Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Educational Management:Vol12.Issue4.1998:
Auditing staf f-management communication in
schools: a framework for evaluating performance
Dennis Tourish
Sc ho o l o f Be havio ural and Co mmunic atio n Sc ie nc e s, Unive rsity o f Ulste r,
Ne wto wnabbe y, No rthe rn Ire land
Owen Hargie
Sc ho o l o f Be havio ural and Co mmunic atio n Sc ie nc e s, Unive rsity o f Ulste r,
Ne wto wnabbe y, No rthe rn Ire land
Communication is the
lifeblood of any organisation.
The need for effective internal
communication systems is
particularly crucial when
organisations, such as
schools, are operating in a
turbulent environment of
rapid and sustained change.
Schools must be innovative to
be able to respond and adapt
to the challenges presented
by such changes. It is now
increasingly evident that
those organisations which
promote good internal communication reap positive
dividends in meeting these
challenges. However, there is
a need for hard data on the
nature, structure, fl ow and
practice of communication to
ensure that the most effective
systems are put in place and
are working to the optimal
level. To achieve this a
method of investigation, the
communication audit, has
been developed which allows
for a thorough-going analysis
of internal organisational
communication. Explores the
principal tools utilised in the
implementation of a communication audit, and discusses
the benefi ts which this
approach offers to school
management teams.
Many of the ideas contained
in this article were developed by our late colleague,
friend and brother Colin
Thomas Cecil Hargie (19481996), and we therefore
dedicate it to his memory.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [ 1998] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 176 ]
Introduction
E du ca tion , a s w ith oth er a r ea s of th e pu blic
sector in th e UK, h a s r ecen tly been su bjected
to a n u m ber of m a jor r efor m s. Th ese r efor m s
h ave been dir ected a t both th e r eor ga n isa tion
of th e sch ool cu r r icu lu m a n d th e m a n a gem en t str u ctu r e of th e edu ca tion system itself.
Th e wh ole th r u st of LMS (loca l m a n a gem en t
of sch ools), for exa m ple, is to sign ifi ca n tly
ch a n ge th e w ay sch ools a r e to be m a n a ged.
Th e m a in effect is to sh ift r espon sibility for
sch ool m a n a gem en t aw ay fr om loca l a u th or ities a n d on to th e gover n or s a n d pr in cipa l.
Th is cr ea tes fa r -r ea ch in g ch a n ges in m a n a gem en t fu n ction s a n d w ill im pose h eavy bu r den s on m a n a ger s w ith in sch ools a n d colle ges. In pa r ticu la r, sch ool m a n a ger s w ill be
m or e r espon sible for sta ff m a n a gem en t r ela tion sh ips, th e flow of in for m a tion on m a jor
in itia tives a n d th e qu a lity of in ter -gr ou p
r ela tion s th a n a t a n y tim e in th e pa st.
At th e sa m e tim e sta ff h ave h a d to cope w ith
wh a t cou ld be descr ibed a s a n “in itia tive
over loa d” ca u sed by th e ta sk of im plem en tin g
th e ch a n ges r equ ir ed by LMS a n d th e in tr odu ction of th e n a tion a l cu r r icu lu m . Th u s,
sta ff w ith in sch ools a r e livin g in wh a t h a s
been descr ibed a s a n a ge of or ga n isa tion a l
a n xiety (Ba r k er a n d Tom pk in s, 1994), ch a r a cter ised by h igh a n d r isin g levels of u n cer ta in ty a bou t wh a t th e fu tu r e w ill br in g.
Su ch levels of u n cer ta in ty a r e a th r ea t to
sta ff m otiva tion , often cr ea tin g a cor r osive
pr eoccu pa tion w ith or ga n isa tion a l politics
r a th er th a n th e a ch ievem en t of th e essen tia l
goa ls of th e sch ool. Resea r ch su ggests th a t
on e m a jor sou r ce of u n cer ta in ty is a poor fl ow
of in for m a tion fr om m a n a ger s to sta ff a n d
vice ver sa con cer n in g cr u cia l ch a n ge issu es
con fr on tin g th e or ga n isa tion (Tou r ish a n d
Ha r gie, 1996). Sim ila r ly, Ber ger (1987) postu la tes th a t a k ey con cer n in a ll com m u n ica tive
in ter a ction s is th a t of u n cer ta in ty r edu ction .
Ma n y w r iter s on or ga n isa tion a l th eor y
(Ga lbr a ith , 1973; Ma r ch a n d Sim on , 1968;
Per r ow, 1970; Th om pson , 1967) h ave con cu r r ed w ith th e a sser tion th a t th e n eed for
in for m a tion is gr ea ter wh en ta sk u n cer ta in ty
is h igh (Wilson a n d Ma lik , 1995). Good or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion s wh ich deliver clea r,
con cise a n d tim ely in for m a tion a bou t issu es
of cen tr a l con cer n to sta ff is on e im por ta n t
w ay of r edu cin g u n cer ta in ty. In tu r n , th e
r edu ction of u n cer ta in ty a cts to lower th e
existin g levels of a n xiety a m on g sta ff. Th is
en a bles th em to devote m or e tim e a n d en er gy
tow a r ds pr im a r y or ga n isa tion a l objectives.
Hen ce, it h a s been fou n d th a t sta ff wor k in g
w ith in a n open a n d com m u n ica tive m a n a gem en t str u ctu r e wer e th r ee to fou r tim es m or e
lik ely to expr ess sa tisfa ction w ith th eir position a n d tw ice a s lik ely to be com m itted to
th a t or ga n isa tion (Ar n ott, 1987). Th is ten ds to
m a n ifest itself in ta n gible ben efits r e ga r din g
th e or ga n isa tion ’s bottom -lin e per for m a n ce
in dica tor s. For exa m ple, a r ecen t w ide-r a n gin g r eview of ava ila ble r esea r ch con clu des
th a t good qu a lity in ter n a l com m u n ica tion s
secu r es gr ea ter com m itm en t, h igh er levels of
in n ova tion , r edu ced a bsen teeism , gr ea ter
pr odu ctivity a n d h igh er pr ofita bility
(Cla m pitt a n d Dow n s, 1993).
Mea n wh ile, wh a t we m ea n by th e ter m
qu a lity com m u n ica tion s h a s a lso been tr a n sfor m ed by th e ch a n ge dr iven con text in wh ich
su ch pr ogr a m m es a r e n ow bein g im plem en ted. In th e pa st, com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es cou ld con cer n th em selves pr im a r ily w ith a n n ou n cin g m a n a gem en t con clu sion s, r en der in g m a n a gem en t m essa ges com pr eh en sible a n d en su r in g th a t th ey wer e
ea sily fi lter ed th r ou gh th e or ga n isa tion a l
str u ctu r e. However, a s h a s r ecen tly been
poin ted ou t (Qu ir k e, 1995) th e follow in g n ew
objectives a r e a lso pa r a m ou n t:
• th e stim u la tion of th in k in g, pa r ticipa tion
a n d idea s;
• th e n etwor k in g of k n ow -h ow a n d lea r n in g
a cr oss th e or ga n isa tion ;
• th e in volvem en t of a ll em ployees in im pr ovin g pr ocesses;
• th e iden tifica tion of w ays of pr ovidin g a ddition a l va lu e to cu stom er s;
• th e expa n sion of wh a t a ll em ployees believe
is possible.
Th e for m er em ph a sis on top-dow n com m u n ication flow h a s been r epla ced by idea s su ch a s
pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g a n d self-m a n a gin g tea m s (Ba r ker a n d Tom pk in s, 1994). In
la r ge m ea su r e, th ese fr esh a ppr oa ch es der ive
fr om exper ien ce ga in ed in im plem en tin g pr ogr a m m es su ch a s tota l qu a lity m a n a gem en t
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
(TQM), wh ich r equ ir e th e developm en t of
tea m wor k in g w ith in fla tten ed h ier a r ch ies if
th eir poten tia l is to be secu r ed. Th e r ole of
com m u n ica tion in th e developm en t of TQM
w ith in or ga n isa tion s is seen a s in cr ea sin gly
im por ta n t (Hea th et al., 1994). On e con sequ en ce of su ch developm en ts is th a t m a n a ger s
m u st n ow th in k m or e system a tica lly a bou t
h ow sta ff in ter a ct a n d com m u n ica te w ith in
th e or ga n isa tion : th e n ecessa r y pr ecu r sor of
involvem en t a n d com m itm en t. E ffective com m u n ica tion is th u s in cr ea sin gly iden tified a s a
sign ifica n t fa ctor in flu en cin g th e a bility of a n
or ga n isa tion to a ch ieve its goa ls (You n g a n d
Post, 1993).
Un til r ecen tly th er e h a s been th e ten den cy
for m a n a gem en t gen er a lly to pay lip ser vice
to th e view th a t people a r e a n or ga n isa tion ’s
m ost va lu a ble a n d im por ta n t a sset, wh ile
per h a ps, a t th e sa m e tim e, doin g ver y little to
ta k e a ccou n t of th e wh a t sta ff th in k a n d feel
a bou t h ow th e or ga n isa tion a ctu a lly wor k s
a n d h ow th in gs cou ld be im pr oved. P a r t of th e
expla n a tion is th a t m a n a ger s ten d to over r a te th eir effectiven ess a s com m u n ica tor s
a n d over estim a te th e effectiven ess of th eir
or ga n isa tion ’s com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es.
For exa m ple, we a r e fa m ilia r w ith a su r vey in
on e or ga n isa tion wh ich h a d in stitu ted a
“m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g a bou t” pr ogr a m m e, a n d pr ou dly r e ga r ded it a s a su ccess. However, sever a l su r vey r espon den ts
der ided th is a s “m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g
pa st”, givin g a n en tir ely differ en t per spective
on sta ff m a n a gem en t r ela tion sh ips! An oth er,
a n d m or e ea sily r em edied fa ctor, is sim ply
th a t m a n a gem en t u n til r ecen tly la ck ed a
system a tic pr ocedu r e for eva lu a tin g its com m u n ica tion pr a ctices a n d th eir im pa ct on
wor k in g r ela tion sh ips a n d cor por a te ou tcom es. As m a n a ger s wou ld in sta n tly r ecogn ise elsewh er e, su ch a ch r on ic la ck of eva lu a tion tools is pr a ctica lly gu a r a n teed to cr ea te
exa gger a ted im pr ession s of effectiven ess.
Com m u n ica tion a u dits r epr esen t a n
a ppr oa ch a n d set of tools wh ich ca n fu lfil th is
fu n ction a n d th er efor e a ssist or ga n isa tion s to
im pr ove th eir com m u n ica tion pr a ctices.
Accor din gly, a u dits h ave been defi n ed
(E m m a n u el, 1985, p. 50) a s:
a com pr eh en sive a n d th or ou gh stu dy of com m u n ication ph ilosophy, con cepts, str u ctu r e,
flow a n d pr a ctice with in a n or ga n isation .
