USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
feedback paper about the assigned readings for the selected session. Do not simply summarize the readings. The feedback paper assignment should include your feedback and insight on the readings and at least one thought-provoking discussion question
524536
research-article2014
MCQXXX10.1177/0893318914524536Management Communication QuarterlyMen
Research Note
Strategic Internal
Communication:
Transformational
Leadership,
Communication
Channels, and Employee
Satisfaction
Management Communication Quarterly
2014, Vol. 28(2) 264–284
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0893318914524536
mcq.sagepub.com
Linjuan Rita Men1
Abstract
The current study investigates how leadership influences internal public
relations by building the linkage between transformational leadership,
the use of communication channels, symmetrical communication, and
employee satisfaction. Furthermore, it examines the effectiveness of various
internal communication channels. Through a web survey of 400 employees
working in medium-sized and large corporations in the United States, the
study showed that transformational leadership positively influences the
organization’s symmetrical internal communication and employee relational
satisfaction. Transformational leaders most often use information-rich faceto-face channels to communicate with followers. Leaders’ use of face-toface channels is positively associated with employee satisfaction. Employees
mostly prefer emails to receive information from the organization regarding
new decisions, policies, events, or changes, followed by general employee
meetings and interpersonal communication with managers. Theoretical and
practical implications are discussed.
1Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA
Corresponding Author:
Linjuan Rita Men, Department of Communication Studies, Southern Methodist University,
6550 Shady Brook Lane, APT 1233, Dallas, TX 75206, USA.
Email: lmen@smu.edu; cicirita@gmail.com
Men
265
Keywords
transformational leadership, internal public relations, communication
channels, symmetrical communication, employee satisfaction
The rapidly changing and increasingly connected modern society has made
employees one of the most important strategic constituencies of organizations (Kim & Rhee, 2011). On one hand, employees are the organization’s
production force, which directly contributes to organizational performance.
On the other hand, employees are corporate ambassadors and brand advocates that represent the organization to external stakeholders (i.e., customers
and stockholders) both online and off-line. Therefore, satisfying employee–
organization relationships could not only boost employee productivity but
also help create a critical and cost efficient workforce that cultivates quality
external relations and protects the organization’s invisible assets such as reputation (Berger, 2008).
Public relations scholars (L. Grunig, Grunig, & Dozier, 2002) have suggested that symmetrical internal communication is among the most effective communication strategies for employee relations (e.g., L. Grunig et al.,
2002; Jo & Shim, 2005; Kim & Rhee, 2011; Smidts, Pruyn, & van Riel,
2001). Considering its strategic importance, it is not surprising that
researchers have concentrated attention on identifying factors that could
affect symmetrical internal communication—including organizational culture, structure, management behavior, power distribution, and diversity
(L. Grunig et al., 2002). Notably absent from this work, however, is how
exactly organizational leadership influences internal symmetrical communication. Yukl (2006) found that leadership at different levels in an organization directly or indirectly determines organizational culture, climate, and
communications. Different types of leadership, which advocate different
styles and communication channels to influence followers, constitute a
major component of internal communication systems (Whitworth, 2011).
Transformational leadership, for instance, an extensively studied and particularly effective style of leadership (Knippenberg & Sitkin, 2013), has
been suggested to promote interactive, caring, visionary, inspirational, and
empowering communication (Hackman & Johnson, 2004). However, little
research to date has empirically verified these connections. As such, this
study aims to fill the research void by empirically investigating how transformational leadership is related to the practice and effectiveness of symmetrical internal communication.
Technological development is changing the fundamental landscape of
communication as well as the internal communication formula of companies.
266
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
The easy access of organizations to numerous new communication tools
(e.g., Facebook business pages, Twitter, instant messenger, and YouTube) has
transformed how companies communicate with employees and what channels are most effective to reach employees. Thus, a second purpose of this
study is to evaluate the current and preferred channels in corporate and leader
communication with employees and how leadership style is related to leaders’ use of communication channels.
By identifying the preferred communication channels for employees to
receive information from the organization and their leaders, the study can
provide important insights for organizational management and public relations professionals into how to best reach their internal audience and build
quality relationships with employees. Examining the relationships between
leadership, use of communication channels, symmetrical communication,
and the relational outcome helps fill the gap in research on internal communication and leadership and contributes to the growing literature on internal
relationship management.
Literature Review
Managers at different organizational levels influence the top-down transmission of messages to employees and the communication of the opinions of
employees to top management (Men, 2011; Whitworth, 2011). Immediate
supervisors are the information source preferred by employees and thus
have more credibility with employees than senior executives (e.g., Larkin &
Larkin, 1994; Whitworth, 2011). Meanwhile, leadership is performed largely
through communication (Holladay & Coombs, 1993). The communication
competence, quality, styles, and channels of a leader can influence the attitude and behavior of employees (e.g., Shaffer, 2000; Snyder & Morris,
1984).
