Organizational Communication- Exam 1- OU
Information Transfer
(Focus on sender) Early definitions of communication were based on information transfer models. At the most basic level, these models suggested that one person, the sender, has an idea. The sender encodes the idea into a message which is then sent through a channel (e.g., speech, written memo, text message) to a receiver who decodes the message and hopefully understands it as the sender intended. In this approach "noise" is interference that results in less than perfect transmission of the intended message. This interference could include physical noise, such as background music or traffic noise that makes it difficult to hear, or psychological noise, such as biases and misperceptions that interfere with an accurate understanding of the message. Later, scholars recognized that information transfer is a cyclical process of sending and receiving messages through feedback. The focus of study from this perspective is on the sender and factors that result in more or less accurate transmission of ideas from the sender to others. An information transfer model essentially defines communication as the process of transferring information or ideas from one person to another person or group through verbal and nonverbal behavior. Many individuals and organizations implicitly function with this understanding of communication.
5 uses of Strategic Ambiguity
(Unified diversity) First, ambiguity can be used strategically to create unified diversity. Unified diversity exists when different people have different understandings of the same words or ideas but think that they are in agreement. A common example of this is the mission statement of most organizations. For example, many state universities have a mission statement that says the university stands for excellence in teaching, research, and service. Students, professors, administrators, parents, and state legislatures may all endorse this mission statement but actually understand it quite differently. To students and parents, excellence in service may mean having good food service and recreational facilities on campus. Faculty members may think it means having effective committees to address faculty governance. State legislators often consider university outreach programs, such as agricultural education or nutrition and health programs to the community as important service. The different groups often have different ideas about what excellence in research means and how much time and money should be spent on it. So despite each group having a different understanding of the ambiguous mission statement, they all endorse the mission statement and create the impression of unity despite diverse thinking. A clearly worded mission statement, by contrast, would create problems for the organization as different groups may be unwilling to support the mission statement or the organization because they do not agree with its specific focus. Due to these issues, most mission statements are strategically ambiguous. Another value of strategic ambiguity is that is allows for adaptability to change. A very specific goal can be difficult to change whereas an ambiguous one is easier to change. Eisenberg points out that the ocean liner industry first changed its mission from travel to entertainment when air travel replaced sea travel as a form of transportation. While initially this meant providing fine dining and a relaxed atmosphere for vacationers headed to exotic places, this ambiguous goal has allowed the industry to add amenities to their boats from zip lines and surfing pools to casinos and Broadway shows, and even offer trips to nowhere, ones that simply go out to sea and return. All of these changes were possible without having to change the industry's mission due to the strategic ambiguity of the mission. Similarly, an organization committed to providing excellent customer service can change how it provides that service without having to change its values. On a more personal level the use of strategic ambiguity can help maintain relationships. While we often state that we want people to be honest, we frequently use strategic ambiguity to avoid complete honesty and save face for ourselves or others. Many of us have thanked someone for an unwanted gift by stating that it was "unique" or "unexpected" rather than giving our true evaluation of it. In organizational settings, we may describe a coworker's impractical idea as "creative" or "full of possibilities" while guiding the discussion toward a more practical alternative. In both instances, strategic ambiguity allows us to maintain our relationship with the other person where a more honest comment would likely strain the relationship. People in power can often maintain power through the use of strategic ambiguity. If a supervisor creates a clearly stated policy that anyone who is late three times in one month will be fired, the supervisor loses the ability to make decisions about particular employees; the policy determines the outcome instead of the supervisor. A clear policy means that if the best employee is late three times in a month for any reason, that employee gets fired. An ambiguous policy that says "after three absences in a month an employee may be subject to dismissal" maintains the power of the supervisor who can enforce it rigidly on poor performing employees, but be more forgiving of the better employees. Finally, an ambiguous statement may allow for plausible deniability at a later time. A commitment to address the problem "as quickly as possible" allows a supervisor to deny a subordinate's interpretation that "I expected this to be addressed by the end of the month." Of course, this can work both ways. A subordinate can also make ambiguous promises and deny the supervisor's interpretation, as well. The idea that strategic ambiguity is a form of effective organizational communication challenges most of our definitions of communication because it suggests that transferring information clearly or creating actual shared meaning are not always the appropriate goal for a communicator. A competent communicator may need to use ambiguity strategically to create coordinated activities and maintain relationships while being clear at other times.