By ca r r yin g ou t su ch a n a u dit, edu ca tion m a n a ger s w ill be a ble to discover wh at com m u n ica tion ch a n n els a r e bein g u tilised, h ow well
th ey a r e u sed, th e a m ou n t of cr eden ce th a t
sta ff give to va r iou s sou r ces of in for m a tion
a n d, m ost im por ta n tly, h ow sta ff feel com m u n ica tion cou ld be im pr oved. Ma n a gem en t w ill
ben efit by fin din g ou t wh at sta ff a r e a ctu a lly
com m u n ica tin g a bou t, r a th er th a n wh a t it
th in k s th ey a r e or sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g
a bou t. Un der ta k in g a com m u n ica tion a u dit
w ill en a ble m a n a ger s to listen better to wh a t
sta ff h ave to say a n d th u s iden tify str en gth s
a n d wea k n esses in th e com m u n ica tion system . Th is in tu r n w ill a llow a n y per ceived
com m u n ica tion deficits w ith in th e sch ool
or ga n isa tion to be a ddr essed a n d sh ou ld fa cilita te th e developm en t of a com pr eh en sive com m u n ica tion s str a tegy.
A focused communication strategy
A focu sed com m u n ica tion str a te gy m a k es a
sign ifica n t con tr ibu tion to a ch ievin g m a n a ger ia l effectiven ess a n d m u st becom e a n in te gr a l pa r t of th e str a te gic pla n n in g pr ocess for
a ll or ga n isa tion s. As pa r t of th is, effective
com m u n ica tion system s a n d pr a ctices n eed
to be developed a n d im plem en ted. Th is sta r ts
w ith a scer ta in in g th e existin g level of com m u n ica tion effectiven ess (or br ea k dow n )
w ith in th e or ga n isa tion con cer n ed. Mu ch
m a n a gem en t a ctivity con sists of “fir e figh tin g” r a th er th a n th e exer cise of str a te gic
lea der sh ip, wh ile th e con fla gr a tion s th a t
pr ove so distr a ctin g on a day-to-day ba sis a r e
often th e con sequ en ce of vola tile com m u n ica tion system s. Th ese pr odu ce poor sta ff com m itm en t, a n d lea d to sta ff wh o a r e less effective in th eir jobs (La r son a n d F u k a m i, 1984),
w ith m or e a bsen teeism (Steer s, 1977) a n d
h igh er sta ff tu r n over (An gle a n d Per r y, 1981)
th a n th eir m or e in for m ed cou n ter pa r ts. As a
r esu lt, wh en w in ds of ch a n ge blow th r ou gh
th e or ga n isa tion , fl ick er in g em ber s of dissen t
ca n gr ow in to a n in fer n o of dissa tisfa ction .
By con tr a st, th e com m u n ica tion pr ocess
sh ou ld be design ed a s pa r t of th e developm en t
of a positive socia l system (Reilly a n d DiAn gelo, 1990), so a s be a ble to a ddr ess a n y ba r r ier s to th e pr om otion of effective com m u n ica tion w ith in th e or ga n isa tion . To con tin u e th e
for m er a n a logy, fir e pr even tion is pr efer a ble.
Th e r espon sibility for th e developm en t of
effective com m u n ica tion s str a te gies a n d
system s is essen tia lly th a t of m a n a gem en t.
Ma n a ger s n eed to or ga n ise w ays of in te gr a tin g a com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m e w ith existin g gen er a l m a n a ger ia l fu n ction s. Th ey
sh ou ld th er efor e th in k a bou t h ow to develop a
com pr eh en sive com m u n ica tion s str a te gy a s
a n in te gr a l pa r t of th eir over a ll str a te gic
pla n n in g pr ogr a m m e. For th is r ea son , it h a s
been a r gu ed th a t com m u n ica tion is th e cr itica l su ccess in gr edien t in a sch ool’s str a te gic
pla n n in g (N e gben , 1991).
Hen ce, edu ca t ion m a n a ger s m u st be a ble t o
a ssess t h e effect iven ess of t h eir sch ool’s
com m u n ica t ion pr a ct ices. To do so t h ey n eed
[ 177 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
t o k n ow wh a t t h ese a r e a n d h ow well t h ey a r e
cu r r en t ly fu n ct ion in g. It is im por t a n t t h a t
t h er e sh ou ld be som e r eview of a n d a ccou n t a bilit y for t h e fl ow of or ga n isa t ion a l com m u n ica t ion . At t h e pr a ct ica l level, t h is m ea n s
t h a t if vit a l in for m a t ion is n ot r ea ch in g it s
t a r get a u dien ces, t h en t h e block a ges in t h e
com m u n ica t ion ch a n n els ca n be iden t ifi ed
a n d dea lt w it h (Tou r ish a n d Ha r gie, 1996).
T h e pr oblem , t h er efor e, is t h e n ecessit y fi r st
of a ll, t o a ccu r a t ely a ssess t h e sch ool’s pr esen t com m u n ica t ion per for m a n ce so a s t o be
a ble t o devise a n d im plem en t wor t h wh ile
im pr ovem en t s. Su ch a st r a t e gy be gin s w it h
ga t h er in g a ccu r a t e in for m a t ion a bou t cu r r en t com m u n ica t ion syst em s a n d pr a ct ices
w it h in t h e or ga n isa t ion .
Th e k ey steps in developin g su ch a str a te gy
cou ld be su m m a r ised a s follow s.
• Iden tify th e n a tu r e of cu r r en t pr a ctice. Th e
m ost system a tic m eth od for so doin g is
th r ou gh th e im plem en ta tion of a com m u n ica tion a u dit, a n d th is for m s th e m a in th r u st
of th is pa per.
• Use th e r esu lts of th e a u dit to sen sitise
m a n a gem en t a n d sta ff to th e r ea lities of
good com m u n ica tion pr a ctice. Dissem in a te
th e r esu lts w idely a n d fr a n k ly, a t a ll levels.
Ask for su ggestion s to effect im pr ovem en ts,
a n d m on itor closely th e pr ogr ess of pr ogr a m m es set u p in r espon se to th e a u dit
exer cise.
• In te gr a te th is pr ocess in to th e bu sin ess
pla n n in g cycle of th e or ga n isa tion – i.e. a sk
a ll con tr ibu tor s to th e bu sin ess pla n n in g
pr ocess to con sider th e com m u n ica tion
con sequ en ces of th e decision s th a t a r e
bein g con tem pla ted. Requ est deta iled exa m ples of h ow m a n a gem en t beh aviou r ca n be
ch a n ged to m eet th e n ew com m u n ica tion
ch a llen ges wh ich h ave been iden tified.
• Feed th e r esu lts of th is pla n n in g in to fu tu r e
a u dit m a ter ia ls, th er eby cr ea tin g ben ch m a r k s for fu r th er im pr ovem en ts in or ga n isa tion a l coh esion a n d efficien cy. In oth er
wor ds, a sk specific qu estion s a bou t n ew
com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es, a ssess
wh eth er u n der sta n din g of pa r ticu la r issu es
h a s im pr oved a n d a scer ta in wh eth er r ela tion sh ips on th e gr ou n d a r e im pr ovin g a s a
r esu lt.
Auditing communication at school
level
A tech n iqu e ter m ed th e com m u n ica tion a u dit
h a s been developed a n d in cr ea sin gly u tilised
to in vestiga te th e n a tu r e a n d fu n ction in g of
com m u n ica tion system s a n d pr a ctices w ith in
or ga n isa tion s. A com m u n ica tion a u dit
pr ovides m a n a ger s w ith h a r d da ta on th e
[ 178 ]
effica cy of th eir or ga n isa tion ’s com m u n ica tion beh aviou r s (Tou r ish a n d Tou r ish , 1996).
It is a va lu a ble m a n a gem en t tech n iqu e by
wh ich th e pr ocesses of com m u n ica tion da ta
collection a n d a n a lysis ca n be ca r r ied ou t a n d
cor r ective a ction ca n be in stiga ted a s a r esu lt.
Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit offer s a system a tic
a n d r igor ou s a ppr oa ch for a ssessin g n ot ju st
th e qu a n tity bu t m or e im por ta n tly th e qu a lity of com m u n ica tion between gr ou ps of sta ff
a n d between sta ff a n d m a n a gem en t. By
en a blin g m a n a ger s to dia gn ose th e effica cy of
com m u n ica tion a n d r ela tion sh ips w ith in th e
or ga n isa tion , th is a ppr oa ch pr ovides th e
sta r tin g-poin t for pla n n in g specific ch a n ges
in or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r e a n d pr a ctice. As
Ba bba r a n d Aspelin (1994, p. 35) a sser t:
On e effective a ppr oa ch to cr ea tin g a clim a te
for pa r ticipa tion , in itia tive a n d excellen ce is
to m a n a ge by exa m ple. Open u p th e ch a n n els of com m u n ica tion both h or izon ta l a n d
ver tica l. Restr u ctu r e a n d r eor ga n ise if th a t
is wh a t ta k es to fa cilita te com m u n ica tion
a n d pa r ticipa tion a t a ll levels.
Th e em ph a sis h er e is on th e idea of m a n a ger s
a s fa cilita tor s of effective com m u n ica tion
th r ou gh ou t th e or ga n isa tion , u sin g th e tools
of com m u n ica tion a n a lysis in or der to pr om ote a n or ga n isa tion a l clim a te so a s to
en su r e cla r ity a bou t or ga n isa tion a l goa ls,
per m it a n u pw a r d a n d dow n w a r d flow of
in for m a tion , cr ea te a n a tm osph er e of open n ess a n d tr u st a n d en cou r a ge th e m a xim u m
a m ou n t of in for m a l in ter a ction between a s
m a n y gr ou ps of people a s possible.
Con sequ en tly, a com m u n ica tion a u dit ca r r ied ou t w ith in th e sch ool w ill r evea l:
Wh o you sh ou ld com m u n ica te w ith
Wh o you a ctu a lly do com m u n ica te w ith
Wh a t you sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g
How you sh ou ld com m u n ica te w ith th em ;
and
How you a ctu a lly do com m u n ica te w ith
th em (Bla n d a n d J a ck son , 1990, p. 142).
Th er e a r e two ph a ses in em ployin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit. Th e fir st is dia gn ostic. Her e
th e existin g or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e is closely
exa m in ed, u tilisin g in str u m en ts wh ich r evea l
th e w ays in wh ich va r iou s gr ou ps of sta ff
com m u n ica te w ith on e oth er a n d h ow well
th ey do so. Th ese com m u n ica tion tools h elp
to dem ystify r ela tion sh ips a n d, th er efor e,
m a k e th em m or e visible, a n d a s a r esu lt m or e
m a n a gea ble. Th er e is a da n ger, oth er w ise,
th a t th e system of or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion is m er ely a ssu m ed, ta k en for gr a n ted
a n d h en ce r em a in s la r gely ign or ed. Con sequ en tly, it is u n exa m in ed a n d th er efor e
u n qu estion ed.
Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit does n ot m ea su r e com m u n ica tion per for m a n ce sim ply for
th e sa k e of doin g so. A pr escr iptive ph a se of
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
th e com m u n ica tion a u dit n ow follow s, in
wh ich th e fin din gs th a t em er ge fr om th e dia gn ostic a ctivities lea ds to th e developm en t of a
sh a r ply focu sed str a te gy (Tou r ish a n d
Ha r gie, 1996).
Th e follow in g sequ en ce of steps h ave been
a dopted in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion
a u dit w ith in or ga n isa tion s (Ha r gie a n d Tou r ish , 1993).
• A wor k sh op is or ga n ised w ith sen ior m a n a gem en t w ith in th e or ga n isa tion , a t wh ich
th e r a tion a le a n d m eth odology of com m u n ica tion a u dits a r e ou tlin ed a n d expla in ed.
Ma n a ger s a r e a sk ed to cla r ify wh a t th ey
u n der sta n d by com m u n ica tion a n d its pla ce
w ith in th e effective fu n ction in g of th eir
ow n or ga n isa tion .
