I need someone to knows SPSS and quantitative research " linear regression"

The Importance of Communication in the workplace

Project

Introduction

The lack of interpersonal communications between public administrators and their staff members can have a number of consequences in the workplace. One of the consequences is disorganization and disorder among the employees about their duties and tasks ascribed to them. Another consequence is a failure to pursue organizational objectives in an effective manner, which has repercussions in serving the greater public. A lack of communication between public administrators and their staff members can also create conditions of chaos and division in regards to pursuing what is best for the public constituents (Denhardt, R.B., Denhardt, J.V. & Aristigueta, M.P., 2013). The research question to be addressed in this study is: Does good communication between leaders and employees improve employee productivity?

In organizations the lack of communication and how it impacts on the teamwork has a negative relation with the organization goals. For instance, Dekay (2012 ) asserts that a major pitfall in organizational workplaces is the lack of knowledge and skills in regards to interpersonal communications. This author embarks on a research effort to clarify that many employers fail to place any value on improving written communications, and in addressing oral communications, many of their approaches are insufficient or inadequate. It is found in this research effort that interpersonal communication skills are critically important for productive, successful employees, while those who have less developed or inadequate interpersonal communication skills struggle to achieve positive outcomes. Delcambre (2010) clarifies the nature of interactions, transactions, and exchanges in an organizational setting to distinguish the value of interpersonal communications. By focusing in on the exact nature of these interactions, transactions, and exchanges in organizational settings, this author attempts to demonstrate the positive impacts of interpersonal communication skills. It is evident that when managers and employees deploy interpersonal communication skills effectively that they have much greater success. Bonaccio and colleagues (2016) research they often-overlooked dimension of non-verbal communications in the social worlds of organizations. It is discovered by these researchers that management has lagged behind in understanding the crucial importance of their non-verbal behaviors on their subordinates. It is asserted that nonverbal behavior by management has extensive impacts on the productivity of their subordinates. Choren (2015) asserts that interpersonal communication skills are vital for professional development and personal growth in organizational settings. This author explains that interpersonal communication skills are vital for employees in any organizational context to transmit useful, valuable information to each other, to management, and to outsiders, like suppliers and clients.

In order to support some of these research findings, this research study will specifically uses data from the 2015 Federal Employee View Point Survey (FEVS) Department of Human Health and Services in regards to interpersonal communication skills of public administrators and subordinates in public organizations, and conduct quantitative analysis to help clarify some of these important findings in the relevant literature on this subject area. The unit of analysis is an individual. The dependent variable is my agency is successful at accomplishing its mission and the independent variables are: Managers promote communication among different work units (for example, about projects, goals, needed resources), Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization, In the last six months, my supervisor has talked with me about my performance, My supervisor listens to what I have to say, My supervisor treats me with respect and the control variables: age, education, sex, supervisory and minority.

This study is important because of the lack of attention given to interpersonal communication skills by many public administrators. This study seeks to demonstrate clearly and concisely how valuable interpersonal communication skills can be for success to be achieved in public organizations. In addition, this study can demonstrate by failing to address the importance of interpersonal communication skills in the public organizations, many public administrators are overlooking an extremely vital area that can assist in improving the transmission of information and the productivity of their workplaces. Finally, this study will also shed light on the need to pursue further research efforts in this area of interpersonal communications in the public administrative workplaces.

The study is organized in various sections; literature review, methods, results and conclusion. Under literature review section, the relevant studies used in developing theoretical framework for the study will be synthesized. The section also provides an overview of the important research associated with outcome of lack of communication in the workplace. The data and statistical measures used in conducting the study are described under the methodology section. The results section provides a brief description of the major findings of the study while the conclusion section discusses the possible implications of the key findings.

Review of Literature

In studying communications in the Department of Human Health and Services, a review of literature can clarify relevant themes, ideas, and issues that are significant in this area of inquiry. Because communications is such an expansive field, this study’s focus will be on specific areas of interpersonal communications, such as speaking, listening, and supportive communications, in order to directly relate it to the field of public administration, and specifically the Department of Human Health and Services. In reviewing these relevant scholarly journals and important articles on interpersonal communications, the central themes will be noted in improving interpersonal communications in the Department of Human Health and Services in three strategic areas: (1) communications from supervisors to subordinates, (2) communications from subordinates to supervisors, and (3) communications among subordinates.

