Stein,
A., Bentley, C., & Wanta, W. (1998, March 25-28).
Delivering the news: A study of employee communications practices
used by newspaper editors. Paper presented at the Public
Relations/Corporate Communications Track of the 11th Annual Meeting of the International
Academy of Business Disciplines, Chicago.
News
for the Newsroom:
A Study of Employee Communications
Practices Used by Newspaper Editors
by
Andi Stein, University of Oregon
Clyde Bentley, University of Oregon
Wayne Wanta, University
of Oregon
Communication is generally regarded
as an essential part of the innerworkings of an
organization, as it involves the flow of information between the organization
and its external and internal publics. This information may be disseminated
through multiple channels and may be dependent upon a myriad of tools and
practices used to convey various messages to these publics.
The need for communicating
information to an organization's internal public — its employees — has become
of utmost importance in the last 10-15 years, as the changing nature of the
workplace has had an impact on employee attitudes and employee morale.
Corporate mergers, downsizing, and reengineering have left many employees
feeling uncertain about their job security and hungry for information about the
future of their companies. Consequently, today's employees have more questions
about their roles within their organizations than ever before and have a need
for more information from their employers than has traditionally been provided
by these employers.[1]
In the past, the employee
publication was the primary tool used by employers to communicate with their
employees. The employee publication generally took the form of a newsletter,
newspaper, or magazine that was produced at regularly-established
intervals
and distributed to all those who worked for a particular organization.[2] Other
channels used for communicating information to employees have included staff
meetings, formal memos, one-on-one meetings with supervisors, and, less
formally, the internal "grapevine." With the development of new
technologies and their application to the workplace in recent years, employee
communications programs have been expanded to include the use of electronic
mail (email), voice mail, teleconferencing, and internal websites.
In the last few years, partly in
response to the changes that have occurred in the workplace in the past decade
and a half, a number of studies and articles have begun to examine the changing
role of employee communications in the business world and to assess the
effectiveness of some of the practices currently being used to communicate
information to employees.[3] Ironically, little research has been done on
the use of employee communications within the communications industry. As the
media are generally perceived as responsible for communicating news to a
variety of external publics, there is
a lack of information available as to how media organizations communicate with
their own employees. This has been particularly true of the newspaper industry,
which communicates information daily, in many instances, to millions of
readers, but which at the same time employs thousands of individuals who are
responsible for gathering, producing, and distributing this information but who
may or may not be receiving sufficient news about the innerworkings
of their own organizations.
This paper reports on a study that
looks at some of the internal communications tools and practices used by
newspaper editors to communicate with and provide feedback to their employees
and evaluates which of these tools and practices are used most frequently. The
paper presents the results of a survey of 228 newspaper editors nationwide who
were asked to report on their usage of a variety of internal communications
practices, including the use of employee
publications, face-to-face communication, memos, staff meetings, and electronic
mail. It is the purpose of this paper to examine some of the internal communications practices used
by what has traditionally been regarded as an industry devoted primarily to the
production and distribution of information to an external public.
Literature
Review
The literature for this paper can be
classified into two categories. The first category addresses the overall
concept of employee relations and examines some of the issues companies can
take into consideration when developing employee communications programs. The
second category looks at specific tools and practices used by organizations to
communicate with their employees.