De Vries, Bakker-Pieper, and Oostenveld (2010) examined the relationships between the leadership and communication styles of leaders and found
that people-oriented (i.e., transformational) leaders are generally more communicative than task-oriented (i.e., transactional) ones. However, there is still
a dearth of research that demonstrates exactly how organizational leadership
is related to internal communication characteristics. Among various leadership types, transformational leadership has received the most significant
scholarly attention across disciplines because of its relationship-oriented
nature and the rich empirical evidence of its positive influence on employee
attitudes and behavior, even though it has been criticized for its conceptual
broadness and measurement validity issues (e.g., Dumdum, Lowe, & Avolio,
2002; Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002; Northouse, 2004).
Men
267
Transformational Leadership
Bass and Avolio (1997) defined transformational leadership as a leadership style
that motivates followers by appealing to their higher order needs and inducing
them to transcend self-interest for the sake of the group or the organization.1
This form of leadership involves creating an emotional attachment between
leaders and followers. Jin (2010) noted that transformational leadership integrates “empathy, compassion, sensitivity, relationship building, and innovation”
(p. 174). Transformational leaders take a genuine interest in the well-being of
employees, foster a climate of trust, nurture confidence in their followers, and
encourage individual development. To these ends, transformational leaders
often engage in close interactions with their followers to understand and address
their needs better. In terms of decision making, transformational leaders seek to
empower followers. They are willing to share power and delegate significant
authority to followers to make them less dependent on the leader (Aldoory &
Toth, 2004; Men & Stacks, 2013). Therefore, transformational leaders are characterized by interactive, visionary, passionate, caring, and empowering communication behaviors (Hackman & Johnson, 2004).
Symmetrical Internal Communication
Symmetrical communication is a communication worldview and practice characterized by an emphasis on “trust, credibility, openness, relationships, reciprocity, network symmetry, horizontal communication, feedback, adequacy of
information, employee-centered style, tolerance for disagreement, and negotiation” (J. Grunig, 1992, p. 558). Two-way by nature, symmetrical communication aims to facilitate dialogue between the organization and its employees. By
contrast, asymmetrical communication is a one-way, top-down approach
(L. Grunig et al., 2002) designed to sway or control employee behavior according to management requirements. Positive associations were found between
internal symmetrical communication and employee outcomes, such as job satisfaction, identification, loyalty, employee–organization relationships, and
employee communication behavior in the literature (e.g., L. Grunig et al., 2002;
Jo & Shim, 2005; Kim & Rhee, 2011; Smidts et al., 2001). Therefore, the current study predicts a positive association between symmetrical communication
and employee relational satisfaction with the organization.
Employee Satisfaction
The satisfaction of employees with their jobs and leaders has been extensively studied in the business and organizational communication fields. In the
268
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
literature on relationship management, satisfaction refers to the degree to
which parties to the relationship are satisfied with each other. Stafford and
Canary (1991) characterized a satisfying relationship as one in which “the
distribution of rewards is equitable and the relational rewards outweigh the
cost” (p. 225). Hung (2006) defined satisfaction as a favorable feeling about
the other party; this feeling can be nurtured through a positive expectation of
relationships. According to Ni (2007), among the four widely studied relationship indicators (i.e., trust, control mutuality, commitment, and satisfaction), satisfaction has received the most attention in the literature and has
been used as the major measure for effective employee relations. When
employees are satisfied and contented, they are more likely to commit in a
long-term relationship.
Transformational Leadership, Symmetrical Communication, and
Employee Satisfaction
As previously discussed, transformational leadership strongly emphasizes
listening, openness, feedback, participation, and relationship, which are key
attributes of symmetrical communication. Leaders interact with employees
daily; thus, transformational leadership communication serves as an important avenue for symmetrical communication in the organization. In particular,
transformational leaders are open to different opinions and invite employees
to participate in the decision-making process (Hackman & Johnson, 2004).
They genuinely care about the well-being and feelings of their followers.
Accordingly, such leaders often communicate well and closely interact with
employees to understand and address their higher order needs. By communicating a desirable, inspirational, and attainable vision, transformational leaders give followers a sense of meaning within the organization (Yukl, 2006)
and thus improve their relational satisfaction. Extant research on transformational leadership has demonstrated its positive impact on employee attitudes
and behaviors, such as trust in leaders, job satisfaction, satisfaction with leaders, leader–follower relationship, organizational commitment, loyalty, task
performance, employee perception of organizational reputation, and organizational citizenship (e.g., Dirks & Ferrin, 2002; Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Men
& Stacks, 2013). Similarly, the current study predicts that interactive, supporting, caring, empowering, and inspirational transformational leadership
communication could contribute to employee satisfaction with the organization. With regard to the effect of symmetrical internal communication, concurring with previous scholarship (L. Grunig et al., 2002; Jo & Shim, 2005;
Kim & Rhee, 2011; Smidts et al., 2001), this study predicts that employees
Men
269
feel more satisfied with the organization when its communication system is
symmetrical. A communication system that is open, two-way, and responsive
will invite feedback; address the opinions and concerns of employees; boost
mutual understanding, collaboration, and dialogue; and nurture employee
satisfaction. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1: Transformational leadership is positively associated with
symmetrical internal communication.