• Th e wor k sh op is th en u sed to iden tify a n d
a gr ee on a n u m ber of a r ea s a n d issu es
wh er e m a n a ger s con sider th e or ga n isa tion
n eeds to h ave effective in ter n a l com m u n ica tion s. Th is in pu t is su bsequ en tly in cor por a ted in to th e a u dit pr ocess a n d th e a u dit
m a ter ia ls th a t w ill be u sed. For exa m ple,
wh en sta ff a r e a sk ed to con sider h ow m u ch
in for m a tion th ey r eceive on cer ta in k ey
issu es th e im por ta n t topics wh ich m a n a gem en t h ave iden tifi ed a r e u sed a s ca se
exa m ples.
• Both th e qu a lity a n d qu a n tity of com m u n ica tion tr a n sa ction s a bou t th ese k ey issu es
a n d a r ea s a r e in vestiga ted th or ou gh ly,
u sin g a n u m ber of r esea r ch in str u m en ts. A
r a n ge of da ta collection tools a r e ava ila ble
for u se in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion
a u dit. Wh a t is m ost a ppr opr ia te w ill va r y
fr om on e or ga n isa tion to a n oth er. Th is is
lik ely to depen d on su ch fa ctor s a s th e size
a n d scope of th e or ga n isa tion con cer n ed,
th e com plexity of its or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r es a n d th e r a n ge of issu es th a t a r e to be
in vestiga ted. On e of th e m ost im por ta n t of
th ese a u dit tools is th e u se of a qu estion n a ir e, specifi ca lly design ed for th e pu r poses
of con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit.
• Th e focu s of th e a u dit ca n be a im ed a t th e
gen er a l or ga n isa tion a l level a n d it a lso ca n
be dir ected to exa m in e pa r ticu la r a r ea s of
th e or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r e. It is, th er efor e
im por ta n t th a t a clea r pictu r e of th e existin g str u ctu r e of sch ool com m u n ica tion is
fir st of a ll delin ea ted.
• Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit qu estion n a ir e
com pr ises a n u m ber of section s wh ich
specifica lly exa m in e th e qu a lity of com m u n ica tion sen t a n d r eceived, a n d h ow tim ely
it is r eceived. Th is ca n exa m in e per ception s
of com m u n ica tion effectiven ess in gen er a l
ter m s; it ca n a lso focu s on som e of th e k ey
issu es wh ich m a n a gem en t w ill h ave iden tified th a t th ey th in k a r e fu n da m en ta l to th e
sch ool’s su ccess, a n d on wh ich a ll sta ff
sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g effectively.
• Addition a l m eth ods of da ta collection u sed
in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit ca n
a lso in clu de in ter view s a n d “self-r epor ts of
in ter a ctive episodes”. Wh ile th e u se of
in ter view s is a lon g-sta n din g a n d va lu a ble
m eth od, it ca n be a costly, tim e con su m in g
pr ocess depen din g on th e size a n d com plexity of th e or ga n isa tion . However, it ca n be
u sed to follow -u p in gr ea ter depth a r epr esen ta tive sa m ple of th ose com pletin g a u dit
qu estion n a ir es a bou t pa r ticu la r issu es
wh ich m ay h ave em er ged.
Self-r epor tin g of in ter a ctive episodes
in volves sta ff iden tifyin g a n d item isin g
deta ils of th eir com m u n ica tive a ctivities
over a specifi c per iod in a pa r ticu la r a r ea .
Th is ca n in clu de iden tifyin g th e sou r ce,
topic, ch a n n el, len gth / du r a tion of th e com m u n ica tion a n d wh eth er it w a s on e or two
w ay. Respon den ts a r e a lso a sk ed to m a k e
qu a lita tive ju dgem en ts a bou t th e com m u n ica tion , for exa m ple, r a tin g it on a sca le of
effectiven ess. Th is m eth od ca n r evea l a r ich
sea m of da ta a bou t th e com m u n ica tive
h ea lth of th e sch ool or ga n isa tion .
• In con du ctin g th e a u dit sta ff sh ou ld be
given th e oppor tu n ity to com m en t on th e
com m u n ica tion system in th e sch ool gen er a lly a n d a lso to pr ovide a ctu a l specifi c
exa m ples of existin g com m u n ica tion pr a ctice. Su ch da ta yields a va lu a ble a m ou n t of
in sigh t in to th e sch ool’s or ga n isa tion a l
cu ltu r e a n d th e qu a lity of in ter a ction a n d
r ela tion sh ip w ith in . Th ese a r e th en con ten t
a n a lysed to r evea l br oa d th em es a n d issu es.
• Th e r esu lts of th e a u dit qu estion n a ir e is
a n a lysed to a ssess th e n a tu r e a n d qu a lity of
com m u n ica tion . For exa m ple th e a ctu a l
issu es of con cer n to sta ff ca n be discover ed;
block a ges in com m u n ica tion ca n be a ccu r a tely pin poin ted; over / u n der -u sed ch a n n els of com m u n ica tion ca n be h igh ligh ted;
or gr ou ps of sta ff r equ ir in g “r em edia l a tten tion ” ca n be iden tified.
Communication audit: recurrent
trends
We h ave con du cted n u m er ou s com m u n ica tion a u dits a cr oss a r a n ge of pu blic a n d pr iva te sector or ga n isa tion s, in clu din g th e edu ca tion sector. Th e m a in tr en ds to em er ge
fr om th ese a r e a s follow s.
The need for information
Sta ff desir e, a n d appr eciate, bein g fu lly
in for m ed abou t key issu es a ffectin g th eir
or ga n isation , a n d in pa r ticu la r th ose wh ich
will h ave a dir ect bea r in g on th eir jobs. Th e
[ 179 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
m a in r ecu r r in g com pla in t in ou r a u dits h a s
been th at of people feelin g u n der -in for m ed,
a n d, by im plication , u n der va lu ed. Given th e
well-k n own a da ge th at “in for m ation is power ”,
la ck of in for m ation u n der sta n dably r esu lts in
a feelin g of disem power m en t. Du r in g per iods
of ch a n ge, it is even m or e vita l th at sta ff feel
fu lly (a n d h on estly) in for m ed abou t wh at is
h appen in g or is abou t to h appen with in th e
or ga n isation . Wh ile th e pa ce of ch a n ge is often
exter n a lly dr iven a n d ou tside th e con tr ol of
sen ior m a n a gem en t, its im pa ct ca n be lessen ed
by en su r in g th at sta ff a r e in for m ed a s soon a s
possible abou t wh at ch a n ges will occu r, wh en ,
a n d wh at th e im plication s a r e likely to be.
Power of the grapevine
If th er e is a n in for m a tion sh or tfa ll, th e bu sh
telegr a ph wor k s over tim e to fill it, a n d sta ff
w ill devote m or e tim e to th e r u m ou r. Th e
gr a pevin e flou r ish es in or ga n isa tion s wh er e
sta ff a r e selectively in for m ed on a “n eed to
k n ow ” ba sis. Wh er e in for m a tion is n ot for th com in g fr om m a n a gem en t, sta ff w ill inven t it.
All or ga n isa tion s h ave “cr ea tive” in dividu a ls
wh o, bu ildin g on ba sic in for m a tion , con str u ct
pla u sible scen a r ios of im pen din g gloom a n d
doom . To cir cu m ven t su ch doom sday stor ies
con ta m in a tin g th e or ga n isa tion , cr edible a n d
speedy com m u n ica tion ch a n n els a r e essen tia l.
Th e tim elin ess of in for m a tion deliver y is m or e
difficu lt in or ga n isa tion s spa n n in g sever a l
differ en t sites, a n d h er e m ech a n ism s m u st be
esta blish ed to en su r e a sw ift flow of in for m a tion . Or ga n isa tion s sh ou ld develop fr ee-flow in g com m u n ica tion h igh w ays a lon g wh ich
m essa ges ca n be deliver ed both speedily a n d
a ccu r ately, a n d to wh ich a ll sta ff sh ou ld h ave
r ea dy a ccess. On e w ay of a ch ievin g th is is to
a ppoin t com m u n ica tion “ch a m pion s” - en th u sia stic in dividu a ls wh o w ill be tr u sted a n d
r espected by th eir peer s - to deliver in for m a tion w ith in th eir ow n loca tion .
Upwards communication
Ou r a u dits u n der lin ed th e im por ta n ce wh ich
sta ff a tta ch to u pw a r ds com m u n ica tion . Th ey
va lu e a clim a te in wh ich bottom -u p com m u n ica tion is foster ed a n d seen a s positive. In th e
m or e dysfu n ction a l or ga n isa tion s, th er e w a s
a fea r a m on gst sta ff th a t if th ey voiced cr itica l
view s, th ey m igh t th en be “m a r k ed” by sen ior
m a n a ger s. Sta ff a r e especia lly k een to r epor t
on in itia tives ta ken in th eir a r ea a n d to be
a ble to ga in r ea dy a ccess to job-r ela ted in for m a tion . Th ey a lso w a n t a ction to be ta ken on
in for m a tion wh ich th ey pr ovide, pa r ticu la r ly
fr om sen ior m a n a ger s. Upw a r ds com m u n ica tion m u st be solid a n d n ot a th in ven eer, sin ce
a positive ben efit w ill on ly be for th com in g if
a ction is seen to be ta ken by m a n a ger s a ctin g
on th e in for m a tion ga th er ed.
[ 180 ]
Channels of communication
Sta ff expr ess a con sisten t pr efer en ce for fa ceto-fa ce com m u n ica tion , yet in m a n y or ga n isa tion s th er e is a n over -r elia n ce on w r itten
com m u n ica tion . A blizza r d of m em os fr om
sen ior m a n a ger s is u su a lly a good in dica tor
of a fr ozen or ga n isa tion , ba r r en of a n y w a r m
cr ea tive fr ee-flow of idea s. We fou n d in m a n y
sch ools a n d colle ges sta ff view of th e ster eotypica l edu ca tion a l m a n a ger loca ted in th e
sa fety of th e office “bu n k er ”, a dvised by a
bu r ea u cr a tic a dm in istr a tor, cr ea tin g a n ever en din g, u n n ecessa r y a n d ir r ita tin g a r m ou r y
of m em os a n d letter s wh ich a r e th en fir ed off
by th e secr eta r y a t th e defen celess wor k for ce!
Th is lea ds on to th e n ext fin din g.
Visibility of senior managers
Sta ff w ish to com m u n ica te w ith sen ior m a n a ger s. A per iodic a n d r ath er “stiff ” m eetin g of
a ll sta ff is n ot wh a t is r equ ir ed h er e. Th e
n otion of “m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g a bou t” h a s
been r ecom m en ded for over a deca de. How ever, ca u tion n eed to be exer cised wh en so
doin g. Wh en pr ior n otice is given , th e r ed
ca r pet tr ea tm en t is given a n d th e exer cise
becom e som eth in g a k in to a r oya l visit w ith
r oom s (a n d th eir in h a bita n ts!) bein g scr u bbed
a n d polish ed befor e th e sen ior m a n a ger
“in spects” th em . Th e m a n a ger a r r ives,
a n n ou n ces som eth in g a k in to “J olly well don e.
Good sh ow. Keep u p th e good wor k ” a n d disa ppea r s ba ck to HQ. In essen ce th is becom es
m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g pa st! Conver sely, if
th e sen ior per son a r r ives u n a n n ou n ced, th is is
seen a s a for m of “ch eck in g u p”. Th e pr efer r ed
option is for m a n a ger s to a r r a n ge r egu la r
for m a l m eetin gs w ith va r iou s gr ou pin gs of
sta ff a t wh ich th er e is a n oppor tu n ity for a n y
issu e to be discu ssed. Th er e sh ou ld be a for m a l
in for m a lity a bou t th ese con ta cts – th ey sh ou ld
be r ou n d ta ble, over coffee, for a set per iod (n o
m or e th a n on e h ou r ), ch a ir ed by som eon e
r ela tively ju n ior, sh ou ld begin w ith a br ief
sta tem en t fr om th e sen ior m a n a ger, a n d open
ou t to a llow a n yon e to r a ise a n y topic. Th is n ot
on ly a llow s sen ior execu tives to “a ddr ess th e
tr oops”, it foster s a sen se of open n ess a n d
a ccessibility w ith in th e or ga n isa tion . Th er e is
a ca th a r tic effect in m eetin g a n d bein g listen ed to by th ose in position s of power a n d th is
sh ou ld be m a xim ised.
Conclusion
An y a ttem pt to eva lu a te a n d ch a n ge or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e m u st be gin fir st w ith a clea r
m a n a gem en t u n der sta n din g of a n d com m itm en t to su ch a pr ocess. Hen ce, a t th e ou tset
sen ior m a n a gem en t n eed to cla r ify th eir ow n
idea s of com m u n ica tion w ith in th e sch ool;
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
wh a t m igh t be r e ga r ded a s th eir “idea l type”
of a positive com m u n ica tion a ppr oa ch a n d
wh a t th e k ey issu es in fa ct a r e. A cr u cia l pa r t
of th is is th e iden tifica tion of th e va lu es
wh ich m a n a gem en t believes u n der pin th eir
com m u n ica tion pr a ctices, a n d th e developm en t of sta n da r ds wh ich r efl ect th ese va lu es
in a ction . E xper t fa cilita tion is u su a lly
r equ ir ed a t th is sta ge, to en su r e th a t people
expr ess wh a t th ey r ea lly feel r a th er th a n
wh a t th ey im a gin e is “politica lly cor r ect”. It
m ay well be th a t th is becom es th e m ost lon g
dr aw n ou t pa r t of th e a u dit pr ocess, sin ce th e
wh ole exer cise w ill be doom ed to fu tility
u n less th e sen ior m a n a gem en t tea m h a s
a gr eed objectives a n d a sh a r ed system of
com m on va lu es. For exa m ple, if sch ools h ave
been a m a lga m a ted it m ay be th a t sen ior m a n a ger s h ave a differ en t cu ltu r a l tr a dition a n d
possess r a dica lly differ en t m a n a gem en t
styles. Th e pr oblem s ca u sed by th is m u st be
fa ced a t a n ea r ly sta ge.
It is a lso im por ta n t to h igh ligh t th e qu estion of h ow im pr ovem en ts in com m u n ica tion
str a te gies, a n d th e system s wh ich r esu lt
sh ou ld be m ea su r ed. It h a s been a r gu ed th a t
m a n y ch a n ge pr ogr a m m es fa il beca u se th e
eva lu a tion ca r r ied ou t sim ply focu ses on th e
pr ocess th a t is in tr odu ced r a th er th a n on
wh a t is essen tia l – th e u ltim a te goa ls of th e
or ga n isa tion (Sch a ffer a n d Th om pson , 1992).
It is n ecessa r y, th er efor e, to avoid th e ea sy
tem pta tion to eva lu a te ch a n ges r esu ltin g
fr om en ga gin g in a com m u n ica tion a u dit
exclu sively in ter m s of expr essed sa tisfa ction
w ith n ew com m u n ica tion a r r a n gem en ts
a lon e, th e “feel-good” fa ctor. Wh ile su ch a
positive decla r a tion is en cou r a gin g, its u ltim a te im por ta n ce a n d wor th r ests to th e
exten t th a t it fu r th er s oth er essen tia l or ga n isa tion a l goa ls. Th e pu r pose of a com m u n ica tion a u dit essen tia lly is to iden tify pr oblem s
wh ich ca n be specifica lly a scr ibed to th e
n a tu r e of th e existin g com m u n ica tion pr a ctices a n d to ta k e pla n n ed a ction for th e elim in a tion of th ese wh ich w ill lea d to ch a n ges in
h ow sta ff in ter a ct w ith ea ch oth er w ith in
va r iou s or ga n isa tion a l settin gs.
Wh ile com m u n ica tion a u dits a r e still n ot
yet w idely k n ow n a bou t n or u tilised w ith in
or ga n isa tion s in th e UK, th er e is a gr ow in g
in ter est a m on g th ose m a n a ger s wh o h ave
com e to r ea lise th a t it is n o lon ger possible to
ign or e th e qu a lity a n d effectiven ess of or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion . Th e u tilisa tion of
th is a ppr oa ch w ith in edu ca tion a l or ga n isa tion s su ch a s sch ools a n d colle ges ca n con tr ibu te sign ifi ca n tly to a r a isin g of aw a r en ess
of th e im por ta n ce of effective com m u n ica tion , n ot on ly in r en der in g r ela tion sh ips
m or e m a n a gea ble bu t a lso in fa cilita tin g th e
developm en t of a n or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e
wh ich str ives to im pr ove th e qu a lity of its
oper a tion . In th e lon g r u n , it is pr ecisely th e
developm en t of su ch a cu ltu r e wh ich w ill
deter m in e h ow well sch ools ca ter for th e
n eeds of ch ildr en .
References
An gle, H. a n d Per r y, J ., “An em pir ica l a ssessm en t
of or ga n isa tion a l com m itm en t a n d or ga n isa tion a l effectiven ess”, A d m in istra tiv e S cien ce
Qu a r terly, Vol. 21, 1981, pp. 1-14.
Ar n ott, M. (1987), “E ffective em ployee com m u n ica tion ”, in Ha r t, N. (E d.), Effectiv e Corpora te
R ela tion s, McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ba bba r, I. a n d Aspelin , D. (1994), “It’s a s ea sy a s
ABC”, T ota l Qu a lity M a n a gem en t, Vol. 6 N o. 3,
pp. 32-8.
Ba r k er a n d Tom pk in s P.K. (1994), “Iden tifica tion
in th e self-m a n a gin g or ga n iza tion ”, Hu m a n
Com m u n ica tion R esea rch , Vol. 21 N o. 2,
Decem ber, pp. 223-40.
Ber ger, C. (1987), “Com m u n ica tin g u n der u n cer ta in ty”, in Roloff, M. a n d Milla r, G. (E ds),
In terperson a l Processes: N ew Direction s in
Com m u n ica tion s R esea rch , Sa ge, Lon don .
Bla n d, M. a n d J a ck son , P. (1990), Effectiv e
Em ployee Com m u n ica tion s, Koga n P a ge,
Lon don .
Cla m pitt, P. a n d Dow n s, C. (1993), “E m ployee
per ception s of th e r ela tion sh ip between com m u n ica tion a n d pr odu ctivity: a fi eld stu dy”,
J ou r n a l of B u sin ess Com m u n ica tion , Vol. 30
N o. 1, pp. 5-28.
E m m a n u el, M. (1985), “Au ditin g com m u n ica tion
pr a ctices”, in Reu ss, C. a n d Silva s, D. (E ds),
Orga n isa tion a l Com m u n ica tion , 2n d ed.,
Lon gm a n , Lon don .
Ga lbr a ith , R. (1973), Design in g Com plex Orga n iz a tion s, Addison -Wesley, Rea din g, MA.
Ha r gie, O. a n d Tou r ish , D. (1993), “Assessin g th e
effectiven ess of com m u n ica tion s in or ga n isa tion s: th e com m u n ica tion a u dit a ppr oa ch ”,
Hea lth S er vices M a n a gem en t R esea rch , Vol. 6
N o. 4, pp. 276-85.
Hea th , R., Leth , S. a n d N a th a n , K. (1994), “Com m u n ica tin g ser vice qu a lity im pr ovem en t:
a n oth er r ole for pu blic r ela tion s”, Pu blic
R ela tion s R eview, Vol. 20 N o. 1, pp. 29-41.
La r son , E . a n d F u k a m i, C. (1984), “Rela tion sh ips
between wor k er beh aviou r a n d com m itm en t
to th e or ga n iza tion a n d u n ion ”, Proceed in gs of
th e A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t, pp. 222-6.
Ma r ch , J . a n d Sim on , H. (1968), Orga n iz a tion s,
J oh n Wiley a n d Son s, N ew Yor k , N Y.
N e gben , M. (1991), “Th e k ey to su ccess in str a te gic
pla n n in g is com m u n ica tion ”, Ed u ca tion
L ea d ersh ip, Vol. 48 N o. 7, pp. 26-8.
Per r ow, C. (1970), Orga n iz a tion a l A n a lysis: A
S ociologica l V iew , Tavistock P u blica tion s,
Lon don .
Qu ir k e, B. (1995), “In ter n a l com m u n ica tion ”, in
Ha r t, N. (E d.), S tra tegic Pu blic R ela tion s,
Ma cm illa n , Hou n dm ills.
[ 181 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
[ 182 ]
Reilly, B.J. a n d DiAn gelo, J .A., “Com m u n ica tion :
a cu ltu r e system of m ea n in g a n d va lu e”,
Hu m a n R ela tion s, Vol. 43 N o. 2, pp. 129-40.
Sch a ffer, R. a n d Th om pson , H. (1992), “Su ccessfu l
ch a n ge pr ogr a m s be gin w ith r esu lts”,
Ha r va rd B u sin ess R eview , pp. 80-90.
Steer s, R. (1977), “An teceden ts a n d ou tcom es of
or ga n iza tion a l com m itm en t”, A d m in istra tiv e
S cien ce Qu a r terly, Vol. 22, pp. 46-56.
Th om pson , J .D. (1967), Orga n iz a tion s in A ction ,
McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Tou r ish , D. a n d Ha r gie, O. (1996), “Com m u n ica tion a u dits a n d th e m a n a gem en t of ch a n ge: a
ca se stu dy fr om a n N HS u n it of m a n a gem en t”,
Hea lth S er vices M a n a gem en t R esea rch , Vol. 9
N o. 2, pp. 125-35.
Tou r is h , D. a n d Tou r is h B. (1996), “As s ess in g
s t a ff – m a n a gem en t r ela t ion s h ip s in loca l
a u t h or it y leis u r e fa cilit ies: t h e com m u n ica t ion a u d it a p p r oa ch ”, M a n a gin g L eisu re:
A n In ter n a tion a l J ou r n a l, Vol. 1 N o. 2,
p p. 91-104.
Wils on , D.O. a n d M a lik , S.D. (1995), “Look in g
for a few good s ou r ces : com m u n ica t ion lin k a ges of fir s t -lin e m a n a ger s ”, T h e J ou r n a l of
B u sin ess Com m u n ica tion , Vol. 32 N o. 1,
p p. 31-48.
You n g, M. a n d Post, J. (1993), “Ma n a gin g to com m u n ica te, com m u n ica tin g to m a n a ge: h ow
lea din g com pa n ies com m u n ica te w ith
em ployees”, Orga n iz a tion a l Dyn a m ics,
Vol. 22, pp. 31-43.
schools: a framework for evaluating performance
Dennis Tourish
Sc ho o l o f Be havio ural and Co mmunic atio n Sc ie nc e s, Unive rsity o f Ulste r,
Ne wto wnabbe y, No rthe rn Ire land
Owen Hargie
Sc ho o l o f Be havio ural and Co mmunic atio n Sc ie nc e s, Unive rsity o f Ulste r,
Ne wto wnabbe y, No rthe rn Ire land
Communication is the
lifeblood of any organisation.