Several authors have discussed the
impact that the changing work environment has had on the area of employee
relations. Clifford Ehrlich, for example, provided an historical overview of
the relationship between employers and their employees and explained how this association
has changed in the last 10-20 years. Ehrlich offered four basic principles for
companies to consider when trying to build an effective working relationship
between the two groups. These included the development of a strong
communications program and the promotion of a working environment based on
teamwork. He said:
Employer actions based on these four principles will
enable the employer-employee relationship
to evolve in the years ahead in a manner that balances human, customer,
and financial considerations. Skillfully managed, this
new relationship will accommodate
both economic realities and the emerging needs of employees.[4]
Other articles specifically
addressing the issue of employee communications emphasized the need for
employers to take a hard look at how they have traditionally communicated with
their employees, in light of the recent changes that have occurred in the
workplace. Bob Smith noted that in the past, employee communications programs
focused primarily on events and announcements. Given the changing climate of
today's work environment, he noted, this limited approach to internal
communications is insufficient to provide employees with the kind of
information they need and want. "Employee communications...now encompass a
broader range of topics. More employers are using their communications to keep
workers updated on company performance, restructuring efforts, total quality
initiatives, performance appraisal systems and training programs," he
explained.[5]
Likewise, John Gerstner discussed
the impact that downsizing has had on employee morale and stressed the
importance of employee communications in maintaining this morale. He said:
Good communication is the glue that can bind an
organization together in its quest to be
the best. Good communication is the fiber optics cable that shines critical
light throughout the organization and
lets everyone know how the battle is going. Good communication prepares and helps employees change.... Good
communication... helps employees buy into
the new business reality with trust,
loyalty and enthusiasm.[6]
David Lindo
urged employers to think of employee communications as a "...total
communications effort designed to inform your various served internal
publics." He suggested that a strong internal public relations program
will help employers establish positive working relationships with employees;
strengthen employee support for organizational objectives; and assist employers
in gaining employee acceptance for company policies and procedures.[7]
A number of authors have looked at
the need for improved two-way communication between employers and their
employees. Harriet Lawrence and Albert Wiswell, for
example, addressed the topic of employee feedback and its relevance to the
development of a smooth working relationship between management and employees.
"Constructive feedback requires more than one-way communication,"
they explained.[8] The
authors discussed some of the elements required for giving effective feedback
to employees and encouraging employees to provide it in return. They also
offered specific examples of how this feedback process can be successfully
incorporated into an internal communications program. "The responsibility
for initiating and responding to feedback extends to those on both sides of the
two-way street.... That sharing of information can lead to several outcomes,
helping both parties make decisions, follow directions, correct errors, and
confirm beliefs about themselves and others."[9]
In the second category of
literature, which encompasses some of the tools and practices used by employers
to communicate with their employees, a number of different communication
techniques are discussed by a variety of authors. Many articles have been
written over the years about the employee publication, as this has
traditionally been the primary formal channel of communication used by
employers to disseminate information to their employees. In the last few years,
however, as the climate of the workplace has changed and the availability of new
technologies has provided employers with additional channels to use when
communicating information to employees, the changing role of the employee
publication in employee communications programs has emerged as a topic of
discussion.
Robert Parker addressed this issue
in an article for Communication World. Reporting
on the results of a survey conducted by the International Association of
Business Communicators (IABC), Parker examined some of the factors that have
influenced the employee publication in recent years. He concluded that the
economy has had an impact on both the content and format of the employee
publication and credited the proliferation of desktop publishing for a
reduction in the overall costs of the production of employee publications.[10]
The use of electronic mail or
"email" in employee communications programs was discussed by Craig Ey, who predicted that by the year 2000, email users would
reach the 100 million mark worldwide.[11] Ey reported that from an internal communications
standpoint, email can be used to transmit information between management and
employees in companies with multiple offices, saving both time and money as
well as opening up the communication channels between workers in separate
locations. "The business community has become more enamored with Email
than any communications technology since the telephone," he noted.[12]
While authors such as Ey have chronicled the increasingly important role that
technology has begun to play within the field of employee communications
programs, others, such as communications consultant Carole Howard, have written
about the need for employers to make face-to-face communications the backbone
of their internal communications programs. Howard suggested that a strong
face-to-face program can help managers develop an ongoing positive working
relationship with their employees, as it offers the chance for enhanced two-way
communication. She said:
Face-to-face sessions give people the opportunity to ask
questions, offer opinions, and
give and receive feedback — unique advantages over even
the best print publications,
video programs and e-mail messages. They give senior
executives the opportunity to hear
firsthand what is on their employees' minds....[13]
The debate over face-to-face vs.
electronic communication has emerged as a somewhat controversial issue in the
ongoing discussion of employee communications practices. Several authors have
tried to assess whether one method of communicating with employees can be
viewed as more effective and efficient than the other. At the same time, others
such as Denise Rupp have argued that finding a balance between these two forms
of communication is a more sensible approach to developing an effective
employee communications program. Rupp noted that even with the new technologies
now available for use in employee communications programs, "Studies
continue to suggest that most employees look to their immediate supervisors as
their chief source of information."[14] She
encouraged managers to try to integrate both technology and face-to-face
communication into their employee communications programs and suggested that
one way to determine the direction of an internal communications program is to
ask employees how they prefer to receive their information.
