actively campaigned against suffrage, asking that they not be entrusted with the power to vote! This is a great example to illustrate the point, because today that is hard to imagine that particular case even happening. The reality however is that hegemonic power balances in which the oppressed accept the power relationship must be numerous very today. It is interesting to try to think about what we will look back on as a society and be equally as flabbergasted about.

Mc[Expletive] (Wk 3 Blog 2)

I feel like a broken record, but yet again, I have a comparison to something in Public Administration: Ch. 6 p. 185-8 talks about employee “resistance” to organizational control and power. I liked the example of the employee who wear the “Mc[expletive]” shirt underneath his official McDonalds uniform. This illustrates an aspect of the concept behind the book “The Ethics of Dissent: Managing Guerrilla Government” by Rosemary O’Leary. The author talks about the very real situation that many employees are faced with: rebelling against the organization from within- legally, ethically, and (hopefully) in such a way as to not get fired.

A Culture of Secrecy (Wk 3, Blog 1)

Organizational culture (Ch. 5 p 127) is such an important concept in public administration. It’s the reason for the saying “that’s not how we do things here.” It seems that the longer an organization exists, the more entrenched the people who work there become in doing things “the way it’s always been done.” The best example of the downside of this cultural entrenchment can be found in Ch. 4 p. 108, which talks about the organizational and communication breakdowns of our national security agencies prior to 9-11. The incident shines a bright light on what has been a festering problem. The FBI and CIA’s failure to effectively communicate stems in large part from their divergent histories and founding objectives. Because the world has changed so much in decades since they were founded, many of their duties now overlap while their approaches to problem solving still differ. While the failure of these 2 organizations stands out, the problem goes well beyond them.

I interned for the U.S. State Dept in the office in Washington D.C. the summer after 9/11. One of my projects was to collect basic contact information for some of the Pentagon and various national security agency personnel working at the State Dept. I was introduced to the appropriate department heads, given the tools to do my job including the appropriate security clearances, and then was let loose to spend the summer beating my head against a brick wall. While I ended up completing my project, it took far longer than it should have. I blame the very different cultures represented by the people from whom I was trying to get information. The one characteristic that they all shared is the knee-jerk reaction of secrecy (That is a cultural value that transcends all security agencies!) It is understandable: information can mean life or death. (Just watch the movie Breach about our nation’s most notorious traitor Robert Hanssen.) Some of the people I tried to get information from could not be bothered by a lowly intern. Others felt that it was something I should get from their secretary. One individual from the pentagon was so against having his information be collected that I had to visit him 6 times and hear a different tail-chasing reason why I couldn’t have it that time. Individuals from other agencies were more inclined to help me, others did what they were told and were fine with “following the rules.” I even had a few people bring me under their wings and explain how to treat people certain agencies to get what I wanted.

Following 9/11 there have been small and large attempts to change the structure of the FBI, CIA and other security organizations in an attempt to alter their cultures. While some changes have been made, I don’t really see them as making much progress. In order to change an organizational culture, there will have to be radical overhaul and a shift in their objectives that brings them in line to meet the modern needs of the country.

Government and Feedback

Ch. 4 Processes and Feedback P. 109-110:

Under the systems theory, both negative and positive feedback are “a system of loops that connect communication and action.” As we learned before, learning organizations take advantage of both negative and positive feedback to improve their operations.

In the public sector, I suspect that government entities are not as willing to benefit from negative feedback as they could be. Because the purpose of many public entities is to provide a legally-mandated services equally to all people in its charge, treating people “equally” tends to trump efficiency, timeliness and often times - courtesy. As government strives to adapt to the societal needs of the 21st century, it must work to become more aware of both internal and external interdependencies as well as its environment. Feedback will help it to achieve this going, and can come in a myriad of ways: fewer people using a once-popular bus route, an increase in affordable housing requests, objections to development plans, etc. Of course, the system is complicated by the fact that government agencies are limited in the extent to which they can change as they are subject to the laws passed by the people and governing bodies.

Organizational Hierarcy and the Industrial Revolution

The section on the societal shift during the industrial revolution from people working mainly for themselves to working mainly for a large company really stuck me. Industrial Revolution (Ch. 3 Page 71)
The section went on to describe how today, the trend is starting to reverse itself with outsourcing, downsizing, etc. and people are once again venturing into self-employment. The industrial revolution shift (or cementing) of class structure which came from the subordination of individuals to the hierarchical factories and their top-down approach to management and communications has shaped our society and individual’s self-perceptions. It will be very interesting to see how this trend towards self employment will once again change the face of society.