Managerial communication

Managerial communication cannot exist without management. It is a major,

fundamental component of the latter. Each evolution stage of management determined specific
forms of managerial communication. Due to the fact that the manager’s attributions are varied
and complex (as administrator, he organizes process at an organizatorical level, as leader,
makes decisions, as entrepreneur takes action at the right moment for the good functioning of
the organization), managerial communication becomes a real force, occupying a central place in
the activity of any manager. It is compulsory that every manager develops and promotes a
policy based on communication which permits him the permanent adjustment of the structure
and organizational system to the changing conditions inside and outside the organization.
Moreover, through his role of negotiator, of promoter of the organizational policy and its
transmitter, the manager has to put together and maintain an entire network of contacts with the
organization’s partners, for the realization of external policies and an informational network
useful for the maintenance of internal politics. In conclusion, modern management places a
special emphasis on communication, as a vital component of the managerial system of any
organization, either in the private sector (under the jurisdiction of private management) or in the
public sector (private management).

Managerial communication is a subdivision of interhuman communication, a leadership

tool with the help of which the manager exerts his specific attributions: planning, training,
organization, coordination, control, evaluation1. As part of the leadership process (Henry Fayol
added communication to planning, prevision, organization and command as one of the
fundamental elements of management)2, through which the manager understands subordinates
making himself understood to them, managerial communication is oriented not only towsrds the
transmission of messages, but also towards changing mentalities and their psychological
adaptation to the institution’s objectives. Managerial communication represents an auxiliary to
management, placing in circulation information about decision results, which return to the
decision centre, thus making possible the action comming to terms with objectives and results
with planning. The importance of communication in organizations is owed also to the complex
character that this process has at this level. Thus, in every organizational framework there are
numerous communication networks, that is groups of communication channels in specific
configurations which all form the communicational system. That is why communications have
a big role in the decisional frame, of amplifying relationships between group components, of
consolidating their cohesion.

Managers fulfill 3 categories of roles: interpersonal, informational and decisional3. Among

these, informational roles, monitor, difusor, and spokesman, are those which define
communication, but the informational character can be identified in the other roles also.
Depending on the hierarchical level that the person occupies, communication might take 80%
of his time. In conclusion, communication is everything in management, as long as on the
quality of communication depends the understanding of each employee’s problems, from
manager to the clerk on the lowest hierarchical position. The durability of realtionships between
them, the capacity of the manager to motivate and lead his subordinates but also the relations
with the external environment of the organization are very important elements, from which
precious information can be extracted for the well functioning of activities.
1
HINTEA, Calin, Management strategic in administratia publica, Ed. Gewalt, Cluj-Napoca,
2000
2
FAYOL, Henry, Management general si industrial
3
MINTZBERG, Henry, The nature of managerial activity, 1973

3
One of the important components of management is represented by the exchange of
informations and messages between the manager of the organization and subordinates, as well
as between employees with the same hierarchical level, with no management attributions. The
particularities of managerial communication in comparison with the other existent
communication types are generated by the aim, objectives and roles of this communication, by
the frame and structure of organizations as well as by the context of the organizational culture.
Similarly, managerial communication in any type of organization is subject to certain ethical
norms which are part in the organizational culture, in the organizational policies and obviously,
in the individual ethics of the manager.

Any employee with management attributions, in his quality of manager, controls how his
decisions were implemented only if he communicates with executants. This is the only way
subordinates can know what they have to do, when they have to do it and can make suggestions
and raise problems. At the organizational level, especially those in the public sector,
communication is done deficiently because of the too large bureaucratization which many times
makes information pass through many hierarchical levels to arrive to the destinatary. Oftenly,
top management lacks real information, being saturated with endless and meaningless reports
which don’t communicate anything. An efficient communication would take into consideration
precisely the avoidance of situations like this, which burdens decision-making and problem-
solving.

