Content-Type: text/html Managing In A Converged Environment -- 1 Managing In A Converged Environment -- Managing In a Converged Environment: Threading Camels through Newly Minted Needles By Kenneth C. Killebrew, Ph.D. School of Mass Communications University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave. CIS 1040 Tampa, Florida 33620-7800 Email: [log in to unmask] Paper submitted to the Media Management and Economics Division of AEJMC for presentation at Washington D.C., August 2001 "_Revolutions are not made, they come." Wendell Phillips Introduction In the deregulated high-tech media environment of today, the revolution has come. Media managers are faced not only with the disruptions of collapsing ownership and value-shifting by those owners; they are faced with a revolution in how they provide their content. It is a race to see who, in the changing world of information delivery, will win. The race is being run on two fronts, the technological front which has received a great deal of attention and the provider front where reporters now must change how they do their work to survive. This paper deals with the second battlefront where the human elements are meeting the technological revolution. For it is at the human level where media managers must confront existing journalistic traditions and conventions, and must deal with presenting a call to action to today's journalists to enter the technological race of change. This paper places change in a context that will outline current problems while providing media manage rs with options for making the technological revolution a success for both managers and employees. Journalists, defined in this case as individuals who purvey information to audiences through print, broadcast and the internet/web, are at a crossroads. The acquisition of information is a fundamental first step for journalists. Gleaning the wheat from the chaff, often referred to as gatekeeping, is what separates the profession from the public. While web journalism is still in its infancy, traditional journalism training has focused on providing specific yet significantly different skills to print and broadcast journalists. In fact, since the explosion of broadcast journalism programs in our universities during the early and mid-70's there has been a distinct divergence in training from print reporters. Much of that change is a reflection of the profession, where an emphasis on consultants, image and ratings has pushed broadcast news programs into new directions. The changes resulted in a shift by broadcast educators from an emphasis on training that provided audiences dense content to an emphasis on techniques where viewers received simplified information with strong and often emotional performances from broadcast reporters. Now, nearly 30 years later, those training techniques are considered standard and have given us more than a generation of broadcasters who emphasize action rather than content. Print media reporter training has remained largely unchanged. They have been trained in the art and science of information gathering, the inverted pyramid (though sometimes denigrated today) and have placed emphasis on depth content while remaining literary where possible. Broadcasters have been trained to emphasize the visual aspects of their stories, to shorthand the details and bring the story's "essence" to the fore quickly. But the advent of the internet coupled with current experiments in convergence journalism are putting today's reporters and editors in a new and sometimes frightening environment. That is because the workplace is changing, particularly where management mandates convergence and multi-media activities. The Changing Workplace In some instances, the journalistic workplace is changing rapidly and from its foundations. Reporters, editors and the supervisors charged with making convergence journalism a reality are finding a great deal of dissonance in the workplace today. Organizations and people unwilling, uncertain or just plain fearful of change will soon be left behind. For some years, discussions have centered on the changing work environment in the wake of ever-broadening media mergers and an aggregation of media services. Great debates concerned with the centralization of power and the reduction in the numbers of owners in media have raised questions about organizational characteristics and the passing of individual voices in the media. But little has been written about the impact on the information gatherers or as some have derisively called them "content providers." While these debates continue it is likely that convergence journalism will be disruptive to the process of collecting and presenting news and information. Convergence journalism, or "New Media journalism," is a dynamic and fascinating prospect. In the trenches however, where experiments already are underway, it is a nightmare. And that is often because of the differing styles of journalistic content and presentation. Convergence journalism asks reporters to provide both print and broadcast material, potentially creating a cultural nightmare. To offer an example, Media General, Inc. has undertaken a tripartite operation in cross-platform activities in Tampa, Florida uniting news reports from television station WFLA, The Tampa Tribune newspaper, and its new internet news provider TBO.com. In early 2000, the "News Center" opened as a new venture, placing all three operations under one roof. And while the editorial activities of the print and broadcast operations are maintained on separate floors, the message of the unity was simple: converge. In the wake of the development of the News Center, more than one hundred print journalists were put through a one-day "performance" training seminar at the University of South Florida. Broadcast reporters were retrained and now write print stories and several even have recurring columns in the newspaper. Internet reporters are asked to perform in all three venues, often on a daily basis. Cross training has been minimal because of the daily demands on reporters to continue to do the jobs they were hired to do. However, since the inception of the cross-platform, cross-content mission, a number of print reporters have left the newspaper and a number of openings continue to exist there, broadcast reporters have found ways to distance themselves from the print activities, and all three areas have occasionally wound up in bitter disputes over the emphasis of some stories in a particular platform. These disruptions and contentious activities occur under one roof and under one owner. Meanwhile, several other newspapers and television stations which are independent of one another are entering into cooperative agreements where their reporters will provide cross-platform content. It remains to be seen if these efforts can succeed where ownership is separate and the issues have more clutter standing in the way of resolution. Still, the changes are coming. Journalists must be prepared to either cross-train themselves or seek training from other sources while management must be prepared to give them the opportunities and time to do so. How does this jibe with the news requirements of immediacy and media-specific content? How would a newspaper reporter