Transactional Meaning Creation
(focus on both sender and receiver) A third way of defining communication looks at it as an interactive process: meaning is created in the communication transaction involving both parties or through the dialogue between the communicators. There really is no longer a clearly defined sender and receiver because both parties serve both roles as they interact. Through dialogue and interaction, the parties involved create meaning. The combination of messages produced, perception of those messages, resulting messages, and context, all contribute to meaning (e.g., Gerbner, 1956). A transactional process definition of communication emphasizes that communication is the process by which individuals assign meaning in a communicative situation through mutual interaction and influence. In this way, meaning is co-created and there are no distinctions between senders and receivers.
Shared Meaning
(focus on receiver) A second way of defining communication focuses on the meaning that is assigned to communication messages and particularly if there is shared meaning among the people involved. Whereas the transfer model emphasized the senders' role, a shared meaning definition focuses attention on the receiver. This approach also recognizes that meaning can be assigned to unintended messages. This is particularly critical in understanding nonverbal communication. If a supervisor has crossed arms while listening to a group of employees, they may conclude that the supervisor is opposed to their ideas. The supervisor may simply have been cold during that encounter, but because the employees shared an understanding of the crossed arms, they responded based on the meaning they assigned. The focus of the study of communication is on the process by which employees agreed that the supervisor is against their idea. So a shared meaning definition studies communication as the process by which individuals come to share an understanding of verbal and nonverbal communication.
A Communicative Definition of Organizations
-Activity Coordination -Self-Structuring -Membership Negotiation -Institutional Positioning A communicative definition of organizations views them as being created and maintained through communication. In its purest form, this definition asserts that organizations are constituted and exist only through communication. This idea might seem counter-intuitive at first, but, relationships and social structures that we eventually come to call "organizations" require communication at every turn. In fact, organizations are created and maintained in at least four kinds of messaging. First, activity coordination-working interdependently with others to complete tasks-requires individuals to communicate to get work done. Second, self-structuring-discussing and deciding how roles and responsibilities will be divided-requires communication for planning and the creation of policies. Third, membership negotiation-determining who belongs and who does not belong to the group-requires communication, such as what happens during hiring and firing. Finally, institutional positioning-representing the organizations' image to those who are not members-requires messaging, such as advertising, marketing, and public relations. From the communicative definition of organization, the legal entity of the organization only exists as it is constituted through communication. In other words, a physical building is not an organization; through communication it becomes constituted as part of the organizing activities of the people who identify as an organization. From this perspective, it is more difficult to determine which people are members or not of the communicatively created organization. For example, the CEO's spouse may serve an important role in the organization without being an employee. The technology team located in the building but employed by another company likely blurs the organizational boundary when the tech team is referred to as "our team."
Uncertainty Management Theory
-Cognitive Processes -Competing Motivations -Outcomes Newcomers experience a great deal of uncertainty during the encounter phase as they face new work, new supervisors, and new coworkers, all in a new organization. Scholars created a wide range of typologies that identify various topics newcomers seek to learn. These topics have been reduced to a parsimonious list of four topics that seem to summarize these typologies (Kramer, 2010). First, newcomers experience task-related uncertainties. Newcomers experience uncertainty about what their job actually entails, whether there are specific procedures or norms for doing the tasks, and how they will be evaluated for doing their jobs. Second, newcomers experience relational uncertainties. Newcomers tend to be unsure about how to relate to their peers, supervisors, and other organizational members. Not only are they unsure of how to interact with others to complete their work, but they are also uncertain about how to interact with others socially as friends. They also experience relational uncertainties about people throughout the organization as well as with customers or clients and suppliers if they interact with them as well. Third, newcomers experience uncertainty about the broader organization. They do not know its culture or norms. There may be specific language and stories that are unique to the culture that they have trouble understanding. Fourth, they experience uncertainty about the power relationships in the organization. Some people are more influential in an organization than others. The power in an organization may or may not be reflected in people's titles and so newcomers must determine who really is influential rather than who should be influential or thinks they are influential. Given these issues, newcomers must reduce or manage their uncertainties to adapt to their new situations. Newcomers reduce or manage those uncertainties through communication.
