We have learned that organizations should have comprehensive policies and strategies for
communicating with their constituencies, employees, and stakeholders as well as with the
community at large. Ineffective communication may increase the chances for misunderstandings,
damage relationships, break trust, and increase anger and hostility. The company, Honey Pot has
faced communication controversies within the last year. Honey Pot is a line of feminine care
products that arrived on shelves in 2014. The products were marketed as plant derived, with no
artificial fragrances or added parabens. Consumers assumed the products was completely organic.
It was later discovered that the products did contain preservatives and could be potentially unsafe
for sensitive skin.
After much speculation, the creator and owner of the brand confirmed that a change had
happened to the formula and that it was better for the brand and the consumer because it would
allow a longer shelf life without disruption to the quality of the product. Consumers were left
asking what are the ethics of communication within this brand? The change was substantial enough
to warrant a communication between producer and consumer. Poor communication can affect your
business and lead to undesired results, including lowered morale, increased stress, and hundreds of
thousands of dollars in lost sales. The best practices to avoid this type of disruption is to explain,
educate, and then implement. The outcome may have differed if the brand explained the
significance of altering ingredients and educating the public on the benefits behind the change.
Communication is an extremely powerful tool but when used incorrectly can be detrimental.
Recently there have been some changes at my company and the communication has been both
well executed and poorly executed. The situation that occurred or is occurring created strife due to
the lack of communication. The company has headquarters in New Jersey but the production all
occurs in New Hampshire. Due to rising costs of rent and the influx of work from home positions
there had been discussions to end the lease in NJ and to move employees up to NH. All of this has
still yet to be confirmed or denied from upper management. However, no positions are being filled
in the NJ offices. This lack of communication has resulted in an increase in attrition particularly with
top tier talent that has not been easily backfilled. Transparency may have helped with this situation
as employees would have been able to know what to expect while also being able to ask questions.
On the other hand, the company shifted towards a new shift schedule back in October and the
reason for this was for business and a need for increased volume due to sales orders. The
management team conducted surveys to get feedback from the employees that would be going to
the new shift. Ultimately the new shift that was implemented was also the structure that was
chosen by the highest volume of employees. Now 6 months later the shift is still working well for
production needs while also keeping the employees happy. This was done by communication
among the management team which included the discussion of the surveys and was well received
by the employees because they had a say in the way things moved.
These two instances, both within the same company, highlight how communication can make or
break a situation. As discussed in week 1, transparency is very important aspect to communication.
One of the instances incorporated it while the other did not and the results are examples of the
success and downfall of using it and not. One experience that comes to mind is how a company I
worked for handled major layoffs. It was unexpected. We had a companywide mandatory meeting
put on our calendars. For the most part we are a remote company, so this was held via zoom.
Leadership briefly discussed the current economic state and then said that today will be the last
day at the company several employees. They said zoom meetings will be put on our calendars
where you will either be put in a group meeting to debrief and discuss the layoffs or you will have a
one-on-one meeting with the head of your department where you will be laid off. First, leadership
hardly had any discussion and abruptly ended the zoom. We were all left in shock and working
remote so alone in our homes confused. We thought meetings would take place soon after but
they were put on the calendar for hours later in the late afternoon. So not only was this dropped
on us but we had to wait hours to find out if we were going to be with or without a job. The next
major issue was employees were able to figure out who had one on one meetings and who did not,
which means we could see who was being let go. We were able to do this because of course all
employees were talking and asking what time their meetings were for and we were able to figure
out that almost everyone had the same time for meetings for the same length of time and then
fewer employees had meetings at a different time and they were scheduled for much shorter
amount of time. This in fact did turn out to be correct. My good friend was one of the employees
let go. She had a zoom call that was less than ten minutes and as soon as it ended, she and those
other employees were locked out of all their accounts and information taken off our company
platforms. A major issue we learned is that employees who were let go were not told why they
were the ones being let go. This was especially hard because we work remote and we never got the
chance to say goodbye or check on those employees who were let go and we all live all over the
country. The entire process seemed to be handled poorly and communication was not transparent.
This impacted company morale and left employees who stayed with the company frustrated and
anxious.
One scenario where an organization may have miscommunicated a message to its employees is
during a merger or acquisition. When two companies merge, or one acquires another, there is
often a lot of uncertainty and anxiety among employees. If the communication is mishandled, it can
lead to confusion, mistrust, and decreased morale.
For example, my former employer bought another firm, and the employees of Firm B are unsure of
what this means for their future. The leadership of Firm A does not communicate clearly and
promptly with the employees of Firm B about the details of the acquisition and what it means for
them, the employees may start to feel neglected and undervalued. This can lead to decreased
productivity, increased turnover, and negatively impacting the company's bottom line. The two
firms had completely different leadership styles.
Furthermore, the employees of Firm B were not informed about changes in processes, policies, and
procedures resulting from the acquisition, which led to confusion, frustration, and a decrease in
efficiency. The employees continued to follow the old ways of doing things, which can lead to
mistakes and a lack of alignment with the company's goals. Of the eight employees that were
brought into Firm A, only one remained with the firm after one year.
To address these issues, the company should communicate clearly and transparently with its
employees about the acquisition, what changes will occur, and how it will impact them. This
communication should be timely, frequent, and two-way, allowing employees to ask questions and
provide feedback. The company should also provide training and support to help employees adjust
to the changes and ensure a smooth transition.
In summary, miscommunication during a merger or acquisition can significantly affect the
employees and the company. Clear and transparent communication is essential to alleviate anxiety
and uncertainty, ensure alignment with company goals, and maintain productivity and morale.
References
Felix, C. (2022). Honey Pot Meltdown: Explained. The Cut. Retrieved from
https://www.thecut.com/2022/05/what-happened-with-honey-pot-company-we-explain.html
