CONVERSATIONAL DILEMMAS: PROPOSED STUDY ON THE
NEGATIVE COMMUNICATION EFFECTS ON EMPLOYEES
INVOLVED IN CORPORATE MERGERS
Christian Lisle
Abstract
The following research proposal centers on the dilemmas employees experience when
involved in a corporate merger and subsequent future downsizing. Specifically, it
approaches the issue from the perspective of employees that have lost their manager and
are being forced to assimilate into a new system. The variables of concern are:
Communication between newly joined team members and existing team members, as well
as with the new manager; the uncertainty of job retention in the face of immanent
downsizing; and, job satisfaction of the assimilating team members. These three
variables each have a direct relationship to conversational dilemmas.
The reason for conducting this research is to gain a better understanding of the dilemmas
experienced by employees involved in corporate mergers. The main purposes are to:
Gather information in order to gain a frame of reference for future studies, and to serve
consultative functions for individuals involved in similar situations.
LITERATURE REVIEW
There have been many studies conducted regarding corporate downsizing, and its
affects on employees. Some topics of interest include information seeking behaviors of
downsizing survivors (Casey, Miller, & Johnson, 1997), the contradicting viewpoints of
employees who have experienced corporate downsizing (Faihurst, Cooren, & Cahill, 2002),
and the effects downsizing has on surviving employees (Susskind, Miller, & Johnson, 1998).
Some of this can be related to Berger and Calabrese’s (1975) uncertainty reduction theory
(URT) as well as Kelly’s (1955) personal construct theory. However, there has been no
relevant research on the affects corporate mergers have on the communication that
employees of the separate company teams exhibit, or the communicative dilemmas these
employees experience in the face of certain future downsizing, as well as existing loyalties.
These employees must try to quickly and efficiently integrate themselves into the new
structure of the organization without knowing what that structure may be. Further, with the
likelihood of having new managers to report to, these employees can experience a very
serious disjunctive dilemma: loyalty to previous manager or assimilation into the new
corporate hierarchy. The act of assimilation can be hampered by disqualifying messages as
well as equivocal messages by the new management. In the following research proposal,
previous studies in the realm of corporate restructuring and downsizing, as well as
disqualifying and strategically ambiguous messages, will be briefly discussed, followed by a
proposal of research, and the method in which it can be conducted.
Downsizing survivors’ information seeking.
Casey et al. (1997) looked at the different strategies that employees use in the realm of
information seeking when faced with the possibility of employment termination during a
corporate downsizing campaign. First, the researchers asserted that employees often look for
some sort of support from their supervisors and other fellow employees, in efforts to reduce
the uncertainty of their future with the company (Casey, et. al., 1997). The key problem faced
by these employees is the previously mentioned uncertainty of the future, and their efforts in
seeking information focus on the reduction of that uncertainty (Casey, et. al, 1997).
Uncertainty reduction theory originally focused on the three stages of interaction: entry
phase, personal phase, and exit phase (Berger & Calabrese, 1975). However, the underlying
principles of the theory can be related to many different contexts, including corporate
downsizing. Because of the many unknown variables involved in a corporate restructuring,
the existing employees have absolutely no certainty of their employment future. This results
in their often-desperate attempts to seek information in order to reduce that uncertainty, or
put more compassionately, achieve peace of mind. Casey et al. (1997) proposed ten
hypotheses; however, the first one is very relevant regarding this proposal. Hypothesis one
stated that survivors of downsizing experienced “increased feelings of information
deprivation” (Casey, et. al., 1997, p. 758). This hypothesis is directly related to the notion of
uncertainty reduction. Employees, in efforts to seek information about the future downsizing
plans of the company, and their futures with the company, constantly try to gain information,
most often by interaction with other employees as well as observation of the conversations
and actions of their managers. Casey et al. (1997) found that 90% of the respondents that
they surveyed felt that they were uninformed and did not know what was happening in the
organization. This shows extreme support for why employees try to reduce their uncertainty.