Critical Perspective
-Focus on power differences, oppression, or exploitation -Quantitative or qualitative methods The critical perspective views organizations as systems of economic and political exploitation in which individuals in positions of power or influence use that power in ways that benefit themselves over other organizational members. Critical scholars see organizations as places where power issues result in some groups being privileged while other groups are dominated or oppressed. The system of domination and oppression is created through organizational communication. For example, the hierarchical structure that exists in most organizations creates a system in which the communication from those at the top of the organization generates an inequitable system in which their voices and decisions control those lower in the organization. Then those at the top of the organization decide that the profits of the organization should be funneled into high salaries for executives and modest ones for rank and file employees. Those who work with and cooperate with those in power receive disproportionate benefits compared to those who do not. In organizations dominated by white male executives, the result is often that women and minorities are excluded from those benefits. Critical scholars may use a wide range of methods to support their critique of organizations as places of oppression, including those of the post-positive and the interpretive scholars. For example, the concept of the glass ceiling is the idea that certain groups, typically women or minorities, can only get close enough to see the people in high power positions in an organization, but cannot actually obtain those positions for themselves. This concept has been explored using quantitative methods to show that women are underrepresented and underpaid in high ranking positions, as well as to examine what caused the problem and how to solve it across organizational types. Other scholars have used interviews to provide insights into the dynamics that contribute to gender disparity for women even in an industry increasingly dominated by women like public relations. Other critical scholars have analyzed organizational texts or oral legends to show how these stories help those in powerful positions, like CEOs, maintain their power while keeping those near the bottom of the organization controlled through self-serving organizational rules. This freedom to use whatever method can be used to critique an organization has advantages and does not align clearly with an objective or subjective view of reality. Critical scholars face a number of criticisms themselves. Critical scholars like to position themselves as being marginalized in the field of organizational communication, much like the individuals they study, and then offer critiques of the dominant perspectives from that position. Given how frequently this type of research is published, however, it is difficult for critical scholars to continue to argue that they are marginalized. In a somewhat related critique, it has been suggested that in providing a critique of others, critical scholars are themselves becoming dominant and elitist when they attempt to impose their perspective on others.
Classical Management theory
-Originated in the 1900s with industrialization and urbanization. -Fredrick Taylor -Henri Fayol -Max Weber
A Social Definition of Organizations
-Position in society A social definition of organization focuses on the social responsibilities of organizations and the expectations that they be responsible and responsive to the public. Because organizations have become an increasing complex part of our social system as we have moved from an agrarian society to an urban/suburban one, concern over institutional responsibility has increased. As a result of these growing expectations, organizations have needed to create a unique sense of identity or self for the organization in relationship to the community, its citizens and other institutions. In part due to the distrust of organizations after various scandals like the Watergate Scandal, the collapse of Enron, and the banking crisis of 2008, many organizations have embraced the corporate social responsibility (CSR) movement to demonstrate that they are concerned about people in their communities, are guided by ethical principles, and are concerned about more than their bottom line. Through community involvement and support for employee volunteering, organizational leaders strive to demonstrate that they value the relationship between their organization and their various stakeholders, and not just profits. Although from this perspective it may also be easy to determine technically who the organizational members are, organizational members are simply one of the important stakeholders to consider. Community members who follow the organization through social media are also stakeholders. A social definition of organizations involves looking broadly at all the stakeholders to understand the organization and its context. Having explained three different ways of defining organizations, it is important to recognize that most of the time we use these different definitions interchangeably. These definitional distinctions are often of more interest to organizational scholars interacting with each other than to people living and operating in organizations. Organizational employees, regardless of its size, are likely aware of its legal status and recognize that it is accountable to the legal system. They also recognize that it is only through their communication interactions that the organization continues to function and be productive. They are likely concerned about how it is perceived by various community stakeholders, including stockholders if it is publicly traded, the local government who may provide tax incentives for job creation, citizens in the surrounding area who are concerned about how their quality of life may be impacted by the company's waste products, and a variety of others. Volunteers in nonprofit organizations are similarly aware of the importance of these factors. So although we easily understand the term organization, we frequently use a mixture of these three definitions.
