02 6月 澳洲论文没过怎么办：公司的沟通问题
公司首先注意到的沟通问题是缺乏垂直沟通的垂直问题。水平通信是在团队内部传递的通信，就像在相同级别的情况下一样。另一方面，垂直通信是向上和向下传播的通信。由于垂直通信的问题，消息没有被发送到管理层。垂直沟通中的问题会导致诸如信息的凝聚(信息可能被遗漏)、信息的粉饰(信息变得有偏见)等问题(Postmes et al .， 2001)。在案例研究中，下属和他们的意见并没有传达给他们的管理者。哈利的观点是，这些策略对公司都没有用处，公司应该学会信任员工。然而，由于缺乏适当的垂直沟通，这些信息无法到达管理部门。其次，可以看出，管理者对问题解决团队隐瞒了信息，只在最后的会议中才透露信息。知识就是力量，但是由于管理者故意隐瞒知识，他们已经创造了一种改变主动性不成功的局面。主管人员应该按照创建变更计划的需要传递信息，在这里垂直沟通同样是有用的。
注意到的第二个沟通问题是反馈问题。良好的沟通的阶段:起始的沟通,沟通的转移,质疑允许接收器,接收器能够提出问题并得到一些澄清的信息传达给他们,更多(Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995)。如果沟通是一种方式，那么信息交换是非常无效的。员工和管理者应该能够以互动交流的形式相互反馈。员工必须就他们的表现得到反馈，管理层必须就员工对现有实施策略的看法得到反馈。在现有的案例研究中，我们可以看到，在工作场所有不同的策略以重新设计和裁员的形式被实施，而员工Harry只是说这些策略不起作用，它们不能代替努力工作和一点信念。因此，管理层必须与员工合作，找出他们为什么说这些计划不起作用，并在制定计划时必须包括他们的反馈。因此，反馈结构必须成为工作场所沟通系统的重要组成部分。
The first communication issue noticed in the company is the lack of vertical issues of vertical communication. Horizontal communication is communication passed inside teams as in the case of the same levels. On the other hand, vertical communication is that of communication being transmitted upward and downwards. Because of problems of vertical communication, the messages are not being sent up to the management heads. Problems in vertical communication lead to such issues as that of condensation of information, where information might be left out, whitewashing of information where information becomes biased and more (Postmes et al, 2001). In the case study, the subordinates and their opinions have not been passed onto their managers. Harry’s opinion is that none of these strategies for the company are useful, and that companies should instead just learn to trust the employees. However, this information does not reach the management because of the lack of proper vertical communication. Secondly, it is seen that supervisors have withheld information the problem solving teams and reveal the information only in the final meet. Knowledge is power, but by intentionally withholding it the supervisors have created a situation where the change initiative is not successful. The supervisors should have transferred information as was necessary to create the change initiative plans, once again vertical communication could have been useful here.
The second communication issue noticed is that of feedback issues. The phases in good communication are: initiation of the communication, the transfer of communication, the questioning allowed to the receiver so that the receiver would be able to ask questions and get some clarifications on the information that has been communicated to them and more (Graen, & Uhl-Bien, 1995). Where communication is one way, then the information exchange is very ineffective. Employees and managers should be able to provide feedback to one another in the form of an interactive communication. Employees must receive feedback on their performance, and the management heads must receive feedback on what employees feel about the existing implemented strategies. In the existing case study, it is seen that there are different strategies that have been implemented in the workplace in the form of re-engineering and downsizing, and employee Harry just states that these are not working and they are no substitute for hard work and a little faith. The management heads must hence work with the employees to find out why they stated that the programs were not working, and must include their feedback when making plans. Feedback structures hence must become a vital part of the communication system in the workplace.