Communications from Supervisors to Subordinates

One of the key communication channels in any public organization is that between supervisors and subordinates, and the manner in which supervisors communicate with their subordinates. Ciampi (2015) clarifies that supervisors must exercise their leadership skills in this role of communicator, especially as a translator of information, statistics, and concepts for the benefit of other workers. In addition to this role, an organizational leader must also figure out who the key constituents are in the workplace, have frequent one-on-one meetings with them, and establish authentic, transparent communication exchanges with them (Ciampi, 2015). In turn, this authentic communication with key constituents will transmit the vision and mission of the organization more effectively to the other subordinates throughout the organization.

Subordinates depend on their supervisors for these communications to be credible and trustworthy, and rely on their supervisors in a public administrative setting to also be guided by a strong set of ethics (Cooper, 2012). Subordinates will thus respond more effectively to their supervisors’ communications when respecting them for having a high level of ethical integrity and a personal code of ethics. Nalbandian and Llorens (2010) stress a strong set of ethics among organizational leaders in public administrative settings is paramount to gaining not only respect from subordinates, but also assuring that they will listen attentively to their supervisors’ directions and guidelines for workplace behavior and workplace performance.

Another important context for communications flowing from supervisors to subordinates is the nature of its content and implications. Bonnaccio and colleagues (2016) assert that supervisors and managers who display negative non-verbal behavior patterns consistently have lower productivity and more problematic workplaces. In addition, these negative non-verbal behavior patterns are assumed by subordinates. This means that the organizational setting can be infused with negativity by these negative non-verbal behavior patterns shared and exchanged by supervisors to subordinates. In contrast, the opposite is true for positive non-verbal behavior patterns (Bonnaccio et al, 2016). Supervisors who establish authentic communication exchanges with subordinates foster greater trust and rapport with one another, which leads to better performance in the workplace.

Dekay (2012) found that many top executives and high level managers in organizations simply overlook the importance of interpersonal communications. Based on his evidence, many supervisors lack effective interpersonal communication skills with their subordinates, and in turn the subordinates therefore suffer from poor interpersonal communication skills with their supervisors, as well as among each other. In contrast, successful, productive organizations are found to have managers and employees with highly evolved interpersonal communication skills, which automatically elevates a certain trust and rapport among one another, and also proven to have much better relations with clients and suppliers (Dekay, 2012).

Eunson (2012) ascertains that without attentive listening, supervisors can never understand the nature of their employees, how they work, why and when. Actually, attentive listening can be said to be the most essential component of interpersonal communication. According to Varner, Beamer & Beamer, (2011) this is because it enables both parties to understand each other and know how to relate with each other which in turn enhances employee performance and attainment of organizational objectives in the long run. Attentive listening is an art that has to be learnt through training by a communication specialist.

Communications from Subordinates to Supervisors

Through having a strong sense of trust and rapport with supervisors, subordinates will perform more productively and efficiently in the public workplace, and also will likely engage in attentive listening to their supervisors, which in turn assures more meaningful feedback from them. Delcambre (2010) underscores the importance of evolving excellent listening habits as a key to interpersonal communication success in a workplace. Delcambre (2010) asserts that through attentive listening skills of subordinates toward an organizational leader, these subordinates are able to provide meaningful, highly-valued feedback. In turn, the workplace becomes a more cohesive, integrated setting for organizational members, as well as much more productive. Ward (2011) clarifies as an organizational leader in the U.S. military that he strengthened the communication channels of subordinates to supervisors in what is a traditionally rigid hierarchy of command by emphasizing becoming a learning and listening organization. It gave the subordinates this opportunity to communicate to supervisors authentically and openly without any fears of reprimands.