handle turning over an exclusive story to its internet cousin where it would likely be published in time for the newspaper reporter's print competitors to respond. Many reporters would rather face a firing squad than lose an exclusive story. Meanwhile reporters and editors are tasked with providing new products while their cross training is ongoing. Stress and disenchantment with the news organization will likely follow. Both management and organizational communications literature provide direction in this transitional period. It is the purpose of this paper to first recognize these changes. It will then analyze the factors of change involved in convergence journalism and finally offer direction in the somewhat chaotic transition of journalistic endeavors from media-specific platforms to media-general, multi-media activities. This paper will conclude with potential long-range solutions for management in this changing climate. Management & Mergers Chan-Olmstead (1998) defines mergers as a combination of two corporations in which only one corporation survives. Instances of consolidation occur according to Chan-Olmstead when two corporations join to form a completely new company. While the literature on mergers and consolidations is significant, areas of human concern seem to be addressed extensively in merger discussions, with less discussion in consolidations. Some of the more significant studies, primarily since the mid-to-late 90's have been examining the dynamics of a changed workplace. It is significant to understand that mass media, whether buying, creating its own, or entering into cross-platform agreements with other media to provide multi-media content is fundamentally moving in a direction that fosters merger-like conditions. In most merger cases, the conditions create a volatile environment. Sometimes these environmental changes become hostile. Examining research in this area is necessary to determine which issues are applicable to the mass media and to discover if they are important barriers to convergence. In this light we may find processes for overcoming those barriers. In The Human Side of Mergers and Acquisitions author Thomas Legare (1998) differentiates between organizational "fits" and "mis-fits." Legare points out that not every member of an organization is poised to carry out a new mission. This is not a performance issue, but a readiness issue. Some people simply hesitate when change is presented to them abruptly. Yet, Legare reports that the ultimate success of reorganization (or as in most media cases: integration) rests with the people. Legare writes, "If these human resources issues are not resolved, they can result in the turnover of key people, people refusing assignments, performance drops and morale problems." According to Legare one of the most common causes of these transitional problems lies in the lack of adequate integration planning which he says creates an "analytical" vacuum that will result in conflicts, and frequently seemingly irresolvable dilemmas. These vacuums are dealt with in many ways and are as varied as the personalities of the individuals charged with making change. A possible method for understanding how to deal with the nature of these cultural differences comes in understanding three areas of human psychology: the unconscious, psychological transference, and human defense mechanisms. Freud, the sometimes revered, sometimes hated father of modern psychoanalysis was the first to explicate the notion of the unconscious mind. Unlike the subconscious, where one's deepest notions are buried, the unconscious is constantly alert, but individuals rarely notice it. The unconscious mind has a direct influence on the behavior of individuals and in some instances will help move through change while in other situations set up roadblocks. All of this depends on the individual's background and experience with change. If change was good once, the unconscious is likely to help create a positive atmosphere for any current changes. Bad experiences will send employees off looking for ways to sabotage the changes or at least distance themselves from change. Transference in Freud's definition is about how we were cared for in our formative years. Freud argued that no one could be reared in a perfect environment and that our longing to fill voids would likely dictate some of the actions of an individual's adult years. In many individuals this is actualized through a feeling of safeness in their job environment. Rules and specific plans for the future help create a sense of understanding in individuals. Changes in the rules and the workplace overwhelm expectations of safety, creating a higher level of dissatisfaction in workers. Finally, every individual creates a set of defense mechanisms. While Freud dealt with the psychoanalytic issues of the Ego and Id, there are more practical ways of discussing how this influences behavior in organizations. Simply put, defense mechanisms tend to be activated by individuals when they enter periods of anxiety and uncertainty. People often resort to making decisions based on perceptions rather than facts because they are unable to cope with change. These perceptions lead to the acceptance (or sometimes generation) of information that has been extrapolated from sources that may not be accurate. This in turn leads the individual to act in ways that may be counterproductive to both the organizational goals and their own job safety. In other words, individuals may act in ways in which they believe they are protecting themselves when in fact they are placing their jobs at risk because others do not share their perception of change. In a period of change, these defense mechanisms are often disruptive as employees seek to protect themselves rather than take risks. Argyris (1993) suggests that organizations create their own defensive routine in a "skillful action that inhibits individuals, groups, inter-groups and organizations from suffering embarrassment or threat and at the same time prevents individuals from reducing the causes of the embarrassment or threat." In other words, when change enters the workplace, finding ways to practically instill new organizational activity may reach a standstill. The organization and its workers reach a standoff as both sides stage ways to save face and protect themselves. One of the principal actors in these scenarios is organizational culture. Every organization is its own creation of perceptions, values, hierarchy and each has its own formal and informal sense of identity. What Kurt Lewin described as group and inter-group "life space" controls the organization's ability to deal with issues of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Where dissatisfaction cannot be attributed to others, Argyris suggests that the members are predisposed to either covering up the situation or bypassing it altogether. In situations where organizational leaders constitute the group that seeks to bypass dissatisfaction, the changes may be damaging to the entire organization. There is evidence that cultural incompatibility is the greatest cause of reduced performance and non-responsiveness to organizational goals. For a moment, let's reenter a discussion of the print and broadcast worlds. To a certain