Finally, an article in Training & Development reminded
managers not to overlook the role of the grapevine in the overall scheme of
internal communications programs. Reporting on the results of a survey on
office gossip, the article noted that the grapevine often becomes a source of
company news when employers fail to provide this information to employees
through other channels. "Why is gossip such a widespread workplace
activity? Unfortunately, many organizations provide few official means of
learning what's going on."[15] The
article suggests that by making a concerted effort to provide employees with
information through various communication channels, companies can cut down on
the pervasiveness of the office grapevine.
A review of the literature indicates
that a number of articles exist on some of the issues related to the need for
developing effective employee communications programs, as well as on some of
the tools and practices that are being used within these programs in various
organizations. There appears to be little information available, however, on
the employee communications practices being used within media organizations,
and, more specifically, within the newspaper industry. It is the purpose of
this paper to fill this gap.
Research
Questions
This paper will address the
following research questions:
1) What are some of the tools and practices used by
newspaper editors to communicate
information to their employees? Which of these tools and practices
are used most often by these editors to communicate this
information?
2) Which of these tools and practices are considered most
effective by the newspaper editors
using them?
3) Are there any noticeable differences in the types of
tools and practices used by newspaper
editors to communicate information to employees based on the circulation sizes of the different papers studied?
Method
Data come from a mail survey of a
random sample of 400 national daily newspapers conducted in spring of 1995.
Newspapers and addresses were randomly selected from the 1994 Editor and Publisher International Yearbook. The questionnaire
was addressed to the managing editor — or the equivalent editor if a managing
editor was not listed — at each of the 400 newspapers.
A reminder postcard was sent to
newspapers two weeks after the initial mailing.
Four weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up letter and another
copy of the questionnaire were sent to those newspapers that had not responded.
A total of 228 newspapers responded,
for a 57 percent response rate. An analysis revealed that the circulations of
the newspapers that returned surveys corresponded closely to the overall
circulation categories of U.S. dailies as reported in the 1994 Editor & Publisher Yearbook.
The questionnaire dealt with several
aspects of newsroom operations. Included were several questions dealing with
communication channels available to editors to communicate information and
provide feedback to employees.
The questionnaire asked editors
“Different newspapers employ different methods of getting work-related
information to their employees. How often would you say that you use the
following to provide feedback to your employees?” The list of feedback channels
were: regularly published in-house publication similar to “Winners and Sinners”
newsletter of the New York Times;
in-house publication with no set publication schedule; formal memos or email to
all employees; formal memos or email to all employees within certain
departments; formal memos or email to individual employees; informal notes to
individual employees; staff meetings; and informal word of mouth. Response
categories were never, rarely, monthly, weekly, or daily and were coded on a
score of 0 to 4.
An open-ended question asked
respondents: “In your opinion, what is the most effective way of providing
feedback to your employees?”
Mean scores were computed for the
feedback channel questions to determine which of the channels were used most
often. A simple frequency of responses to the open-ended question determined
the ranking of feedback channels viewed most effective.
Finally, the responses were broken
down by circulation categories.
Newspapers were grouped by under 10,000 circulation for small papers,
10,000 to 45,000 for medium papers, and 45,000 and over for large papers. Analysis
of variance tests examined differences between circulation categories for the
series of feedback channel questions. Because the open-ended question produced
nominal data, a chi-square examined responses across circulation categories for
the most effective feedback channel question.