Choren (2015) asserts interpersonal communication skills are essential for supervisors and subordinates to engage in mutual professional development and personal growth. Only through the exchange of authentic communications can people trust each other, establish rapport with one another, and be inspired to help each other grow in organizational settings. This communication from subordinates to supervisors can be hampered by reluctance to be open and transparent, since supervisors are always in a position of greater power in a public organization. It is these barriers to interpersonal communications between subordinates and supervisors that has to be addressed to open up the channels and facilitate the exchange of more accurate, meaningful information.

These effective interpersonal communications between subordinates and supervisors must always then be a two-way exchange with meaningful feedback necessary to maintain accuracy and authenticity to the information being shared. In bureaucratic settings, subordinates can tend to back away from confrontation with supervisors. However, this hampers the accuracy and authenticity of the information being shared by the subordinates to their supervisors. In allowing open, transparent communications to be evolved between subordinates and supervisors, these bureaucratic barriers to effective interpersonal communications can be addressed and eliminated (Pearce, 2015).

Communications among Subordinates

In order for the public organization, like the Department of Human Health and Services, to have effective interpersonal communications between supervisors and subordinates, there must also be effective interpersonal communications among subordinates. Pearce (2015) clarifies how effective interpersonal communications among subordinates results in having trust for one another, and becoming a cohesive team. A key component is two-way, culturally sensitive communications between subordinates on the cohesive team, which focus on the most important information of any given situation (Pearce, 2015). This need for effective interpersonal communications among subordinates is stressed by relevant public administration literature to create a productive workplace through developing trust and rapport among subordinates (Denhardt et al, 2012; Nalbandian, 2010).

The empowerment of subordinates to make their own decisions, pursue their own actions, and significantly contribute to the public workplace is also relevant to improving interpersonal communications among them. Ciampi (2015) emphasizes how the organizational leader in the ‘Universal Translator’ role requires transmitting the vision and mission of the organization in layman’s terms, and asserting it in a persuasive manner, in order to set the context for the subordinates to pursue the necessary goals and objectives. It is evident that an organizational leader, like a top executive or a public administrator, is not going to have the time to meet one-on-one with all subordinates. By identifying the key people, who represent team leaders, and respected senior employees, authentic, transparent interpersonal communication exchanges can be pursued with them and almost certainly guarantee the rest of the subordinates will have the most important messages and vital information transmitted effectively as a result. This is why effective interpersonal communications among subordinates is so vital for the success of a public organization.

Thus, this review of literature provides exceptional information and insights into how improvements in interpersonal communications in a variety of workplaces, private sector and public sector, can lead to greater productivity. These specific areas of interpersonal communications, speaking, listening, and supportive communications, were all interconnected in these various scholarly findings and article presentations. One of the over-arching themes connecting all the literature was that authentic, transparent interpersonal communications in any organizational setting improves productivity due to stronger levels of trust and rapport among organizational members. In regards to this study, public administrators can recognize the important of being the organizational leaders in stressing the value of authentic interpersonal communications among all subordinates and between subordinates and administrators. Only through this authentic interpersonal communications can these administrators and employees engage in professional development and personal growth.

Methods:

Intro

1. Section begins with restatement of purpose statement to introduce reader to the need for study. 2. Identify the research method: Quantitative research method, and discuss your rationale for selecting this method.

Sample

In the 2015 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS) the participated employees were more than 400,000. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) surveyed 82 agencies; 37 were large agencies, 45 were small agencies (OPM, 2015). Respondents were randomly selected. However, this study will focus on the department of Human Health and Services (HHS) only. The department of Human Health and Services surveyed 69,008 federal employees but it only has 36,772 respondents. The responses rate is 53.3% (OPM, 2015).

Data:

This study uses Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS). The FEVS is a cross- sectional survey for the year of 2015. It is a secondary data collected by the Office of Personnel Management. This study uses the FEVS data for several reasons: the enormous number of the public sector employees included in this data, the data asks questions that are related to communication in public sector. The unit of analysis is an individual. The sample size in this study is 28,529 respondents.

Dependent Variable: This study uses Q39 “My agency is successful at accomplishing its mission” as an outcome of interpersonal communications in the Department of Human Health and Services (HHS) to measure employees’ productivity. Respondents responses will be by selecting either: 1“ Strongly disagree”, 2 “Disagree”, 3 “Neither agree of disagree”, 4 “Agree”, and 5 “Strongly agree”.