extent, organizational disdain has existed between print and broadcast reporters for decades. Print reporters often refer to broadcasters as the "hair and smile" people. Of significance is the number of newspapers cartoons which often portray broadcast journalism schools as "hairstyling 101" or "Smirk School." In contrast, broadcast reporters think of print journalists as ponderous and too rigid to get the story done in a way that the public will either read or care about. Melding these cultures would be a seemingly endless clash of individuals and values. Yet, that is what convergence calls for if it is to be done correctly. Lowe (1998) suggests that organizations use default remodeling as a way to bring organization-to-organization goals into compliance. Default remodeling calls for developing three relationship phases in the reorganization of a workplace. In the first instance, relationships are cultivated. In the second instance, some relationships are terminated and in the third phase some relationships are neglected. The method easily could be adapted to the workplace and the individual just as well. In this scenario, members of the organization who can supply active support for the merging units are perceived as partners who can provide an advantage in the move toward change. These partners can support the changes either overtly or covertly. In covert actions, the organization often provides "deal sweetening" or favors to the needed partner. Favors and deal sweetening are generally limited to a select few partners who have the power to persuade others to participate in the change. In terminating relationships, the organization recognizes areas where disharmony is prevalent. In these instances, the organization may take several approaches to achieve the goal of ending the relationship. Four areas are outlined by Lowe, including coercive isolation, stigmatizing, tainting and intimidating. Coercive isolation occurs when the organization systematically begins a process of freezing out the difficult individuals. Pending raises are not forthcoming, and other positive activities designed for the worker disappear. In stigmatizing the organization identifies and treats the individual as out-of-date or not useful to the organization's progress. Tainting is the process of labeling the individual as uncooperative or someone who is noncompliant in their work. Intimidating is a more direct approach to either force behavioral change or get the individual to leave the organization. The third primary area of remodeling is neglecting relationships. Lowe reports this as essentially creating benign denial and points to four categories of benign denial: distancing, impeding, misunderstanding and discouraging. Distancing is a form of isolation, cutting the individual out of decision-making or other information. Impeding is more direct, placing blockages in the path of the worker's specific tasks. Misunderstanding may be purposefully created by providing individuals with incomplete information so tasks go undone. Discouraging is direct action taken to allow the individual to know their work is less than helpful to the organization. In fact, the work may be useful, but management understates its usefulness to push discouragement. The purpose of all neglecting relationship techniques is to push the individual to leave the organization. The individual may be productive, but is not considered essential to the well being of the organization and in fact may be counterproductive to expected goals. There are problems with attempting to incorporate the default remodeling technique into the media workplace. Other workers, whom the organization believes are useful, will generally see and understand the activity underway and may believe that they too are on the same slippery slope. In some instances, the techniques could lead employees who are considered valuable to vacate their jobs rapidly. And it may send them to competitors. This obviously would be counterproductive to the organization's mission. Still others have examined cultural contexts in other ways. Berry (1983) identified the process of acculturation. His examination dealt with how immigrants settled into the cultures of their new societies. He developed four modes of acculturation: Integration, Assimilation, Separation, and Deculturation. Nahavandi and Malekzadeh (1988) took Berry's work and molded it toward merging organizations. The authors identified integration as the process of two organizations seeking to work together while preserving their own cultures. They noted that this often led to structural assimilation, but did little to assist in cultural or behavioral assimilation. Assimilation was identified as a unilateral process in which one group willingly adopts the identity and culture of the other. The adopting group's culture simply disappears. In separation, one group or organization attempts to preserve its own culture and practices by remaining apart from the other members of the organiz ation. In these instances, there is minimal communication and the groups tend to continue to operate independently. Finally, there is deculturation, which involves losing cultural and psychological contact with both one's group and the other group. In instances where this happens, the individuals involved will remain outcasts from both groups. Appelbaum, et al (2000) adapted a version of Berry's 1983 model to show how culture influences the behaviors of workers. The model has two components. One aspect of the model reports that the level of attractiveness felt by one group will directly influence its behavior toward the group as they assimilate (or not). How they behave toward the other group is also dependent on how highly they value their own culture. Berry showed that in instances of high attractiveness and where the second organization held its own values highly, the merger led to integration. When the second group held the first attractive, but also had a low opinion of its own values, the mergers ended in assimilation. Conversely, when the second organization found the first organization unattractive, but held its own values high, there was a great deal of separation. And in the worst of scenarios, organizations that found the first organization unattractive and held its own values in low esteem found themselves in a situation of decult uration. A second model based on Berry's work and modified by Appelbaum et al (2000) deals with the level of multiculturalism of the firms and their relatedness in terms of operational activities. In this instance, organizations with a high level of multiculturalism with activities highly related to those of the second organization, found themselves to easily move towards integration. Unicultural groups with a high degree of related activities usually fell into assimilation. Multicultural groups where the activities were unrelated remained in a position of separation, while organizations that were unicultural and had unrelated operational activities faced deculturation. Another study, conducted by the A.T. Kearney (1999) management consulting firm listed four primary barriers to integration; failure to achieve employee commitment, obstruction of middle management, cultural barriers and lack of leadership