Nicholas DiFonzo

Uncertainty during organizational change: Is it all about control?

Uncertainty is a major source of psychological strain during organizational change. This study tested a model of change-related communication, uncertainty, and control and their relationship with psychological strain, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions. Self-report data were obtained from staff at a psychiatric hospital undergoing restructuring. Results indicated that uncertainty had a direct and an indirect (via feelings of lack of control) relationship with psychological strain. Partialling out common method variance led to a complete mediation of this relationship by control. Other predictions about the relationship of these variables with psychological strain, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions were supported. Implications for future research and practice of change communication are discussed.

A TALE OF TWO CORPORATIONS: MANAGING UNCERTAINTY DURING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

Ineffective strategies of communicating about organizational change (e.g., corporate restructuring, mergers, downsizing) are earmarked by the presence of pervasive rumors that flourish in a climate of uncertainty. Using 15 structured field interviews with management and public relations personnel from multinational corporations, this article posits that successful programs of change communication hinge upon the proper management of uncertainty associated with change. Two detailed case studies are highlighted as opposing illustrations of change communication tactics that succeeded and failed. Effective change communication campaigns tend to reveal rather than conceal, reduce uncertainty through collective planning, and proactively establish and maintain trust. 1

Reining in rumors

x umors do not just fill up time around the water fountain. They can drain productivity, reduce profits, create stress in the workplace, or sully a company’s image. Some rumors tear at a company’s credibility, with both personnel and customers. Others have catapulted firms into financial disaster. It is imperative that managers know how to deal with the spread of questionable information, but even “experts” give a bewildering array of mixed signals. For instance, there is disagreement on whether a company should deny rumors. Sociologist Frederick Koenig, author of Rumor in the Marketplace (Auburn House, 1985), recommends that, “If a company is the target of a rumor, it should deny it immediately as forcefully and publicly as possible, showing the evidence that proves it is unfounded.” But many public relations experts consider denials counterproductive. Business writer Owen Edwards stated that “about the only way not to counter a rumor is to deny it, since any denial tends to give rumor added clout. The more vehement the denial, the more credible the story becomes.” There also is disagreement on something more basic: whether to comment at all. Thomas R. Horton, former president of the American Management Association, advised, “Above all, avoid having any company representative answer any media question with ‘no comment.“’ If it cannot be answered, then explain why it cannot be answered to the media, Horton advised. Some authorities, however, subscribe to the World War II dictum: “Keep mum!” Management consultant David Walke said he believes that “the safest thing to say is that our company policy is not to comment on rumors.” There also is little consensus on the treatment for rumor-plagued organizations. Managers often find themselves forced into a predicament similar to that of a tribal medicine man who has at his disposal a variety of mostly prescientific folk remedies, nostrums, and incantations. Often, the reason managers have so little to rely on is that savvy intuitions about how to combat rumors may not take into account recent findings on the way rumors get generated and transmitted. Thus, on the whole, efforts to create rumor

Problem Solving in Social Interactions on the Internet: Rumor As Social Cognition

Rumor discourse has been conceptualized as an attempt to reduce anxiety and uncertainty via a process of social sensemaking. Fourteen rumors transmitted on various Internet discussion groups were observed and content analyzed over the life of each rumor. With this (previously unavailable) more ecologically robust methodology, the intertwined threads of sensemaking and the gaining of interpretive control are clearly evident in the tapestry of rumor discourse. We propose a categorization of statements (the Rumor Interaction Analysis System) and find differences between dread rumors and wish rumors in anxiety-related content categories. Cluster analysis of these statements reveals a typology of voices (“communicative postures”) exhibiting sensemaking activities of the rumor discussion group, such as hypothesizing, skeptical critique, directing of activities to gain information, and presentation of evidence. These findings enrich our understanding of the long-implicated sensemaking function of rumor by clarifying the elements of communication that operate in rumors social context.

Microworlds for experimental research: Having your (control and collection) cake, and realism too

Microworlds (MWs) are dynamic computer-generated environments that subjects interact with in the laboratory and that simulate conditions encountered in the field. Precise levels of experimental control and improved accuracy and efficiency of data collection procedures are characteristic of MWs. It is proposed that these benefits are achieved with concomitant gains in internal validity (afforded by high levels of experimental realism) and external validity (afforded by the replication of the temporal-interactive nature of most field phenomena). To illustrate these ideas, three sets of MW studies are described that investigated rumor and behavior in the stock market (Broker), escalation behavior (Inve

Rumor, Gossip and Urban Legends

tment Choice

Management Are Aliens!: Rumors and Stress during Organizational Change

), and the application of foraging theory to internet shopping (Cybershopper).

How top PR professionals handle hearsay: corporate rumors, their effects, and strategies to manage them

The term ‘rumor’ is often used interchangeably with ‘gossip’ and ‘urban legend’ by both laypersons and scholars. In this article we attempt to clarify the construct of rumor by proposing a definition that delineates the situational and motivational contexts from which rumors arise (ambiguous, threatening or potentially threatening situations), the functions that rumors perform (sense-making and threat management), and the contents of rumor statements (unverified and instrumentally relevant information statements in circulation). To further clarify the rumor construct we also investigate the contexts, functions and contents of gossip and urban legends, juxtapose these with rumor, and analyze their similarities and differences.

Corporate rumor activity, belief and accuracy

Rumors collected from a large public hospital undergoing change were content analyzed, and a typology comprising the following five broad types of change-related rumors was developed: rumors about changes to job and working conditions, nature of organizational change, poor change management, consequences of the change for organizational performance, and gossiprumors. Rumors were also classified as positive or negative on the basis of their content. As predicted, negative rumors were more prevalent than positive rumors. Finally, employees reporting negative rumors also reported more change-related stress as compared to those who reported positive rumors and those who did not report any rumors. The authors propose that rumors be treated as verbal symbols and expressions of employee concerns during organizational change.

Kindergarten screening : A survey of current practice

Abstract Seventy-four experienced public relations professionals serving top global corporations were surveyed to investigate types of organizational rumors, their prevalence and effects, effectiveness of rumor management strategies, and associated psychological and situational variables. Results showed that harmful rumors are commonplace, especially during organizational change. The majority of rumors were internal in nature and were most likely to be about personnel changes, job security, or job satisfaction. External rumors were most likely to consist of hearsay of concern to the general public, such as those rumors affecting the organization’s reputation and those about product/service quality. Rumors incited a variety of effects, most of which were rated as somewhat severe. Three distinct dimensions of rumor effects emerged: external ramifications (e.g., bad press), internal attitudes (e.g., lowered morale), and internal behaviors (e.g., increased absenteeism). Numerous strategies were rated as highly effective in preventing and neutralizing harmful rumors. Two broad approaches, composed of strategies that structured (i.e., gave boundaries to) uncertainty and strategies that focused on enhancing the efficacy of official comments, emerged. Implications for PR professionals are discussed and include anticipating rumors as the norm, monitoring effects in three different dimensions, and proactively creating two-pronged rumor prevention and management action plans that structure uncertainty and enhance formal communications. Nicholas DiFonzo, Ph.D., is assistant professor of Psychology at Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY (nxdgss@rit.edu); Prashant Bordia, Ph.D., is lecturer at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia.