- Email: [email protected]
A systems solution to communication problems
A Systems Solution to Communication Problems John L. DiGaetani
57 J o h n DiGaetani is an Assistant Professor of English at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. He specializes in business communication and has written a b o o k in this area, Writing Out Loud: A Self-Help Guide to Clear Business Writing (Dow Jones-Irwin, 1983).
An improved written communication system can make e m p l o y e e s happier with their jobs, cut down on confusion and paperwork, and even, as it did in this case, bring in more business. s. Claire A n t h o n y is an assistant vice president at the Connecticut Bank and Trust C o m p a n y in Hartford. In April 1982, she and the author talked about the way Connecticut Bank has restructured their communication s y s t e m - s o m e of the problems t h ey encountered, some of the successes they had, and some of the problems they're still working on.
M
JD: Tell me about some of the problems you've had at the bank and h o w y o u r new program has solved them. CA: This all started back in O ct ober of 1980 when we did a Climate (attitude) survey of our employees. This was the first employee survey we ever did and we have about 3,500 employees. There were five different categories in the survey, one of which was communication. A n o t h e r typical category was employee benefits. Our c o m m u n i c a t i o n results were poor. By poor, I mean that 40 percent or more of the employees
were n o t satisfied with the way c o m m u n i c a t i o n was going. JD: So the survey indicated that m any employees thought c o m m u n i c a t i o n in the bank needed a lot of improvement. CA: That's right, and more than any other area. When we looked at the study, we also recognized that m a n y of the concerns in ot her areas could also be communication problems. For instance, m any people didn't think they were paid well, which was a perception problem because in fact we do pay our people a cut above our competition. We knew that c o m m u n i c a t i o n was an issue we had to look at. The chairman of the bank, Walter Connolly, made it his responsibility to improve communication. In fact, he made a statement that said responsibility for c o m m u n i c a t i o n cannot be delegated just as the financial soundness of the bank cannot be delegated. The chief executive office has to take full accountability. JD: Well, having that kind of Business Horizons / September-October 1983
58
support for the program must have ferent staff departments were regubeen a big plus. larly telling them about policies CA: Right. And it was his and procedures. impetus that made us address the JD: An information overload. communication question. Because CA: Yes, definitely. Plus conhe took full accountability for the flicting signals. It wasn't possible issue, he formed a corporate com- for these people to absorb the munication committee with him- information on all these pieces of self as chairman. On the committee paper. With the help of some top were the people who managed dif- managers in a task force, we set ferent areas of communication. policies and goals for written comBut he needed someone who munication. They were: that any would help him with the daily instruction going to a subordinate activity of this committee. That is must first go through the boss, that where I came into the picture. quantity should be based on "need Right from the start, our com- to k n o w , " and that quality should mittee saw that written communi- go up. A big change. Before, staff cation was a big part of communi- functions could tell anyone what cation in the bank. to do. We didn't say everything JD: So you feel that's the area had to go through the boss; what where the most work needed to be we said was everything that told done. someone what to do has to come CA: That was the place to f r o m the supervisor. For written start. One of the questions on the communications that weren't employee survey was, "Do y o u policy and procedure, we asked: think bank policies are admin- Why does it have to be in a memo? istered uniformly from department Why d o n ' t we cut out all the other to d e p a r t m e n t ? " Forty-one per- stuff? Can the newsletter comcent of the employees responded, municate this? " N o . " Part of the reason was that JD: In other words, do we there were no uniform, up-to-date really need all this paperwork? personnel policies. CA: Exactly. There are thirty So the personnel director pro- divisions in the bank, all producing duced a new personnel policy and receiving memos. To