Email is asynchronous, fast, text-based, and you can communicate with many individuals as easily as one person (Finhoult & Sproull, 1990). It is also acceptably terse in a way that face-to-face communication cannot permit (Montgomery & Benbasat, 1983). The requirements of social etiquette surrounding telephone and face-to-face conversations causes them to be more time consuming than the telegraphic style of computer-based messaging. Electronic communication also cuts down on wasted time moving about the office looking for people (Finhoult & Sproull, 1990).
Email facilitates an increase in shared organizational knowledge. Within minutes the answer to a problem can be received after sending out a simple, "Does anybody know…?" message (Finholt & Sproull, 1990). Associates can ask questions of co-workers while on the phone with a client (who is none-the-wiser) without having to put the caller on hold to find an answer (Durland, 2004).
Email and IM are also useful in distributed work environments to connect with remote co-workers. "Instant messaging delivers immediacy and interactivity that mirrors in-person conversations but without the need for meeting face-to-face" (Durland, 2004, p. 56).
IM also makes back-channel communication possible (communication with someone while engaged in another task, such as a phone call), but it is also a dual-edged sword as it can become a major distraction (Hind & Krieger, 1995).
The Changing Face of Communication in the Workplace
Prior to email and instant messaging, most organizational communication occurred through face-to-face meetings, paper-based memorandums, or by telephone. The inherent challenge with telephone communication is that it is not conducive to one-to-many communication. Communication by memorandum is slow, and face-to-face communication across an entire organization is not always feasible, or presents logistical problems.
New organizational forms have taken shape from EMS. Some examples presented in the research of Fulk & DeSanctis (1995) are:
- A dramatic increase in the speed of communication with high volume of data exchange
- Improved organizational coordination
- A significant reduction in the cost of communication
- A sharp rise in communication bandwidth, which facilitates multi-media communication, voice, text, data and graphics, within a common system.
- Vastly expanded connectivity with millions of users
- Improved problem solving and decision making
Fulk & DeSanctis (1995) have also observed that the integration of communication with computing technologies has "moved communication beyond a connective function to a communal function" (p. 338). The concept of a virtual community is a result of electronic messaging systems.
EMS has affected an evolution in organizations which has resulted in less bureaucratic and hierarchical organizational communication (Fulk & DeSanctis, 1995). This is largely due to EMS creating more fluid associations within an organization, instead of associates only interacting within the parameters of a rigid organizational structure. This enables the creation of ties between people that do not even know each other and increases the volume of communication in all directions. Email provides increased accessibility of top managers to non-managers, and contributes to information sharing. It also increases upward communication, improving superior/subordinate relationships (Ku, 1996). Email also increases the opportunity for more individuals in an organization to become a source of information.
Research by Finoult & Sproull (1990) has found that people tend not to be as aware of social hierarchy when emailing, and may assume equality. Their research also revealed that "individuals who are reticent or of lower status are more likely to contribute in an electronic medium" (Finholt & Sproull, 1990, p.46).
"In the bureaucratic organizational model, consensus was reached by acquiescing to the decision makers in the company, instead of through communication and influence. Influencing relationships depend on trust, shared vision and broad communication of corporate strategy" (Fulk & DeSanctis, 1995, p.342).
Prior to this communication evolution, a tree analogy could perhaps best sum up the typical communication structure in organizations; the upper echelons of management are represented by the branches, with one common communication trunk going down to the rest of the organization. Recently, communication networks are more analogous to a nervous system, with complex branching and connectivity.
This change from a bureaucratic organizational model has presented some new and interesting challenges. First and foremost is the evolving set of skills needed in management positions. "Instead of command giving, top level leaders now must possess leadership and coordination skills" (Fulk & DeSanctis, 1995, p.341). Also, managers must become astute at selecting the communication medium most appropriate for the message being sent, instead of relying on email, indiscriminately. Typically, email is suitable for less ambiguous, routine information exchanges (Ku, 1996, p.299).
Work Life in the Changing Organization
Today’s worker is presented with new kinds of pressures and concerns in the world of EMS. The ability to cope with these pressures, and constant change, can be increasingly complex. Some of the concerns in today’s EMS environment are:
- Loss of privacy and security concerns
- Lack of standardization of technologies
- User acceptance and adoption
- Increased interruptions
- Unstructured/informal communication, where the important and less important are not distinguished, and underlying assumptions are not explicit
- The time consuming reality of dealing with amorphous amounts of communication
Although task-oriented use is always the intended purpose of EMS, users will always have a tendency towards socio-emotional content (Ku, 1996). Socio-emotional use of EMS can keep employees motivated; however, excessive use can decrease organizational productivity. Also, the electronic forum provides a vehicle for employees to share their grievances, and electronic groups could potentially "mobilize organizational discontent" (Finholt & Sproull, 1990, p.60).
Interestingly, though overall electronic communication has increased, it has been found that general overall communication has decreased. Sarbaugh-Thompson & Feldman (1990) have found that "if people are not proximate, they are less likely to greet each other" (p.691).
Is electronic communication less personal and cold? Will users innately inject socio-emotional content into their communications? Much debate exists over whether electronic communication can be a rich form of communication (such as face-to-face). Is it restricted to being a lean form of communication due to it’s text-based nature and lack of visual cues? Lee (1994) argues that when richness occurs, "it is an emergent property of the interaction that is taking place" (p.156).
The impact to the organizational structure in the EMS climate has been relatively clear. Where more research needs to be done is in the area of the socio-emotional impacts of electronic communication systems on today’s workers and the effect of EMS on co-worker relations.
References
Durland, S. (2004). Instant Messaging Brings Risks and Rewards. National Underwriter, 55-57
Finholt, T. & Sproull, L. (1990) Electronic Groups at Work. Organization Science, 1, 41-64.
Fulk, J. & DeSanctis, G. (1995). Electronic Communication and Changing Organizational Forms. Organization Science, 6, 337-339.
Hinds, P. & Kiesler, S. (1995). Communication Across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies. Organization Science, 6, 373-393.
Jedd, M. (2007). Rethinking Instant Messaging. Sales & Marketing Management, 159, 19-20.
Ku, L. (1996). Social and Nonsocial Uses of Electronic Messaging Systems in Organizations. The Journal of Business Communication, 33, 297-325.
Lee, A. (1994). Electronic Mail as a Medium for Rich Communication: An Empirical Investigation using Hermeneutic Interpretation. MIS Quarterly, 18, 2, 143-157.
Montgomery, I. & Benbasat, I. (1983). Cost/Benefit Analysis of Computer-Based Message Systems. MIS Quarterly.
Sarbaugh-Thompson, M. & Feldman, M. (1998). Electronic Mail and Organizational Communication: Does Saying "Hi" Really Matter? Organization Science, 9, 685-698.
Tschabitscher, H. (2008). How Many Emails Are Sent Every Day? Retrieved on April 11, 2009 from http://email.about.com/od/emailtrivia/f/emails_per_day.htm.