A Legal Definition of Organizations
-Same as people The legal definition of organizations views organizations based on recognizing them as entities with the same sorts of rights, privileges, and obligations as people (Brummer, 1991). This definition recognizes organizations as entities that buy and sell property, sign contracts, produce profits and losses on which they are obligated to pay taxes (unless they have nonprofit status in the United States), and must comply with the nation's legal system. From this perspective, it is fairly easy to determine who are the members of organizations as employees, as well as who is not, although when organizations rely on volunteers and allow employees to work from home as telecommuters, the membership boundaries become less clear. The use of this definition is sometimes criticized for implicitly characterizing organizations as impersonal containers that exist apart from people; it suggests that people enter and leave pre-existing organizations that have clearly defined physical boundaries
Interpretive Perspective
-Shared meaning -Intersubjectivity -Typically qualitative methods An interpretive scholar is not concerned with maintaining objectivity and does not focus on organizational efficiency. Instead interpretive researchers focus on the subjective meaning that individuals assign to their organizational experiences. This approach focuses on communication as the process of symbolic interaction which creates meaning or understanding about organizational experiences for its members. Interpretive scholars recognize the importance of understanding the subjective meaning of experiences and that there are multiple subjective meanings assigned to events by different individuals. It is important to note that interpretive researchers do not adopt a relativistic perspective. A relativistic perspective suggests that any interpretation is acceptable because meaning is completely subjective. Interpretive researchers reject the idea that any one claim is as good as the next and that there is no way to establish knowledge claims. For the interpretive researcher there must be some level of intersubjective, or shared meaning, in which multiple individuals agree on the "reality" of the situation based on their communication interactions. This means that the researcher does not accept any single individual's subjective meaning, but seeks to discover some level of agreement within a group of individuals. For example, if the researcher is trying to understand the relationships of a team manager to the team, and the first team member interviewed says the manager is terrible, the researcher does not stop there. Instead, the researcher does additional interviews to establish if that is an appropriate representation of the intersubjective reality of the team. The next team member says the manager is great, and then others point out mostly positive characteristics of the manger and only a few negative ones related to handling personality conflicts in the team. Based on this information, the researcher then uses the collected evidence to conclude that the team manager is largely effective, but fails to address some personality conflicts in the team. However, even though there is intersubjective agreement that this is an accurate description of the team, that "reality" is not some objective truth simply because of the agreement. Interpretive scholars typically use qualitative research methods to systematically collect and analyze data in order to find the shared meanings of organizational members. Instead of relying on survey responses to measure concepts, interpretive scholars are interested in various communication "texts" or data. The data may include examination of actual written texts, documents, or artifacts of the organization, such as annual reports, company slogans, or webpage information. The data that are studied quite often are interviews of organizational members, but can also include notes taken while observing in the organization, recordings of dialogue among organizational members, and often both verbal and nonverbal behaviors. To gain an understanding of the shared meaning, interpretive scholars typically say that they start with the data and then develop theory and understanding based on their analysis of it. Through careful, systematic data analysis, the researcher gains an understanding of how participants make sense of their lived experience. However, since it is impossible to approach a study without some preconceived notions of what is important or interesting to examine, interpretive scholars do not claim to be unbiased. Often the interpretive scholar will show the individuals who are the focus of the study a copy of their interpretation to check to make sure that they have accurately described the shared meaning of their experience. This process known as "member checking" is just one of several methods interpretive researchers can use to establish the appropriateness of their interpretations. Most scholars and individuals using this perspective view organizations as a culture rather than as machine or organism. An organization's culture has a set of expectations (norms), values, and beliefs that are shared among the organizational members; the culture is developed over time through communication. Interpretive researchers gain an appreciation of the culture through their analysis of data and strive to represent the culture accurately as understood by organizational members.
Post-Positivist Perspective
-What is the effect of X on Y? -Typically quantitative methods -Focus on objectivity Researchers who embrace this perspective view reality as an objective phenomenon and perceive that their role as researchers is to measure and examine organizations objectively much like scientists conducting experiments. Functionalists initially viewed organizations as machines that did not change. Over time, they recognized that organizations are less like machines and more like living organisms that change and adapt to their environment, but they continued to view their role as that of scientists objectively dissecting an organization to understand the reality of how it worked. By understanding how the organization worked, researchers hoped to suggest ways to improve its functioning and efficiency. The researcher might examine how many resources were purchased by the organization, how many employees were used in producing the final product, and whether the process was efficient. Focusing on communication, the researcher would measure how often supervisors interacted with their subordinates to determine if a certain amount of communication resulted in greater efficiency. If the organization recently adopted a teamwork philosophy, the researcher might compare the output under the former hierarchical structure