Friday, November 18, 2016

Excerpt from the Importance of Communication in Public Organization

Brandon Figliolino 
PUAD 5001 Introduction to Public Administration 
The Importance of Communication in Public Organizations 
October 12, 2016 
 
Public administrators, both those who supervise and those who work at the street-level, are inundated with information on a daily basis. When handling such large amounts of material, it can be difficult to disseminate it appropriately across departments and to external partners. To communicate well, workers must know their roles; information has to be available; and leaders must be charismatic and willing to listen. Mismanagement of communication elements can lead to unappealing, and sometimes severe, consequences. Regardless of the barriers that exist, solid communication is critical for public organizations if they are to remain agile enough to serve citizens, rebalance their structures, and solve the problems they encounter. 
***

If the preceding case studies (not included in this excerpt) all encapsulate unproductive communication within public organizations, what does effective communication resemble? In sum, it is an organization in which consistent streams of communication allow for the transmission of creative ideas between individuals who are engaged and inspired to the call of public service. A model example of this in practice was the Resettlement Administration (RA).

At the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s inauguration, the country was ravaged by the “wicked problem” of widespread poverty (Rittel and Weber, 155). Previous attempts at solving the effects of the Great Depression were fruitless; the “scientific basis for confronting problems of social policies” was no longer effective (Rittel and Weber, 155). What was done in the past was no longer acceptable for the future. Roosevelt understood that his administration had to rethink how government worked and “revitalize a sense of common purpose” within the bureaucracy (Durant, 20). Taking on the role of charismatic leader, he engaged others to join in public service to the nation. To do this, he facilitated the Resettlement Administration’s attempt to make the federal government more active than passive when it came to addressing the social issues Americans faced.

Roosevelt’s strong communication as a leader was one of the reasons the RA was successful in “revitalizing a sense of common purpose” in the government and “reconnecting with citizens” (Durant, 20). Working with his “brain trust” of scholarly advisers, he promoted an agenda that was one of “bold, persistent experimentation” (Gawthrop, 6). He communicated his ideas with passion and hope. In turn, his team believed in what he said. Everyone realized that the institutions that preceded the Roosevelt Administration needed radical modification. The RA was their attempt at that influential vision. 

Stephen Toumlin said, “Convincing narratives have a kind of weight that mathematical formulas do not” (Maynard-Moody and Musheno, 25). Roosevelt used that idea to his advantage. Shared values can be a “cornerstone of a cohesive public organization,” Roosevelt’s ability to communicate his values for public service to his team was critical for establishing a narrative that all his workers cherished (Wise, 326). Despite “frenetic” working conditions that included food and sleep deprivation, “hourly crises,” and “bureaucratic tidal waves,” Roosevelt’s public servants continued pressing onward (Gawthrop, 9). Street-level workers in the RA believed in Roosevelt and his message, and sacrificed much to make the organization function. Had Roosevelt been tepid in communicating his goals, those working for him may not have rallied around his programs as much as they had.

When workers, such as Rexford Tugwell, felt powerless, Roosevelt reminded them of the importance of progress. For example, the Agricultural Administration Act (AAA), first passed prior to the establishment of the RA, was a grandiose attempt at implementing “co-production” policies between farmers and the government (Kannan and Chang, 15). Despite the ambitious attempts at encouraging farmers to create a “service to be used by others,” the AAA was ineffective because of party divisions (Kannan and Chang, 7). Tugwell especially felt defeated when many of his teammates were ousted from the AAA altogether. Yet, Roosevelt didn’t agree with Tugwell’s claims that the AAA failed. Instead, he encouraged Tugwell to remain optimistic and continue problem-solving.

Roosevelt and Tugwell talked through the issues with the AAA, and through those discussions, determined “effective social reform could not be realized within the existing structures of the Department of Agriculture” (Gawthrop, 8). It was this willingness to discuss the troubles of his street-level workers that led Roosevelt to create the RA, which became one of the “distinctive agencies of the New Deal” (Gawthrop, 8). Roosevelt did what Bernadine Healy did not; he reached out to all levels of his organization and established meaningful relationships. He also, unlike the street-level workers in the Maine police and probation departments, saw citizens as individuals, and not tasks. If Roosevelt had dismissed his workers’ concerns and the suffering of poor Americans, the good services the Resettlement Administration provided to those in need would not have been actualized.

Another element of successful communication that came from the RA was their use of an alternative means of communication. Tugwell appointed John Franklin Carter to head a public information program that utilized photography as a way to describe the RA’s mission and document its successes. Photographing the Great Depression turned photographers into “agents of change who spanned the boundary between the agency, the Congress, and the public” (Gawthrop, 10). The photographers, which included renowned Dorothea Lange, would go into the field to document the devastating living conditions of farmers. They would then send the photos to other bureaucratic organizations to be included in reports and policy recommendations.