commitment. Media Management Most media management literature takes its cues from general business management structures. The thought is and has been that managing people rarely transitions from one business to another. But there is some literature that would suggest that dealing with highly creative people should take a more proactive approach. In Media Management, A casebook approach (Sohn, et al 1998), the authors recognize that team building is an important activity in creating positive work strategies in media organizations. The authors discuss the three stages of group development, orientation, dissatisfaction, and finally resolution. Powers and Lacy (1992) modified the path-goal theory model into a situational model for job satisfaction. Their model recognized four groups of factors involving job satisfaction among television news employees. Those factors included leadership, individual factors, market factors, and organizational factors. Powers and Lacy pointed out that these factors influence how journalists perceive the success of their organization and the goals that are embodied in successful workplaces. Each of those factors is a minefield in the media world. Adding the concept of convergence to the media stew would likely increase the number of volatile factors in the mix of profitability and organization. Powers and Lacy noted that the most important factor seemed to be leadership behavior. In newsrooms where news directors took a human relations approach and developed positive relationships with employees there was a higher sense of job satisfaction. Killebrew (1994) using SYMLOG to evaluate the relationship between newsroom managers and reporters in both print and television newsrooms found that reporters held their managers and editors in higher esteem in instances where those managers worried about the satisfaction of their workers. The implication in that study was that the concern for employees showed through in the actions and activities of the manager. Redmond and Trager (1998) point out that "Human nuances and individual perceptions of reality ebb and flow within the interactions of the social beings of which groups are composed. Media organizations are even more so because of the combination of mechanistic and professional aspects to the activity_as well as the inherent difficulty of managing creative people." The authors point out that the laboratory of life is very different from the cold analysis of theory or textbooks. Redmond and Trager urge media managers to put a simple equation on their desks: B= f(SO). The meaning is that behavior (B) is a function (f) of the situation (S) and the organism (O) or organization if you prefer. Under systems theories, all organizations are organic, changing, moving, and reshaping themselves. It is clear that convergence is an outward example of organization as organism. Zavonia and Reichert (2000) examined the issues of workflow and its impact on the evolving environment of visual journalists in the converged workplace. They examined the website created by a joint venture between the The Dallas Morning News and The Fort Worth Star Telegram. The authors point out that while research has examined the technological and educational factors in converged platforms, little has been done about workflow or decision-making. They found that the majority of activity in online publications is done without clear communications from hardcopy counterparts. In the instances where communication and decisions were shared, the authors termed those activities as anomalies. If we are to believe that a merged/converged environment is coming, then the Zavonia and Reichert study points to the likelihood of serious problems in the converged workplace in the future. Organizational Culture Defining organizational culture has been an ongoing exercise for at least the last forty years. Researchers have examined culture from a variety of perspectives, but literature from three areas traditional management perspectives, organizational psychology perspectives and organizational communication perspectives are all helpful in this discussion. Organizational psychologists tend to view cultural actions from the perspective of the individual and a great deal has been written about organization-person fit. In these studies researchers examine how the individual contributes to or accepts the organization's culture. Traditional management literature tends to discuss culture in organizational terms with descriptions of overarching themes and attributes and their contributions to organizational understanding. Organizational communications literature often runs the gamut, placing perspectives on the unit of need and at a specific level of analysis, i.e. individual, group , organization. But all three are keyed into the interrelationship of the organization's culture and the individual only the view is shifted. Some focus will be placed on the interpretivist's view of organizational culture. Interpretivists see reality as socially constructed. Organizations are the result of the coming together of various meanings to produce what is seen. All three research paradigms have significant literature centered on the interpretivist perspective. Under this socially constructed umbrella, media organizations could be defined as organizations constructed from the need of those in the organization to create and distribute messages informing others of the actions of those who are observed. Organizational culture could be broadly defined as everything that constitutes "organizational life." Weber (1947) said, "that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun_ culture (is) those webs." This examination of organizational culture seeks to explain the attributes of the organization in relationship to change. Three specific areas are examined in this context: values, structure and organizational climate/openness. Values can be defined as either enduring or transitory in organizations. Dose (1997) defined values as "evaluative standards relating to work or the work environment by which individuals discern what is 'right' or assess the importance of preferences'." Rokeach (1973) defined values as "an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of control." Still other researchers create lists of values that may or may not operationalize in specific organizations. Chatman (1989, 1991) and her colleagues used q-sort methodology in several studies in the late 1980s and early 1990s to determine the "value fit" between individuals and organizations. In those studies 54 values were sorted into nine categories by individuals to determine their commitment to the organization's perceived values. In those studies, value was in the eye of the beholder. Structure as part of organizational culture tends to be those artifacts that are more formal in their nature. It is the behavior and nature of human action within an organization. Certain acts and actions will always be considered appropriate and conversely others will be viewed as inappropriate. Structure is often found in the policy manuals of traditional organizations, but it doesn't need to be written down. Certainly families, clans and other groups have somewhat formal structures without requiring that the rules be written