The dilemma here is that the employee, in an effort to gather information, can either directly
ask their managers questions regarding their concerns, or wait and see what the future holds
for them. Neither option is viable in acquiring the information that they seek. In the instance
where the employee asks their superiors directly about their future, it is assumed that they
will receive an ambiguous response. To add to this, the manager will most likely perceive
insecurity on the part of the employee, which can have negative affects. Conversely, if the
employee does not ask questions directly, they must rely only on hearsay, which does not
relieve their insecurities regarding their future.
Constructionist approach to employee discourse during corporate downsizing
Fairhurst et al. (2002) took a constructionist approach to employees discourse during periods
of downsizing. They posited that these employees relied on each other’s perceptions in order
to seek information as well as to define their experiences (Fairhurst et al., 2002). This can be
related to Kelly’s (1955) corollary of sociality which involves an individual’s construing
what others construes in order to define what they believe, as well as establish a common
frame of reference with others. In Kelly’s (1955) words, the sociality corollary said “To the
extent that one person construes the construction processes of another, he may play a role in
a social process involving the other person (p. 95). Further, the study concerned itself with
the contradiction of policies that the management administering the downsizing exhibited
(Fairhurst et al., 2002). As mentioned in the previous section, there are significant dilemmas
associated with these practices. First, the employees, in defining their roles and futures by
social construction, do not achieve the information that they ultimately desire (Fairhurst et
al., 2002). To add to this, the contradicting positions of the management during downsizing
also do not provide valuable information. The final aspect of the dilemma involves the
employee having no reliable outlet for reducing their uncertainty regarding their future. This
is a recurrent theme and gives credence to the research proposal outlined later on.
Structural effects on downsizing survivors
Susskind et al. (1998) took a networking approach to downsizing. Their key area of interest
was that of structural holes (Susskind et al., 1998). “A structural hole exists when two
members who are not directly connected to one another also lack common network contacts”
(Susskind et al., 1998, p. 31). What is important regarding this concept is when employees
from two different corporations are put together during a corporate merger. Not only do these
people have completely different networks, they have completely different operational
systems. This means that each team operates in a unique way, and the combination of these
two systems causes a dilemma of sorts. The question is how these two separate entities
integrate, communicate, and network with one another. Although not a concern of Susskind
et als (1998) study, one might induce that two separate systems being combined will attempt
to dominate one another in efforts to preserve their respective values. The dilemma occurs
with the question of which system will prevail, or what qualities of each system will be
dominant.
Disqualification
Disqualifying messages are very relevant when considering conversational dilemmas.
Bavelis (1983) defined disqualification as “nonstraightforward communication” (p. 130).
Bavelis (1983) stated that there are three different explanations why this might occur. First,
an error might occur in a communication interaction, which is random (Bavelis, 1983). The
second reason could be that the two interactants might have different educational or social
levels, which can be to differences in communication ability (Bavelis, 1983). The third,
which is most relevant to this proposal, is that the individual providing the ambiguous or
disqualifying message may be doing it deliberately due to some contextual or situational
reason (Bavelis, 1983). In this instance, a manager might very likely not provide direct
answers to their employees’ inquiries. Reasons could stem from the manager not knowing
what the answer might be, protectionist policy by the manager, or the privileged nature of the
information being sought.
In this study, the researcher looked at a number of different contexts in which disqualifying
messages might occur. For the purpose of this research, only one will be addressed. Bavelis
(1983) conducted an experiment relating to “Conflict theory” (p. 138) in order to find
explanations of why one might use disqualifying messages. This dealt with what the
researcher referred to as “avoidance-avoidance conflict, in which two unappealing choices
repel the individual, who will leave the field if possible…communicationally, by evasive or
indirect communication (Bavelis, 1983, pp. 138 – 139). In the research by Bavelis (1983), the
experiment asked more personal questions, like how someone looks, or how one likes
another’s gift. However, this can easily be compared to the messages managers use when
attempting to avoid giving clear answers to their employees. The manager’s motives for
avoidance are most likely completely different than in interpersonal relationships discussed
by Bavelis (1983). For instance, the manager may be attempting to stall the employee in
order to gain as much information from them as possible before release, or they could be
attempting to prolong an employee’s retention, due to unknown factors that they cannot
control. Ultimately, Bavelis (1983) found overwhelming support for the use of disqualifying
messages in avoidance-avoidance situations.