control manual to replace our severely the memos going out and coming outdated one. At the same time, in, we appointed a Communication the h u m a n resource development Officer to help each division head. director organized refresher trainJD: Was this somebody in that ing in personnel policies for super- division already? visors to coincide with the new CA: Yes. Division heads could manual. We recognized that the pick anyone they wanted but the supervisors had to be the com- person had to have a good attitude municators at the bank. Everyone and good writing skills. The policy reported to a supervisor and that gives division heads full accountwas the best way to communicate. ability for the information that I think the big change started goes to and f r o m their staffs. No when we audited all the written more staff telling the line what to communication. We found that the do. Each time a memo is going to managers of staff support depart- tell the people what to do, it goes ments were telling the line people through their communication ofhow to do thelr jobs. If y o u looked ficer. We developed a checklist for at one big line group, our "Personal Bankers" who open new ac- Communication Officers to use to counts at our ninety-five offices, reduce quantity and improve y o u ' d see that they received an quality of memos. It asks questions onerous number of memos from like, "Should this be part of a staff departments. And eight dif- manual? . . . . Is it as clear and simple
as possible?" The producing division's Communication Officer fills it out and sends it with the memo t o - t h e receiving division's Communication Officer, who must agree with the answers. Before the producer sends the memo to the receiver, he has put it in a form ready to be signed. Getting the memo in that perfect form is a result of the "Completed Staff Work" part of our policy. "Completed Staff Work" is a favorite d o c u m e n t of the chairman. It says that what you present for approval should have all questions answered so that the receiver can say " y e s " or " n o " with full confidence. The producer's final step in getting the m e m o in the most effective shape is to test it on a potential receiving individual. This prevents a c o m m o n writing flaw-writing from the producer's point of view. JD: Rather than the reader's. CA: Yes. In developing the policy, we went out and talked to all the receivers to find out what their needs were. A lot of the success we're having is because now we are listening to the receivers. We are really writing to them now. One of the questions on the checklist is: "Is this material being sent to people based on 'need to k n o w ' ? " Often the receiver will say something like, "No, we d o n ' t have to go to the tellers with this. We can go to the teller managers for this." So we save about 200 memos because y o u sent them only to the managers. JD: That's what we call in management communication "writing from the reader's point of view," and it is very important. If you try to figure out what the reader needs and what his problems are, you will address those issues. Communication then becomes much more efficient• CA: Going through the Communication Officer tests the memo from the management standpoint and the potential receiver tests it
A Systems Solution to Communication Problems
"If you try to figure out what the reader needs and what his problems are, you will address those issues. Communication then becomes much more efficient."
59 from the working standpoint. The manager has to decide who in this division needs to get what; it's management's decision. The Communication Officer's job is to help the manager. The network is working just fine. I know when we talk about checklists it sounds very mudane and mechanical, but the employees are comfortable with the system. JD: Plus, a lot of the communication problems are mundane and mechanical, and connecting them with that kind of solution makes sense if the solution works. CA: Well, to make sure it works, we have a bounce-back policy to monitor the system. Now that people are becoming aware that it's not policy to receive instructions from anyone but their boss and that memos must be written well, they'll bounce "underground m e m o s " back to their own Communication Officer~ JD: In other words, the reader can send it back and say, "This is a mess" or "I can't understand it." CA: Yes, and then the Communication Officer will translate that to "this piece could be improved by doing this . . . " and send it back to the producing division. JD: Well, efficiency is cheaper from the bank's point of view.