down. The expectation of appropriateness is there. Most individuals constantly monitor the behaviors of others in the group and model their "appropriate" behavior over their construction of what the group believes is appropriate. The so-called "black sheep" of the family is usually someone who ignores or doesn't understand the structure of the family. This notion extends to all organizations. Clegg (1981) developed a relationship between organizational structure and organizational power noting that three interrelated factors operate in the organizational mix. Those are 1) surface structure, which is used to negotiate and is the dimension which guides adoption or restrictions of strategies, 2) deep structure which is an unseen power source which legitimizes control of one group member over another through the perceptions of those involved, and 3) "structures of interpretation" where deep structures influence surface structure negotiations and vice versa. Conrad (1983) writes that deep structures are "preconscious, deeply held assumptions about what are and what are not appropriate actions in a particular organization." Surface structure is relevant as "language-in-use" and is generally ease for researchers to interpret. Deep structure actions resist both identification and analysis. Conrad likens incidents where "whistleblowers" are shunned by their fellow employees as instances of deep structure. Whistle blowing in those organizations is seen as inappropriate, but it is not discussed openly. Structure may also show itself through organizational hierarchy and the emphasis on central or decentralized decision-making. The degree of centralization often is a component of organizational climate. Organizational climate is defined by Poole and McPhee (1983) as the "spirit of the organization." It is the atmosphere surrounding the activities of the organization. Most of us understand the notion of climate. It is the organizational climate that influences the behavior, though rarely the beliefs of individual employees and managers. Organizational climate is based on factors like safety, ease of training, realistic expectations of workers and openness to change and criticism. Generally, climate is viewed at the surface. Individual awareness of the operations of an organization and how they fit in that organization is essential. Where awareness is low, the organizational climate is often reflected in a constrained atmosphere, the result of uncertainty by organizational members. Factors of change and organizational climate are intrinsically linked. Change, by its nature puts the expectations of safety and awareness at a disadvantage. Even when organizations communicate specific accurate messages, uncertainty is part of the ongoing conscious thought process of organizational members. The degree to which an organization embraces openness to change is likely an outcome of the interrelationship between values, structure and climate. In instances where organizations have been open in the past, if organizational members feel there is a continuation of accurate and reliable information and actions, it is likely there will be a greater degree of acceptance to change. Human Convergence Issues Having examined the literature in both management and psychology we can conclude there are a variety of issues that can be viewed as barriers to successfully progressing through the convergence process. At this point the principal issues seem to be: Issues of management readiness, issues of employee readiness, issues of value structure differences between the merging groups (even when the groups remain physically separate), issues of organizational attitudes (both in culture and climate) and issues of structural/relational differences. Then there is the stress resulting from the unanswered questions raised by the complex act of group/organizational integration. Each of these is a major threat to successful convergence. We will address each area specifically and then present an extended method for overcoming many of the difficulties inherent in human convergence. Management readiness and employee readiness are two sides of the same coin. Managers who are ill-prepared to cope with the stress of change in the move to a converged news environment will increase the level of stress among employees who are being asked to work in a new cross platform environment. While eliminating stress is likely impossible, improving management readiness will reduce the power of stress in the transition phase. Readiness is an issue of training, but not training in the traditional sense. While managers and employees must be trained and made comfortable in their new platforms, they must also be trained in working under new conditions. This means that training shouldn't be limited to advancing the skills of the managers and the practitioners, but should include a process for identifying the individuals who will most easily adapt to the new strategies and placing them in the forefront of the changing activity. In the near term this may be disruptive to the traditional hierarchy of the newsroom, but it will be essential for long-range success in the convergence process. These frontline managers who understand, adapt and adopt the converged process will provide a more confident source of new structure for employees. Most news organizations proceeding with technological convergence have examined the issue of management and employee readiness at superficial levels. The selection criteria used to identify cross platform managers and workers have frequently focused on singling out people who are talented in one area and pressing them into service in the cross platform environment. The thinking has been that creative people, who write well, should be capable of adapting their talents to multiple platforms. While this is partially true, proceeding with convergence and using talent as the primary criteria may actually undermine the process. The training process therefore should identify managers and employees who are not only flexible and competent in cross platform reporting/writing/presentation, but who are interested as well. Defining value and attitude differences between converging news organizations are measurable activities. Q-sorts, such as those used by Chatman (1991) would allow the organizations to be evaluated on the same scales. Content analysis procedures would be useful in defining the embedded organizational values and attitudes of the converging news organizations. While both of these measurements would be likely to examine surface values, there is some expectation that deeper values would be tested on the forced q-sort if there were significant descriptions of the values being ranked. What remains a challenge would be developing a process for overcoming those value/attitude differences. Here, a variety of persuasive techniques would likely help, but organizations would need to ensure that they were monitoring value change at both a superficial and deep structure level. We will examine persuasive theory and techniques at greater length later. Of serious concern are the differences in structural and relational functions. Where the differences in structural are fundamental, say a heavily hierarchy-dominated organization versus a