Hypothesis 2: Transformational leadership is positively associated with
employee relational satisfaction.
Hypothesis 3: Symmetrical internal communication is positively associated with employee relational satisfaction.
Evolution of Internal Communication Channels
McLuhan (1964) pointed out that “the medium is the message.” Each medium
engages audiences in different ways, and affects the scale and pace of communication. To date, various communication channels have been utilized by
companies and managers to communicate with employees, ranging from traditional print publications (e.g., newsletter, magazines, posters), phone calls,
voice mails, and face-to-face communication, to Web 2.0 tools, such as
intranet, blog, instant messenger, and internal social networking sites
(Crescenzo, 2011).
Media richness. Daft and Lengel (1984, 1986) suggested that medium options
fall along a richness continuum based on four characteristics: immediacy of
feedback or interactivity, the use of verbal and nonverbal cues, natural language (i.e., the ability to communicate in a conversational style), and personal focus (i.e., the ability to direct the message to a specific individual).
Along this continuum, face-to-face communication is the richest medium and
an optimal channel for communicating complex information because it facilitates immediate feedback, the use of natural language and multiple cues, and
personal focus. Simple announcements, annual reports, and posters are lean
(i.e., less rich) and impersonal forms of media channels. Emails and phone
calls fall in the middle of the media richness continuum (Daft & Lengel,
1984).
In the organizational context, scholars have argued that using rich media,
such as face-to-face communication, facilitates the organization’s symmetrical communication as it allows for instant feedback and internal dialogues (J.
Grunig, 1992). Cameron and McCollum (1993) noted that the two-way
nature of interpersonal communication channels, such as team meetings,
270
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
group problem-solving sessions, and supervisor briefings, enhances management–employee relationships better than publications. Such informal and
personalized communication fosters communication symmetry and a sense
of community and belonging among employees (White, Vanc, & Stafford,
2010). Therefore, a fourth hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 4: Face-to-face leadership communication is positively associated with organizational symmetrical communication.
Emerging social media channels. The advent of the Web 2.0 era fundamentally
changed the landscape of communication and the internal communication of
companies. Social media tools, such as blogs, bulletin boards, and social networking sites, which are interactive, social, communal, and relational by
nature, have been increasingly used by companies to promote two-way communication and employee engagement (Crescenzo, 2011). Scholars (e.g.,
Kock, 2004; Sheer, 2011) argue that the concept of media richness has laid a
foundation for understanding human behavior involving electronic communication media. However, few studies have investigated social media richness, particularly in the internal communication setting.
As noted by Sheer (2011), although having limited capacity to carry social
information compared with face-to-face communication, new media channels with rich features (e.g., webcams, embedded audio or video, commenting and sharing, and online chat functions) facilitate relationship building.
Organizational social media channels with two-way, interactive/dialogical,
communal, and relational features also promote employee participation and
engagement, facilitate conversation between employees and the organization,
and encourage employees to articulate their opinions. These characteristics
again reflect the organization’s symmetrical communication. Therefore, the
following hypothesis is derived:
Hypothesis 5: Social media leadership communication is positively associated with organizational symmetrical communication.
Transformational Leadership, Communication Channels, and
Employee Satisfaction
As previously discussed, transformational leaders are open, interactive,
empowering, and communicative. Such leaders care about the feelings and
concerns of employees and are thus more likely to utilize rich media with
two-way and personalization features, such as face-to-face communication
Men
271
and social media, to listen to and gather feedback. Furthermore, empirical
studies have found that employees prefer interpersonal face-to-face communication with management to mediated communication, such as email
(Cameron & McCollum, 1993; White et al., 2010). Although email is preferred by several employees for its convenience both for the sender and
receiver, email lacks information richness and fails to convey complicated
information to influence or persuade (White et al., 2010). In addition, the rise
of social media channels blurred the boundaries between communication
hierarchies and thus more significantly expanded participation and the sharing of opinions, ideas, and knowledge in corporate social networks. Stein
(2006) found a high correlation between dialogical communication and the
community-building process. Therefore, it can be predicted that social media
and collaborative technology can facilitate an organization’s symmetrical
communication and community engagement. Employees who feel engaged
and involved are more likely to be satisfied in their relationship with their
organization. Therefore, the following hypotheses can be proposed:
Hypothesis 6: Transformational leaders utilize more rich channels (e.g.,
face-to-face communication and social media) than lean channels (written memoranda and phone messaging) to communicate with their
followers.
Hypothesis 7: Employees feel more satisfied in the relationship with the
organization when their managers use more face-to-face and social media
channels to communicate with them.