The need for effective internal
communication systems is
particularly crucial when
organisations, such as
schools, are operating in a
turbulent environment of
rapid and sustained change.
Schools must be innovative to
be able to respond and adapt
to the challenges presented
by such changes. It is now
increasingly evident that
those organisations which
promote good internal communication reap positive
dividends in meeting these
challenges. However, there is
a need for hard data on the
nature, structure, fl ow and
practice of communication to
ensure that the most effective
systems are put in place and
are working to the optimal
level. To achieve this a
method of investigation, the
communication audit, has
been developed which allows
for a thorough-going analysis
of internal organisational
communication. Explores the
principal tools utilised in the
implementation of a communication audit, and discusses
the benefi ts which this
approach offers to school
management teams.
Many of the ideas contained
in this article were developed by our late colleague,
friend and brother Colin
Thomas Cecil Hargie (19481996), and we therefore
dedicate it to his memory.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [ 1998] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 176 ]
Introduction
E du ca tion , a s w ith oth er a r ea s of th e pu blic
sector in th e UK, h a s r ecen tly been su bjected
to a n u m ber of m a jor r efor m s. Th ese r efor m s
h ave been dir ected a t both th e r eor ga n isa tion
of th e sch ool cu r r icu lu m a n d th e m a n a gem en t str u ctu r e of th e edu ca tion system itself.
Th e wh ole th r u st of LMS (loca l m a n a gem en t
of sch ools), for exa m ple, is to sign ifi ca n tly
ch a n ge th e w ay sch ools a r e to be m a n a ged.
Th e m a in effect is to sh ift r espon sibility for
sch ool m a n a gem en t aw ay fr om loca l a u th or ities a n d on to th e gover n or s a n d pr in cipa l.
Th is cr ea tes fa r -r ea ch in g ch a n ges in m a n a gem en t fu n ction s a n d w ill im pose h eavy bu r den s on m a n a ger s w ith in sch ools a n d colle ges. In pa r ticu la r, sch ool m a n a ger s w ill be
m or e r espon sible for sta ff m a n a gem en t r ela tion sh ips, th e flow of in for m a tion on m a jor
in itia tives a n d th e qu a lity of in ter -gr ou p
r ela tion s th a n a t a n y tim e in th e pa st.
At th e sa m e tim e sta ff h ave h a d to cope w ith
wh a t cou ld be descr ibed a s a n “in itia tive
over loa d” ca u sed by th e ta sk of im plem en tin g
th e ch a n ges r equ ir ed by LMS a n d th e in tr odu ction of th e n a tion a l cu r r icu lu m . Th u s,
sta ff w ith in sch ools a r e livin g in wh a t h a s
been descr ibed a s a n a ge of or ga n isa tion a l
a n xiety (Ba r k er a n d Tom pk in s, 1994), ch a r a cter ised by h igh a n d r isin g levels of u n cer ta in ty a bou t wh a t th e fu tu r e w ill br in g.
Su ch levels of u n cer ta in ty a r e a th r ea t to
sta ff m otiva tion , often cr ea tin g a cor r osive
pr eoccu pa tion w ith or ga n isa tion a l politics
r a th er th a n th e a ch ievem en t of th e essen tia l
goa ls of th e sch ool. Resea r ch su ggests th a t
on e m a jor sou r ce of u n cer ta in ty is a poor fl ow
of in for m a tion fr om m a n a ger s to sta ff a n d
vice ver sa con cer n in g cr u cia l ch a n ge issu es
con fr on tin g th e or ga n isa tion (Tou r ish a n d
Ha r gie, 1996). Sim ila r ly, Ber ger (1987) postu la tes th a t a k ey con cer n in a ll com m u n ica tive
in ter a ction s is th a t of u n cer ta in ty r edu ction .
Ma n y w r iter s on or ga n isa tion a l th eor y
(Ga lbr a ith , 1973; Ma r ch a n d Sim on , 1968;
Per r ow, 1970; Th om pson , 1967) h ave con cu r r ed w ith th e a sser tion th a t th e n eed for
in for m a tion is gr ea ter wh en ta sk u n cer ta in ty
is h igh (Wilson a n d Ma lik , 1995). Good or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion s wh ich deliver clea r,
con cise a n d tim ely in for m a tion a bou t issu es
of cen tr a l con cer n to sta ff is on e im por ta n t
w ay of r edu cin g u n cer ta in ty. In tu r n , th e
r edu ction of u n cer ta in ty a cts to lower th e
existin g levels of a n xiety a m on g sta ff. Th is
en a bles th em to devote m or e tim e a n d en er gy
tow a r ds pr im a r y or ga n isa tion a l objectives.
Hen ce, it h a s been fou n d th a t sta ff wor k in g
w ith in a n open a n d com m u n ica tive m a n a gem en t str u ctu r e wer e th r ee to fou r tim es m or e
lik ely to expr ess sa tisfa ction w ith th eir position a n d tw ice a s lik ely to be com m itted to
th a t or ga n isa tion (Ar n ott, 1987). Th is ten ds to
m a n ifest itself in ta n gible ben efits r e ga r din g
th e or ga n isa tion ’s bottom -lin e per for m a n ce
in dica tor s. For exa m ple, a r ecen t w ide-r a n gin g r eview of ava ila ble r esea r ch con clu des
th a t good qu a lity in ter n a l com m u n ica tion s
secu r es gr ea ter com m itm en t, h igh er levels of
in n ova tion , r edu ced a bsen teeism , gr ea ter
pr odu ctivity a n d h igh er pr ofita bility
(Cla m pitt a n d Dow n s, 1993).
Mea n wh ile, wh a t we m ea n by th e ter m
qu a lity com m u n ica tion s h a s a lso been tr a n sfor m ed by th e ch a n ge dr iven con text in wh ich
su ch pr ogr a m m es a r e n ow bein g im plem en ted. In th e pa st, com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es cou ld con cer n th em selves pr im a r ily w ith a n n ou n cin g m a n a gem en t con clu sion s, r en der in g m a n a gem en t m essa ges com pr eh en sible a n d en su r in g th a t th ey wer e
ea sily fi lter ed th r ou gh th e or ga n isa tion a l
str u ctu r e. However, a s h a s r ecen tly been
poin ted ou t (Qu ir k e, 1995) th e follow in g n ew
objectives a r e a lso pa r a m ou n t:
• th e stim u la tion of th in k in g, pa r ticipa tion
a n d idea s;
• th e n etwor k in g of k n ow -h ow a n d lea r n in g
a cr oss th e or ga n isa tion ;
• th e in volvem en t of a ll em ployees in im pr ovin g pr ocesses;
• th e iden tifica tion of w ays of pr ovidin g a ddition a l va lu e to cu stom er s;
• th e expa n sion of wh a t a ll em ployees believe
is possible.
Th e for m er em ph a sis on top-dow n com m u n ication flow h a s been r epla ced by idea s su ch a s
pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g a n d self-m a n a gin g tea m s (Ba r ker a n d Tom pk in s, 1994). In
la r ge m ea su r e, th ese fr esh a ppr oa ch es der ive
fr om exper ien ce ga in ed in im plem en tin g pr ogr a m m es su ch a s tota l qu a lity m a n a gem en t
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
(TQM), wh ich r equ ir e th e developm en t of
tea m wor k in g w ith in fla tten ed h ier a r ch ies if
th eir poten tia l is to be secu r ed. Th e r ole of
com m u n ica tion in th e developm en t of TQM
w ith in or ga n isa tion s is seen a s in cr ea sin gly
im por ta n t (Hea th et al., 1994). On e con sequ en ce of su ch developm en ts is th a t m a n a ger s
m u st n ow th in k m or e system a tica lly a bou t
h ow sta ff in ter a ct a n d com m u n ica te w ith in
th e or ga n isa tion : th e n ecessa r y pr ecu r sor of
involvem en t a n d com m itm en t. E ffective com m u n ica tion is th u s in cr ea sin gly iden tified a s a
sign ifica n t fa ctor in flu en cin g th e a bility of a n
or ga n isa tion to a ch ieve its goa ls (You n g a n d
Post, 1993).
Un til r ecen tly th er e h a s been th e ten den cy
for m a n a gem en t gen er a lly to pay lip ser vice
to th e view th a t people a r e a n or ga n isa tion ’s
m ost va lu a ble a n d im por ta n t a sset, wh ile
per h a ps, a t th e sa m e tim e, doin g ver y little to
ta k e a ccou n t of th e wh a t sta ff th in k a n d feel
a bou t h ow th e or ga n isa tion a ctu a lly wor k s
a n d h ow th in gs cou ld be im pr oved. P a r t of th e
expla n a tion is th a t m a n a ger s ten d to over r a te th eir effectiven ess a s com m u n ica tor s
a n d over estim a te th e effectiven ess of th eir
or ga n isa tion ’s com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es.
For exa m ple, we a r e fa m ilia r w ith a su r vey in
on e or ga n isa tion wh ich h a d in stitu ted a
“m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g a bou t” pr ogr a m m e, a n d pr ou dly r e ga r ded it a s a su ccess. However, sever a l su r vey r espon den ts
der ided th is a s “m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g
pa st”, givin g a n en tir ely differ en t per spective
on sta ff m a n a gem en t r ela tion sh ips! An oth er,
a n d m or e ea sily r em edied fa ctor, is sim ply
th a t m a n a gem en t u n til r ecen tly la ck ed a
system a tic pr ocedu r e for eva lu a tin g its com m u n ica tion pr a ctices a n d th eir im pa ct on
wor k in g r ela tion sh ips a n d cor por a te ou tcom es. As m a n a ger s wou ld in sta n tly r ecogn ise elsewh er e, su ch a ch r on ic la ck of eva lu a tion tools is pr a ctica lly gu a r a n teed to cr ea te
exa gger a ted im pr ession s of effectiven ess.
Com m u n ica tion a u dits r epr esen t a n
a ppr oa ch a n d set of tools wh ich ca n fu lfil th is
fu n ction a n d th er efor e a ssist or ga n isa tion s to
im pr ove th eir com m u n ica tion pr a ctices.
Accor din gly, a u dits h ave been defi n ed
(E m m a n u el, 1985, p. 50) a s:
a com pr eh en sive a n d th or ou gh stu dy of com m u n ication ph ilosophy, con cepts, str u ctu r e,
flow a n d pr a ctice with in a n or ga n isation .
By ca r r yin g ou t su ch a n a u dit, edu ca tion m a n a ger s w ill be a ble to discover wh at com m u n ica tion ch a n n els a r e bein g u tilised, h ow well
th ey a r e u sed, th e a m ou n t of cr eden ce th a t
sta ff give to va r iou s sou r ces of in for m a tion
a n d, m ost im por ta n tly, h ow sta ff feel com m u n ica tion cou ld be im pr oved. Ma n a gem en t w ill
ben efit by fin din g ou t wh at sta ff a r e a ctu a lly
com m u n ica tin g a bou t, r a th er th a n wh a t it
th in k s th ey a r e or sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g
a bou t. Un der ta k in g a com m u n ica tion a u dit
w ill en a ble m a n a ger s to listen better to wh a t
sta ff h ave to say a n d th u s iden tify str en gth s
a n d wea k n esses in th e com m u n ica tion system . Th is in tu r n w ill a llow a n y per ceived
com m u n ica tion deficits w ith in th e sch ool
or ga n isa tion to be a ddr essed a n d sh ou ld fa cilita te th e developm en t of a com pr eh en sive com m u n ica tion s str a tegy.