functionally open and team-oriented organization, the ability to overcome these problems will be difficult. Structure dictates how the organizations will work together. If there is a perception in the membership of one group that the other group is too rigid (i.e. a heavily traditional environment) or too lax in behavior control (as with a team-based or circular management system) neither group will respect the other. Attempts to incorporate the dominant management tradition for both will generally prove disruptive to all. There is some indication that adopting a new management style that encompasses neither of the previous styles functions well. Unfortunately, most of the managers in a new organization will come from the existing organizations, which will preclude full adoption of a n ew style. The age of the organizations is likely to play into the ability to create a new organizational culture as well. There is also the perception of age. Newspapers tend to think of themselves as enduring providers of information. In most instances, community newspapers are able to trace their publication dates back more than 100 years. Television stations are the "new kids" in the media picture. Few are over 50 years of age and many are only 25 to 35 years old. This tends to skew the view of newspaper editors and reporters toward an attitude that "we were here first," and "we do it best." These cultural definitions are embraced in both the value and structure of the newspaper industry. In one contentious meeting of television and newspaper editorial staffs, one news director blatantly accused the newspaper of trying to undermine the convergence efforts. There was little evidence to show that either media outlet was working against the project, but the frustrations poured out over the managerial decision-making process that is traditionally slower and more layered in the newspaper environment. Decisions simply take longer to make at newspapers. Forging New Partnerships Media General, Inc. likely understood that placing either WFLA-TV or The Tampa Tribune in charge of the convergence activities would be problematic. TBO.com was created with employees from both organizations and was more fully staffed through hiring other online reporters and editors who work for the dot.com entity. Their paychecks come from Media General, Inc. and they report to staff on the TBO.com line. Still, both the newspaper and the television station are fundamental to the success of TBO.com. There are other interesting sidelights as well. Both The Tribune and WFLA maintain their own separate websites, those the websites are often maintained by the TBO.com staff. While staffs from all three outlets contribute to all three venues, some grossing continues. Most difficult among those is the perception by newspaper reporters that they do not receive equal pay for their work. This is a serious problem; one exacerbated by the fact that television news reporters in the 14th media market in the nation are well paid many in the upper five-figure bracket (some even more). Newspaper reporters actually receive talent fees when they appear on television. They do not receive extra pay for stories that appear on TBO.com. Television reporters don't receive extra pay for the TBO stories either. However, there are relatively few television reporters, and a great many newspaper reporters. The difficulty is really one of semantics. Television reporters should be viewed in similar fashion to the columnists whose articles and names appear in the pages of the newspaper. Newspaper reporters should compare their salaries to those of producers and field producers at the television station; a group paid less than on-air talent but comparably to newspaper reporters. It is likely the newspaper reporters simply don't know how television news works. Television reporters in major markets seldom gather much of the information for their stories. Producers do the background and set up the interviews. The reporters are the visual characters, not the essential news gatherers. As one Tampa television reporter stated, "the emphasis is on performance at this level, not on news gathering. It's nice that I know how, but I rarely do much of my own background information gathering these days." Still, it is likely that what has become a cultural myth in the newspaper will not be overcome quickly. However, persuasive techniques and activities could be employed to bring the two newsrooms to a better understanding. We will now discuss those in detail. Persuasion & Performance Getting people to work together who come from distinctly different backgrounds is a bit like herding cats. Everyone has a point of view and the point of view is usually different from what others think or what management wants. Several behavioral and persuasive techniques are worthy of discussion. Social self-efficacy, Elaboration Likelihood Model and Schemata theories will be looked at in detail. Social self-efficacy, as described by Bandura (1997) is a process where one's beliefs concerning competence in specific behavioral domains influence choice, performance and persistence in endeavors requiring or utilizing those behavioral competencies. In other words, if an individual views themselves as competent in a specific area, they will make career choices based on that perceived competency. Bandura bases his theory on four experiential sources: personal performance accomplishments, vicarious learning or modeling, emotional arousal (anxiety), and social persuasion and encouragement. Personal performance accomplishments is self-defining. When one sees themself perform a task well, they become confident in doing the task again. Vicarious learning or modeling comes from drawing on the experience and actions of others. Watching is a way of learning. When individuals model their work behavior along the lines of those who are successful in that work, they often become successful as well. Emotional arousal has long been used to gain performance compliance, but fear, anxiety and threat are also useful in positive ways as individuals shape their performance in appropriate ways. Finally, social persuasion and encouragement is the external acts of others who report to the individual that they are doing good work. Considerable research has shown social self-efficacy to have significant influences on career choices and career performance in a variety of contexts. Still, much of the research has shown that the strongest indicator is personal performance accomp lishments. Doing something and doing it well is simply the best way for people to improve their confidence (Anderson and Betz, 2001; Lent, et al 1996). The use of social self-efficacy in convergence has potentially important implications. Newspapers reporters reported high levels of anxiety when being cross-trained to prepare broadcast material. Broadcast reporters had high levels of anxiety in attempting to write in newspaper style and provide greater content than they were generally used to providing. Through social self-efficacy, reporters from both groups could lower anxiety levels. Newspaper reporters who already have been cross trained and "performed" on air state they have a greater respect for the activities of television reporters. Some even have