Effective Management Through Language Communication In An Organization
[A STUDY OF DELTA STATE POLYTECHNIC, OGWASHI-UKU]

Robbins outlines language communication process to include: the communication source, encoding, message, channel, decoding, the receiver and feedback. This is illustrated in the diagram below:

The source initiates a message by encoding a thought. The message is the actual physical product from the source.The channel is the medium through which the message travels. It is selected by the source, who must determine whether to use a formal or informal channel.   Formal channels are established by the organization and transmit messages that are related to the professional activities of members. They traditionally follow the authority chain within the organization. Other forms of messages such as personal or social follow the informal channels in the organization.
The receiver is the object to whom the message is directed. Before the message can be received, the symbols in it must be translated into a form that can be understood by the receiver. This step is the decoding of the message.
The final link in the communication process is a feedback loop. Feedback is the check on how successful we have been in transferring out messages as originally intended. It determines whether understanding has been achieved (Robbins, 284 – 5).In my own view, every language communication must undergo the processes explained above for it to be effective in the context it is used.
2.5    Communication and Organizational Conflict
In any human group, establishment or institution, no matter its population size, conflicts are inherent and take different dimensions. Expatiating on this, Koontz and Weihrich opine:
Conflict is a part of organizational life and may occur within the individual, between individuals, between the individual and the group and between groups (285).
Koontz et al (qtd. in Akpovi) affirm that: “a major reason why conflict develops in organizations is that people do not understand their assignments and those of their co-workers”. In their opinion, “no matter how well conceived an organization structure, people must understand it to make it work” (213).
According to Imhabekhai and Oyitso (92-3), causes of conflict in modern organizations are inexhaustible since human needs, interests and motives are quite nebulous and cannot be easily predicted. They assert that one cause of conflict in organizations is the style of management which involves the inability of Management to understand the workers, cooperate, appreciate, offer judicious rewards, integrate the workers and above all allow industrial democracy to prevail in the organization.
Another cause of organizational conflict highlighted by these authors is workers level of consciousness. They opine that workers who are illiterates or have low level of understanding of their organization’s activities or performance can make spurious demands on Management.   When such demands are not met, they become aggressive, uncooperative. This can generate industrial conflict. On the other hand, workers who are highly enlightened and know the performance of their organization, their duties, rights in the work place will resist obnoxious tendencies of their employers. Rather, when they notice any aberration, they seek redress as appropriate using both orthodox and unorthodox means as they deem fit.
From the foregoing, it is obvious that a fundamental reason for conflict in an organization is the lack of or breakdown in communication. Elaborating on this, Stoner et al state:
Much of the conflict we experience arises from our communication of wants, needs and values to others. Sometimes, we communicate clearly, but others have differing needs. Sometimes, we communicate poorly and conflict emerges because others misunderstand us (565).
Similarly to the above view, Seiler and Beall add:
Faulty communication is a social factor that can lead to conflict. This is evident by the fact that individuals communicate in ways that anger or annoy others even though it might not be the communicator’s intention to do so (396).
In my own opinion, organizational conflict can be attributed to the under listed faults:
Breakdown in any one of the communication process, Wrong choice of communication medium,
Wrongly routed lines of communication and
Misunderstood context or background of a particular communication.
When the above faults are not properly handled, they may cause deep seated problems in the organization. However, effective management through language communication is a veritable tool for conflict prevention and resolution. Arhagba
affirms:
Conflict resolving communication takes place when people involved in a dispute have both motives to co-operate and to compete. Bargaining, peace keeping (mediation) can be seen as communication geared towards resolving conflict (17).