A focused communication strategy
A focu sed com m u n ica tion str a te gy m a k es a
sign ifica n t con tr ibu tion to a ch ievin g m a n a ger ia l effectiven ess a n d m u st becom e a n in te gr a l pa r t of th e str a te gic pla n n in g pr ocess for
a ll or ga n isa tion s. As pa r t of th is, effective
com m u n ica tion system s a n d pr a ctices n eed
to be developed a n d im plem en ted. Th is sta r ts
w ith a scer ta in in g th e existin g level of com m u n ica tion effectiven ess (or br ea k dow n )
w ith in th e or ga n isa tion con cer n ed. Mu ch
m a n a gem en t a ctivity con sists of “fir e figh tin g” r a th er th a n th e exer cise of str a te gic
lea der sh ip, wh ile th e con fla gr a tion s th a t
pr ove so distr a ctin g on a day-to-day ba sis a r e
often th e con sequ en ce of vola tile com m u n ica tion system s. Th ese pr odu ce poor sta ff com m itm en t, a n d lea d to sta ff wh o a r e less effective in th eir jobs (La r son a n d F u k a m i, 1984),
w ith m or e a bsen teeism (Steer s, 1977) a n d
h igh er sta ff tu r n over (An gle a n d Per r y, 1981)
th a n th eir m or e in for m ed cou n ter pa r ts. As a
r esu lt, wh en w in ds of ch a n ge blow th r ou gh
th e or ga n isa tion , fl ick er in g em ber s of dissen t
ca n gr ow in to a n in fer n o of dissa tisfa ction .
By con tr a st, th e com m u n ica tion pr ocess
sh ou ld be design ed a s pa r t of th e developm en t
of a positive socia l system (Reilly a n d DiAn gelo, 1990), so a s be a ble to a ddr ess a n y ba r r ier s to th e pr om otion of effective com m u n ica tion w ith in th e or ga n isa tion . To con tin u e th e
for m er a n a logy, fir e pr even tion is pr efer a ble.
Th e r espon sibility for th e developm en t of
effective com m u n ica tion s str a te gies a n d
system s is essen tia lly th a t of m a n a gem en t.
Ma n a ger s n eed to or ga n ise w ays of in te gr a tin g a com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m e w ith existin g gen er a l m a n a ger ia l fu n ction s. Th ey
sh ou ld th er efor e th in k a bou t h ow to develop a
com pr eh en sive com m u n ica tion s str a te gy a s
a n in te gr a l pa r t of th eir over a ll str a te gic
pla n n in g pr ogr a m m e. For th is r ea son , it h a s
been a r gu ed th a t com m u n ica tion is th e cr itica l su ccess in gr edien t in a sch ool’s str a te gic
pla n n in g (N e gben , 1991).
Hen ce, edu ca t ion m a n a ger s m u st be a ble t o
a ssess t h e effect iven ess of t h eir sch ool’s
com m u n ica t ion pr a ct ices. To do so t h ey n eed
[ 177 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
t o k n ow wh a t t h ese a r e a n d h ow well t h ey a r e
cu r r en t ly fu n ct ion in g. It is im por t a n t t h a t
t h er e sh ou ld be som e r eview of a n d a ccou n t a bilit y for t h e fl ow of or ga n isa t ion a l com m u n ica t ion . At t h e pr a ct ica l level, t h is m ea n s
t h a t if vit a l in for m a t ion is n ot r ea ch in g it s
t a r get a u dien ces, t h en t h e block a ges in t h e
com m u n ica t ion ch a n n els ca n be iden t ifi ed
a n d dea lt w it h (Tou r ish a n d Ha r gie, 1996).
T h e pr oblem , t h er efor e, is t h e n ecessit y fi r st
of a ll, t o a ccu r a t ely a ssess t h e sch ool’s pr esen t com m u n ica t ion per for m a n ce so a s t o be
a ble t o devise a n d im plem en t wor t h wh ile
im pr ovem en t s. Su ch a st r a t e gy be gin s w it h
ga t h er in g a ccu r a t e in for m a t ion a bou t cu r r en t com m u n ica t ion syst em s a n d pr a ct ices
w it h in t h e or ga n isa t ion .
Th e k ey steps in developin g su ch a str a te gy
cou ld be su m m a r ised a s follow s.
• Iden tify th e n a tu r e of cu r r en t pr a ctice. Th e
m ost system a tic m eth od for so doin g is
th r ou gh th e im plem en ta tion of a com m u n ica tion a u dit, a n d th is for m s th e m a in th r u st
of th is pa per.
• Use th e r esu lts of th e a u dit to sen sitise
m a n a gem en t a n d sta ff to th e r ea lities of
good com m u n ica tion pr a ctice. Dissem in a te
th e r esu lts w idely a n d fr a n k ly, a t a ll levels.
Ask for su ggestion s to effect im pr ovem en ts,
a n d m on itor closely th e pr ogr ess of pr ogr a m m es set u p in r espon se to th e a u dit
exer cise.
• In te gr a te th is pr ocess in to th e bu sin ess
pla n n in g cycle of th e or ga n isa tion – i.e. a sk
a ll con tr ibu tor s to th e bu sin ess pla n n in g
pr ocess to con sider th e com m u n ica tion
con sequ en ces of th e decision s th a t a r e
bein g con tem pla ted. Requ est deta iled exa m ples of h ow m a n a gem en t beh aviou r ca n be
ch a n ged to m eet th e n ew com m u n ica tion
ch a llen ges wh ich h ave been iden tified.
• Feed th e r esu lts of th is pla n n in g in to fu tu r e
a u dit m a ter ia ls, th er eby cr ea tin g ben ch m a r k s for fu r th er im pr ovem en ts in or ga n isa tion a l coh esion a n d efficien cy. In oth er
wor ds, a sk specific qu estion s a bou t n ew
com m u n ica tion s pr ogr a m m es, a ssess
wh eth er u n der sta n din g of pa r ticu la r issu es
h a s im pr oved a n d a scer ta in wh eth er r ela tion sh ips on th e gr ou n d a r e im pr ovin g a s a
r esu lt.
Auditing communication at school
level
A tech n iqu e ter m ed th e com m u n ica tion a u dit
h a s been developed a n d in cr ea sin gly u tilised
to in vestiga te th e n a tu r e a n d fu n ction in g of
com m u n ica tion system s a n d pr a ctices w ith in
or ga n isa tion s. A com m u n ica tion a u dit
pr ovides m a n a ger s w ith h a r d da ta on th e
[ 178 ]
effica cy of th eir or ga n isa tion ’s com m u n ica tion beh aviou r s (Tou r ish a n d Tou r ish , 1996).
It is a va lu a ble m a n a gem en t tech n iqu e by
wh ich th e pr ocesses of com m u n ica tion da ta
collection a n d a n a lysis ca n be ca r r ied ou t a n d
cor r ective a ction ca n be in stiga ted a s a r esu lt.
Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit offer s a system a tic
a n d r igor ou s a ppr oa ch for a ssessin g n ot ju st
th e qu a n tity bu t m or e im por ta n tly th e qu a lity of com m u n ica tion between gr ou ps of sta ff
a n d between sta ff a n d m a n a gem en t. By
en a blin g m a n a ger s to dia gn ose th e effica cy of
com m u n ica tion a n d r ela tion sh ips w ith in th e
or ga n isa tion , th is a ppr oa ch pr ovides th e
sta r tin g-poin t for pla n n in g specific ch a n ges
in or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r e a n d pr a ctice. As
Ba bba r a n d Aspelin (1994, p. 35) a sser t:
On e effective a ppr oa ch to cr ea tin g a clim a te
for pa r ticipa tion , in itia tive a n d excellen ce is
to m a n a ge by exa m ple. Open u p th e ch a n n els of com m u n ica tion both h or izon ta l a n d
ver tica l. Restr u ctu r e a n d r eor ga n ise if th a t
is wh a t ta k es to fa cilita te com m u n ica tion
a n d pa r ticipa tion a t a ll levels.
Th e em ph a sis h er e is on th e idea of m a n a ger s
a s fa cilita tor s of effective com m u n ica tion
th r ou gh ou t th e or ga n isa tion , u sin g th e tools
of com m u n ica tion a n a lysis in or der to pr om ote a n or ga n isa tion a l clim a te so a s to
en su r e cla r ity a bou t or ga n isa tion a l goa ls,
per m it a n u pw a r d a n d dow n w a r d flow of
in for m a tion , cr ea te a n a tm osph er e of open n ess a n d tr u st a n d en cou r a ge th e m a xim u m
a m ou n t of in for m a l in ter a ction between a s
m a n y gr ou ps of people a s possible.
Con sequ en tly, a com m u n ica tion a u dit ca r r ied ou t w ith in th e sch ool w ill r evea l:
Wh o you sh ou ld com m u n ica te w ith
Wh o you a ctu a lly do com m u n ica te w ith
Wh a t you sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g
How you sh ou ld com m u n ica te w ith th em ;
and
How you a ctu a lly do com m u n ica te w ith
th em (Bla n d a n d J a ck son , 1990, p. 142).
Th er e a r e two ph a ses in em ployin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit. Th e fir st is dia gn ostic. Her e
th e existin g or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e is closely
exa m in ed, u tilisin g in str u m en ts wh ich r evea l
th e w ays in wh ich va r iou s gr ou ps of sta ff
com m u n ica te w ith on e oth er a n d h ow well
th ey do so. Th ese com m u n ica tion tools h elp
to dem ystify r ela tion sh ips a n d, th er efor e,
m a k e th em m or e visible, a n d a s a r esu lt m or e
m a n a gea ble. Th er e is a da n ger, oth er w ise,
th a t th e system of or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion is m er ely a ssu m ed, ta k en for gr a n ted
a n d h en ce r em a in s la r gely ign or ed. Con sequ en tly, it is u n exa m in ed a n d th er efor e
u n qu estion ed.
Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit does n ot m ea su r e com m u n ica tion per for m a n ce sim ply for
th e sa k e of doin g so. A pr escr iptive ph a se of
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
th e com m u n ica tion a u dit n ow follow s, in
wh ich th e fin din gs th a t em er ge fr om th e dia gn ostic a ctivities lea ds to th e developm en t of a
sh a r ply focu sed str a te gy (Tou r ish a n d
Ha r gie, 1996).
Th e follow in g sequ en ce of steps h ave been
a dopted in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion
a u dit w ith in or ga n isa tion s (Ha r gie a n d Tou r ish , 1993).
• A wor k sh op is or ga n ised w ith sen ior m a n a gem en t w ith in th e or ga n isa tion , a t wh ich
th e r a tion a le a n d m eth odology of com m u n ica tion a u dits a r e ou tlin ed a n d expla in ed.
Ma n a ger s a r e a sk ed to cla r ify wh a t th ey
u n der sta n d by com m u n ica tion a n d its pla ce
w ith in th e effective fu n ction in g of th eir
ow n or ga n isa tion .
• Th e wor k sh op is th en u sed to iden tify a n d
a gr ee on a n u m ber of a r ea s a n d issu es
wh er e m a n a ger s con sider th e or ga n isa tion
n eeds to h ave effective in ter n a l com m u n ica tion s. Th is in pu t is su bsequ en tly in cor por a ted in to th e a u dit pr ocess a n d th e a u dit
m a ter ia ls th a t w ill be u sed. For exa m ple,
wh en sta ff a r e a sk ed to con sider h ow m u ch
in for m a tion th ey r eceive on cer ta in k ey
issu es th e im por ta n t topics wh ich m a n a gem en t h ave iden tifi ed a r e u sed a s ca se
exa m ples.
• Both th e qu a lity a n d qu a n tity of com m u n ica tion tr a n sa ction s a bou t th ese k ey issu es
a n d a r ea s a r e in vestiga ted th or ou gh ly,
u sin g a n u m ber of r esea r ch in str u m en ts. A
r a n ge of da ta collection tools a r e ava ila ble
for u se in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion
a u dit. Wh a t is m ost a ppr opr ia te w ill va r y
fr om on e or ga n isa tion to a n oth er. Th is is
lik ely to depen d on su ch fa ctor s a s th e size
a n d scope of th e or ga n isa tion con cer n ed,
th e com plexity of its or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r es a n d th e r a n ge of issu es th a t a r e to be
in vestiga ted. On e of th e m ost im por ta n t of
th ese a u dit tools is th e u se of a qu estion n a ir e, specifi ca lly design ed for th e pu r poses
of con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit.
• Th e focu s of th e a u dit ca n be a im ed a t th e
gen er a l or ga n isa tion a l level a n d it a lso ca n
be dir ected to exa m in e pa r ticu la r a r ea s of
th e or ga n isa tion a l str u ctu r e. It is, th er efor e
im por ta n t th a t a clea r pictu r e of th e existin g str u ctu r e of sch ool com m u n ica tion is
fir st of a ll delin ea ted.
• Th e com m u n ica tion a u dit qu estion n a ir e
com pr ises a n u m ber of section s wh ich
specifica lly exa m in e th e qu a lity of com m u n ica tion sen t a n d r eceived, a n d h ow tim ely
it is r eceived. Th is ca n exa m in e per ception s
of com m u n ica tion effectiven ess in gen er a l
ter m s; it ca n a lso focu s on som e of th e k ey
issu es wh ich m a n a gem en t w ill h ave iden tified th a t th ey th in k a r e fu n da m en ta l to th e
sch ool’s su ccess, a n d on wh ich a ll sta ff
sh ou ld be com m u n ica tin g effectively.
• Addition a l m eth ods of da ta collection u sed
in con du ctin g a com m u n ica tion a u dit ca n
a lso in clu de in ter view s a n d “self-r epor ts of
in ter a ctive episodes”. Wh ile th e u se of
in ter view s is a lon g-sta n din g a n d va lu a ble
m eth od, it ca n be a costly, tim e con su m in g
pr ocess depen din g on th e size a n d com plexity of th e or ga n isa tion . However, it ca n be
u sed to follow -u p in gr ea ter depth a r epr esen ta tive sa m ple of th ose com pletin g a u dit
qu estion n a ir es a bou t pa r ticu la r issu es
wh ich m ay h ave em er ged.
Self-r epor tin g of in ter a ctive episodes
in volves sta ff iden tifyin g a n d item isin g
deta ils of th eir com m u n ica tive a ctivities
over a specifi c per iod in a pa r ticu la r a r ea .
Th is ca n in clu de iden tifyin g th e sou r ce,
topic, ch a n n el, len gth / du r a tion of th e com m u n ica tion a n d wh eth er it w a s on e or two
w ay. Respon den ts a r e a lso a sk ed to m a k e
qu a lita tive ju dgem en ts a bou t th e com m u n ica tion , for exa m ple, r a tin g it on a sca le of
effectiven ess. Th is m eth od ca n r evea l a r ich
sea m of da ta a bou t th e com m u n ica tive
h ea lth of th e sch ool or ga n isa tion .
• In con du ctin g th e a u dit sta ff sh ou ld be
given th e oppor tu n ity to com m en t on th e
com m u n ica tion system in th e sch ool gen er a lly a n d a lso to pr ovide a ctu a l specifi c
exa m ples of existin g com m u n ica tion pr a ctice. Su ch da ta yields a va lu a ble a m ou n t of
in sigh t in to th e sch ool’s or ga n isa tion a l
cu ltu r e a n d th e qu a lity of in ter a ction a n d
r ela tion sh ip w ith in . Th ese a r e th en con ten t
a n a lysed to r evea l br oa d th em es a n d issu es.
• Th e r esu lts of th e a u dit qu estion n a ir e is
a n a lysed to a ssess th e n a tu r e a n d qu a lity of
com m u n ica tion . For exa m ple th e a ctu a l
issu es of con cer n to sta ff ca n be discover ed;
block a ges in com m u n ica tion ca n be a ccu r a tely pin poin ted; over / u n der -u sed ch a n n els of com m u n ica tion ca n be h igh ligh ted;
or gr ou ps of sta ff r equ ir in g “r em edia l a tten tion ” ca n be iden tified.
Communication audit: recurrent
trends
We h ave con du cted n u m er ou s com m u n ica tion a u dits a cr oss a r a n ge of pu blic a n d pr iva te sector or ga n isa tion s, in clu din g th e edu ca tion sector. Th e m a in tr en ds to em er ge
fr om th ese a r e a s follow s.
The need for information
Sta ff desir e, a n d appr eciate, bein g fu lly
in for m ed abou t key issu es a ffectin g th eir
or ga n isation , a n d in pa r ticu la r th ose wh ich
will h ave a dir ect bea r in g on th eir jobs. Th e
[ 179 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
m a in r ecu r r in g com pla in t in ou r a u dits h a s
been th at of people feelin g u n der -in for m ed,
a n d, by im plication , u n der va lu ed. Given th e
well-k n own a da ge th at “in for m ation is power ”,
la ck of in for m ation u n der sta n dably r esu lts in
a feelin g of disem power m en t. Du r in g per iods
of ch a n ge, it is even m or e vita l th at sta ff feel
fu lly (a n d h on estly) in for m ed abou t wh at is
h appen in g or is abou t to h appen with in th e
or ga n isation . Wh ile th e pa ce of ch a n ge is often
exter n a lly dr iven a n d ou tside th e con tr ol of
sen ior m a n a gem en t, its im pa ct ca n be lessen ed
by en su r in g th at sta ff a r e in for m ed a s soon a s
possible abou t wh at ch a n ges will occu r, wh en ,
a n d wh at th e im plication s a r e likely to be.
Power of the grapevine
If th er e is a n in for m a tion sh or tfa ll, th e bu sh
telegr a ph wor k s over tim e to fill it, a n d sta ff
w ill devote m or e tim e to th e r u m ou r. Th e
gr a pevin e flou r ish es in or ga n isa tion s wh er e
sta ff a r e selectively in for m ed on a “n eed to
k n ow ” ba sis. Wh er e in for m a tion is n ot for th com in g fr om m a n a gem en t, sta ff w ill inven t it.
All or ga n isa tion s h ave “cr ea tive” in dividu a ls
wh o, bu ildin g on ba sic in for m a tion , con str u ct
pla u sible scen a r ios of im pen din g gloom a n d
doom . To cir cu m ven t su ch doom sday stor ies
con ta m in a tin g th e or ga n isa tion , cr edible a n d
speedy com m u n ica tion ch a n n els a r e essen tia l.
Th e tim elin ess of in for m a tion deliver y is m or e
difficu lt in or ga n isa tion s spa n n in g sever a l
differ en t sites, a n d h er e m ech a n ism s m u st be
esta blish ed to en su r e a sw ift flow of in for m a tion . Or ga n isa tion s sh ou ld develop fr ee-flow in g com m u n ica tion h igh w ays a lon g wh ich
m essa ges ca n be deliver ed both speedily a n d
a ccu r ately, a n d to wh ich a ll sta ff sh ou ld h ave
r ea dy a ccess. On e w ay of a ch ievin g th is is to
a ppoin t com m u n ica tion “ch a m pion s” - en th u sia stic in dividu a ls wh o w ill be tr u sted a n d
r espected by th eir peer s - to deliver in for m a tion w ith in th eir ow n loca tion .
Upwards communication
Ou r a u dits u n der lin ed th e im por ta n ce wh ich
sta ff a tta ch to u pw a r ds com m u n ica tion . Th ey
va lu e a clim a te in wh ich bottom -u p com m u n ica tion is foster ed a n d seen a s positive. In th e
m or e dysfu n ction a l or ga n isa tion s, th er e w a s
a fea r a m on gst sta ff th a t if th ey voiced cr itica l
view s, th ey m igh t th en be “m a r k ed” by sen ior
m a n a ger s. Sta ff a r e especia lly k een to r epor t
on in itia tives ta ken in th eir a r ea a n d to be
a ble to ga in r ea dy a ccess to job-r ela ted in for m a tion . Th ey a lso w a n t a ction to be ta ken on
in for m a tion wh ich th ey pr ovide, pa r ticu la r ly
fr om sen ior m a n a ger s. Upw a r ds com m u n ica tion m u st be solid a n d n ot a th in ven eer, sin ce
a positive ben efit w ill on ly be for th com in g if
a ction is seen to be ta ken by m a n a ger s a ctin g
on th e in for m a tion ga th er ed.
[ 180 ]
Channels of communication
Sta ff expr ess a con sisten t pr efer en ce for fa ceto-fa ce com m u n ica tion , yet in m a n y or ga n isa tion s th er e is a n over -r elia n ce on w r itten
com m u n ica tion . A blizza r d of m em os fr om
sen ior m a n a ger s is u su a lly a good in dica tor
of a fr ozen or ga n isa tion , ba r r en of a n y w a r m
cr ea tive fr ee-flow of idea s. We fou n d in m a n y
sch ools a n d colle ges sta ff view of th e ster eotypica l edu ca tion a l m a n a ger loca ted in th e
sa fety of th e office “bu n k er ”, a dvised by a
bu r ea u cr a tic a dm in istr a tor, cr ea tin g a n ever en din g, u n n ecessa r y a n d ir r ita tin g a r m ou r y
of m em os a n d letter s wh ich a r e th en fir ed off
by th e secr eta r y a t th e defen celess wor k for ce!
Th is lea ds on to th e n ext fin din g.
Visibility of senior managers
Sta ff w ish to com m u n ica te w ith sen ior m a n a ger s. A per iodic a n d r ath er “stiff ” m eetin g of
a ll sta ff is n ot wh a t is r equ ir ed h er e. Th e
n otion of “m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g a bou t” h a s
been r ecom m en ded for over a deca de. How ever, ca u tion n eed to be exer cised wh en so
doin g. Wh en pr ior n otice is given , th e r ed
ca r pet tr ea tm en t is given a n d th e exer cise
becom e som eth in g a k in to a r oya l visit w ith
r oom s (a n d th eir in h a bita n ts!) bein g scr u bbed
a n d polish ed befor e th e sen ior m a n a ger
“in spects” th em . Th e m a n a ger a r r ives,
a n n ou n ces som eth in g a k in to “J olly well don e.