Results
Table 1 lists the breakdown of
responses to the series of questions dealing with the editors’ usage of various
feedback channels. Generally, editors preferred informal methods rather than
formal methods. Editors most often used informal word of mouth to get
information to their employees (mean of 3.701, or nearly daily), followed
closely by informal notes or emails to employees (mean of 3.061). The remaining
feedback methods, in order, were staff meetings, formal memos or emails to
individual employees, formal memos or emails within departments, and formal
memos or emails to all employees.
Editors generally did not use
regular publications and/or publications with no set timetable. The low scores
here may be due to the fact that some newspapers do not produce internal
publications, and those that do publish these types of publications do so
monthly.
Table 2 shows the editors’ responses
regarding the most effective feedback channel. Word of mouth/individual
meetings with employees was by far the most common response, with 103 (60
percent) of the responses falling into this category. When combined with the third-most common
response, formal memos or email with person-to-person follow-up, nearly 71
percent of the editors responding to this question felt that some face-to-face
meeting was the most effective method of providing feedback to employees.
Staff meetings was the second-most
common response. Informal memos/emails to individuals and formal memos/emails
to all employees within certain departments were also mentioned as effective
feedback channels by respondents.
Several differences were found
across newspaper circulation categories on the feedback channel questions. In
general, larger papers used formal channels of communication more than smaller
papers did. All papers, however, used face-to-face meetings to similar extents.
As Table 3 details, six of eight the
Analysis of Variance tests produced statistically significant results. Larger
papers, more often than other papers, used regular publications (F=13.083, p
< .001), publications with no set timetable (F=6.991, p < .001), formal
memos/emails to all employees (F=11.202, p < .001), formal memos/emails
within departments (F=9.149, p < .001), formal memos/emails to individual employees
(F=7.247, p < .001), and informal
notes/emails to employees (F=2.797, p < .05). Only for the feedback channels
of staff meetings and informal word of mouth did the ANOVA not produce
statistically significant results. Here, small, medium, and large papers were
equally likely to use these two feedback channels.
Table 4 lists the most effective
feedback channel mentioned by editors in the three circulation categories.
Here, the editors in the three newspaper categories were remarkably similar
with one exception. More editors at medium sized papers (16) believed staff
meetings were the most effective feedback channel than editors at large (5) and
small papers (6).
Discussion
The
purpose of this study was to examine the internal communications tools and
practices used by newspaper editors to communicate with and provide feedback to
their employees. Through our mail survey of managing editors, personal
interaction appears to be the method of choice.
Although
it may seem a contradiction that editors prefer word of mouth to using their writing skills to
communicate with employees, this fits with the folksy, unpretentious aura
newspapers have cultivated since the roll-top desk days. The newsroom culture
historically is fast-paced and vocal, which fits more readily with a spoken (or
shouted) comment than a monthly newsletter. There is evidence, however, that
this verbal culture is falling behind the demands of the modern work
environment.
When
Russial and Bentley explored the employee incentive
programs used by newspapers, they found that journalists often value
communication from their bosses more than they do bonuses or awards. “The money
is nice, but the public recognition and the specific feedback on why something
was good carries real weight,” they quoted the Cincinnati Enquirer’s
Michael Roberts in their Presstime
article.[16]
The
article noted the popularity of “drive-by feedback,” such as a “Great story!”
comment made in passing, but said employees often seek more. “I don’t think you
can over stress the value of a handwritten, specific note telling people
exactly what they did well,” the article quoted Joe Grimm of the Detroit Free Press.[17]
The
preferences revealed in this survey are consistent with those in other
industries. Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman said
managers in all industries prefer verbal communication.[18] As work
groups get larger or organizational information gets more complex, however, it
becomes logistically difficult to rely entirely on verbal communications. The
data in this study indicate editors feel regular publications such as
newsletters are on the opposite, least personal end of the employee
communications spectrum. Between the
verbal comment and the newsletter is a hierarchy of techniques that include
staff meetings, memos and e-mail to individuals, and memos or e-mail to groups.
