Daft and Lengel (1986) argued that all organizations processed information under some degree of uncertainty and equivocality. When dealing with uncertainty organizations understand they must gather more data or information to fill in the gaps of what they need to know to be successful. When dealing with equivocality, the gaps are not so clear. Equivocality means ambiguity, and confusion about what is needed to be known. “Uncertainty is a measure of the organization’s ignorance of a value for a variable in a space. Equivocality is a measure of the organization’s ignorance of whether a variable exists in the space” (Daft & Lengel, 1986 p 557).
There is a difference. Most organizations deal with equivocal problems and equivocality is difficult …show more content…
Stephenson G. M. & Rutter, 1979) determined for a variety of measures of communication, the total number of visual cues available from visual communication, physical presence, etc. was what most important in the social interaction. Equivocal messages are harder to explain and respond to through email and over the telephone without visual social cues to help build context. This is one major reason why working in virtual teams differs from working in traditional face-to-face teams. The media used to communicate in virtual teams must match the equivocality of the task at hand. Face-to-face communication allowed for instant feedback and fast adjustment and clarification of messages (Daft et al., 1987) when necessary. Some messages are unequivocal, easily understood, and can be sent via email or instant message clearly. In some cases, face-to-face communication lead to confusion and distraction (Daft & Lengel, 1986), as in instances where “authority, legitimacy, compliance with protocol or lack of urgency” needed to be communicated and written messages were best to do so (Daft & Lengel, …show more content…
Alge, Wiethoff, & Klein (2003) determined that familiar virtual teams fared just as well as face-to-face teams when it came to openness and trust in information sharing. Channel expansion theory suggested that it is not just the communication media and the amount of available cues that determined how well a message would be delivered in a virtual environment. Carlson & Zmud's (1999) study of channel expansion theory found strong support for the importance of communication media experience and communication partner experience influenced the perception of media richness. While Rains (2008) study showed some support for richness perceptions being explained by communication media and communication partner experience, they found age to account for a large portion of variance in richness perceptions. This made sense when we consider there are four generations in the workplace for the first time in our history, all with different approaches to using technology (brady, bradley chapter 11). Although sending an email may seem to be a rich enough choice of communicating a particular message in the eyes of a millennial, the baby boomer on the other end may not perceive it as so. These perceptions are not limited to age differences, less educated communication partners also perceived technological communication tools as less rich forms of communication media (brady, bradley chapter 11 pg 267). In
There is a difference. Most organizations deal with equivocal problems and equivocality is difficult …show more content…
Stephenson G. M. & Rutter, 1979) determined for a variety of measures of communication, the total number of visual cues available from visual communication, physical presence, etc. was what most important in the social interaction. Equivocal messages are harder to explain and respond to through email and over the telephone without visual social cues to help build context. This is one major reason why working in virtual teams differs from working in traditional face-to-face teams. The media used to communicate in virtual teams must match the equivocality of the task at hand. Face-to-face communication allowed for instant feedback and fast adjustment and clarification of messages (Daft et al., 1987) when necessary. Some messages are unequivocal, easily understood, and can be sent via email or instant message clearly. In some cases, face-to-face communication lead to confusion and distraction (Daft & Lengel, 1986), as in instances where “authority, legitimacy, compliance with protocol or lack of urgency” needed to be communicated and written messages were best to do so (Daft & Lengel, …show more content…
Alge, Wiethoff, & Klein (2003) determined that familiar virtual teams fared just as well as face-to-face teams when it came to openness and trust in information sharing. Channel expansion theory suggested that it is not just the communication media and the amount of available cues that determined how well a message would be delivered in a virtual environment. Carlson & Zmud's (1999) study of channel expansion theory found strong support for the importance of communication media experience and communication partner experience influenced the perception of media richness. While Rains (2008) study showed some support for richness perceptions being explained by communication media and communication partner experience, they found age to account for a large portion of variance in richness perceptions. This made sense when we consider there are four generations in the workplace for the first time in our history, all with different approaches to using technology (brady, bradley chapter 11). Although sending an email may seem to be a rich enough choice of communicating a particular message in the eyes of a millennial, the baby boomer on the other end may not perceive it as so. These perceptions are not limited to age differences, less educated communication partners also perceived technological communication tools as less rich forms of communication media (brady, bradley chapter 11 pg 267). In