reported they are developing a higher level of competency than they had expected. Broadcast reporters also indicate they feel more confident in print skills and a few say they actually enjoy the print work. It would seem that these self-reporting measures are helping overcome one obstacle to convergence. Social self-efficacy expectations have evolved (if not changed). If management is careful and uses social persuasion and encouragement activities, the barriers between the two groups may eventually fade significantly. The Elaboration Likelihood Model, better known as ELM, has been around for more than 15 years. It was developed by Petty and Cacioppo from a set of theoretical constructs they developed over several years of work. ELM, in its essence, suggests that important variations in the nature of persuasion are a function of the likelihood that receivers will engage in "elaboration" of information relevant to the persuasive issue (O'Keefe, 1990). Elaboration means to "engage in issue-relevent thinking." It may be thinking about a persuasive issue centrally (directly) or peripherally. How directly an individual thinks about the issue usually is a key to how directly involved they are in the issue. Petty and Cacioppo (1986) developed a series of explanations for how people tend to draw their conclusions about issues and problems. Centrality in thinking generally means that the individual thinking about the issue is actually engaged in studying the problem. Individuals may examine messages very closely, engaging the process with strict scrutiny. They will also consider other issue-relevant material which may not come from direct messages (but fro memories, and self-produced arguments). Peripheral thinking comes about when some decision route is taken. Most frequently pointed out in ELM is that the communicator of the issue or idea might seem credible, or attractive, thus evoking agreement, while non-credible or unattractive communicators may be seen negatively. As elaboration likelihood decreases, the issue-thinking moves from the central to the peripheral until little thought takes place and the decision-making mechanisms kicks-in. Some researchers have derided ELM because of its complex nature. It is difficult to understand thinking which takes place peripherally and even more difficult to measure. Others find it useful, particularly in developing persuasive messages where the issue-thinker has little involvement. In those instances, there is a great deal of emphasis placed on the communicator or communication style and very little placed on the issue itself. In the workplace, it is important to note that most individuals have a high level of elaboration likelihood because the decisions and issues of the workplace will directly influence their working activities and environment. Understanding this in the converged workplace means that managers should take special steps to ensure and develop a set of criteria that easily explains its position on the issue. Since it is a high elaboration environment, managers should recognize that messages must be clear and specific. Any room for error will lead to the creation of counter-arguments for the activity by employees who do not feel fully involved in the process. Message must meet action. And those actions must be truthful and consistent. Understanding ELM in converged newsrooms should show managers that it is extremely important to communicate with employees. News editorial staffs are generally well-read and insightful, but they also have a nasty way of creating their own conclusions where a vacuum exists. They may deal in facts with the public, but most reporters hear a great deal of innuendo from their sources. They may filter and discount that information, but that also places them in a position to understand and create their own innuendo. The Term "Schemata" has arisen from a variety of social psychology literature (Price, 1992, p. 52). Schemata is the corporate activity of various schema. A schema is a "cognitive structure that represents one's general knowledge about a given concept or stimulus domain." (Fiske & Taylor, 1984, p. 13.) Price indicates that a domain includes both the attributes of the concept and the relationships among the concepts. In other words, schema can relate to any information structure. It can be seen as an inferred system of related ideas about a particular concept. Psychological research notes that once engaged, schema provide us with a shorthand in thinking and perceiving about an issue. They are a heuristic function, allowing people to simplify the task of evaluating objects or issues. Schemata affect opinion formation in several ways. First they constitute perceptual filters through which relevant information must pass on an issue. Second, schemata may form the basis for inferences made in response to information about an issue. Another is that attitudes form a special class of schema, serving as perceptual and cognitive devices to aid in organizing thoughts around an issue. Attitudes are bundles of interconnected beliefs about a particular object which have been fused together in the collective mind (Pratkanis and Greenwald, 1989). Changing attitudes requires unbundling them and their schemata. Discussion Examining persuasive theories and constructs brings us to the next level of the discussion on overcoming convergence angst. It is clear that media managers attempting to enter into a converged environment should go about it thoughtfully and view convergence from a humanistic as well as technological center. A few suggestions are possible. First, media managers embarking on convergence activities should work to create an organizational value shift among the participants of the upcoming enterprise. Those individuals should be identified among organizational risk takers, and from those who share similar values at both an individual and corporate level. They should write well, be easily cross-trained, and should be targeted for inclusion before the undertaking is announced. These people must be trained prior to the launch of the converged activities. Once individuals have been identified and trained for the convergence activity, the organization(s) must undertake a well-designed plan of action to foster understanding among all employees and managers. This activity should be planned to discuss the new platform from both a positive and negative vantage. Reporters are well-trained in misspeak and will understand when actions and words are at odds with one another. The organization must take care to identify those who will view the activity negatively before the launch. These people should be neutralized where possible by engaging them in thoughtful discussions about the future of the field and at the same time reassuring them they will be exempt from cross platform activities. Ongoing communication is essential for everyone working in the cross platform environments. Value and attitude discrepencies will pose serious risks to the undertaking if communications are not complete, accurate and forthcoming. Corporate myths regarding the competing platforms should be discovered and either exorcised from the lexicon or marginalized by consistent and frequent information to all employee groups. Finally, managers