Method
Population and Sample
A quantitative online survey was conducted to test the hypotheses. The study
population comprised of employees at different positions in medium-sized
and large corporations in the United States.2 Sample selection aimed to cover
a diverse range of business communities to enhance the generalizability of
data. Instead of participant corporations, individual employees of various
corporations were recruited by a multinational sampling firm from its 1.5
million-member research panel in the United States. Stratified and quota random sampling was used to obtain a representative sample with comparable
ages, gender, and corporation size across various income and education levels. A final sample size of 400 was obtained. The sample was comprised of
45.6% males and 54.4% females, and 59.2% nonmanagement and 40.8%
management employees; the average age was 44, and the average corporate
272
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
tenure was 10 years.3 Around 55% of the respondents held at least a bachelor’s degree.
Measures
Using 7-point Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
7 (strongly agree), three focal concepts in this study including transformational leadership, symmetrical internal communication, and employee satisfaction were measured.4 The measure of transformational leadership was
adapted from the Transformational Leadership Inventory of Podsakoff,
MacKenzie, Moorman, and Fetter (1990).5 Prior empirical studies confirm
the reliability and validity of this scale (e.g., Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen, &
Lowe, 2009; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996; Podsakoff et al.,
1990; Viator, 2001). Similar to Kirkman et al. (2009) and based on the results
of the preliminary study (Men & Stacks, 2013), a shortened measure of six
items was used to evaluate each aspect of transformational leadership (i.e.,
“My manager articulates a vision,” “My manager provides an appropriate
model,” “My manager facilitates the acceptance of group goals,” “My manager makes it clear that he or she expects a lot from us all of the time,” “My
manager shows respect for my personal feelings,” “My manager challenges
me to think about old problems in new ways,” α = .90).
To operationalize symmetrical communication in the internal corporate
setting, six items developed by Dozier, Grunig, and Grunig (1995) were used
(e.g., “Most communication between management and other employees in
this organization can be considered two-way communication,” α = .86). To
assess employee satisfaction with the organization, the study adopted the
measure of relational satisfaction developed by Hon and Grunig (1999),
which includes five items (e.g., “I enjoy dealing with the company,” α = .96).
In addition, two questions regarding corporate internal communication
channels were asked: (a) By which form of media do you most prefer to
receive information about your company (e.g., new decisions, policies,
events, and changes)? (b) Which form of media does your company most
commonly use to communicate with you (e.g., regarding new decisions,
policies, events, and changes)? Respondents were asked to select the three
communication channels most commonly used by their companies. Finally,
to explore leader communication channels, two 7-point Likert-type scale
questions were asked: (a) How often does your manager use (the name of
the medium) to communicate with you? (from 1 = rarely to 7 = very often);
(b) To what extent do you prefer to use (the name of the medium) to communicate with your manager? (from 1 = least preferable to 7 = most
preferable).
Men
273
Results
Descriptive Analyses
The three media channels most commonly used by companies to communicate with employees about new decisions, policies, events, and changes were
email (f = 289, 71.9%), employee meetings (f = 236, 58.7%), and print media
(e.g., memoranda, brochures, newsletters, reports, policy manuals, and posters; f = 153, 38.1%; Table 1).6 Other commonly used channels were internal
communication with the immediate manager (f = 135, 33.6%), internal website (f = 131, 32.6%), and phone and voice mail (f = 61, 15.2%). Digital channels, such as video conferencing (f = 27, 6.7%) and internal social media
(e.g., blogs, mini-blogs, social network sites, f = 2, 0.5%), were the least
commonly used. By contrast, the three media channels by which employees
most prefer to receive information from their companies were email (f = 295,
73.4%), employee meetings (f = 268, 66.7%), and interpersonal communication with the immediate manager (f = 181, 45%). These channels were followed by print media (f = 154, 38.3%) and internal website (f = 128, 31.8%).
Leaders from all levels in medium-sized and large corporations most often
used face-to-face interactions (M = 5.34, SD = 1.81) to communicate with
employees, followed by email (M = 4.96, SD = 2.21) and phone and voice
mail (M = 3.76, SD = 1.94; Table 2). Internal website (M = 2.37, SD = 1.77),
instant messengers (M = 2.08, SD = 1.69), and internal social media (M =
1.47, SD = 1.07) were the channels less used in leadership communication.
When asked to what extent employees prefer to use these channels to communicate with their managers, similar patterns were reported. Employees
most preferred face-to-face interactions with their leaders (M = 6.09, SD =
1.37), followed by email (M = 5.25, SD = 1.86) and phone and voice mail
(M = 4.23, SD = 1.97). Internal instant messenger (M = 2.44, SD = 1.85),
internal website (M = 2.41, SD = 1.74), and internal social media (M = 1.62,
SD = 1.25) were less preferred.
Transformational Leadership, Communication Channels, and
Symmetrical Communication
Hierarchical regression analysis was performed to test the hypotheses. All
sets of independent variables in the regression models had low multicollinearity (tolerance ranged from .46 to .99). Transformational leadership
explained 49.1% of the variance in symmetrical communication in the organization, F change (1399) = 385.45, p < .001, ΔR2 = .49 (Table 3). The linear
combination of the use of different communication channels by leaders
274
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Corporate Internal Communication Channels
(n = 400).
Variables
Corporate
communication
channels
Employee
preferred
channels
to receive
corporate
information
Items
f
%
n
Email
Employee meetings
Print media such as memos,
brochures, newsletters,
reports, policy manuals, and
posters
Internal communication with
my direct manager
Internal website
Phone and voice mail
Video conferencing
Internal social media
Email
Employee meetings
Internal communication with
my direct manager
Print media such as memos,
brochures, newsletters,
reports, policy manuals, and
posters
Internal website
Phone and voice mail
Video conferencing
Internal social media
289
236
153
72.2
59.0
38.2
400
400
400
135
33.7
400
131
61
27
2
295
268
181
32.7
15.2
6.7
.5
73.7
67.0
45.3
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
154
38.5
400
128
56
34
12
32.0
14.0
8.5
3.0
400
400
400
400
Note. Respondents selected three communication channels for each variable.
explained 3.2% of the variance in internal symmetrical communication after
the influence of transformational leadership is controlled for, F change
(6394) = 4.41, p < .001, ΔR2 = .032. Transformational leadership style (t =
15.87, p < .001, β = .62), the use of face-to-face communication by leaders
(t = 3.40, p = .001, β = .13), and internal instant messengers (t = 2.52, p =
.012, β = .10) were significant predictors of the organization’s symmetrical
communication system. Surprisingly, however, the frequency of use of social
media channels by leaders showed a nonsignificant effect on symmetrical
communication. Therefore, Hypotheses 1 and 4 were supported by the data,
but Hypothesis 5 was rejected.
275
Men
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics for Leader Communication Channels (n = 400).
Variables
Leader
communication
channels
Employee
preferred
channels to
communicate
with leaders
Items
M
SD
n
Face-to-face interactions
Email
Phone and voice mail
Internal website
Internal instant
messengers
Internal social media
Face-to-face interactions
Email
Phone and voice mail
Internal instant
messengers
Internal website
Internal social media
5.34
4.96
3.76
2.27
2.08
1.81
2.21
1.94
1.77
1.69
400
400
400
400
400
1.47
6.09
5.25
4.23
2.44
1.07
1.37
1.86
1.97
1.85
400
400
400
400
400
2.41
1.62
1.74
1.25
400
400
Table 3. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Transformational
Leadership and Leader Communication Channels on Symmetrical Communication
(n = 400).
DV: Symmetrical communication
IVs
ΔR2
Model 1
1. Transformational leadership
Model 2
1. Transformational leadership
2. Face-to-face interactions
Email
Phone and voice mail
Internal website
Internal instant messengers
Internal social media
.49***
β
Part
.70***
.70***
.62***
.13***
.02
.06
−.05
.10**
.03
.55***
.12***
.02
.05
−.04
.08**
.03
.032***
Note. IVs = independent variables; DV = dependent variable. Squaring the value of part is the
percentage of variance each predictor uniquely explains.
*p < .05 (one-tailed test). **p < .01 (one-tailed test). ***p < .001 (one-tailed test).
276
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
Transformational Leadership, Communication Channels,
Symmetrical Communication, and Employee Satisfaction
With the effects of the demographic variables controlled for, transformational
leadership explained 44.7% of the variance in employee satisfaction, F
change (1393) = 345.89, p < .001, ΔR2 = .447 (Table 4).7 The linear combination of the use of various communication channels by leaders explained an
additional 2% of the variance in employee satisfaction, F change (6387) =
2.54, p < .05, ΔR2 = .019, whereas symmetrical communication explained an
additional 10%, F change (1386) = 97.30, p < .001, ΔR2 = .098.
Transformational leadership (t = 6.87, p < .001, β = .32), the use of face-toface communication channels by leaders (t = 2.06, p < .05, β = .07), and the
symmetrical communication system of the organization (t = 9.86, p < .001,
β = .46) were all significant positive predictors of employee satisfaction with
the organization. Therefore, Hypotheses 2 and 3 were supported; Hypothesis
7 was partially supported. Partially contradictory to Hypothesis 7, however,
the use of social media by leaders only slightly and insignificantly affected
employee satisfaction. In addition, correlations between transformational
leadership and leader use of communication channels revealed that transformational leaders were more likely to utilize two-way face-to-face communication (r = .33, p < .01) and phone/voice mail (r = .26, p < .01) to communicate
with followers than any other channels. Yet the correlation between transformational leadership and leader use of social media channels was not significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 6 was only partially supported.
Discussion
This study aims to expand the literature on leadership and internal communication by establishing the linkage between transformational leadership, the
selection of communication channels by leaders, systematic symmetrical
communication, and employee relational satisfaction.
Transformational Leadership, Communication Channels, and
Symmetrical Communication
The study found that transformational leaders most often use informationrich channels, such as face-to-face communication and telephones, to communicate with employees. This finding confirms the notion proposed by Bass
(1998) that transformational leaders encourage two-way communication.