Problems and Adaptations CA: It is all smoothed out now, but we had some problem areas. JD" What problem areas? CA: For example, personnel needs to communicate with all divisions. That means that they would have to send out thirty checklists each time they did a memo. That's not practical. So, we had personnel make a list of messages they felt could be sent directly to employees, and messages that should go from the boss. For example, if they are going to tell people to work Saturday, they w o u l d n ' t have it from the Personnel Director. They have it come from the employee's direct supervisor, saying why and asking for support. JD: More politically shrewd, really. CA: Yes. If you're going to tell people that we're not going to give out raises this year, that shouldn't come from personnel either. That should come from the boss. Sometimes the boss doesn't want to do it in a memo. A meeting or a one-on-one talk might be better. Personnel is one example of how we've adapted the system. Controllers are another example of that. They have to communicate with everyone who does budgets. Budgeting is a big process. A lot of
communication is required back and forth and a lot of people complained last year about how the budget instructions were written. You can imagine how bankers would write budget instructions. The budget has been isolated with a special communications system, so we solved that. The system is greased and oiled well now, even though every now and then a memo goes out from someone who has forgotten how to go through the Communication Officer, or chose not to for some reason. The "bounce-back" gets them back in the system quickly, though. JD: Well, communication is a very sensitive area. When you correct somebody's English, you're hitting a very sensitive nerve. By implying that somebody can't write, you can make an enemy for life. CA: That's right. JD: Let me summarize what your plan involves. First of all, the whole plan was generated by an employee survey which indicated that there were problems with communication and this resulted in wasted time and a lot of unhappy employees. CA: That's right. JD: And the chairman began a program to bring the quantity of
"In terms o f quantity, at last count, we were s e n d i n g 57 p e r c e n t fewer m e m o s than last year at the same time. A n d , we did the attitude survey again this year . . . . Many items i m p r o v e d on the survey, but n o t h i n g went u p like c o m m u n i c a t i o n . "
60 written communication down and the quality up. The solutions involved rules about who can send policy and procedure memos, a Communication Officer in each division who was responsible to the manager, a checklist before the memo goes out, and a "bounceb a c k " policy so that if a memo caused utter confusion or irritation it could be redone. Finally, the manager has full accountability for communication in and out of his division. CA: That last point is the key because we used to have fuzzy accountability. Before we had eight different staff units telling people what to do, and the staff manager didn't feel accountable. Now managers are totally accountable for communication, and the policy has made this clear. JD: So then the five points I summarized are the main elements of the program? CA: Also, all memos are tested before they go out. A lot of companies, even if they didn't use the Communication Officer system, could easily start a test system. It really catches unclear directions before it's too late. JD: So the test occurs before the memo goes out. Somebody in the receiving department reads it. CA: Right. A typical receiver--
someone with nothing to do with generating the memo. JD: So the people in the other department would read the memo. If there are messages that d o n ' t meet their needs or cause confusion, this would be pointed out, and then before the final memo went out, this feedback would be taken into account. CA: Yes. Many people balked at the new system at first. Communication Officers said, "I d o n ' t have time to do it." Well, we have a network of testers out there now and we've found people love being testers. JD: Sure, it is very flattering to be asked to criticize somebody else's work, so they somehow manage to find time in their busy day to do it. So these are the key elements in the plan. What evidence do you have that it's been working? Proofs of Success CA: In terms of quantity, at last count, we were sending 57 percent fewer memos than last year at the same time. And, we did the attitude survey again this year, a year later. We deemed anything that rose 6 percent or better in favorability as a significant improvement. All the communication is-
sues went up by 6 percent or b e t t e r - e v e r y single one of them. One rose more than 30 percent, from 31 to 62 percent in favorability. JD: That is a crucial indication as well of employee satisfaction. CA: The survey also shows that 87 percent of the employees were satisfied overall. That's very significant. JD: Employee turnover is expensive. CA: Many items improved on the survey, but nothing went up like communication. JD: Well, this year's survey results indicate two things: First of all, that y o u r plan has worked in the sense that communication issues addressed in the original survey have shown improvement and a significant improvement, and the results also indicate what I've long suspected. A company that communicates well has more happy employees. Of course, there are still grapevines and rumormills. CA: You will never get rid of the grapevine. JD: But it generates a lot of resentment and confusion in an organization. Clearer communication produces happier employees. CA: We have proof of that in an incentive campaign going on right now for our employees. Em-
A Systems Solution to Communication Problems
ployees get points toward gifts for bringing in a new account. Communications can make or break a program like this. The outside company that does all the computer work for the program told us that for the size of our bank and our number of employees, we could expect 10,000 items to be processed during this seven-month campaign. We had 10,000 items in the first two weeks! Our employees are very happy to sell their own bank. JD: In other words, happy em-
ployees generate business. CA: Y e s , they're happy to bring in their friends. JD: Sure, the disgruntled employees would say things like, "'I w o u l d n ' t give that bank a dime." That's not good for business. A bank is a part of a c o m m u n i t y and depends on that community. I think it is good for any business to add to the pool of happy people rather than create bitterness and frustration. CA: Yes. The results of the incentive program prove that in a
measurable way. JD: Well, I'm glad your new communication program has been such a success. I think a lot of companies would like to know how this program helped solve your bank's communication problems. So often communication problems are everywhere in a large organization, but there seem to be few solutions. CA: Our new communication program has been working for uS.
