ibam 8 - san diego, ca november 9-11, 2000
DESCRIPTION
IBAM 8 - San Diego, CA November 9-11, 2000. Commitment as a Communicative Process: Using Communication Boundary Management when Disclosing Private Information at Work Melody L. Wollan Clemson University. Why commitment is important. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
IBAM 8 - San Diego, CA November 9-11, 2000
Commitment as a Communicative Process:
Using Communication Boundary Management when Disclosing Private
Information at Work
Melody L. Wollan
Clemson University
Why commitment is important...
How employees are perceived impacts mentor resources and promotability
Serves to categorize an employee’s intentions with the organization, their career, their jobs, and loyalty to supervisor
Impacts the amount of resources (training, assignments) invested in employees
Assessing Commitment
Should be assessed on the basis of two distinct constructs: – Level of commitment (normative, affective,
continuance– Foci (Supervisor, Job, Organization, Career
Is assessed through communicative processes
Communication of Commitment
Commitment is a symbolic process involving identification with organizational structures and strategies
Employee shares private information as way of managing identities
However, once engaged in disclosure, sender loses ability to control message the receiver(s) interpret
Communication Boundary Management Theory
Petronio (1991, in press) Theoretical model and is just starting to be
used in exploratory empirical situations Four parts of boundary structure: control,
ownership, levels and permeability System is: formation of rules, rule choices,
rule coordination, violation management
CBM
Boundary Structure
Control: Risks vs. Gains of Disclosing– Lack of Control once private info is disclosed
and how that information is utilized Ownership: Receiver(s) own information
and go through CBM process independent of the original sender
Boundary Structure (continued)
Levels: Where can information be shared? Peers, Subordinates, Superiors
Permeability: Level of concealment vs. revealing – New Employee information might be revealed
until they have proven themselves
Boundary Rule Foundation
Formation of Rules:– Using criteria such as culture, individual
characteristics, gender and motivation Culture: determines openness/privacy
– High organizationally committed employees may be become unethical/illegal due to culture of org to keep information within organizational boundaries
Boundary Rule Foundation
Individual Characteristics: tolerance of ambiguity or locus of control – low toa employee will have higher levels of
commitment in org and job that is highly structured
Gender:– women more likely to disclose private
information at work
Boundary Rule Foundation
Motivation: – Motivation to disclose based on control needs
in organizations based on structure and hierarchy or Needs fulfillment in jobs where high levels of job commitment or lack of opportunity to promote
Boundary Rule Foundation
Choices of Rules:– Topic– Content– Target– Timing– Depth – Breadth
Rules become triggered and routinized
Boundary Rule Coordination
Interaction and coordination of the sender and the receiver(s)’s rules
Strategies developed to thwart or cope disclosures and private information
The better the coordination, the better management of people skills, org. citizenship behaviors
Boundary Rule Turbulence
Negotiation phase of coordination and rewriting of rules and choices when violations occur in handling private information and disclosures at work
Inadequate coordination and negotiation leads to lower levels of commitment and person-job/person-organization fit issues
Dual obligation turbulence (to organization and to employee)
CBM and Commitment The disclosure of private information is part
of the process of being perceived as a committed employee
Early exploration applying a new communication model in an organizational context
Empirical evidence needed and development of major vs. minor parts of the model