As a result of the photographs, policy recommendations turned into action. Lange soon discovered “just how effective her documentary photographs could be in improving the quality of life” of American farmers (Gawthrop, 13). Lange, and her fellow photographers, reshaped how information was relayed to both the government and the public. Photography “had an extremely powerful effect on those who were unaware of the severity” of the Great Depression (Gawthrop, 15). In one instance, Lange’s photographs of migrants at “Pea Pickers’ Camp” were  “published immediately” by the San Francisco News, which were then republished by the United Press wire service nationally (Gawthrop, 13). 2,000 pounds of food were dispatched to the area by the federal government as a result of the media attention.

Employing photography as a way to relay pertinent information was a vital component of the RA’s success, for multiple reasons. First, using photographs “fundamentally transformed” the RA into a “coherent and purposeful design” (Gawthrop, 10). The initial RA was a catchall for multiple programs and missions, but when the RA began distributing photographs of the rural devastation, the response from the public was so profound, the RA leadership decided to “redefine administrative rationality” and focus their efforts to eliminate “bureaupathologies” and work towards “information-driven” and “customer-focused” policies specific to farmers (Durant, 20). Communicating in a new, profound way helped the RA restructure itself. In doing so, they seized on the chance to change the narrative to focus on those who were suffering, and inspired thousands of others to help with the cause.

Photographs also created outrage over squalid living conditions, prompting swift movement on the part of the government. With each photograph and accompanying news story, the anger over poor living conditions moved the federal government into action. Public servants were able to see the Great Depression through the “faces” of those who suffered (Maynard-Moody and Musheno, 3). So was the public. Looking through the photographs of the farmers, they were able to get “to know them, and also something of the world which they helped make but which was no longer theirs” (Gawthrop, 15). Photography communicated emotions stronger than words. For an organization that strove to change the attitudes of Americans and inspire action against social injustices, pictures were the perfect means to that end.

Jennifer Pahlka stressed that citizens need to “use their voices and their hands” to become more engaged with public service (Pahlka). The RA photographers did just that. While the Resettlement Administration was folded into the Farm Security Administration, the innovative idea of finding a new way to communicate was a success that should be emulated by non-profits and government organizations. Technology, such as the camera, is quick to change the ecology of society. Organizations should utilize that to their advantage. Following technological trends, and embracing them, will help organizations continue to “reconnect with citizens” and “reconceptualize their purpose” (Durant, 20).  Organizations will become more engaged with the citizens they aid, and will provide even greater services as a result.

Communication is vital to the success of any public or non-profit organization. Without strong communication, public servants fail to meet the needs of those they serve. Organizations best assist the public when street-level workers’ roles are clear and concisely explained by their supervisors. These individuals need to comprehend the scope of their duties in order to execute tasks well. Just as important is the need for simple chains of escalation, so data doesn’t get misplaced or ignored. Public organizations must also be willing and able to share information with external partners. Acquiring new information will help street-level workers better serve the public by allowing collaboration and new insights to formulate. The executives of non-profits and governments need to build relationships with all their employees, too. Relationships built on trust, transparency, and a willingness to cooperate will help foster more creative problem-solving and will make employees feel that their work is valued. Guaranteeing that these elements of effective communication are applied at all times will better enhance the organization’s ability to perform.

The preceding case studies exemplify the importance of communication, and outline what happens when communication falters. Public servants should take note of the communication shortcomings and successes of these examples. Doing so will provide them with a better understanding of why communication is imperative, and how it can be done in such a way that the goals of the organization for which they work are achieved.
 
Works Cited:
Durant, Robert. 2014. Why Public Service Matters: Public Managers, Public Policy, and Democracy. NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gawthrop, Louis. 1999. “Images of the Common Good.” Public Service: Callings, Commitments and Contributions. Ed. Marc Holzer. New York: Westview Press.
Kannan, P.K. and Chang, Ai-Mei. 2013. “Beyond Citizen Engagement: Involving the Public in CO-Delivering Government Services.” IBM Center for the Business of Government.
Maynard-Moody, Steven and Musheno, Michael. 2003. Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Pahlka, Jennifer. 2012. “Coding for a Better Government.” Ted Talk. http://www.ted.com/talks/jennifer_pahlka_coding_a_better_government.
Rittle, Horst and Webber, Melvin. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4. 1973. P.155-169.
 
 
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment