This paper examines how organizational change is best communicated through face-to-face interaction. The thesis argues that face-to-face communication is the most effective way to convey first and second level change. Research on a company that implemented a new HR system found employees were more willing to adopt the new technology after face-to-face training compared to only receiving manuals. While face-to-face has disadvantages if feedback is not incorporated, it allows for change to occur in a timely manner and builds inclusion as employees can ask questions. Face-to-face communication is concluded to be the most efficient and effective way to communicate organizational change.

1. Thesis
In this course, Organizational Change Management (MBA 750), we have discussed many different
factors that are significant to organizational change. Regarding this project, Edward Ferguson, Kenny
Kern, and I, Joe Meloni, have decided to concentrate on a very important discussion in reference to
organizational change, which is how it is communicated. Taking another step forward, and striving to
locate important research, this project will not only focus on how change is communicated, but will prove
the goal of our thesis which is the fact that communicating change face to face is the most effective way
of conveying first and second level change in an organization. This paper has been divided into three
sections with each group member focusing their attention and research on certain significant points
regarding the thesis statement that is stated. Academic research and a professional interview are included
in this project as supporting evidence of our thesis and concentration.
Abstract
It is a time honored belief that communication is vital for organization to function and maintain
themselves. This is especially the case when an organization has to undergo organizational change in
order to sustain its competitive advantage in the marketplace. With top down the task to effectively
communicate the organizational change falls to the managers. If they fail to meet this responsibility, it can
disrupt the change process and subsequently the daily routines of the organization. Preparation is required
to provide a vision and address feedback by those affected. There are few categories to communicate this
change like verbal, written, and electronic channels. Electronic channels seem to be the default choice as
we tend to rely more and more on our technological tools. It is a rare occasion to resort to face-to-face
(FTF) communication despite this medium having high media rich benefit. This benefit can be
characterized as having a full access to the words, vocal and facial expressions, and body language of the
given speaker all within a common setting. FTF communication is especially preferable during
employment negotiation meetings, electronic message clarifications and conflict resolutions.
Additionally, organizational change is no exception to present alterations as well as grander
transformations to the organization as a whole. The workforce and upper management can mutually
exchange potential ideas, questions, concerns and obstacles so as to reach a general consensus for the
given change. One example is the Opco Company whom underwent a technological organizational
change by a implementing a new human resource information system (HRIS). Third party research
discovered significant differences with HRIS users more willing to adopt the new technology after
undergoing the favorable FTF training as opposed to hard copy training booklets. Compared to other
mediums, FTF does carry it fair share of pros and cons despite its overall media richness. One
disadvantage is when the receivers, like employees, do not feel their feedback is being heard then they are
less likely to be receptive to the organizational change at hand. Management needs to be receptive to the
sensibilities of their workforce regardless of objection or disagreement. Furthermore, management
should allow an alternative channel (an open door policy) to present future questions and concerns should
they arise. This counteracts the disadvantage when something wasn’t clearly understood because the
receiver was under stress at the time and builds inclusion. By congregating the staff together, team
members can perceive a sense of camaraderie, a shared personal and emotional state and a common
vested interest in the upcoming change. FTF is further advantageous in that it allows organizational
change to come about in a more timely fashion meeting with pre-established deadlines. Overall, FTF
communication can convey successfully where organizational change will take place in a more efficient
and effective manner.