BUS709 Organisational Communication: Woolworths & MeatPack Analysis

This essay provides a comparative analysis of organisational communication strategies, contrasting Woolworths Group Limited, which demonstrates effective communication practices, with MeatPack, an Australian food-processing company struggling with communication breakdowns. It identifies factors contributing to Woolworths' success, such as effective internal and external communication, active listening, and robust governance systems. The essay then explores the causes of poor communication at MeatPack, including communication breakdowns, lack of transparency, failure to involve junior staff in decision-making, and cross-cultural misunderstandings. Finally, it recommends enhancing communication at MeatPack through the application of relevant theories like the 21st VUCA business model, Rockefeller Habits Model, and Hofstede’s model, advocating for a Leader-Manager approach, accountability, and cultural sensitivity to improve overall organisational performance. The document is available on Desklib, a platform providing study tools for students.

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 1
ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION
Name
Student Number
Tutor
Institution
Date of Submission

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 2
Introduction
Communication is a vital aspect of the success of every organization. The manner in which the
top management of a company communicates to the junior staff and vice versa will influence the
outcome (Eunson, 2012, p. 5). Good communication improves the worker’s efficiency and
morale. Understanding both the verbal and non-verbal cues is critical in ensuring passage of the
proper message. When the message is distorted, there is a high likelihood of missing the main
point hence the failure of the organization (Hargie, 2016, p. 2017). Woolworths Group Limited is
one of the leading Australian companies that has invested heavily in proper communication
strategies. As such, this has seen the company expand and become competitive globally.
On the other hand, MeatPack is an Australian food-processing company located in Sydney. It has
been in operation for more than 27 years, but it has reached greater levels because of its poor
communication strategies. This paper, therefore, discusses the strategies that Woolworths uses to
enhance their communication within the organization, the causes of poor communication skills in
MeatPack, and recommendations to enhance effective communication.
Factors relating to the success of verbal and written communication skills at Woolworths
Woolworths understands the significance of effective business communication. Within the
organization, the top officials have implemented techniques that allow smooth flow of
information from the senior management to the junior employees and vice versa. They have
effective internal communication through which the employees are free to express themselves to
the top management without fear of intimidation. Many of the business fails because the junior
staff feels inferior to their seniors thereby affecting their efficiency in their job delivery (Chang,
2016, p. 75). However, if the workers are allowed to give out their ideas and get involved in the

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 3
general working of the business, then they feel part of the team. Hence their effectiveness in
service delivery improves.
Similarly, they have implemented external publications whereby the communication with their
customers and other stakeholders such as investors is monitored closely. They have understood
that how you sell yourself to the outside market will determine the amount of revenue you will
obtain. For instance, when the majority of the online users attacked Woolworths for the billboard
they had erected labeling doughnuts as fresh food along the Warrego Highway nearby Ipswich,
they immediately responded by letting the public know they would pull the billboard down with
immediate effect. Many people recommended the organization for acting quickly and averting
this disaster that could significantly damage their reputation. Also, their ability to listen to the
criticism and responses of their customers is commendable. It’s through active listening that the
company can understand the needs, wants, and preferences of their customers, hence respond
appropriately (Eunson, 2012, p. 19).
Woolworths has also invested in developing effective decision-making processes through
appropriate systems of governance for corporate sustainability (Klettner, Clarke, and Boersma,
2014, p. 147). They have an active Board of Directors that tackle the crucial issues affecting the
company. Therefore, they communicate to the rest of the staff on the decisions arrived at and
how they can be implemented. They also carry out regular consultations with the stakeholders
regarding several areas that affect business operations such as human rights, environment, anti-
corruption, and labor. It has adopted effective management systems whereby there is an
allocation of responsibilities and accountability for every staff (Klettner, Clarke, and Boersma,
2014, p. 155). The staff as well are trained in how to raise any issue arising within the
organization without causing more harm. Such include communication channels such as the

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 4
whistleblower mechanism and grievances mechanisms for seeking advice or reporting concerns.
When a company creates a friendly environment between the junior and senior staff, and they
can express their complaints when they occur without fear, it allows the top management to
understand the underlying issues affecting the business hence respond before the problem
escalates (Eunson, 2012, p. 45).
Causes of poor communication skills at the MeatPack company
Communication breakdown
It is crucial to ensure that there is no communication breakdown between the senior leaders and
the junior staff. In the event, such a scenario happens, every business operation will be affected.
For instance, if the passage of information from the top management is received wrongly by the
junior workers, there will be a considerable resistance happening from underground (Quirke,
2017, p. 23). The officials may fail to understand the reason behind it not realizing there was a
breakdown of communication somewhere. This scenario was experienced at MeatPack when the
top officials tried to introduce a new system of business management. The workers didn’t
understand the new structure and the leaders never bothered to explain. When some staff
members raised this concern during the annual general meeting, the manager never answered
satisfactorily frustrating the members the more.
Failure to involve the junior workers in the decision-making process
The opposition that is experienced in organizations when the leaders are implementing a new
policy or strategy arises mainly from the fact that the junior staffs were not involved during the
making of the decisions. It’s crucial to collaborate and coordinate with all the workers while
bringing a change in the organization (Cummings and Worley 2014, p. 9). Although the final

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 5
decision should be left in the hands of the leaders, it’s important to listen to the ideas of the rest
of the staff. By doing so, it will allow the change to be accepted quickly. The MeatPack,
however, failed to incorporate other employees in effecting change. Hence they were faced with
resistance.
Lack of transparency and accountability in the communication process
The problems encountered at the MeatPack originates from the fact that there is no transparency
and accountability in the communication process amongst the workers. For instance, the strategy
team that the Manager-Bison formed is not known which brought uncertainties within the team
members. They never understood their part fully in the team. Also, it is hard for the employees to
enumerate the exact roles and position help by the strategy team in the company as well as
functions of the senior leadership. The junior staff fears questioning the top management even
though they don’t understand the information passed. Also, it was not clear whom they were
accountable to among the leaders. Such issues affect negatively the operations of the business
leading to failure of the organization in the long-run (Thøger, 2002, p. 164).
Cross-cultural misunderstandings
MeatPack is made of workers from diverse cultural backgrounds. The majority of the employees
come from different countries. As such, cross-cultural clashes are experienced due to lack of
understanding one another. Introduction of a new strategy is usually faced with many challenges
due to the composition of people from different culture. Therefore, it essential to adopt proper
policies that will bridge the gap between these workers.
Recommendations for enhancing communication through the application of a relevant
theory

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 6
Management of an organization is critical in its success. Since the majority of the employees are
of a different culture, it’s essential to determine the management style to be used. For instance,
the use of hands-on approach in leading an organization allows smooth flow of information
either downwards or upwards (Giessner and Wong, 2016, p. 11). The leaders interact with the
junior staff in their day-to-day activities, thereby leading as compared to managing. Based on the
21st VUCA business model (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity), the Leader-
Manager approach is ideal compared to Manager-Leader approach (Nandram and Bindlish,
2017, p. 3). Therefore, when the leaders engage in leading rather than managing, then other staff
feel accommodated thereby improving their productivity (Algahtani, 2014, p. 75). Establishing a
culture of accountability also is vital in enhancing the performance of the company. For instance,
the adoption of the Rockefeller Habits Model that stresses on accountability or rhythm, strategic
goals (priorities), and performance feedback (data), will go a long way in ensuring accountability
and transparency in the flow of information (Harnish, 2002, p. 2).
The people working for the MeatPack company are from diverse cultural backgrounds. In such a
company, the top management needs to be very careful about how they handle these people to
avoid interfering with their cultural beliefs. The Hofstede’s model discusses different dimensions
of culture change and how they influence organization performance in the long-run (Fang, 2003,
p. 351). The MeatPack company used to have a hierarchical organizational setting (high-power
distance) whereby the superiors have an authoritarian decision-making style. However, it is
crucial to employ a low power-distance setting whereby the employees will feel part of the
decision-making process (Khatri, 2009, p. 3). Given that the composition of workers at the
MeatPack, it is very tough to determine the uncertainty avoidance since every community
responds to uncertainty differently. However, the workers value collectivist culture whereby

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 7
everyone is involved in the operations of the business. They also prefer a feminine culture where
there is cooperation between the staff and the leaders as well a high long-term orientation culture
(Triandis, 2018, p.65). The implication of this model shows that even though people come from
different cultures, they can co-exist, work together, resolve problems, and produce excellent
results
Conclusion
Effective communication determines whether one will close a deal in the business negotiation or
not. It’s through effective communication that a good working relationship is established within
the organization. It’s crucial for every company to implement appropriate communication
strategies that will allow smooth flow of information, and hence improve productivity. Failure to
do so will lead to conflicts within the organization due to communication breakdown and
distortion of information.

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 8
References
Algahtani, A., 2014. Are leadership and management different? A review. Journal of
management policies and practices, 2(3), pp.71-82.
Chang, J.F., 2016. Business process management systems: strategy and implementation.
Auerbach Publications, pp. 1-254.
Cummings, T.G. and Worley, C.G., 2014. Organization development and change. Cengage
learning, pp. 1-243.
Eunson, B., 2012. Communicating in the 21st Century, Google eBook. John Wiley & Sons, pp.
1-349.
Fang, T. (2003). A critique of Hofstede’s fifth national culture dimension. International journal of cross
cultural management, 3(3), pp. 347-368.
Giessner, S. and Wong, S., 2016. The fine line between hands-on and hands-off leadership. RSM
Discovery-Management Knowledge, 25(1), pp.11-13.

ORGANISATIONAL COMMUNICATION 9
Hargie, O., 2016. The Importance of Communication for Organizational Effectiveness. Mayıs, 2,
pp. 2017.
Harnish, V., 2002. Mastering the Rockefeller habits: What you must do to increase the value of
your growing firm. Gazelles Incorporated, pp. 1-4.
Khatri, N. (2009). Consequences of power distance orientation in organizations. Vision, 13(1), pp. 1-9.
Klettner, A., Clarke, T. and Boersma, M., 2014. The governance of corporate sustainability:
Empirical insights into the development, leadership and implementation of responsible business
strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(1), pp.145-165.
Nandram, S. S. and Bindlish, P. K., 2017. Managing VUCA Through Integrative Self-
Management. Springer, pp.1-6.
Quirke, B., 2017. Making the connections: using internal communication to turn strategy into
action. Routledge, pp. 1-327.
Thøger, C.L., 2002. Corporate communication: the challenge of transparency. Corporate
communications: an international journal, 7(3), pp.162-168.
Triandis, H. C. (2018). Individualism and collectivism. Routledge, pp.1-345.