The
quandary for editors and other managers is to keep employee communications
personal as the size and complexity of the organization grows. Two areas of
this study are indicative of that problem, both linked to size of publication.
Larger
newspapers, the analysis found, were more likely than other papers to use the
less personal techniques of newsletters and mass memos or e-mails. Just as an
urbanized society requires mass media to transmit its information, a large
newspaper requires mass techniques to reach its many employees. Large
newspapers often have personnel departments and other specialists who can
produce newsletters and similar communication documents.
Staff
meetings – the second-best choice of most editors – were more likely to be seen
as effective by mid-sized newspapers. Logistics are likely at work here,
also. Editors and reporters at a small
newspaper with a limited staff can talk comfortably over the desktop, so seldom
need a formal meeting. Metros, on the other hand, have news staffs so large
that few rooms can accommodate them for a meeting. For the mid-sized paper, the
staff meeting is an accomplishable compromise.
The
growth of media companies, combined with significant changes in both business
education and electronic technology, are likely to lead to refinements in the
“newsletter” for newspaper employees. Williams found that business
communications is the hot curriculum item at business schools across the
country.[19] Human
resources research has forced top MBA schools to add classes in listening
skills, communication strategy, corporate identity, media training and even
writing skills to the traditional fare of quantitative analysis, production
theory, and finance. The industrial peer pressure of the business school method
is potent and is likely to spread to industries not-yet dominated by the MBA,
like newspapers.
The
second factor impacting newspapers in myriad ways is the Internet. As newsrooms
are highly computerized, they have become natural seedbeds for internal
electronic mail systems. These are rapidly evolving into “intranet” systems
that combine internal and external communications with the graphical interface
of the World Wide Web.
These
sophisticated systems allow editors and other managers to quickly and
efficiently communicate with employees on a one-to-one, small group, or mass
basis. Some systems can integrate
graphics, photographs, typography, and the other tools the newspaper has
learned to use to improve its own readership. The ease of production and lack
of printing expense means that newspapers can electronically send employees
corporate news, deadline schedules, and team-building “social” news daily, if
they wish.[20]
Face-to-face
discussions, personal notes, staff meetings, newsletters, or even the
highest-tech e-mail system are for naught, however, if editors and managers
employ them with a poor mental frame. Barry House, writing in Communication World, said that when
management comes off as superior, controlling, or condescending, it drives
employee attitudes in the wrong direction. “Copping the right attitude can help
management effectively communicate its message, its vision for the company’s
future and the employee’s role in that future,” he said.[21]
Conclusion
This
paper has reported on the results of a study that examined the internal
communications tools and practices used by newspaper editors to communicate
with and provide feedback to their employees. The study surveyed 228 managing
editors to determine how frequently these editors used various internal
communications tools such as employee publications, face-to-face communication,
memos, staff meetings, and email to disseminate information about their
organizations to their employees.
Findings
of the study reported that overall, the newspaper editors surveyed preferred
informal methods to formal methods when communicating information to employees.
The most frequently reported practices of internal communications were informal
word of mouth, closely followed by informal notes or email messages. Based on
the traditional informal nature of the newsroom environment, it is not
surprising that this type of communication would be preferred over more formal
communication tools such as regularly-published employee publications.
In
terms of effectiveness, the editors surveyed reported that they perceived word
of mouth and individual meetings with employees to be the most effective method
of communicating with and providing feedback to their employees. Staff meetings
with employees and informal memos were also reported to be effective channels
of internal communications. This reliance on personal communication supports
the arguments
of those such as author Carole Howard who
emphasize the importance of using
face-to-face communication in employee
communications programs.[22]
In
looking at the relationship between newspaper circulation size and types of
employee communications used by newspaper editors, it is apparent that those
newspapers with larger circulations and larger staffs tend to use more formal
channels of communication, such as regularly-published employee publications,
than those with smaller circulations and staffs. This can be attributed to the
fact that as the employee base within a newspaper increases, the need for more
regularly-established channels of communication may be required to reach larger
numbers of workers.
This
study is a preliminary step in assessing some of the internal communications
practices used by managers in what has traditionally been regarded as an
industry focused on providing information to an external public. Further
research on this topic could examine some of the internal tools and practices
used to communicate with and provide feedback to employees of other types of
media organizations, such as television and radio stations. Additional studies
could be used to examine the effectiveness of internal communications practices
within media organizations from the perspective of employees, in order to
determine whether or not those employees receiving information about their
organizations from their employers believe these tools and practices to be
effective.
Table 1.
Mean scores and standard deviations for responses to feedback channel uses by
newspaper editors.
Feedback channel Mean S.D.
Regular Publication 1.284 1.285
Publication with 0.670 0.951
no set timetable
Formal memos 1.916 1.361
or emails to
all employees
Formal memos 2.221 1.354
or emails within
departments
Formal memos 2.355 1.509
or emails to
individual employees
Informal notes 3.061 1.179
to employees
Staff meetings 2.722 0.970
Informal word 3.701 0.881
of mouth
Table 2.
Best feedback channels mentioned by newspaper editors.
Feedback channel Number
of
responses
Word of mouth/ 103
individual meetings
Staff meetings 28
Formal memo/email 18
with person-to-person
follow-up
Formal memo to
individuals 11
Informal notes to
individuals 6
Formal memo to all
employees 2
within certain department
All other responses 3
Table 3.
Mean scores and ANOVA results for responses to feedback channel uses by
newspaper editors compared across circulation groups.
Feedback Small Medium Large F-score
channel papers papers papers
Regular
Publication 0.72 1.36 1.86 13.083***
Publication
with 0.39 0.67 1.04 6.991***
no set timetable
Formal
memos 1.44 1.89 2.57 11.202***
to all employees
Formal
memos 1.73 2.27 2.77 9.149***
or emails within
departments
Formal
memos 1.79 2.55 2.73 7.247***
or emails to
individual employees
Informal
notes 2.76 3.13 3.33 3.797*
to employees
Staff
meetings 2.53 2.81 2.73 1.574
Informal
word 3.73 3.71 3.64 0.157
of mouth
* -- p < .05
** -- p < .01
*** -- p < .001
Table 4.
Best feedback channels mentioned by newspaper editors grouped by circulation
categories.
Feedback channel Number
of responses
Small Medium Large
papers papers papers
Word of mouth/ 31 46 26
individual meetings
Staff meetings 6 16 5
Formal memo/email with 2 9 7
person-to-person
follow-up
Formal memo/email to
individuals 3 4 4
Informal notes to
individuals 2 2 2
Formal memo/email to all
employees 0 0 2
within certain
department
All other responses 0 3 0
Chi-square: 15.01, p =
.24
References
Berk, Laurey, and Phillip G. Clampitt.
"Finding the Right Path in the Communication
Maze." Communication World 8:10 (October 1991):
28
Brockner,
Joel. "Managing the Effects of Layoffs on Survivors." California Management
Review 34:2 (Winter 1992): 9.
"Did You Hear it Through the Grapevine?" Training & Development 48:10
(October
1994): 20.
Ehrlich, Clifford J. "Creating an Employer-Employee
Relationship for the Future."
Human Resource Management 33:3 (Fall
1994): 491.
Ey,
Craig. "Message is Clear: Email Use Skyrocketing." The Business Journal 16:5
(December 1,
1995): 25.
Gerstner, John. "Good Communication, Bad
Morale." Communication World
11:3
(March 1994):
18.
Haug,
Margaret and Charles A. Lubbers. “The Evolution of the Corporate Newsletter,”
paper
presented to
the 10th annual meeting of the International Academy of Business Disciplines,
April 1998, San
Francisco.
Hellriegel, Don,
John W. Slocum, and Richard W. Woodman.
Organizational Behavior,
4th ed. St.
Paul, MN: West Publishing, 1986.
House, Barry. “Cop an Attitude for Effective Employee
Communication.”
Communication World 14:4 (February-March
1997): 30.