to the output under the new team structure to see if the changes in communication channels from hierarchical, top-down communication to lateral communication resulted in a more efficient and effective organization. Post-positivists differ from early functionalists in a number of important ways. First, although like functionalists, post-positivists largely accept reality has an objective existence apart from researchers, they recognized that their efforts as researchers are not objective and that efforts to observe reality are always tainted by certain theoretical assumptions or personal biases of the researcher. Post-positivists try to maintain as objective a stance as possible in trying to measure concepts and establish cause-effect relationships, but they recognize that in choosing to focus on measuring a particular concept and seeing if it is related to a particular outcome, they are actually creating perceptions of reality through their subjective choices; those perceptions of reality do not represent an objective reality. For example, choosing to measure the frequency of supervisor to subordinate interaction-as opposed to the frequency of peer to peer communication-is a subjective choice. Examining how each affects company profits rather than employee turnover is also a subjective choice. Second, where many researchers using a functional perspective focused on the bottom line of profit, post-positivists are likely to have a broader understanding of organizational effectiveness that includes outcomes such as employee satisfaction and identification with the organization, retention of employees, or a positive public image among others. Whereas functionalists tended to maintain distance from human perceptions, feelings, and attitudes, post-positivists frequently explore the subjective and human side of organizations. There are likely few pure functionalists currently studying organizational communication who believe that they are completely objective and that their measurements of various concepts and attitudes do not involve some level of subjectivity, but even with their changed perspective, post-positivists share some commonalities with functionalists. Like functionalists, researchers who embrace the post-positivists perspective typically use quantitative measures. Quantitative methods allow researchers to measure characteristics of the organization and its communication process and then look for statistical relationships between those measures. Typically, researchers begin with a theory or framework and then conduct a study to test the accuracy of its predictions. They often view themselves as more scientific than other approaches because they try to remain objective and impersonal. Of course, the selection of a theoretical perspective and the decision to use quantitative measures are subjective choices. If they measure the quality of supervisor communication and its relationship to job satisfaction, the post-positivists know that their measurement of quality is not objective, but they attempt to measure it in a valid and reliable manner so that others can replicate the study. The objective part of the process is the application of the statistical analyses conducted once the other research decisions have been made, but even those statistical tests are based on assumptions that do not have an objective reality.
3 definitions of organizations
1. A Legal Definition of Organizations 2. A Communicative Definition of Organizations 3. A Social Definition of Organizations
5 sources of anticipatory socialization
1. Family 2. Education 3. Peers 4. Previous experience 5. Media
3 definitions of communication
1. Information Transfer 2. Shared Meaning 3. Transactional Meaning Creation
3 Communication Perspectives
1. Post-Positivist Perspective 2. Interpretive Perspective 3. Critical Perspective
3 messages conveyed in nonverbal communication in organizations
1. Security (Privacy) 2. Symbolic Identification (Status) 3. Social Contact
Realistic Job Preview
As mentioned in the introduction to this chapter, it is not uncommon for new employees to experience unmet expectations that lead to high turnover rates. It is not difficult to see why this happens. Family members and teachers typically encourage young men and women to have high expectations for their jobs. During the recruitment process, organizations are involved in image enhancement as they attempt to attract the best candidates. The combination of optimistic socialization messaging and strong impression management by organizations during recruitment and selection can often lead to job applicants' unrealistic expectations. These unrealistic expectations can be about abstract concepts like whether an organization has a positive work environment or many opportunities for advancement, as well as objective issues such as the number of work hours required by a job, its salary, and the quality of benefits enjoyed by members. To address this concern, scholars proposed that the recruitment process should include realistic job previews (RJPs). RJPs provide the applicant with the positive and attractive aspects of a future job and place of employment, as well as information about some of the less attractive or mundane aspects of the job in their recruitment messages. By providing this more balanced or more realistic job preview, new employees will not experience as many unmet expectations. So for example, if a social work applicant is told during the interview process that there is a fair amount of boring paperwork to do, but that is just part of the job that needs to be done to provide the kind of caring support to clients that makes the job attractive, when the new employee finds out that there really is a lot of paperwork, it will not be as big of a surprise and will be less likely to lead to dissatisfaction and turnover. Research supports the conclusion that RJPs have positive outcomes for new employees. An analysis of 40 studies using RJPs found that that they were related to more accurate initial job expectations, higher job performance, and lower rates of turnover among new hires (Phillips, 1998). Given these findings, one might wonder why more organizations do not use RJPs. If all organizations were doing RJPs, none of them would be at a disadvantage. The fear is that an organization will lose some of its top prospects if they provide an RJP and their competition does not. There is some evidence to support this fear, since more applicants drop out of the hiring process after RJPs.
Uncertainty Reduction Theory
Basic Premise: When we encounter uncertainty, we try to learn more so that we are less uncertain. Knowing more reduces uncertainty and makes us like the situation (person) more Critique: Maybe we don't want to learn more. Maybe knowing more makes us like the situation (person) less.