Independent Variables: There are five independent variables in this study: Q48 “My supervisor listens to what I have to say”, Q49 “My supervisor treats me with respect”, Q50 “In the last six months, my supervisor has talked with me about my performance’, Q56 “Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization”, and Q58 “Managers promote communication among different work units (for example, about projects, goals, needed resources)”. The variables are being measured on a scale of 1-5: 1“ Strongly disagree”, 2 “Disagree”, 3 “Neither agree of disagree”, 4 “Agree”, and 5 “Strongly agree”.

Control Variables: Several control variables were included in this model. Demographic variables are used to influence the experimental results. These factors are: Age 1 “Under 40”, 2 “40-49”, 3 “50-59”, 4 “60 or older”), gender (1 “male”, 0 “female”), minority (1 “minority”, 0 “non minority”, supervisor (1 “supervisor or manager”, 0 “nonsupervisory”), and Education (1 “Prior to a Bachelor degree”, 2 “Bachelors degree”, 3 “Post-Bachelor’s degree).

Hypotheses: This study examine the following hypotheses:

H1: Productivity is positively associated with supervisors listening to what employees have to say.

H2: Productivity is positively associated with supportive communication.

Table 1

Variables and Data Sources

2015 Federal Employee View Point Survey (FEVS); Department of Human Health and Services

Regression Model

A quantitative research was conducted to answer the research question “Does good communication between leaders and employees improve employee productivity?”. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package of the Social Sciences (SPSS) to identify number of respondents, mean, minimum, maximum and standard deviation of the dependent and independent variables. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression method was used to analyze the relationship between the dependent and independent variables (Healey, 2009). If the relationship between the dependent and independent variables is linear, it can be represented by the following equation:

Where: Y= My agency is successful at accomplishing its mission; = My supervisor/team leader listens to what I have to say; = My supervisor/team leader treats me with respect; = In the last six months, my supervisor/team leader has talked with me about my performance; = Managers communicate the goals and priorities of the organization; = Managers promote communication among different work units; = Age; = Education; = Supervisor; = Minority; = Gender; and is the error term.

Table 2

Table 2 details the descriptive statistics for the sample’s measures of: mean, standard

Deviation, minimum and maximum values for each variable. The mean values show the central tendency for the noted variables for the respective sample. The standard deviation (SD) values show the variation on this data set. Total number of observations is 28,529. The minimum and maximum scores for the dependent and independent variables are on a scale from 1-5: (1) Strongly disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Neither agree or disagree, (4) Agree, (5) Strongly agree.

The results of the descriptive analysis from the Department of Human Health and Services (HHS) are: an average employee at HHS agrees that their supervisors listen to what they say (Mean= 4.05, SD= 1.076), an average employee at HHS agrees that their supervisors treat them with respect (Mean= 4.15, SD= 1.041), an average employee at HHS agrees that within the last six months their supervisors has talked to them about their performance (Mean= 4.05, SD= 1.010), an average employee at HHS agrees that managers communicate the goals and the priorities of the organization (Mean= 3.57, SD= 1.099). However, an average employee at HHS neither agrees or disagrees that managers promote communication among different work units (Mean= 3.39, SD= 1.171).

Additionally, control variables provide more details about the sample population. At the Department of Human Health and Services (HHS): most of the participants were 40 to 49 years old (Mean= 2.38, SD= 1.027). In addition, the sample consisted of more employees who have completed bachelor’s degree (Mean= 2.38, SD=.781). There are more females than males in the sample (Mean= .36, SD=. 481). Also, there are fewer minority in the sample (Mean=.44 , SD=.497). Finally, this sample consisted of more supervisors (Mean=.19, SD= .860 ) than non supervisors.

Results

The overall model is statistically significant. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) coefficients were computed to determine which variable has the greatest effect on employees’ productivity in the public sector. 39% is the calculated R-Square for the OLS analysis, which is the variation in productivity in the HHS department, which means that the relationship between the dependent variable and the independent variables is weak. The Unstandardized coefficients for each variable are listed in Table 3.