Good sh ow. Keep u p th e good wor k ” a n d disa ppea r s ba ck to HQ. In essen ce th is becom es
m a n a gem en t by w a lk in g pa st! Conver sely, if
th e sen ior per son a r r ives u n a n n ou n ced, th is is
seen a s a for m of “ch eck in g u p”. Th e pr efer r ed
option is for m a n a ger s to a r r a n ge r egu la r
for m a l m eetin gs w ith va r iou s gr ou pin gs of
sta ff a t wh ich th er e is a n oppor tu n ity for a n y
issu e to be discu ssed. Th er e sh ou ld be a for m a l
in for m a lity a bou t th ese con ta cts – th ey sh ou ld
be r ou n d ta ble, over coffee, for a set per iod (n o
m or e th a n on e h ou r ), ch a ir ed by som eon e
r ela tively ju n ior, sh ou ld begin w ith a br ief
sta tem en t fr om th e sen ior m a n a ger, a n d open
ou t to a llow a n yon e to r a ise a n y topic. Th is n ot
on ly a llow s sen ior execu tives to “a ddr ess th e
tr oops”, it foster s a sen se of open n ess a n d
a ccessibility w ith in th e or ga n isa tion . Th er e is
a ca th a r tic effect in m eetin g a n d bein g listen ed to by th ose in position s of power a n d th is
sh ou ld be m a xim ised.
Conclusion
An y a ttem pt to eva lu a te a n d ch a n ge or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e m u st be gin fir st w ith a clea r
m a n a gem en t u n der sta n din g of a n d com m itm en t to su ch a pr ocess. Hen ce, a t th e ou tset
sen ior m a n a gem en t n eed to cla r ify th eir ow n
idea s of com m u n ica tion w ith in th e sch ool;
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
wh a t m igh t be r e ga r ded a s th eir “idea l type”
of a positive com m u n ica tion a ppr oa ch a n d
wh a t th e k ey issu es in fa ct a r e. A cr u cia l pa r t
of th is is th e iden tifica tion of th e va lu es
wh ich m a n a gem en t believes u n der pin th eir
com m u n ica tion pr a ctices, a n d th e developm en t of sta n da r ds wh ich r efl ect th ese va lu es
in a ction . E xper t fa cilita tion is u su a lly
r equ ir ed a t th is sta ge, to en su r e th a t people
expr ess wh a t th ey r ea lly feel r a th er th a n
wh a t th ey im a gin e is “politica lly cor r ect”. It
m ay well be th a t th is becom es th e m ost lon g
dr aw n ou t pa r t of th e a u dit pr ocess, sin ce th e
wh ole exer cise w ill be doom ed to fu tility
u n less th e sen ior m a n a gem en t tea m h a s
a gr eed objectives a n d a sh a r ed system of
com m on va lu es. For exa m ple, if sch ools h ave
been a m a lga m a ted it m ay be th a t sen ior m a n a ger s h ave a differ en t cu ltu r a l tr a dition a n d
possess r a dica lly differ en t m a n a gem en t
styles. Th e pr oblem s ca u sed by th is m u st be
fa ced a t a n ea r ly sta ge.
It is a lso im por ta n t to h igh ligh t th e qu estion of h ow im pr ovem en ts in com m u n ica tion
str a te gies, a n d th e system s wh ich r esu lt
sh ou ld be m ea su r ed. It h a s been a r gu ed th a t
m a n y ch a n ge pr ogr a m m es fa il beca u se th e
eva lu a tion ca r r ied ou t sim ply focu ses on th e
pr ocess th a t is in tr odu ced r a th er th a n on
wh a t is essen tia l – th e u ltim a te goa ls of th e
or ga n isa tion (Sch a ffer a n d Th om pson , 1992).
It is n ecessa r y, th er efor e, to avoid th e ea sy
tem pta tion to eva lu a te ch a n ges r esu ltin g
fr om en ga gin g in a com m u n ica tion a u dit
exclu sively in ter m s of expr essed sa tisfa ction
w ith n ew com m u n ica tion a r r a n gem en ts
a lon e, th e “feel-good” fa ctor. Wh ile su ch a
positive decla r a tion is en cou r a gin g, its u ltim a te im por ta n ce a n d wor th r ests to th e
exten t th a t it fu r th er s oth er essen tia l or ga n isa tion a l goa ls. Th e pu r pose of a com m u n ica tion a u dit essen tia lly is to iden tify pr oblem s
wh ich ca n be specifica lly a scr ibed to th e
n a tu r e of th e existin g com m u n ica tion pr a ctices a n d to ta k e pla n n ed a ction for th e elim in a tion of th ese wh ich w ill lea d to ch a n ges in
h ow sta ff in ter a ct w ith ea ch oth er w ith in
va r iou s or ga n isa tion a l settin gs.
Wh ile com m u n ica tion a u dits a r e still n ot
yet w idely k n ow n a bou t n or u tilised w ith in
or ga n isa tion s in th e UK, th er e is a gr ow in g
in ter est a m on g th ose m a n a ger s wh o h ave
com e to r ea lise th a t it is n o lon ger possible to
ign or e th e qu a lity a n d effectiven ess of or ga n isa tion a l com m u n ica tion . Th e u tilisa tion of
th is a ppr oa ch w ith in edu ca tion a l or ga n isa tion s su ch a s sch ools a n d colle ges ca n con tr ibu te sign ifi ca n tly to a r a isin g of aw a r en ess
of th e im por ta n ce of effective com m u n ica tion , n ot on ly in r en der in g r ela tion sh ips
m or e m a n a gea ble bu t a lso in fa cilita tin g th e
developm en t of a n or ga n isa tion a l cu ltu r e
wh ich str ives to im pr ove th e qu a lity of its
oper a tion . In th e lon g r u n , it is pr ecisely th e
developm en t of su ch a cu ltu r e wh ich w ill
deter m in e h ow well sch ools ca ter for th e
n eeds of ch ildr en .
References
An gle, H. a n d Per r y, J ., “An em pir ica l a ssessm en t
of or ga n isa tion a l com m itm en t a n d or ga n isa tion a l effectiven ess”, A d m in istra tiv e S cien ce
Qu a r terly, Vol. 21, 1981, pp. 1-14.
Ar n ott, M. (1987), “E ffective em ployee com m u n ica tion ”, in Ha r t, N. (E d.), Effectiv e Corpora te
R ela tion s, McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Ba bba r, I. a n d Aspelin , D. (1994), “It’s a s ea sy a s
ABC”, T ota l Qu a lity M a n a gem en t, Vol. 6 N o. 3,
pp. 32-8.
Ba r k er a n d Tom pk in s P.K. (1994), “Iden tifica tion
in th e self-m a n a gin g or ga n iza tion ”, Hu m a n
Com m u n ica tion R esea rch , Vol. 21 N o. 2,
Decem ber, pp. 223-40.
Ber ger, C. (1987), “Com m u n ica tin g u n der u n cer ta in ty”, in Roloff, M. a n d Milla r, G. (E ds),
In terperson a l Processes: N ew Direction s in
Com m u n ica tion s R esea rch , Sa ge, Lon don .
Bla n d, M. a n d J a ck son , P. (1990), Effectiv e
Em ployee Com m u n ica tion s, Koga n P a ge,
Lon don .
Cla m pitt, P. a n d Dow n s, C. (1993), “E m ployee
per ception s of th e r ela tion sh ip between com m u n ica tion a n d pr odu ctivity: a fi eld stu dy”,
J ou r n a l of B u sin ess Com m u n ica tion , Vol. 30
N o. 1, pp. 5-28.
E m m a n u el, M. (1985), “Au ditin g com m u n ica tion
pr a ctices”, in Reu ss, C. a n d Silva s, D. (E ds),
Orga n isa tion a l Com m u n ica tion , 2n d ed.,
Lon gm a n , Lon don .
Ga lbr a ith , R. (1973), Design in g Com plex Orga n iz a tion s, Addison -Wesley, Rea din g, MA.
Ha r gie, O. a n d Tou r ish , D. (1993), “Assessin g th e
effectiven ess of com m u n ica tion s in or ga n isa tion s: th e com m u n ica tion a u dit a ppr oa ch ”,
Hea lth S er vices M a n a gem en t R esea rch , Vol. 6
N o. 4, pp. 276-85.
Hea th , R., Leth , S. a n d N a th a n , K. (1994), “Com m u n ica tin g ser vice qu a lity im pr ovem en t:
a n oth er r ole for pu blic r ela tion s”, Pu blic
R ela tion s R eview, Vol. 20 N o. 1, pp. 29-41.
La r son , E . a n d F u k a m i, C. (1984), “Rela tion sh ips
between wor k er beh aviou r a n d com m itm en t
to th e or ga n iza tion a n d u n ion ”, Proceed in gs of
th e A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t, pp. 222-6.
Ma r ch , J . a n d Sim on , H. (1968), Orga n iz a tion s,
J oh n Wiley a n d Son s, N ew Yor k , N Y.
N e gben , M. (1991), “Th e k ey to su ccess in str a te gic
pla n n in g is com m u n ica tion ”, Ed u ca tion
L ea d ersh ip, Vol. 48 N o. 7, pp. 26-8.
Per r ow, C. (1970), Orga n iz a tion a l A n a lysis: A
S ociologica l V iew , Tavistock P u blica tion s,
Lon don .
Qu ir k e, B. (1995), “In ter n a l com m u n ica tion ”, in
Ha r t, N. (E d.), S tra tegic Pu blic R ela tion s,
Ma cm illa n , Hou n dm ills.
[ 181 ]
De nnis To urish and
Owe n Hargie
Auditing staff-manage me nt
c o mmunic atio n in sc ho o ls: a
frame wo rk fo r e valuating
pe rfo rmanc e
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 2 / 4 [1 9 9 8 ] 1 7 6 –1 8 2
[ 182 ]
Reilly, B.J. a n d DiAn gelo, J .A., “Com m u n ica tion :
a cu ltu r e system of m ea n in g a n d va lu e”,
Hu m a n R ela tion s, Vol. 43 N o. 2, pp. 129-40.
Sch a ffer, R. a n d Th om pson , H. (1992), “Su ccessfu l
ch a n ge pr ogr a m s be gin w ith r esu lts”,
Ha r va rd B u sin ess R eview , pp. 80-90.
Steer s, R. (1977), “An teceden ts a n d ou tcom es of
or ga n iza tion a l com m itm en t”, A d m in istra tiv e
S cien ce Qu a r terly, Vol. 22, pp. 46-56.
Th om pson , J .D. (1967), Orga n iz a tion s in A ction ,
McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Tou r ish , D. a n d Ha r gie, O. (1996), “Com m u n ica tion a u dits a n d th e m a n a gem en t of ch a n ge: a
ca se stu dy fr om a n N HS u n it of m a n a gem en t”,
Hea lth S er vices M a n a gem en t R esea rch , Vol. 9
N o. 2, pp. 125-35.
Tou r is h , D. a n d Tou r is h B. (1996), “As s ess in g
s t a ff – m a n a gem en t r ela t ion s h ip s in loca l
a u t h or it y leis u r e fa cilit ies: t h e com m u n ica t ion a u d it a p p r oa ch ”, M a n a gin g L eisu re:
A n In ter n a tion a l J ou r n a l, Vol. 1 N o. 2,
p p. 91-104.
Wils on , D.O. a n d M a lik , S.D. (1995), “Look in g
for a few good s ou r ces : com m u n ica t ion lin k a ges of fir s t -lin e m a n a ger s ”, T h e J ou r n a l of
B u sin ess Com m u n ica tion , Vol. 32 N o. 1,
p p. 31-48.
You n g, M. a n d Post, J. (1993), “Ma n a gin g to com m u n ica te, com m u n ica tin g to m a n a ge: h ow
lea din g com pa n ies com m u n ica te w ith
em ployees”, Orga n iz a tion a l Dyn a m ics,
Vol. 22, pp. 31-43.