Howard, Carole M. "Face-to-Face Communications:
Payback is Worth the Effort."
Public Relations Quarterly 41:1 (Spring
1996): 11.
Larkin, T.J., and Sandar M.
Larkin. "Internal Communication: Have We Missed the
Mark?" Communication World 12:3 (March 1995):
12.
Lawrence, Harriet V., and Albert I. Wiswell.
"Feedback is a Two-way Street." Training
&
Development 49:7
(July 1995): 49.
Lindo,
David. "Have You Checked Out Your Public Relations Lately?" Supervision
(November
1995): 14.
McCune, Jenny.
"The Intranet: Beyond E-Mail." Management
Review 85:11
(November 1996): 23.
Parker, Robert A. "Employee Publications — Dying?
Flourishing?" Communication
World 10:1 (January-February
1993): 31.
Rupp, Denise. "Tech Versus Touch." HR Focus 73:11 (November 1996): 16.
Russial,
John, and Clyde Bentley. “Newsroom Awards: Cost is Not the Point— The
Style is in
the Delivery” Presstime
20:4 (April 1998).
Smith, Bob. "Beyond Chit-chat: Programs Reflect
Changing Times." HR Focus 70:2
(February 1993): 13.
Weidenbaum,
Murray L. "A New Social Contract for the American Workplace."
Challenge 38:1 (January-February 1995):
51
Williams, John. “Top Business Schools See Value of
Communication Skills.”
Communication World 13:8 (October-November
1996): 36.
[1] See, for example, Joel Brockner,
"Managing the Effects of Layoffs on Survivors," California Management Review 34:2 (Winter 1992): 9; Murray L. Weidenbaum, "A New Social Contract for the American
Workplace," Challenge 38:1
(January-February 1995): 51; and John Gerstner,
"Good Communication, Bad Morale," Communication
World 11:3 (March 1994): 18.
[2] See
Margaret Haug and Charles A. Lubbers, “The Evolution
of the Corporate Newsletter,” paper presented to the 10th annual meeting of the
International Academy of Business Disciplines, April 1998, San Francisco, for
background on the development and growth of the employee publication.
[3] See, for
example, T.J. Larkin and Sandar
M. Larkin, "Internal Communication: Have We
Missed the Mark?" Communication
World 12:3 (March 1995): 12; and Denise Rupp,
"Tech Versus Touch," HR Focus 73:11
(November 1996): 16.
[4] Clifford
J. Ehrlich, "Creating an Employer-Employee
Relationship for the Future," Human
Resource Management 33:3 (Fall 1994): 491.
[5] Bob Smith,
"Beyond Chit-chat: Programs Reflect Changing Times," HR Focus 70:2 (February 1993): 13.
[7] David K. Lindo, "Have You Checked Out Your Public Relations
Lately?" Supervision (November
1995): 14.
[8] Harriet V.
Lawrence and Albert I. Wiswell, "Feedback is a
Two-way Street," Training &
Development 49:7 (July 1995): 49.
[10] Robert A.
Parker, "Employee Publications — Dying? Flourishing?" Communication World 10:1
(January-February 1993): 31.
[11] Craig Ey, "Message is Clear: Email Use Skyrocketing," The Business Journal 16:5 (December 1,
1995): 25.
[13] Carole M.
Howard, "Face-to-Face Communications: Payback is
Worth the Effort," Public Relations
Quarterly 41:1 (Spring 1996): 11.
[16] John Russial and Clyde Bentley, “Newsroom Awards: Cost is Not the Point— The Style is in the Delivery,” Presstime 20:4 (April 1998), 51.
[18] Don Hellriegel, John W. Slocum, and
Richard W. Woodman, Organizational Behavior, 4th ed.
(St. Paul: West
Publishing, 1986).
[19] John
Williams, “Top Business Schools See Value of Communication Skills,” Communication World 13:8
(October-November 1996): 36.
[20] See Jenny
C. McCune, "The Intranet: Beyond E-Mail," Management
Review 85:11 (November 1996): 23, for background on the intranet.