[--1
61
57 J o h n DiGaetani is an Assistant Professor of English at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. He specializes in business communication and has written a b o o k in this area, Writing Out Loud: A Self-Help Guide to Clear Business Writing (Dow Jones-Irwin, 1983).
An improved written communication system can make e m p l o y e e s happier with their jobs, cut down on confusion and paperwork, and even, as it did in this case, bring in more business. s. Claire A n t h o n y is an assistant vice president at the Connecticut Bank and Trust C o m p a n y in Hartford. In April 1982, she and the author talked about the way Connecticut Bank has restructured their communication s y s t e m - s o m e of the problems t h ey encountered, some of the successes they had, and some of the problems they're still working on.
M
JD: Tell me about some of the problems you've had at the bank and h o w y o u r new program has solved them. CA: This all started back in O ct ober of 1980 when we did a Climate (attitude) survey of our employees. This was the first employee survey we ever did and we have about 3,500 employees. There were five different categories in the survey, one of which was communication. A n o t h e r typical category was employee benefits. Our c o m m u n i c a t i o n results were poor. By poor, I mean that 40 percent or more of the employees
were n o t satisfied with the way c o m m u n i c a t i o n was going. JD: So the survey indicated that m any employees thought c o m m u n i c a t i o n in the bank needed a lot of improvement. CA: That's right, and more than any other area. When we looked at the study, we also recognized that m a n y of the concerns in ot her areas could also be communication problems. For instance, m any people didn't think they were paid well, which was a perception problem because in fact we do pay our people a cut above our competition. We knew that c o m m u n i c a t i o n was an issue we had to look at. The chairman of the bank, Walter Connolly, made it his responsibility to improve communication. In fact, he made a statement that said responsibility for c o m m u n i c a t i o n cannot be delegated just as the financial soundness of the bank cannot be delegated. The chief executive office has to take full accountability. JD: Well, having that kind of Business Horizons / September-October 1983
58
support for the program must have ferent staff departments were regubeen a big plus. larly telling them about policies CA: Right. And it was his and procedures. impetus that made us address the JD: An information overload. communication question. Because CA: Yes, definitely. Plus conhe took full accountability for the flicting signals. It wasn't possible issue, he formed a corporate com- for these people to absorb the munication committee with him- information on all these pieces of self as chairman. On the committee paper. With the help of some top were the people who managed dif- managers in a task force, we set ferent areas of communication. policies and goals for written comBut he needed someone who munication. They were: that any would help him with the daily instruction going to a subordinate activity of this committee. That is must first go through the boss, that where I came into the picture. quantity should be based on "need Right from the start, our com- to k n o w , " and that quality should mittee saw that written communi- go up. A big change. Before, staff cation was a big part of communi- functions could tell anyone what cation in the bank. to do. We didn't say everything JD: So you feel that's the area had to go through the boss; what where the most work needed to be we said was everything that told done. someone what to do has to come CA: That was the place to f r o m the supervisor. For written start. One of the questions on the communications that weren't employee survey was, "Do y o u policy and procedure, we asked: think bank policies are admin- Why does it have to be in a memo? istered uniformly from department Why d o n ' t we cut out all the other to d e p a r t m e n t ? " Forty-one per- stuff? Can the newsletter comcent of the employees responded, municate this? " N o . " Part of the reason was that JD: In other words, do we there were no uniform, up-to-date really need all this paperwork? personnel policies. CA: Exactly. There are thirty So the personnel director pro- divisions in the bank, all producing duced a new personnel policy and receiving memos. To control manual to replace our severely the memos going out and coming outdated one. At the same time, in, we appointed a Communication the h u m a n resource development Officer to help each division head. director organized refresher trainJD: Was this somebody in that ing in personnel policies for super- division already? visors to coincide with the new CA: Yes. Division heads could manual. We recognized that the pick anyone they wanted but the supervisors had to be the com- person had to have a good attitude municators at the bank. Everyone and good writing skills. The policy reported to a supervisor and that gives division heads full accountwas the best way to communicate. ability for the information that I think the big change started goes to and f r o m their staffs. No when we audited all the written more staff telling the line what to communication. We found that the do. Each time a memo is going to managers of staff support depart- tell the people what to do, it goes ments were telling the line people through their communication ofhow to do thelr jobs. If y o u looked ficer. We developed a checklist for at one big line group, our "Personal Bankers" who open new ac- Communication Officers to use to counts at our ninety-five offices, reduce quantity and improve y o u ' d see that they received an quality of memos. It asks questions onerous number of memos from like, "Should this be part of a staff departments. And eight dif- manual? . . . . Is it as clear and simple
