Contreras WK 5 Application Assignment Interview

Interview with 

Patricia G. Contreras 

Porterville Unified School District Board Member

How important is communication within your organization?  Why?

Very important because communication between board members, administration and the superintendent must be ongoing and is critical.  When communication goes out to the community it must be thorough and appropriate for the audience to ensure that the information is easily understood to garner support and understanding from all constituents.

What type of communication strategy does your organization employ?  Tactical or Strategic?

We employ both strategies however tend to maintain the tactical approach.  We are trying to shift communication to a more strategic approach but the transition has been a difficult task to accomplish.  Strategic communication is important to looking towards long term goals in order to plan and be efficient with the budget so that the school board and the district can plan for the future appropriately.

Is the organization's communication strategy conducive to the needs and challenges facing your organization? 

No it is not, there is no one person channeling the information throughout the organization.  Communication is splintered because the superintendent doesn't clearly define his message and how he wants it to be communicated throughout the organization or school sites.

Do you feel that your organization is able to quickly adapt and foresee change?  If so, why?  If not, do you think a different communication strategy could assist in doing so?  Why?

No, adaptability is a problem for the organization.  Change is difficult for the organization because the organization is hesitant to pursue avenues that may not be cost effective.  Keeping the budget in line is the priority.  Yes, I think a different communication strategy would be helpful.  The district is so entrenched in how things have been done that we don't see other processes that could be employed.

Who controls or conveys the messaging in your organization?  Do they use an integrated approach? Considering the stakeholders and groups involved, is an integrated approach necessary?  Why?

The superintendent and his office control communication in the organization and they currently do not utilize an integrated approach. I believe an integrated approach would be helpful because messaging does not stay consistent. It is typically altered based on organizational team members interpretation.  Organizational messaging requires more control and monitoring.

Does your organization advocate transparency in its communication strategy?  If so, is it effective?  If not, could this strategy be helpful in corporate messaging to the public?  How?

No, we do not employ transparent messaging.  However I think transparency is important and should be incorporated into our communication strategy.  I believe it would help the community to feel that the organization is being honest and forthright and willing to share information.  This would make communication more comprehensive and a priority.

PUSD Communication Strategy Analysis

In evaluating the school district's current communication strategy based upon this week's readings, it is apparent that the organization must shift from its tactical piece meal approach to a more robust strategic communication strategy (Argenti, Beck & Howell, 2005, pp. 83).  Lack of a strategic communication plan hinders the organization from being able to plan long term and prevents it from foreseeing changes on the horizon.  This results in the organization being slow to change.  With regulations and funding changing rapidly for education and with the integration of social media allowing parents and community members immediate access to share their opinion on the current state of the district, communication methods must change in order to adapt to the changing environment.

An additional layer compounding the district's communication issues is the fact that the superintendent serves as the communication professional in the organization.  While the superintendent by most accounts would be the equivalent to a CEO in a corporation, it is rare for a CEO to not have a communication professional at his disposal as a team member to assist with messaging.  With the heavy workload already saddled to the superintendent it would be difficult to ask that he also monitor messaging for his 15 or so sites.  So it not surprising that communication is fragmented and inconsistent.  Also, with communication having to flow through many channels transparency is difficult be messaging is also slow.  Recognizing budgetary constraints, I believe it would be imperative that the superintendent employ his team to assist in the monitoring and messaging for the district.  Protocols should be employed to ensure that the message remains consistent across all channels and is filtered in a timely manner.  This would make transparency more feasible and ensure that the message does not get distorted.

Finally, I believe that the district can benefit from strategic ambiguity in their messaging.  Seeing how the organization must connect with various stakeholders and groups, ambiguous messaging could garner support and build cohesion which seems to be something that is lacking within the organization.  This allows will allow the organization flexibility should things have to change due to regulations or funding cuts (Eisenberg, 1984, pp. 233).  All in all, I think the district seems to be headed in the right direction in their efforts to institute change.  I encourage them to keep going.  Should they succeed they will reap big rewards.

References

Argenti, P., Beck, K., Howell, R., (2005). The strategic communication imperative, MIT Sloan               Management Review, 46 (3),pp. 83-89.

Bonini, S. M. J., Mendonca, L., & Oppenheim, J. (2006). When social issues become strategic, The McKinsey Quarterly, 2, pp. 19-31.

Goodall, B., McDOnald, K. & Terthewey, A. (2006). Strategic ambiguity, communication and public diplomacy in an uncertain world: principles and practices, Consortium for Strategic Communication, pp. 1-14.

Eisenberg, E. (1984) Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication, Communication Monographs, 51, pp.227-242.