Face-to-face interactions, such as manager–follower one-on-one, employee
277
Men
Table 4. Results of Hierarchical Regression Analysis of Demographic Variables,
Transformational Leadership, Leader Communication Channels, and Symmetrical
Communication on Employee Satisfaction (n = 400).
DV: Employee satisfaction
IVs
Model 1
1. Age
Education
Income
Corporate tenure
Level of position
Model 2
1. Age
Education
Income
Corporate tenure
Level of position
2. Transformational leadership
Model 3
1. Age
Education
Income
Corporate tenure
Level of position
2. Transformational leadership
3. Face-to-face interactions
Email
Phone and voice mail
Internal website
Internal instant messengers
Internal social media
Model 4
1. Age
Education
Income
Corporate tenure
Level of position
2. Transformational leadership
3. Face-to-face interactions
Email
Phone and voice mail
Internal website
Internal instant messengers
Internal social media
4. Symmetrical communication
ΔR2
β
Part
.02
−.15**
.13*
.02
−.11*
.01
−.14**
.11*
.02
−.10*
.03
−.09*
.11*
−.002
−.06
.67***
.03
−.09*
.09*
−.002
−.05
.67***
.05
−.10*
.10*
−.01
−.05
.61***
.14***
.05
.03
.02
.03
−.01
.04
−.08*
.08*
−.01
−.04
.54***
.12***
.05
.03
.02
.02
−.01
.002
−.09*
.07
.002
−.03
.32***
.07*
.05
.006
.04
−.007
−.03
.46***
.002
−.08*
.06
.002
−.02
.22***
.07*
.04
.005
.03
−.006
−.02
.31***
.044*
.447***
.019*
.098***
Note. IVs = independent variables; DV = dependent variable. Squaring the value of part is the percentage of
variance each predictor uniquely explains.
*p < .05 (one-tailed test). **p < .01 (one-tailed test). ***p < .001 (one-tailed test).
278
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
general meetings, and phone communications, which arguably facilitate listening, instant feedback, and conversation, were found to additionally promote the organization’s symmetrical communication. Although such
influence was not profoundly consequential, as seen from the small effect
size, it indicates the importance of two-way communication channels in formulating a symmetrical system. Unexpectedly, the effectiveness of social
media channels in facilitating internal symmetrical communication was not
supported. One possible reason is that such channels were not widely used by
organizations included in this study. Given the prevalent notion that social
media is two-way, open, and relational by nature, continued research is
needed to better understand these relationships.
As expected, transformational leadership demonstrated large positive
effects on organizational symmetrical communication. Employees supervised by transformational leaders are more likely to perceive organizational
communication as symmetrical. Previous scholars have argued that transformational leadership is characterized by interactive, visionary, creative, inspiring, and empowering communication behaviors (Bass, 1998; Hackman &
Johnson, 2004). The current study is among the first to provided empirical
evidence for this argument. Transformational leaders care about the welfare,
concerns, and personal growth and development of employees. Thus, transformational leaders listen to the feedback and opinions of employees. Such
leaders often practice “management by walking around workspaces” (Bass,
1998) and interact with employees face-to-face, as evidenced by this study. In
addition, transformational leaders are tolerant of individual differences and
value different opinions. They also delegate power and tasks as a means of
developing followers. Thus, by listening effectively to employees, responding to employees’ higher order needs, caring about employees’ interests, and
empowering employees, transformational leadership communication is symmetrical by nature. Employees feel a balance of power, being cared for rather
than controlled or manipulated.
Transformational Leadership, Communication Channels, and
Employee Satisfaction
Leader communication channels were found to demonstrate a small positive
effect on employee satisfaction. Employees tend to feel more satisfied with
the organization when their managers use more face-to-face channels to communicate with them. Although the effect revealed here was not strong, this
finding concurs with existing literature that employees in general prefer
interpersonal face-to-face communication with management to mediated
Men
279
communication, such as email (Cameron & McCollum, 1993; White et al.,
2010). As the richest medium, face-to-face communication allows nonverbal
communication and immediate feedback and reflects the willingness of the
management to listen to employees. When employees have the chance to
voice their opinion and feel cared about/for, they could be more satisfied in
the relationship with the organization.
In addition, transformational leadership and symmetrical communication
both demonstrated significant strong positive effects on employee relational
satisfaction. Employees tend to feel more satisfied with the organization
when they perceive their managers as interactive, visionary, creative, inspiring, and empowering transformational leaders. This finding provides new
empirical evidence of the effectiveness of transformational leadership in nurturing favorable employee attitudes. Moreover, this study confirmed the
notion that symmetrical communication produces positive employee outcomes. In particular, employees feel more satisfied with an organization that
employs a communication system that is open, two-way, and responsive,
addresses employee opinions and concerns, and boosts mutual understanding, collaboration, and dialogue.