Sometimes communication is deficient becase of a rigid system of communication. It

has to be conceived as a dynamic organism, capable at any time to adapt to the information
needs of employees. Managerial communication in any organization must inform correctly and
efficiently vertically and horizontally. For this, in the managerial communication process there
are certain communicational needs of any employee that need to be fulfiled:
• need to know – professional knowledge necessary for accomplishing tasks or even the
position;
• need to understand – it is not enough to know how to do a certain thing, but also to know why
it has to be done
• need to express themselves – to bring your opinion to the knowledge of those in hierarchically
superior positions

A very high percentage of the activities that a manager develops within an organization
is represented by communication activities. This percentage varies depending on the
hierarchical positions at whose level activities are developed, thus, the higher a position an
individual occupies in the hierarchy, the larger the percentage of communication in his
activities. As mentioned above, there various categories of roles that managers can fulfil:
interpersonal, informational, decisional.
Interpersonal roles refer to the managers’ capacity to represent a certain department or direction
in front of the other employees, to motivate and influence them, to create and maintain
relationships internally and externally. Informational roles refer to the fact that managers have
to be able to collect, monitorize, work out and transmit information inside and outside the
organization, as well as between the organization and other institutions (ususally the PR
department takes care of this). Decisional roles focus on the quality of enterpriser, capacity to
solve problems, responsibility of allocating resources and capacity of negotiation.
In conclusion, communication occupies a central role within management, with a spectacular
evolution from an authoritarian, prescriptive communication (tells you what to do) towards a
relational, democratic communication.

4
 Managerial communication has to focus on the realization of permanent managerial
objectives, which have to be correlated with the functions of management: planning,
organization, coordination, training, evaluation-control.
For understanding the place and role of communication at the level of each function, we must
know the significance of these functions at a managerial level. This helps in deciphering the
structural mechanisms of any organization.
a). At the level of general management, planning or prevision function consists of work
processes through which the main objectives of the company are determined, as well as the
resources and main means necessary for their achievement. The role of this function is to
establish what has to be accomplished, how, by what means, in what conditions and time. These
objectives are realized through planning according to the criteria: detailiation, obligativity and
horizon, prognosis, plans and programes. It is obvious that the base for making up these
prognosis, plans and programs consists of a large process of data collection, documentation and
processing information, a communicational process, actually. In a nutshell, communication
represents an essential component of the planning function, without which this could not be
applicable. At an internal as much as external level it is unconceivable to exert the planning
function without a real communicational support. This is because only through communication
plans and action policies can be done, information can be transmitted at hierarchical levels, and
employees can be trained in decision-making, by encouraging to take part in this process within
meetings and discussions.

b) The second function, organization, designates the management processes through which
physical and intellectual work processes and their components (movements, time, operations,
work, sessions) are established and delimited, as well as their grouping in jobs, work
formations, compartiments and their assignment to personnel, according to certain managerial,
economic, technical and social criteria, with the aim of better realizing the objectives. The role
of the organizing function is to accomplish objectives previously established by efficiently
combining human, material, informational and financial resources, by a correct occupation of
jobs, at the level of compartments and of the whole organization. We observe the double
valence of the organizing function: we speak of organizing of the whole institution as well as of
each department, direction, office, service. At the same time, the organizing function means
communication, means building formal relationships of the internal and extarenal informational
system, means receiving, soliciting and using feedback.

c) The coordination function at the level of general management consists of „the work
processes through which the decisions and actions of the staff and its subsystems are
harmonized within the previsions and the organizatoric system previously established” 4. In the
specialty literature, coordination is appreciated as being „a dynamic organization” thanks to the
fact that:
• the economic agent and the environment are undergoing continuous change which is
impossible to reflect fully in foreseeings and in the organizatoric system;
• staff reactions demand a permanent feedback
In organizations, coordination function focuses on the collaboration of activities and optimally
allocated resources with the aim of realizing objectives. In order to ensure a good coordination
it is essential to have an adequate communication at every level of management in an
organization. This communication has to focus mainly the transmission of information, the

4
NICOLAE, Tudorel, Comunicare organizationala si managementul situatiilor de criza, Ed.
Ministerului Administratiei si Internelor, Bucuresti, 2006

5
whole perception of the message. In its turn, for communication to be efficient, it depends on a
series of factors like:
• the quality of management (leadership style; the realism of objectives propsed through
specific policies, the experience of managers, the concordance between their experience and the
requirements of their positions)
• quality of the excutive apparatus (their experience, aptitudes, interest for problem solving,
receptivity degree)
At the management level in an organizations the coordination function takes two shapes
according to the criteria of communication making:
• bilateral coordination – based on communication of a linear type, realized between manager
and subordinate for obtaining a feedback; this is time consuming;
• Multilateral communication – based on a communication of a network type, implying a large
number of subordinates exchanging information with the manager; it is usually done in
meetings.

An interesting point would be to analyse meetings and meeting participants from a

communicational point of view. This is a somewhat informal characterization of
communication styles reflected in the personalities of participants, so we could say that
communication can also depend on personality (although in a contextual manner).
The characteristics of the meeting as a method:
- has a strong formal character, because its objectives are directly linked about the objectives of
the company; reunites participants which dispose of this formal competence required by the
meeting and the unwinding of the meeting is consemnated in written;
- inside the group thus constitued, usually, there are established ad-hoc and informal groups
depending on personal interests;
- the unrolling of the meeting requires, more than in the case of other methods, the
communication and cooperation of participants;
- directing the meeting requires psychological and entertainer abilities from its owner;
- as it reunites people with different personalities and temperaments, being a good commandor
of verbal, non-verbal communication and active listening is one of the major requirements of he
who leads the meeting as a guarantee for the meeting to be a success.

The long study of the behaviour of employees who participate in meetings uncovered the
existence of several typical figures:
• The vindictive has also something to reproach somebody with something. He is a serious guy
who doesn’t take amusement in the others’ jokes, but laughs satisfied when he marks some
points in the discussion. He smokes without asking if the others mind. His posture is marked by
his chest lean forward, with his hands on the brim of the table. He looks as if he wanted to leave
the meeting. This impression is carried by his continuously moving legs. He can create
conflicts, tensions, by irritating the other participants’ sensitivity.
• The mediator is a calm, balanced guy. If his opinion is demanded, he doesn’t haste to answer.
Keeps a moment of silence, enough for the others to shut up in order to listen to him. His
constant attitude evokes thinking and pondering. He sits straight on his chair. Moves with
discretion. He is the one around which the core of the discussion can be established.
• The scientist prepares carefully his interventions with tabels, figures, quotations. Very serious,
does not laugh at any joke, because he simply considers them waste of time. He hates
diggresions. Notes everything during discussions. He would like to speak, show his
competence, but self-imposes certain rules in his interventions.
• The talkative feels during meetings like the figh in the water. He laughs loudly at any joke.
Comfortably sitted to occupy as much space as possible, never cares to take notes. He is always

6
ahead those who do take notes and uses this time to talk. Does not impose restrictions in this
respect. Looks at everything and everyone at the same time, without paying special attention to
someone in particular. He is the one who can change the direction of discussions most easily.
• The shy guy is frequently located next to the talkative. Usually has no spontaneous
interventions. His attitude is crisped and does not know what to do with his body and
appearance. He is afraid not to invade the vital space of his neighbours while they invade his.
Look at the shy guy and you will make him blush and crisp even more. An introvertit, he is
usually the owner of some good and original solutions, but making him speak up can prove to
be real art.
• The opponent is self-reserved, annoyed by everything and everyone and especially by the
subject of the reunion. He is one of those who didn’t ask for and doesn’t want participation. His
position is static. Arms are crossed, and sometimes frees an arm in order to drum his fingers on
the table. He looks disgusted at the ones who intervene. Sometimes smiles shortly, which
signals that he has an attack idea, but gives up immediately, because attacking means actually
participating. He is against tobacco, if there are smokers, but asks for a cigarette break, if the
others are non-smokers. Everything in his attitude is in contradiction with the present. He can
create confusion, descourage, and transmit a hue of inutility and ridiculous.
• The sleepy is not interested by anything in particular. An amorphous temperament, whose life
flows almost symetrically, between naps and wake ups. He gets bored very easily. He keeps his
eyes half-open and adopts a position which doesn’t indicate clearly if he is awake or thinks. An
unexpected intervention can transform him in a shocking vindicative. His presence in a reunion
is superfluous.
• The senior adopts a superiority position. Leaves the impression that his life is dedicated to
much higher ideals. His position in the chair is rigid and upright. Silent, mysterious, with his
eyes lost along on an imaginary line, he seeks a personal horizon outside the reunion. He
refrains from talking, because the ones around don’t deserve his attention anyway. His mimics
express a slight disgust or a feeling of depression produced by the situation. His presence in a
meeting can easily induce a feeling of inferiority to the other participants and fear to intervene
so as not to be judged by this oracle.
• The cunning examines the grounds and the participants with prudent and squinting looks. He
listens to the discussion with great interest in order to grasp the moment of his intervention. The
look slides away when he is looked straight into his face. If he confronts the looks of the
meeting’s leader it means he is ready to intervene. Usually his intervention is oriented towards
other participant. The final kick will be a killing reply which will make him laugh heartily. His
interventions can turn the discussions unpleasant. As the vindicative, he can generate conflicts,
tensions among participants.
Practice reveals that if managers ignore these human types and personalities, using a
leveling towards them will lead oftenly to losses materialized in time losses, neverending
debates and delays in problem-solving, conflicts and adversities between participants. It is clear
that communication is a key defining and solutioning factor in meetings and not only. It goes
higher to decision-making. That is why communication has to be very carefully planned and
thought of, and specifically-oriented, meaning that the manager has to have such a degree of
involvement and knowledge (of his organization and subordinates) that he can adapt his
communication style to the style of the people who listen to him and with whom he interacts.

d) Training includes the work processes through which the staff is determined to actively
contribute to the establishment and accomplishment of planned objectives, always keeping in
mind the staff’s motivation. In other words, the training function in an organization
accomplishes (through collaboration and motivation) a deeper involvement of employees.
These desideratums can only be done through communication.

7
e) Evaluation-control function can be defined as „the assembly of processes through which the
performances of the organization, of its subsystems and components are measured and
compared with the objectives and standards established initially, in order to eliminate
deficiencies and integrate positive deviations”5.
In organizations, the control activity allows deciosion makers to evaluate if the institution
accomplished or not its objectives through the activities developed. This is made by means of a
pertinent evaluation, based on formulated and precise criteria. This control can be done only if
there is communication, because it is based on communicational processes: evaluation is done
through tests and interviews, editing activity reports, formulating corrections etc. Due to the
complementary character established between the management functions, due to the existence
of interdependence between them, as well as between them and communication, the latter
occupies a central place in the managerial system of any organizations.
Any manager communicates aiming precise targets, which result from his own role. For
fulfilling his role, the manager will use, consciously or not, the following functions of
cummunication:
• function of informing;
• function of command and instruction;
• function of influencing, persuading and advicing;
• function of integration and maintenance.

The function of informing refers to the fact that the manager receives two types of information:
external and internal (circulating through formal and informal channels within the
organization). Through the command function, the manager ensures the convergence of the
other employees’ actions aiming the accomplishment of the organization’s objectives.
Decisions and instructions ensure the alignment to the organizational policies, uniformity in
practices and procedures, correctness of tasks. The function of influencing, persuading and
advicing allows the manager to control the circulating information and the behaviour of the
employees. The function of integration offers the manager the possibility to ensure the
functionality of the departments he leads through the fluency of the informational flux and the
good usage of communicational channels so as to avoid useless information.

Communication between manager and subordinate represents a key point in the vertical
ascendent or descendent communication in organizations. This shouls also allow subordinates
to ask questions about the roles of their work and to come up with suggestions about
improvement. Dar there always are communicational barriers in this communication, the most
frequent being the status of the position and organizational stress.
The effect of the status is that the managers lays too little price on communication with their
subordinates, because it creates the tendency to communicate to people with similar positions.
As a social and psychological element, especially an element of group psychology, there is a
direct relation between the image that the collective staff and each of its member creates about
the manager and the degree to which they accept his authority. Subordinates want to feel their
manager sensitive to their expectations and feelings, to their ideas and suggestions, to inspire
trust and respect through his attitude and behaviour. Likewise, there is the natural wish of
subordinates to receive critical observations, but pertinent, in adequate places and moments.
Tresspasing this wish unjustifiedly, can generate an inadequate work atmosphere.
Nobody can lead nobody if he can’t lead himself. Subordinates can’t be fooled for much time,
they get to know their manager quickly and appreciate him to his real value. They easily find

5
NICOLAE, Tudorel, Comunicare organizationala si managementul situatiilor de criza, Ed.
Ministerului Administratiei si Internelor, Bucuresti, 2006