Strategic Ambiguity.
Eisenberg (1984) took a strategic approach to ambiguous messages. The researcher stated
that “strategic ambiguity is essential in that it: 1) promotes unified diversity, 2) facilitates
organizational change, and 3) amplifies existing source attributions and preserves privileged
positions” (Eisenberg, 1984, p. 227). Concerning unified diversity, the researcher posits that
the use of ambiguity strengthens organizational bonds, assisting in the joint attainment of
goals (Eisenberg, 1984). Eisenberg further said of this, “ambiguity is used strategically to
foster agreement on abstractions without limiting specific interpretations” (p. 231). This just
means that it allegedly strengthens unity, while at the same time, not stifling differing
viewpoints. The second point, facilitating organizational change, serves the purposes of:
Altering the interpretations of group goals and group metaphors; and, by assisting group
members in forming relationships amongst each other (Eisenberg, 1984). Group goals and
metaphors just relates to how a group defines itself as a whole (it’s purpose), and what words
they use to express this definition (Eisenberg, 1984). The final point is that of preservation of
privileged positions. This is the most relevant to the proposed research and touches on many
areas. However, only one area is extremely important here. Eisenberg (1984) stated,
“strategic ambiguity in task-related communication can preserve future options” (p. 235). He
further said that if someone in a position of authority were to always communicate
information in unequivocal terms, it would severely limit options available for future policies
and plans (Eisenberg, 1984). This point can be directly related to the previous section on
disqualification. This can be seen in the example where a manager might use disqualification
to avoid, either prematurely losing someone that they require temporarily, or avoid losing
someone that they plan on retaining. Future plans of this leader would be hampered by a
straightforward communication style.
PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The subject of this research proposal centers on the communicative dilemmas
experienced by employees of companies that are in the process of merging as well as having
plans to downsize. The questions of interest are: (1) how do existing employees cope with
uncertainty of their employment future, and (2), how do these employees deal with
communicative dilemmas regarding new management/restructuring? Emphasis will be placed
on the perceptions and feelings of team members who are attempting to integrate into a new
system. This is will be explained in more detail in the following paragraphs. Three variables
will be looked at in order to gain some understanding as well as to find support for this
research.
First, employees will experience communicative dilemmas when interacting with
team members from the other side of the fence. In other words, when two completely
different teams are merged, each has its own loyalties, processes, and rituals. In all
likelihood, one of the teams will retain their manager, while the other will not. The dilemma
results in how the team members who lost their manager integrate into the new system.
Further, it can be induced that the other team will be loyal to their manager, who has been
retained and will be fishing for information to pass along to them, in order to secure their
positions when the downsizing takes place. This also takes into account the new team
members interactions with their new manager. Uncertainty stems from the team members
unfamiliarity with the new manager and inexperience in operating in the new management
system.
The second variable is strongly related to the first in that it deals specifically with the
threat of job elimination. The employees that have lost their manager have a distinct
disadvantage. This disadvantage stems from the new manager’s familiarity with their existing
team, as well as that teams knowledge of the manager’s operating processes. This can be a
very debilitating problem for the new team members. The assumption here is that the
manager will most likely take a protectionist position of his previous team members. With
this being said, the newly joined team members must perform flawlessly and assimilate into
the new system almost immediately in order to have a chance of surviving the future
downsizing.