Corporate Communication Channels
Regarding corporate communication channels, the results show that nowadays employees seem to prefer to receive information from the organization
regarding new decisions, policies, events, and changes through email and
rich face-to-face channels such as employee meetings and interpersonal communication with direct managers. By contrast, print channels such as memoranda, brochures, newsletters, reports, policy manuals, and posters are less
preferred by employees. This is contradictory to Byrne and LeMay’s (2006)
finding that lean media (e.g., company newsletter) are mostly related to
employees’ satisfaction with the quality of corporate information and that
emails are preferred by employees when receiving urgent corporate news.
Technological development has made email an indispensable part of employees’ daily routine, indicating that the communication medium preferred by
employees has changed over time. Thus, the implications of media richness
theory in the organizational context should be reconsidered.
Another unexpected finding regarding corporate communication channels
pertains to the use of social media. Although public relations professionals and
scholars have started to recognize the advantage of social media in community
building and engagement (e.g., Crescenzo, 2011; Whitworth, 2011), the interactive, communicative, personal, and empowering new media has not been
well integrated into the internal communication system of companies, probably
280
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
because social media remains a relatively new tool for many organizations.
Considering the advantages of social media for cultivating relationships and
fostering community, internal communication professionals should study how
to fully utilize evolving new technology to connect with employees.
Conclusion
The findings of this study imply that transformational leadership should be
considered as a new characteristic of excellent internal public relations
because it significantly shapes symmetrical communication within an organization and fosters favorable employee attitudes. The study also provides
implications for internal public relations professionals on how to optimize
media channels in the Web 2.0 age to cultivate excellent internal communication. The findings further suggest that leaders play a galvanizing role in internal communication. The organization must provide managers at all levels
with accurate information aligned with organizational values and goals, offer
necessary training to equip them with effective transformational leadership
that facilitates strategic internal communication, and develop their leadership
communication skills.
Despite the interesting findings from this study, several limitations should
be addressed in future research. There was possible common source bias due to
measurement, and the data were collected only from the perspective of employees. Perceptions instead of actual leadership style and communication behavior
were measured. Also, the study sample included only employees from largeand medium-sized corporations in the United States thus limiting the generalizability of the findings. Besides, the internal communication content, structure,
and leaders’ communication competence and skills were beyond the scope of
this study. In future research, the procedure may be replicated in different organizational or cultural settings to cross-validate the results. Insights from communication professionals and organizational leaders could be gathered to
provide a more comprehensive understanding of how leadership influences
internal communication. Other related focal variables, such as organizational
culture, corporate message content, and the communication competence and
skills of leaders, can be incorporated. Furthermore, the effectiveness of using
social media in internal communication and possible barriers that may have
hindered organizations from developing transformational leadership and/or
symmetrical communication deserve further deliberations.
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank the editor and three anonymous reviewers for their
valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the article.
281
Men
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Notes
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Yukl (2006) indicated that leadership has been defined from various perspectives, such as from the “traits, behaviors, influence, interaction patterns, role
relationships, and occupation of an administrative position” (p. 2). The current
study adopts a behavioral approach to examine the relation between transformational leadership and internal communication and, similar to Yukl and Van Fleet
(1992), does not distinguish between leaders and managers.
Small business companies with fewer than 250 employees were excluded from
the population because leadership and public relations practices are more salient
in large and mature corporations.
The companies of the participants covered various industries, including education, retail, health care, finance, information technology, food, industrial and
manufacturing, and transportation and logistics.
Before the actual survey, one pretest with 30 employees in a Fortune 100 software
company and one preliminary study of 167 employees in a Fortune 500 energy
company were conducted to ensure reliability and validity of the instrument.
Instead of the standard leadership instrument (Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire), Transformational Leadership Inventory (TLI) was adapted to
measure transformational leadership because it is a more construct-valid measure (e.g., Kirkman, Chen, Farh, Chen, & Lowe, 2009; Scandura & Schriesheim,
personal communication, December 12, 2011).
f is the frequency of each communication channel as selected by the respondents.
Demographic variables were included as control variables in the regression models because the age, income level, corporate tenure, and position of the respondents may significantly affect employee relational satisfaction (e.g., Koberg,
Boss, Senjem, & Goodman, 1999).
References
Aldoory, L., & Toth, E. (2004). Leadership and gender in public relations: Perceived
effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership styles. Journal of
Public Relations Research, 16, 157-183.
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military, and educational
impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full range leadership development: Manual for
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden.
282
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
Berger, B. (2008). Employee/organizational communications. Institute for Public
Relations. Retrieved from http://www.instituteforpr.org/topics/employeeorganizational-communications/
Byrne, Z. S., & LeMay, E. (2006). Different media for organizational communication:
Perceptions of quality and satisfaction. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21,
149-173.
Cameron, G. T., & McCollum, T. (1993). Competing corporate cultures: A multimethod, cultural analysis of the role of internal communication. Journal of Public
Relations Research, 5, 217-250.
Crescenzo, S. (2011). Internal employee communications media. In T. Gillis (Ed.),
The IABC handbook of organizational communication (2nd ed., pp. 219-230).