8
out the managers’ „weaknesses” and won’t hesitate in taking advantage in their favour.
Subordinates appreciate managers who make their lives easier at work, they appreciate
managers through their own interests – want intelligent managers who speak their language,
who can deal with any kinds of situations. This aspect can be dealt with by communicating
fluently and adequately with subordinates – through communication anything can be achieved,
even influencing the image that you have in your subordinates’ eyes.
In the case of organizations we can talk about a specific stress – organizational stress. Common
causes are: inapplicable dispositions from superiors, pressing deadlines, lack of skills or
training necessary for the job, aspirations for superior positions, familial tensions. Subordinates
feel stressed because they are incompatible with their manager, of excessive responsibility
delegations from managers, fear of not loosing their jobs. Investigations revealed mainly the
following categories of potential effects of stress: subjective effects, behavioural effects,
physiological effects, organizational effects6. At group level, there are a series of consequences
of conflicts generated by professional stress: modifications within the group, increasing group
cohesion, the risk of an authoritarian leader emerging, increase in loyalty. The explanation for
misunderstandings, disagreements and even conflicts lies in communication, and in the barriers
that people arouse consciously or not in front of communication.
Besides obstacles generated by managers, there are those generated by subordinates, which are
closely related to the feeling of security and protection of subordinates. They will react
promptly and efficiently to accomplishing tasks if the manager will involve in finding ways to
stimulate this impulse. These ways, from the subordinates’ point of view are: to treat them as
intelligent human beings, not to undermine their authority, to be given tasks according to their
preparation and skills, to be appreciated and receive feedback, to give credit to their
suggestions, to be given attention if they have something to say, to be praised when they
perform outstandingly. Pierre Lamaitre said: „Appreciation is necessary to the extent to which
the praiser is responsible of the evaluation and appreciation of the human resources trusted to
him”7. This, applicable to managers, should be a clear outcome of their communicational skills
and their practice.

Certain qualities are needed in order to be a good manager. Not all the people is made
for this profession. The skills and qualities required are depending on managerial competence,
which refers to the manager’s capacity to perform in his activities, not just do them. A
competent manager must possess 3 types of skills: technical, conceptual and human. They refer
to the manager’s qualities to work with people and consist of being aware of one own’s actions,
perceptions and opinions, of seeing the utility and limits of one’s own attitudes, emotions and
feelings. There is a set of skills necessary for being named a good manager: double
professionalization – reflected by the knowledge and qualities which emphasize the capacity to
lead; the capacity of developing an efficient system of relationships, through which a positive
favourable work climate is built; modelling one’s own behaviour which would influence the
subordinates’ behaviour also and orient it towards performances; formal authority; creativity –
necessary for delaing successfully with technological, social changes; resistance to pressing
solicitations – decisional stress, deadlines, responsibility.
Some conclusions can be designed therefore: the manager is a professional, behavioural and
attitudinal model for subordinates and partners; he develops his own leading style, in
accordance with his personality, experience and preparation and with the precise situation in
which he has to take action; the manager must never forget that he takes action on people and

6
SELYE, Henry, The Stress of Life, New York, Ed. McGraw-Hill, 1956.

7
LAMAITRE, Pierre, European Polyphony, St Martin’s Press, New York, 1989

9
the results obtained are not only his, but of the entire team; by his behaviour, he has to
encourage change and creativity8.

We can affirm that in an organization, internal communication is influenced by a series of

factors:
a) organizational structure;
b) the type of communication implemented;
c) communicational barriers;
d) the importance of informal communication;
e) the manager-subordinate relationship;
f) the climate of communication.

We live and work together, that is why we have to know our needs and interests mutually.
Mutual knowledge is the base of our existence. Any professional group has a leader, any
institutions, irrespective of its profile and mission, has a certain structure. The entire activity of
an organization is developed by people, employed according to specific principles, work
criteria, with certain professional roles, have a status and a statute. And precisely because it is
developed by people, any organization is founded primarily and inevitably on the principle of
communication, in all directions and in all the senses possible.

Bibliography

FAYOL, Henry, Management general si industrial

HINTEA, Calin, Management strategic in administratia publica, Ed. Gewalt, Cluj-Napoca,

2000

LAMAITRE, Pierre, European Polyphony, St Martin’s Press, New York, 1989

MINTZBERG, Henry, The nature of managerial activity, 1973

8
TRIPON, Ciprian, Human Resouces Management, suport de curs

10
NICOLAE, Tudorel, Comunicare organizationala si managementul situatiilor de criza, Ed.
Ministerului Administratiei si Internelor, Bucuresti, 2006

SELYE, Henry, The Stress of Life, New York, Ed. McGraw-Hill, 1956

TRIPON, Ciprian, Human Resouces Management, suport de curs

11