In order to understand the concept of effective communication, the terms
‘effective’ and ‘communication’ were defined separately. The term ‘effective’ can be defined as the capability to produce the purpose or intention (Collins English Dictionary 1999; BusinessDictionary.com 2014; Cambridge Dictionaries Online 2015). Thus, the implication is that something is considered effective, if it is able to produce the desired results. This view is supported by the systems perspective theory on effectiveness which postulates that organisations should be aware of
M.A Ramodibe | From Communication to Communigation: A Conceptual Model to strengthen South Africa’s Government Communication System – The Case of Mpumalanga Province
22
and consider the preference of its publics in order to realise effectiveness (Grunig 1992). Arguably, the success of any organisation is dependent on effective communication (Eisenberg & Goodall 1997; Pandey & Garnett 2006; Shockley-Zalabak 2006; Garnett et al 2008). On the other hand, the competing-values perspective theory on effectiveness stresses innovation as being essential towards effectiveness, whereas the strategic-constituencies perspective theory explains effectiveness in terms of “how well the organi[s]ation satisfies the demands of its relevant external publics – the people, groups and other organi[s]ations upon which the organi[s]ation depends for its survival” (Grunig 1992: 76). In terms of the goal-attainment perspective theory, effectiveness is measured in terms of the goals achieved.
On the other hand, the term communication simply refers to the act of sharing information (Shannon 1948; Drenth et al 1998; Pearson & Nelson 2000; Cleary 2003; Rogers 2003; Koontz & Weihrich 2007; Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2015;
Khanna 2015; Dahiya 2015). The word communication originates from the Latin word ‘communis’ – English for sharing – and can happen verbally, non-verbally, in written format, graphically or through electronic means of human interaction (Communication studies 2013). Rogers (2003: 5) defines it as “a process in which participants create and share information with one another to reach a mutual understanding”. In essence, communication is the process of sharing or exchanging information between the sender and receiver through some sort of channel – be it either by way of mouth, hererin referred to as verbal or face-to-face communication (unmedited communication) or through an impersonal channel, hererin referred to as a mediated communication, such as mass media channels (Motley 1990; Ritchie 1991; Hauser 2000).
Hauser (2000: 6) further argues that information and signal are significant in the communication process, as “signals carry certain kinds of informational content”.
This explains that “human communication is ‘nothing but’ signal encoding, transmission, and decoding” (Ritchie 1991). Through communication, meaning is shared between the sender and the receiver (Shannon 1948; Drenth et al 1998;
M.A Ramodibe | From Communication to Communigation: A Conceptual Model to strengthen South Africa’s Government Communication System – The Case of Mpumalanga Province
23
Pearson & Nelson 2000; Cleary 2003; Rogers 2003; Koontz & Weihrich 2007;
Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2015; Khanna 2015). Evidently, once the meaning of the transmitted information is mutually undertood, effective communication has taken place (Dahiya 2015). This concurs with the assertion by BenDedek and Laoshi (2006) that effective communication is simply “a conversation in which no one gets confused by the other person’s meaning”. Clearly, in order to ensure that there is no confusion or ambiguity about the meaning of the information or message, the two parties in the communication process should be able to interact with each other (McKay, Davis & Fanning 1995; BenDedek & Laoshi 2006;
Fielding 2006; Chase & Shamo 2013). According to Shannon’s communication model, effective communication can only be ascertained once feedback is received from the recipient of the message (Berlo 1960; Mehrabian & Morton 1967; Hall 1980; Rogers 1983, 1995; Pearson 1983; Chandler 1994; Pratt 2000;
Ngenge 2003; Fielding 2006; Krile 2006; Barnlund 2008; Logan 2010; Mudombi 2013).
The feedback received will establish whether the transmitted message was successfully decoded, and if so, successfully concluding the two-way communication process between the sender and the receiver. Brown (2015) further agues that clear and unambiguous messages during the encoding process are fundamental towards successful decoding of the intended message.
Stahl and Caprano (2014)’s study on corporate blogs to examine the characteristics of effective communication established three (3) key drivers of social media success; namely, (1) author characteristics, (2) content characteristics, and (3) interaction characteristics. With regard to author characteristics, the study revealed that the level of authority in an organisation increases the size of the audience; that is, the higher the status of the author of the message, the more effective the communication would be. In terms of content characteristics, the study revealed that story-telling attracted more people while interaction characteristics revealed that interpersonal connectivity influences people to participate in online conversations; that is, the interactivity of social media platforms motivates people to have online conversations with each other
M.A Ramodibe | From Communication to Communigation: A Conceptual Model to strengthen South Africa’s Government Communication System – The Case of Mpumalanga Province
24
(Stahl & Caprano 2014). Two-way communication is thus essential in ensuring that there is no confusion regarding the intended message, as this affords the receiver to get clarity, in case of not being sure. To this end, two-way or interactive communication is fundamental in realising effective communication. Baruah (2012) and Roberts (2014) assert that effective communication is beneficial, as it eliminates any chance of misunderstanding or ambiguity – that is, unsuccessful decoding of messages – which could lead to misinformation and cause confusion during emergency or crisis situations. Brusse (2012) adds that communication is considered to be effective if it creates awareness, understanding and even persuasion. Brusse (2012) and Brown (2015) further argue that effective communication has the potential to influence the recipients of the message, and this could lead to behaviour change when required.
Accordingly, well-informed employees are likely to adopt the organisation’s vision as their own – they end-up regarding themselves as valuable and inextricable to the organisation they work for – hence they would consider themselves as part of the solution towards the success of the organisation (Eisenberg & Goodall 1997; Witherspoon 1997; Elving 2005; Pandey & Garnett 2006; Garnett et al 2008; Gall 2009). This renders effective communication inextricable to organisational change, as it eliminates ambigutity on instructions given or the vision envisaged (Eisenberg & Goodall 1997; Elving 2005; Pandey & Garnett 2006; Garnett et al 2008). Conversely, Elving (2005: 129) asserts that “poorly managed change communication results in rumors and resistance to change, [thus] exaggerating the negative aspects of the change”.
Effective communication can thus be explained as the successful delivery and the comprehension of a message by the recipient, as intended by the sender (McKay, Davis & Fanning 1995; BenDedek & Laoshi 2006; Fielding 2006; Chase
& Shamo 2013; BusinessDictionary.com 2014). For example, if a mother can understand the meaning of ‘shake well before drinking’ instruction on a medicine bottle, to mean that she must shake the bottle – and not the child – that would signal effective communication having taken place. Conclusively, effective
M.A Ramodibe | From Communication to Communigation: A Conceptual Model to strengthen South Africa’s Government Communication System – The Case of Mpumalanga Province
25
communication takes place when the information shared by one party with another is mutually understood as intended.