Jossey-Bass.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial information processing and organizational design. In B. Staw & L. L.
Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 191-233).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements: Media
richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571.
De Vries, R. E., Bakker-Pieper, A., & Oostenveld, W. (2010). Leadership = communication? The relations of leaders’ communication styles with leadership styles,
knowledge sharing and leadership outcomes. Journal of Business Psychology,
25, 367-380.
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and
implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611-628.
Dozier, D. M., Grunig, L. A., & Grunig, J. E. (1995). Manager’s guide to excellence
in public relations and communication management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Dumdum, U. R., Lowe, K. B., & Avolio, B. (2002). A meta-analysis of transformational and transactional leadership. In B. J. Avolio & F. J. Yammarino (Eds.),
Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead (pp. 35-65).
North Holland, The Netherlands: JAI Elsevier Science.
Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A field study. Academy of
Management Journal, 45, 735-744.
Grunig, J. E. (1992). Symmetrical systems of internal communication. In J. Grunig
(Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 531576). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective organizations: A study of communication management in three countries.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2004). Leadership: A communication perspective
(4th ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland.
Holladay, S. J., & Coombs, W. T. (1993). Communication visions: An exploration of the role of delivery in the creation of leader charisma. Management
Communication Quarterly, 6, 405-427.
Men
283
Hon, L. C., & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public
relations. Gainesville, FL: The Institute for Public Relations, Commission on PR
Measurement and Evaluation.
Hung, C. J. F. (2006). Toward the theory of relationship management in public relations: How to cultivate quality relationship? In E. L. Toth (Ed.), The future of
excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 443-476).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Jin, Y. (2010). Emotional leadership as a key dimension of public relations leadership: National survey of public relations leaders. Journal of Public Relations
Research, 22, 159-181.
Jo, S., & Shim, S. (2005). Paradigm shift of employee communication: The effect of
management communication on trusting relationships. Public Relations Review,
31, 277-280.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational leadership and transactional
leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89, 755-768.
Kim, J., & Rhee, Y. (2011). Strategic thinking about employee communication behavior (ECB) in public relations: Testing the models of megaphoning and scouting
effects in Korea. Journal of Public Relations Research, 23, 243-268.
Kirkman, B. L., Chen, G., Farh, J., Chen, Z. X., & Lowe, K. B. (2009). Individual
power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A
cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal, 52,
744-764.
Knippenberg, D. V., & Sitkin, S. B. (2013). A critical assessment of charismatic transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board? The Academy of
Management Annals, 7, 1-60.
Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and
outcomes of empowerment. Group & Organizational Management, 24, 71-91.
Kock, N. (2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computermediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science,
15, 327-349.
Larkin, T. J., & Larkin, S. (1994). Communicating change: Winning employee support for new business goals. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Men, L. R. (2011). Exploring the impact of employee empowerment on organizationemployee relationship. Public Relations Review, 37, 435-437.
Men, L. R., & Stacks, D. W. (2013). The impact of leadership style and employee
empowerment on perceived organizational reputation. Journal of Communication
Management, 17, 171-192.
Ni, L. (2007). Refined understanding of perspectives on employee-organization relationships: Themes and variations. Journal of Communication Management, 11,
53-70.
Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
284
Management Communication Quarterly 28(2)
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational
leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Management, 22, 259-298.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990).
Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader,
satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1,
107-142.
Shaffer, J. (2000). The leadership solution. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Sheer, V. C. (2011). Teenagers’ use of MSN features, discussion topics, and online
friendship development: The impact of media richness and communication control. Communication Quarterly, 59, 82-103.
Smidts, A., Pruyn, A. T. H., & van Riel, C. B. M. (2001). The impact of employee
communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification.
The Academy of Management Journal, 49, 1051-1062.
Snyder, R. A., & Morris, J. H. (1984). Organizational communication and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 461-465.
Stafford, L., & Canary, D. J. (1991). Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender, and relational characteristics. Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 8, 217-242.
Stein, A. (2006). Employee communications and community: An exploratory study.
Journal of Public Relations Research, 18, 249-464.
Viator, R. E. (2001). The relevance of transformational leadership to nontraditional
accounting service, information system assurance and business consulting.
Journal of Information System, 15, 99-125.
White, C., Vanc, A., & Stafford, G. (2010). Internal communication, information satisfaction, and sense of community: The effect of personal influence. Journal of
Public Relations Research, 21, 65-84.
Whitworth, B. (2011). Internal communication. In T. Gillis (Ed.), The IABC handbook of organizational communication (2nd ed., pp. 195-206). Jossey-Bass.
Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Yukl, G., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1992). Theory and research on leadership in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial
and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 147-197). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Author Biography
Linjuan Rita Men (PhD, University of Miami) is an assistant professor in the
Department of Communication Studies at Southern Methodist University, United
States. Her main research interests include leadership communication, employee
engagement, relationship and reputation management, and information and communication technologies at work.
