Business communication is one of the main tools which help managers to create a positive culture and morale, motivate and encourage employees, increase productivity and ensure effective performance. Even though the cultural diversity of the population has increased in the last few decades, communication between people from different cultures and/or ethnic groups is still relatively rare. Most people have little contact with members of other cultures/ethnicities in their daily lives that is not role-related. Some people avoid interacting with members of other cultures/ethnicities and/or view them as “undesirable” people. The aim of the report is to examine and analyze business communication and its importance in the future merger between MORGAN Stanley and Wachovia.
The goal and communication of MORGAN Stanley are to ensure an effectible merger with its direct competitor Wachovia. When others perceive that they are seen as undesirable and/or believe they are being treated in a morally exclusive fashion, they may respond with frustration or aggression. The aim of the paper is to describe and analyze the main communication tools used in cross-cultural communication. Because a merger can be considered to be a mutual agreement of sorts between two firms to join together to become one company, communication techniques are crucial for success and fast integration (Knapp and Vangelisti 2004).
Currently, MORGAN Stanley’s strategies are to reduce resistance to change and maintain a positive climate and morale among employees. Change is inevitable, and these structural changes within the organization take time to settle and be accepted by the respective management and employees. After all, not only are two companies’ physical assets and technologies merging, but their employees must merge together as well. Thus, it is important to recognize that it might take some time before the “dust” settles and the benefits of the merger are realized. Management must be the term success of their corporate strategy (Littlejohn and Foss 2007). It is important to note that negative factors inherent in hostile takeovers are absent. The possibility of massive sell-offs is usually not an issue. In addition, the organization’s employees are more inclined to accept and support the merger than oppose it. There are, however, other factors common to a merger, acquisition, and alliance activities that must be considered, such as power struggles between the firms, a clash of corporate cultures, organizational and reorganization issues, the effects of a new corporate direction, and entry into new or unfamiliar markets. A merger, therefore, like any other business activity, is not without its risks. Moreover, these risks can be managed and minimized. When studying merger activity, several common strategies tend to surface that characterize successful mergers (Severin and Tankard 2000).
When a major reorganization occurs within a company, the benefits of the reorganization are not always immediately apparent. Employees have shuffled around, out of one department and into another, taking on new or additional tasks. Management roles might change. Work locations might change. However, out of this apparent chaos might emerge a stronger, more viable corporate structure. But one factor that undermines this type of activity is that people are basically resistant to change. People become comfortable with the status quo and organize their lives around perceived constants. When these constants that stabilize one’s life are disrupted, one tends to resist them, even if the future benefits will outweigh the current inconvenience (West and Turner 2006).
MORGAN Stanley takes into account the fact that the communication process is considered strategic in nature. Specifically, this would involve the deliberate or managed use of nonverbal behavior to control interaction. There are basically two ways in which interaction regulation may be strategic. In the first, an individual can manipulate the physical or arrangement features (e.g., distance and orientation in seating) so as to facilitate or inhibit interaction. In general, it might be expected that an individual would typically exercise such options only in primary or secondary territories, In addition to the inevitable personnel problems, there were technical hurdles to overcome when integrating banking operations. Thus, an equitable analysis of each bank’s resources became crucial. How these resources were allocated, reallocated, or eliminated determined the overall organization’s future viability. It was the successful integration of the two firms’ resources and assets that was a key element to the merger’s success. With any human endeavor, personalities play a key role in either its success or failure. If a merger has the backing and full support of its employees and management, the chances of success are greatly improved by effective business communication. Although there are fewer obstacles than in the case of a hostile takeover, gaining support and trust is always a difficult endeavor (Wood, 2003).
Each firm will bring unique strengths and assets to business communication, and it is the potential synergy that makes a merger strategy so attractive. The key strengths are obvious and are generally the main reason for the merger in the first place. In the Philip Morris case, Philip Morris was attracted to Kraft by its distribution synergies and proven management strengths. In high-tech mergers, the firms involved are generally attracted to each other because of the technical expertise that each offers the other. There are many other reasons as well, including the influx of financial muscle to the organization, increased distribution channels, the ability to enter new markets, and the establishment of complementary product lines. However diverse the merging companies maybe, an underlying characteristic common with successful mergers is that management focuses on their individual corporate strengths (Wood, 2003).
The strategies of the company are to reduce resistance to change and prepare employees for a future merger. Some employees, for whatever reason, will always view this type of change as a threat, and information will not be volunteered. Their strategy is one of turf protection and not one that furthers the overall corporate objectives. If left unchecked, their sentiments might spread like a virus to others within the organization and could completely shut down communication within the organization. If the merging firms are separated by great distances, communication becomes all the more essential. When opening up a new office or division in a new city, state, or country, plans are made well in advance to maintain communication. Periodic meetings, reports, or visits by management are all traditional methods of keeping in touch with the field office and keeping it in check. Likewise, steps must be taken in advance to ensure that the communication between the merged organizations is maximized. However, it is ineffective and wasteful for corporate management and executives to criss-cross the country on a daily or weekly basis. Temporary relocations may be necessary to ensure that information is transferred to the appropriate personnel.
Thus, a key ingredient to success is to make certain that authority is evenly distributed within the newly organized company. If this is not the case, then power struggles will result between the management of the two companies, and a true merging will never take place. There consequently will always be an “us-versus-them” attitude prevalent within the organizations. Plans must be in place to utilize the managerial talent available within each organization. It is especially important that the upper management of each organization achieves a very good working relationship with the other from the onset. Since these are the people that are the most visible within each organization and will most probably be looked to for guidance and to gauge the merger’s status, their role within the new firm is crucial (Wood, 2003).
The goals of the company are to ensure that the resources each organization brings to the merger and to the new corporate direction work properly. Factors such as the size of the organizations, facilities available, what resources are at their disposal, what long-term commitments are presently in place, assets, liabilities, and cash flow all come into play when assessing resource availability. Once these resources are located, the next step is determining which ones are usable. Not all resources may be needed after the merger. They may not necessarily coincide with the new corporate strategy or there may be duplicates (Wood, 2003).
In sum, a merger between MORGAN Stanley and Wachovia create new demands and needs to improve MORGAN Stanley’s business communication and morale. To accomplish these goals sales managers must be mindful of the process of their communication with strangers. Even though individuals may be mindful and motivated to communicate effectively with strangers, institutional support is necessary to improve intergroup relations in society. The utmost effort must be made to meet planned financial targets. Only a long-term commitment to the merger strategy and a realistic establishment of milestones by upper management can ensure success.
References
Knapp, M.L. Vangelisti, A. (2004), Interpersonal Communication and Human Relationships. Allyn & Bacon; 5 edn.
Littlejohn, S.W., Foss, K. A. (2007). Theories of Human Communication. Wadsworth Publishing; 9 edition.
Severin, W. J., Tankard, J. W. (2000). Communication Theories: Origins, Methods and Uses in the Mass Media. Allyn & Bacon; 5 edition.
West, R. L., Turner, L. H. (2006). Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages; 3 edition.
Wood, J.T. (2003), Interpersonal Communications. Wadsworth Publishing.