Tables 3

OLS Regression Coefficients

H1: The results of the regression prove that productivity is positively associated with supervisors listening to what employees have to say. The relationship is statistically significant at the 1% level. One unit increase in supervisors listening to what employees have to say leads to .066 increase in productivity, holding all other independent variables constant.

H2: The results of the regression confirm that productivity is positively associated with supportive communication. First, the variable that has the greatest effect is managers communicating the organization’s goals and priorities. The relationship is statistically significant at the 1% level. One unit increase in managers communicating organization’s goals and priorities leads to .245 increase in productivity, holding all other independent variables constant. The second variable that has a strong effect is managers promoting communication among different work units. One unit increase in managers promoting communication among different work units leads to .159 increase in productivity, holding all other independent variables constant. The other variable that supports this theory is supervisors treating employees with respect; the relationship is statistically significant at the 1% level. One unit increase in supervisors treating employees’ with respect leads to .062 increase in productivity, holding all other independent variables constant. The last variable is supervisors talking to employees about their performance in the last six months. One unit increase in supervisors’ talking to their employees about their performance in the last six months leads to .048 increase in productivity, holding all other independent variables constant.

The control variables in this study are used to show a different perspective of employees’ productivity in the governmental organizations. The variables gender and minority are negatively associated with productivity, holding all other variables constant. This relationship is statistically significant at the 1% level.

The results presented in the regression analysis shows that education and supervisory are positively associated with productivity, holding all other variables constant. This relationship is statistically significant at the 1% level.

Comparison with previous studies:

Comparing this study results with the previous studies that are synthesized in the review of literature. First, the results suggest that employees’ productivity is affected by attentive listening is consistent with previous studies. For example, Delcambre (2010) and Eunson, (2007) agrees that if managers have good listening skills with their subordinates this will lead them to a better productivity. In addition, the results suggest that employees’ productivity is affected by supportive communication is also consistent with previous studies.

References

Bonaccio, S., O’Reilly, J., O’Sullivan, S. L., & Chiocchio, F. (2016). Nonverbal Behavior and Communication in the Workplace: A Review and an Agenda for Research. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1044-1074.

Choren, A. (2015). The Importance of Communication in the Workplace. IEEE Potentials, 34(3), 10-11.

Ciampi, V. (2016). Four ways to improve communication at work. Adhesives & Sealants Industry, 23(2), 28-30.

DeKay, S. H. (2012). Interpersonal communication in the workplace: A largely unexplored region. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 449-452.

Delcambre, P. (2010). Written and oral communication in the workplace—Deployment, stabilized forms of interactions, and workload: An organizational approach. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(4), 635-642.

D.E, Nalbandian, J., and Llorens, J. (2010). Public Personnel Management: Contexts and Strategies (6th Edition). New York: Longman/Pearson

Cooper, Terry. (2012). The Responsible Administrator: An Approach to Ethics for the Administrative Role (6th Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Denhardt, R. B., Denhardt, J. V., & Aristigueta, M. P. (2012). Managing human behavior in public and nonprofit organizations. Sage Publications.

Pearce

"Kip" Ward, W. (2011). Strategic communication at work. Leader to Leader, 2011(59), 33.

Eunson, B. (2007). Communication in the Workplace. Milton, Queensland [Australia]: John Wiley & Sons Australia.

Newson, P. (2010). Good communication at work can open the gateway to better relationships. Nursing and Residential Care, 12(8), 366-369.

Varner, I. I., Beamer, L., & Beamer, L. (2011). Intercultural communication in the global workplace. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Healey, J. F. (2009). Statistics: a tool for social research (8th Edition ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2015). 2015 federal employee viewpoint survey results: governmentwide management report. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Retrieved from: http://www.fedview.opm.gov/2015FILES/2015_FEVS_Gwide_Final_Report.PDF

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2015). OPM releases complete 2015 federal employee viewpoint survey results. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Retrieved from: https://www.opm.gov/news/releases/2015/10/opm-releases-complete-2015-federal-employee-viewpoint-survey-results/

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (2015). FEVS public release data files. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Retrieved from: http://www.fedview.opm.gov/2015/EVSDATA/

Appendix

SPSS OUTPUT