as possible?" The producing division's Communication Officer fills it out and sends it with the memo t o - t h e receiving division's Communication Officer, who must agree with the answers. Before the producer sends the memo to the receiver, he has put it in a form ready to be signed. Getting the memo in that perfect form is a result of the "Completed Staff Work" part of our policy. "Completed Staff Work" is a favorite d o c u m e n t of the chairman. It says that what you present for approval should have all questions answered so that the receiver can say " y e s " or " n o " with full confidence. The producer's final step in getting the m e m o in the most effective shape is to test it on a potential receiving individual. This prevents a c o m m o n writing flaw-writing from the producer's point of view. JD: Rather than the reader's. CA: Yes. In developing the policy, we went out and talked to all the receivers to find out what their needs were. A lot of the success we're having is because now we are listening to the receivers. We are really writing to them now. One of the questions on the checklist is: "Is this material being sent to people based on 'need to k n o w ' ? " Often the receiver will say something like, "No, we d o n ' t have to go to the tellers with this. We can go to the teller managers for this." So we save about 200 memos because y o u sent them only to the managers. JD: That's what we call in management communication "writing from the reader's point of view," and it is very important. If you try to figure out what the reader needs and what his problems are, you will address those issues. Communication then becomes much more efficient• CA: Going through the Communication Officer tests the memo from the management standpoint and the potential receiver tests it
A Systems Solution to Communication Problems
"If you try to figure out what the reader needs and what his problems are, you will address those issues. Communication then becomes much more efficient."
59 from the working standpoint. The manager has to decide who in this division needs to get what; it's management's decision. The Communication Officer's job is to help the manager. The network is working just fine. I know when we talk about checklists it sounds very mudane and mechanical, but the employees are comfortable with the system. JD: Plus, a lot of the communication problems are mundane and mechanical, and connecting them with that kind of solution makes sense if the solution works. CA: Well, to make sure it works, we have a bounce-back policy to monitor the system. Now that people are becoming aware that it's not policy to receive instructions from anyone but their boss and that memos must be written well, they'll bounce "underground m e m o s " back to their own Communication Officer~ JD: In other words, the reader can send it back and say, "This is a mess" or "I can't understand it." CA: Yes, and then the Communication Officer will translate that to "this piece could be improved by doing this . . . " and send it back to the producing division. JD: Well, efficiency is cheaper from the bank's point of view.
Problems and Adaptations CA: It is all smoothed out now, but we had some problem areas. JD" What problem areas? CA: For example, personnel needs to communicate with all divisions. That means that they would have to send out thirty checklists each time they did a memo. That's not practical. So, we had personnel make a list of messages they felt could be sent directly to employees, and messages that should go from the boss. For example, if they are going to tell people to work Saturday, they w o u l d n ' t have it from the Personnel Director. They have it come from the employee's direct supervisor, saying why and asking for support. JD: More politically shrewd, really. CA: Yes. If you're going to tell people that we're not going to give out raises this year, that shouldn't come from personnel either. That should come from the boss. Sometimes the boss doesn't want to do it in a memo. A meeting or a one-on-one talk might be better. Personnel is one example of how we've adapted the system. Controllers are another example of that. They have to communicate with everyone who does budgets. Budgeting is a big process. A lot of
communication is required back and forth and a lot of people complained last year about how the budget instructions were written. You can imagine how bankers would write budget instructions. The budget has been isolated with a special communications system, so we solved that. The system is greased and oiled well now, even though every now and then a memo goes out from someone who has forgotten how to go through the Communication Officer, or chose not to for some reason. The "bounce-back" gets them back in the system quickly, though. JD: Well, communication is a very sensitive area. When you correct somebody's English, you're hitting a very sensitive nerve. By implying that somebody can't write, you can make an enemy for life. CA: That's right. JD: Let me summarize what your plan involves. First of all, the whole plan was generated by an employee survey which indicated that there were problems with communication and this resulted in wasted time and a lot of unhappy employees. CA: That's right. JD: And the chairman began a program to bring the quantity of