should avoid the "nuance dance." When information is not ready for dissemination, managers shouldn't engage in the "I'll let you know" later. If you don't know, tell employees and managers you don't know. Information is power. It should be used wisely and in information intensive organizations, it should be used often. Several points should be understood by those undertaking converged news environments. Those points are: 1) identify and train good reporters, 2) hire slowly and thoughtfully for the new organization, 3) take the time and investment to create an excellent product, 4) have patience, 5 evaluate constantly and consistently, 6 when problems arise, avoid quick fixes. Conclusions Convergence is here to stay. Anyone who believes that "old school" journalism thinking will suffice for the 21st century is sadly mistaken. What does need to be understood is that convergence is neither an end all or be all, it is simply the next step. Managers who plan on using convergence to save time and money and move to a more efficient operation are likely misunderstanding the nature and the power of this emerging tool of information. The New Media workplace will indeed be new, but managers and media owners should understand the most significant additions to the journalistic toolbox is not the technology. It is rather the ability to conceive and deliver an effective reach for effective journalism, and effective public understanding. Bibliography Anderson, S.L. and Betz, N.E. (2001). Sources of Social Self-efficacy Expectations: Their Measurement and Relations to Career Development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58, pp. 98-117. Academic Press. Appelbaum, S.H., Gandell, J, Yortis, H., Proer, S. and Jobin, F. (2000). Anatomy of a Merger: Behavior of Organizational Factors and Processes throughout the Pre- during- Post-stages (Part 1). Management Decision Journal, 38, 9, pp. 649-661. Bandura, A., Pastorelli, C., Barbaranelli, C. and Capara, G.U. (1999). Self-efficacy Pathways in Depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 258-269. Berry, J.W. (1983). Acculturation: A Comparative Analysis of Alternative Forms. In Samuda, R.J. and Woods, L.S. (eds), Perspectives in Immigrant and Minority Education. University Press of America, Lanham MD. Pp. 66-77. Chan-Olmsted, S. (1998). Mergers, Acquisitions, and Convergence: The Strategic Alliances of Broadcasting, Cable Television and Telephone Services. The Journal of Media Economics, 11, 3, pp. 33-46. Connor, P.E. (Nov./Dec.1997). Total Quality Management: A Selective Commentary on its Human Dimensions, with Special Reference to its Downside. Public Administration Review, pp. 501-509. Conrad, C. (1983). Organizational Power: Faces and Symbolic Forms. In Putnam L.L. and Pacanowsky, M.E. (eds). Communication and Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. pp. 173-194. Sage, Newbury, Park, CA. Dijkstra, J.J. (1999). User Agreement with Incorrect Expert System Advice. Behavior and Information Technology, 18, 6, pp. 399-411. Ekstrom, M. (2000). Information, Storytelling and Attractions, TV Journalism in Three Modes of Communciation. Media, Culture & Society, 22, pp. 465-492. Falbe, C.M. and Yuki, G. (1992). Consequences for Managers Using Single Influence Tactics and Combination of Tactics. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 3, pp. 638-647. Finegan, J.E. (2000). The Impact of Person and Organizational Values on Organizational Commitement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 2, pp. 149-170. Howard, L. (1999). Mergers Won't Mesh Without People Plan. National Underwriter (Property Casualty/Risk & Benefits Ed), 103, 34, p. 7-8. Kabanoff, B., Waldersee, R. and Cohen, M. (1995). Espoused Values and Organizational Change Themes. Academy of Management Journal. 38, 4, pp 1075-1105. Koncel, J. (1998). Managing In a Time of Uncertainty, PIMA's Papermaker, 80, 10, pp. 72-73. Legare, T.L. (1998). The Human Side of Mergers and Acquisitions. Human Resource Planning, 21, 1, pp. 32-41. Lowe, A. (1998). Managing the Post-merger Aftermath by Default Remodelling. Management Decision. 36, 2, pp. 102-110. Messmer, M. (1998). Managing and Motivating During a Merger. Management Accounting, 79, p. 10. Morley, D.D., Shockley-Zalabak, P. and Cesario, R. (1997). Organizational Communication and Culture: A Study of 10 Italian High-technology Companies. The Journal of Business Communication, 34, 3, pp. 253-269. Nahavandi, A. and Malekzadeh, A. (1988). Acculturation in Mergers and Acquisitions, Academy of Management Review, vol. 13, pp. 79-90. O'Keefe, D.J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and Research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park: CA. Pearce, R.J. (2000). The General Manager's Perspective on how Factionalism can Impact the Behaviors and Effectiveness of Top Managers Inside a Shared Management Joint Venture. Journal of Management and Governance. 4, pp 189-206. Petty R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. Springer-Verlag, New York. Poole, S. and McPhee, R.D. (1983). A Structurational Analysis of Organizational Climate. In Putnam L.L. and Pacanowsky, M.E. (eds). Communication and Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. pp. 195-219. Sage, Newbury, Park, CA. Pratkanis, A.R. and Greenwald, A. G. (1989). A Sociocognitive Model of Attitude Structure and Function. In L. Berkowitz, (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, v. 22, pp. 2245-285. Academic Press, NY. Price, V. (1992). Communication Concepts 4: Public Opinion. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Putnam, L.L. (1983). The Interpretive Perspective: An Alternative to Functionalism. In Putnam L.L. and Pacanowsky, M.E. (eds). Communication and Organizations: An Interpretive Approach. pp. 31-54. Sage, Newbury, Park, CA. Redmond, J. and Trager, R. (1998). Balancing on the Wire: The Art of Media Organizations. Coursewise Publishing, Boulder, CO. Roy, D.D., and Ghose, M. (June, 1997). Awareness of Hospital Environment and Organizational Commitment. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137, pp. 380-386. Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. Free Press, NY. Sohn, A.B., Wicks, J.L., Lacy, S. and Sylvie, G. (1999). Media Management: A Casebook Approach. 2nd ed. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. Zavoina, S. and Reichert, T. (2000). Media Convergence/Management Change: The Evolvoing Workflow of Visual Journalists. The Journal of Media Economics. 13, 2, pp. 143-151. Abstract This research examines the complexities of managing journalists in a new media or converged environment. The article examines traditional management, social psychology and persuasion literature in a discussion of the problems facing convergence managers. It uses recent examples of convergence problems with WFLA-TV, The Tampa Tribune and TBO.com in Tampa, Florida. The paper concludes with actions that should be taken by media managers to ensure their convergence endeavors are successful. Managing In a Converged Environment: Threading Camels through Newly Minted Needles By Kenneth C. Killebrew, Ph.D. School of Mass Communications University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave. CIS 1040 Tampa, Florida 33620-7800 Email: [log in to unmask]