The third variable deals with job satisfaction of the newly joined team members that
have lost their manager. Loyalty to their previous manager, comfort with the previous
system, as well as resistance to change all plays a role. The assumption here is that most team
members involved in a corporate restructuring, that enjoyed their jobs, will in all likelihood
become dissatisfied when being forced to integrate into the new system. The dilemma
manifests itself as an extreme desire to resist change. However, as stated in the previous
variable discussions, the employee is also aware that in order to retain any level of security,
they must reject their desires to resist. Unfortunately, this is most likely impossible, not to
mention pointless. Chances are the new manager will protect their previous team regardless
of the new team member’s attempts at integration. The dialectical differences of the
manager’s interactions between the previous and new team members also play a role in the
satisfaction of the new employees. The new team members will be constantly observing the
new manager and how they handle situations with each team. This behavior will probably be
characterized by favoritism toward the manager’s previous team members, which will also
negatively impact job satisfaction.
METHODOLOGY
In order to conduct this research, and gain an adequate understanding of the dilemmas
experienced by displaced employees, a number or procedures must take place. First, a
corporate merger must be identified at its earliest stages, preferably prior to office relocation
of employees and the combination of the separate teams. Once this has been accomplished,
the study should have three information gathering techniques. The first technique should be
the distribution of questionnaires set-up in a Likert-type format. The questionnaires should be
completed as three different times: before the merger, during the merger, and after the
merger. During the same time, direct observation of employee-employee and employeemanager interactions should take place. Although not being overly scientific, the information
gathered may help corroborate the responses on the questionnaires. The final technique
should involve direct interviews of the study participants, which should occur prior to
downsizing and following downsizing. The purpose of this is to get a sense of how attitudes
changed amongst the participants throughout the process as well as how they handled the
dilemmas they faced. The interview data should be grouped according to similar responses to
questions between the participants. Once completed, all the data will be converted into
numerical values in order to analyze using SPSS.
DISCUSSION
The purpose for conducting this research is to gain an understanding of how
employees involved in corporate mergers and future downsizing cope, as well as deal with
communicative dilemmas. The previous proposal should be approached not by making
predictions, but rather by information seeking. Therefore, the study should involve the use of
research questions rather than hypotheses. Due to the relatively narrow nature of the
variables involved, the results should be pretty reliable, and provide a basis for a more
scientific approach for future research. Further, in gathering this information, it is anticipated
that a better understanding of the phenomenon of corporate mergers and downsizing, as well
as its affects on employees, will be achieved.
TIME SCHEDULE
The proposed study will be completed in 15 months. Time schedule may be graphically
presented as follows:
Activities
Preparation, literature review
Pilot study
In-depth interviews
Questionnaire application
Preliminary analysis
Final field study
Analyses
Write-up
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
BUDGET
1. Personnel
a. Director
111 USD
b. Researchers (2)
222 USD
Total (1)
333 USD
2. Data Collection and Analysis
a. SURVEY
i. Transportation (X days * X USD)
111 USD
ii. Pollsters (X questionnaires * X USD)
222 USD
b. INDEPTH INTERVIEWS
i. Interview Expenditure (X * X USD)
333 USD
c. DATA PREPARATION
i. Data Preparation and Analysis Expenditure
444 USD
ii. Stationary
555 USD
iii. Voice recorder, cassette, CDs etc.
666 USD
iv. Unexpected expenditure
777 USD
Total (2)
Grand Total (1+2)
3,180USD
3,513 USD
REFERENCES
Bavelis, J. E. (1983). Situations that lead to disqualification. Human Communication
Research, 9, 130-145.
Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and
beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human
Communication Research, 1, 99-112.
Casey, M. K., Miller, V. D., & Johnson, J. R. (1997). Survivors’ information seeking
following a reduction in workforce. Communication Research, 24, 755-781.
Eisenberg, E. M. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication.
Communication Monographs, 51, 227-239.
Fairhurst, G. T., Cooren, F., & Cahill, D. J. (2002). Discursiveness, contradiction, and
unintended consequences in successive downsizings. Management
Communication Quarterly, 15, 501-540.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs: A theory of personality. New
York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Susskind, A. M., Miller, V. D., & Johnson, J. D. (1998). Downsizing and structural holes.
Communication Research, 25, 30-65.
CURRICULA VITAE OF THE RESEARCHERS