"In terms o f quantity, at last count, we were s e n d i n g 57 p e r c e n t fewer m e m o s than last year at the same time. A n d , we did the attitude survey again this year . . . . Many items i m p r o v e d on the survey, but n o t h i n g went u p like c o m m u n i c a t i o n . "
60 written communication down and the quality up. The solutions involved rules about who can send policy and procedure memos, a Communication Officer in each division who was responsible to the manager, a checklist before the memo goes out, and a "bounceb a c k " policy so that if a memo caused utter confusion or irritation it could be redone. Finally, the manager has full accountability for communication in and out of his division. CA: That last point is the key because we used to have fuzzy accountability. Before we had eight different staff units telling people what to do, and the staff manager didn't feel accountable. Now managers are totally accountable for communication, and the policy has made this clear. JD: So then the five points I summarized are the main elements of the program? CA: Also, all memos are tested before they go out. A lot of companies, even if they didn't use the Communication Officer system, could easily start a test system. It really catches unclear directions before it's too late. JD: So the test occurs before the memo goes out. Somebody in the receiving department reads it. CA: Right. A typical receiver--
someone with nothing to do with generating the memo. JD: So the people in the other department would read the memo. If there are messages that d o n ' t meet their needs or cause confusion, this would be pointed out, and then before the final memo went out, this feedback would be taken into account. CA: Yes. Many people balked at the new system at first. Communication Officers said, "I d o n ' t have time to do it." Well, we have a network of testers out there now and we've found people love being testers. JD: Sure, it is very flattering to be asked to criticize somebody else's work, so they somehow manage to find time in their busy day to do it. So these are the key elements in the plan. What evidence do you have that it's been working? Proofs of Success CA: In terms of quantity, at last count, we were sending 57 percent fewer memos than last year at the same time. And, we did the attitude survey again this year, a year later. We deemed anything that rose 6 percent or better in favorability as a significant improvement. All the communication is-
sues went up by 6 percent or b e t t e r - e v e r y single one of them. One rose more than 30 percent, from 31 to 62 percent in favorability. JD: That is a crucial indication as well of employee satisfaction. CA: The survey also shows that 87 percent of the employees were satisfied overall. That's very significant. JD: Employee turnover is expensive. CA: Many items improved on the survey, but nothing went up like communication. JD: Well, this year's survey results indicate two things: First of all, that y o u r plan has worked in the sense that communication issues addressed in the original survey have shown improvement and a significant improvement, and the results also indicate what I've long suspected. A company that communicates well has more happy employees. Of course, there are still grapevines and rumormills. CA: You will never get rid of the grapevine. JD: But it generates a lot of resentment and confusion in an organization. Clearer communication produces happier employees. CA: We have proof of that in an incentive campaign going on right now for our employees. Em-
A Systems Solution to Communication Problems
ployees get points toward gifts for bringing in a new account. Communications can make or break a program like this. The outside company that does all the computer work for the program told us that for the size of our bank and our number of employees, we could expect 10,000 items to be processed during this seven-month campaign. We had 10,000 items in the first two weeks! Our employees are very happy to sell their own bank. JD: In other words, happy em-
ployees generate business. CA: Y e s , they're happy to bring in their friends. JD: Sure, the disgruntled employees would say things like, "'I w o u l d n ' t give that bank a dime." That's not good for business. A bank is a part of a c o m m u n i t y and depends on that community. I think it is good for any business to add to the pool of happy people rather than create bitterness and frustration. CA: Yes. The results of the incentive program prove that in a
measurable way. JD: Well, I'm glad your new communication program has been such a success. I think a lot of companies would like to know how this program helped solve your bank's communication problems. So often communication problems are everywhere in a large organization, but there seem to be few solutions. CA: Our new communication program has been working for uS.
[--1
61