Friday, March 23, 2007

Technology: Friend or Foe in Workplace Relations?

In the never-ending quest for increased productivity in the workplace, more and more companies are employing increased technology to make workers able to communicate more effectively with each other. Email, cellphones, and Blackberrys are just a few examples of the many technological methods of communication available in the modern workplace. But are these “advances” causing a decline in old-fashioned social skills that are often necessary to move up the corporate ladder and broaden one’s network? Is it possible that our growing reliance on sterile text on a screen is costing us our basic communicative skills, such as body language, eye contact, and ability to deal with face-to-face interaction? Some companies say yes, and they’re putting a stop to it. In a recent news story, Jay Ellison, executive vice president of U.S. Cellular in Chicago, enacted a ban on email on Fridays. He said that, “Some [emails] are very valuable, and some of them are just an excuse not to communicate or to protect myself from something that’s going on…. We tend to use email as a kind of a tool to hide behind issues versus getting up and talking to people.” While his employees initially balked at the idea, they soon found that picking up the phone to deal with issues helped them to learn more about their coworkers (in one case, many of Ellison’s coworkers learned that a woman with a gender-neutral name was, in fact, a woman). But it’s not just employees that can get frustrated with technology. Customers, too, are feeling the aggravation with endless automated menus and voice mail and email messages that seemingly vanish into the great beyond (perhaps they’re colonizing with the lost socks from the dryer?). John Naisbitt, author of Mind Set! urges “any CEO whose company has a voice answering system to call his company and see whether he can get through to himself.” Who hasn’t vented about the twenty minutes it took to get through to “a warm body” while calling the credit card company? By the time you finally do speak to a person, you may be so angry (because chances are, there was a problem that prompted you to call in the first place) that you take it out on them, who in turn may take it out on his or her coworkers, and the negativity continues to spread. Do you feel that the growing dependence on email is costing workers their basic social skills? Do you tend to use email if you don’t want to see or hear the reaction of the recipient? Do you feel that technology is more of a hinderance than a convenience? We look forward to hearing your opinions!

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interoffice emails can be a useful tool for conveying large amounts of or detailed information that may easily be forgotten or too difficult to interpret all at once during a phone conversation. Emails are also a useful follow up from a previous contact. However, at some point, touching base face to face or with a phone call is probably the best method to make sure information was received and conveyed clearly.
I agree that customer service numbers need to be more accessible, rather than a confusing string of automated menus. No one wants to wait 30 minutes to get through to their bank to say their ATM card has been stolen. A lot of damage could be done in that time. Same goes for reporting stolen credit cards or errors in bank transfers.

Anonymous said...

I feel that one of the most difficult aspects of using electronic communication in the office, as well as other places, is adequately conveying tone. It seems challenging to express urgency without also implying criticism. Similarly, it is difficult to convey praise or appreciation with the same quality as is possible in face to face contact. Perhaps this is one factor contributing to the general frustration of using automated systems - the mechanized responses do not match the tone of our needs.

Anonymous said...

I feel that one of the most difficult aspects of using electronic communication in the office, as well as other places, is adequately conveying tone.

This is very true. Speaking as someone with a fairly sarcastic and witty personality, it can be difficult for me to communicate well via email in business relations because I hate feeling like I’m overly professional in my speech (it just feels “stuffy” to me), but on the other hand, my attempts at humor can be easily missed when you just have text to go by (and anything hinting that you were joking, such as smiley faces, just isn’t professional).

It’s why I like communicating in person much better. I also feel you build a better relationship with your coworkers/clients that way because your face is a lot more memorable than your emails, which look the same as everyone else’s.

Anonymous said...

It's my perception that communication through the new technologies has many benefits, but the downside is that it fails to provide the interpersonal benefits of empathy and intimacy that can develop and maintain relationships when the communication is truly from person to person. Frankly I cannot stand listening to the directory assistance machine. I hate that woman's voice. There is no intimacy there!

Anonymous said...

I'm most interested in what anonymous said on March 30, 2007 regarding what can be missing from electronic communication. Empathy, tone, warmth, and the capacity to send a message nonverbally are the real voices in interpersonal communication. It has been measured that 85% of all interpersonal communication is nonverbal, meaning that it's probably what you see and how you hear it that conveys the message. I think that new forms of electronic communication can only reduce interpersonal effectiveness unless they are carefully reduced in terms of their importance in the workplace and elsewhere. Although electronic communication certainly allows us to communicate more frequently with people at a distance, it's the distance that this type of communication creates that is probably the downside.

Anonymous said...

Given that Don Imus exploited the use of one-way radiocommunication for so many years and never had to really engage in meaningful dialogue, I wonder how he made out last night with the Rutgers ladies' basketball team? New experience Don?

Anonymous said...

I find that emailing my associate is a good way to provide her with information while it is fresh in my mind without fear that I am interrupting or distracting her (the absurdity is that she is in the next office and I could probably talk to her without leaving my seat). I do not think that I email her because I want to avoid seeing her reaction. The advantage of email over the conversation is that she has a record of the communication and can refer back to it. The disadvantage is that the tone of the email can be frequently misunderstood and the use of imprecise language can also make the communication inefficient.

Anonymous said...

I agree that internal email can be great for documentation purposes and isn't necessarily used to "avoid" the subject with whom I'm communicating. The key for this communication to work has to be follow through, and I think that direct follow up with the person allows for a better, or more informed, response to the query "did you do that yet?"