Person-Job fit vs. Person-Organization fit
Importance: organizational perspective Importance: employee perspective The concept of Person-Job Fit (P-J) concerns the management goal of finding the right employee to fill an open position. P-J involves matching the attributes and personality of the person to the characteristics and requirements of the job situation. From a management perspective, having the right person in the right position improves the efficiency and productivity of a unit, whereas having the wrong person leads to problems. Research indicates consistently that good P-J fit also results in positive employee work attitudes and job performance. Although the P-J approach spurred a significant amount of research that generally supports the premise that P-J contributes in a positive way to employee outcomes, more recent research distinguished between person-job fit (P-J) and person-organization fit (P-O). Whereas P-J focuses on a match between the employee and the job requirements, P-O concerns a match between the employee and the organization's values and beliefs or, in other words, the organizational culture. Although the two fit concepts are related, they are distinct and have different effects on employees. Research demonstrates that both P-J and P-O are positively related to job satisfaction and negatively related to intention to quit. While both P-J and P-O contribute equally to job satisfaction, P-O contributes the most to reducing the intention to quit, as well as to various positive behaviors such as helping and cooperating with others, and volunteering for extra duties. Although not always stated explicitly, either P-J or P-O or both are typically considered in organizations' recruitment and selection process. When an organization's recruitment and selection process favors a concern for P-J, then there is an assumption that new members will learn the job quickly and adjust to the organizational culture over time. When an organization's recruitment and selection process favors a concern for P-O fit, then there is an assumption at play that new members can be taught the specifics of a job that they do not know, but if they do not fit into the organizational culture, they may not be satisfied and committed to the organization and be more inclined to leave. Although fit is generally perceived as a management concern, it should be a concern of job candidates as well. As potential employees consider accepting a job offer, they should likely consider whether there is a good P-J and P-O rather than accepting a job simply because it pays well. There need not be a perfect match, but finding good P-J and P-O will likely lead to a more satisfying organizational experience.
Information exchange
Information seeking and information giving interact during the communication exchanges as part of the role negotiation process. Role negotiation refers to the social process which newcomers face in needing to figure out what their work role responsibilities will be and how those duties will be performed. Many of the general role responsibilities are negotiated during anticipatory organizational socialization as a newcomer accepts a position in the organization, but many specific details are negotiated after organizational entry. The negotiation process for newcomers is typically viewed as some variation on five steps that include role-sending from the established members and role-making by the newcomer. First, the organizational members have role expectations for themselves and others. Second, those role expectations are communicated to the newcomer. Third, the newcomer interprets those expectations combining them with the self-expectations he or she has. Fourth, the newcomer enacts the role thereby communicating a particular understanding of the role. Then, the enacted role provides feedback to the established members on how the role is being performed, which affects their new expectations for the newcomer, as the process repeats itself. It is through this communication exchange process of negotiating the role that the newcomer and the other organizational members reduce their uncertainty for each other.
Sources of potential job leads
Recruitment Anticipatory organizational socialization involves the interaction between the organizations' efforts to recruit qualified people to hold open positions and the applicants' efforts to find positions in organizations. From the organization's perspective, improving the recruitment process involves considering three factors: 1) objectives; 2) strategies; and 3) activities. The recruitment objectives include more than just getting good applicants. Recruiting also involves determining how many positions need filling, how diverse and large of an applicant pool is desired, and so forth. These objectives then affect the organization's recruitment strategies. Strategies include determining where to advertise positions to attract the desired applicants and whether to focus on the details of the specific job or on the image of the organization. Finally, the recruitment activities include when and where the recruitment activities and interviews will occur. There are numerous strategies for recruiting. A partial list of places to advertise or post jobs includes company websites, general job sites like Monster Jobs (www.monster.com), trade magazines, and local newspapers. Other recruitment strategies include participating in community job fairs, or campus job fairs and placement centers at some universities where interviews are conducted. Another common strategy is to use temporary employment agencies such as Kelly Services (http://www.kellyservices.com/Global/Home/) or Express Employment Professionals (http://www.expresspros.com/). Some temporary agencies even specialize in particular types of occupations. Using temporary employment agencies offers both organizations and potential employees the opportunity to test each other out for fit prior to making any long term commitment. Organizations also use a variety of social media to target potential employees including blogs, Wikis, podcasting, employer marketing videos, text messaging. By the time you read this, there will likely be additional forms of technology used be recruiters.
