The Discretionary Use of Electronic Media: Four Considerations for Bad News Bearers

Timmerman, Peter D.; Harrison, Wayne

doi:10.1177/0021943605279059

Cited by 22 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the symbolic meaning of email may contribute to the neutrality effect when senders mean to convey positive emotion. Whereas faceto-face communication symbolizes caring (Treviñ o, Lengel, & Daft, 1987), email communication may suggest a less personal focus (Timmerman & Harrison, 2005). In effect, the ease with which emails are sent, the informality of emails as a written form of communication, and the often ephemeral quality of emails may contribute to their symbolic meaning such that emails intended to convey positive emotions are interpreted as more neutral (less positive and intense) than the sender intends.…”

Section: Neutrality Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carrying too Heavy a Load? The Communication and Miscommunication of Emotion by Email

Byron

2008

AMR

301

284

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite advice to avoid doing so, email senders intentionally and unintentionally communicate emotion. Email characteristics make miscommunication likely, and I argue that receivers often misinterpret work emails as more emotionally negative or neutral than intended. Drawing on the computer-mediated and nonverbal communication, emotion, and perception literature, I introduce a theoretical framework describing what factors make miscommunication most likely, how emotional miscommunication affects organizations, and how employees can improve the accuracy of emotional communication in emails. Employees are increasingly likely to use and prefer electronic mail (email) to communicate with coworkers, customers, and other colleagues. The proliferation of email for business communication is likely due to some advantages, such as flexibility and asynchrony, it has over other communication media. Consequently, email has increased information sharing in organizations (Rice, 1987; Sproull & Kiesler, 1986) and has improved productivity among employees separated in time and place (Higa, Sheng, Shin, & Figueredo, 2000). However, the proliferation of email communication has also introduced some challenges not associated with other communication media. Research and theory suggest one likely deleterious effect of email use is harm to workplace relationships. Friedman and Currall (2003) have argued that the characteristics of email increase the likelihood of conflict escalation among those communicating by email. In their study of faculty and staff at a university teaching and research institute, Sarbaugh-Thompson and Feldman (1998) found that as email use increased, the overall volume of all forms of communication decreased, mostly because of fewer "greetings" and other informal interactions between

show abstract

Section: Neutrality Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carrying too Heavy a Load? The Communication and Miscommunication of Emotion by Email

Byron

2008

AMR

301

284

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This discomfort stems from multiple causes, including adherence to social norms, guilt from transmission, and avoidance of negative responses or retribution (thus the adage “don’t shoot the messenger”; Rosen and Tesser 1970). Because of the discomfort, people often delay, sugarcoat, or outright avoid bearing the bad news (Luce 1998; Marler et al 2012; Timmerman and Harrison 2005). While these findings are rooted in interpersonal communication contexts, prior research has suggested that consumers often ascribe human characteristics to brands (Aggarwal and McGill 2011), and so one possibility then is that the aversion to sharing negative information with the target of that negativity might extend to consumer-to-brand sharing.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Unhappy Customers Are Unlikely to Share Their Opinions with Brands

Hydock¹,

Chen²,

Carlson³

2020

Journal of Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For brands to thrive, they must understand consumer sentiment; if consumers’ likelihood of sharing their opinion is a function of their attitude toward a brand, then brands’ perception of consumer sentiment may be systematically biased. While research in consumer-to-consumer sharing (i.e., word of mouth) suggests that those with extreme attitude are more likely to share than those with neutral attitude (a U-shaped relationship), the relationship between consumers’ attitude toward a brand and their propensity to share with a brand is unknown. In contrast to the U-shaped pattern observed in word of mouth, the authors find a hockey stick–shaped relationship between attitude and sharing with brands (“__/”). Those with positive attitude (vs. neutral attitude) are more likely to share their opinion, but those with negative attitude do not show a similar increase in sharing. The authors show that this pattern emerges because, among consumers with positive (vs. neutral) attitude toward a brand, reciprocity norms drive increased sharing, but among consumers with negative (vs. neutral) attitude, competing mechanisms drive behavior: the desire to vent increases sharing, but at the same time an aversion to criticize others directly deters sharing. The authors test these ideas using a series of studies, including a field study.

show abstract

“…Managers often complain that giving feedback is often a time consuming task (Clausen, Jones, & Rich, 2008). In addition, many managers do not like to deliver negative feedback (Timmerman & Harrison, 2005;Dibble & Levine, 2010). However, managers need to provide helpful, constructive feedback when employees perform poorly so they can use that feedback to improve their performance (Moss & Sanchez, 2004).…”

Section: Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Increasing Usefulness for Managerial Communication Research on the Main Topics of Management

Bell

Roebuck

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective communication is necessary across all management tiers and functions. In addition, it is an integral part of managerial decision-making. Over the last 10 years, interest in the nuances of communication as related to management has intensified. These studies have fostered diverse approaches to linking management and communication. Our investigation, using 2x5 and 2x4 factorial ANOVAs, reveals that differences exist among the means of five professional communication fields. Numerous articles published between 2004 and 2013 were examined, and we found an increasing usefulness for managerial communication research on the main topic of management.

show abstract

The Discretionary Use of Electronic Media: Four Considerations for Bad News Bearers

Cited by 22 publications

References 38 publications

Carrying too Heavy a Load? The Communication and Miscommunication of Emotion by Email

Carrying too Heavy a Load? The Communication and Miscommunication of Emotion by Email

Why Unhappy Customers Are Unlikely to Share Their Opinions with Brands

An Increasing Usefulness for Managerial Communication Research on the Main Topics of Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About