KAYE V3N393
***** KAYE *************EJC/REC Vol. 3, No. 3 & 4, 1993 ****

ADULT COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT: AN AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE
FOR ENHANCING ORGANISATIONAL  EFFECTIVENESS[1]


Michael Kaye
University of Technology, Sydney


        Abstract.  This article outlines one way that
     the field of communication studies has been
     specifically and selectively applied to the
     initial and continuing professional development
     needs of adult vocational educators undertaking
     postgraduate studies at an Australian university.
     The focus is on the recent and continuing
     evolution of a new applied theoretical perspective
     known as "adult communication management."
     Although this perspective has been developed
     primarily in relation to organisations providing
     vocational education and training, it is argued
     that applications can be made to any kind of
     organisation or human system.

       The Adult Communication Management Perspective

General Features

     There is always the danger of sounding pretentious when
putting forward an allegedly "new" or "fresh" alternative
perspective within the vast and highly theorised domain of
"communication studies".  In this instance, the risk has to
be taken for a variety of reasons.  For one thing, the adult
communication management approach does not sit comfortably
with the conventional divisions within the boundaries of
contemporary communication theory.  In effect, the "adult
communication management" perspective crosses the
traditional boundaries which appear to separate
interpersonal from organisational or instructional
communication.

     Another important difference between the adult
communication management (ACM) perspective and existing
theoretical frameworks within the field of human
communication is that adult communication management theory
draws from a number of diverse disciplinary approaches and
backgrounds.  As such, adult communication management theory
is both multidisciplinary and eclectic.  It is not grounded
solely in social interpretive theory, nor exclusively in
psychologically oriented thinking, although it would be true
to say that there is a strong leaning toward psychologically
determined views of the world.

     A third point to note about adult communication
management is that, unlike several other contemporary
theories of human communication, it does not derive its
rationale exclusively from "communication" literature.  It
has been suggested that the field of communication studies
is not grounded in any single discipline but is rather a
multidisciplinary field characterised by a number of issues
and debates (Kaye, 1988).  Some of these issues and debates
appear to hold minimal interest for scholars in specialised
areas of the communication studies field.  For this reason,
adult communication management is a selective perspective,
concentrating on a set of issues relevant to the way people
communicate with each other in various kinds of systems and
organisations.

     Finally, it may be worth emphasising that the adult
communication management perspective is characterised by a
distinctly applied nature.  Although it purports to have
very general applications, because most graduate students
undertaking study in this area have been actively involved
in adult and/or vocational education, this perspective has
been quite deliberately associated with the adult vocational
education field of practice.  Nevertheless, there is no
necessary reason as to why adult communication management
should not be extended to any work-related contexts in which
people need to communicate with each other.

     One simple way of understanding the thrust of the adult
communication management perspective is to separate the two
key contributing concepts in the term.  In this way, it is
evident that the focus is specifically on adults rather than
children.  This is not to say, however, that, adult
communication management theory is predicated on the
assumption that adults invariably learn and communicate
differently from non-adults.  Despite earlier attempts by
scholars like Knowles (1980) to make such distinctions by
labelling adult learning processes andragogical and
children's formal educative experiences pedagogical, such
claims have since been seriously challenged (e.g.  Tennant,
1986), partly on the grounds that alleged differences of
this kind are untested beliefs rather than validated
principles.  Nevertheless, the development of a parallel
perspective on child communication management may also be
warranted.

     The words "communication management" are used in a
particular sense in this perspective.  Essentially,
communication management refers to the ways in which
communicating individuals construct, coordinate, and clarify
their meanings about their interpersonal worlds.  There is
also a suggestion here that if reciprocity occurs, that is
to say, when individuals are communicating with each other
on the basis of mutually developed understandings, these
individuals are displaying some form of communication
competence.

     At this point, it is important to note that within the
adult communication management perspective, traditional
conceptions and definitions of communication management are
seen to be somewhat limiting.  For example, Farace, Monge
and Russell (1979) saw communication management as a sort of
gatekeeping function.  More specifically,they argued that
communication managers should be located at the centre of
message flows in organisations.  In this way, communication
managers would be able to influence the quality, quantity,
timing and form of messages received by organisational
units.  Thus, "communication managers" were conceived to be
individuals who controlled the flow of information among the
various members of systems or organisations.  More recently,
Ticehurst, Walker and Johnston (1991) suggested that
particular individuals within systems could be labelled
"communication managers".  These authors argued that
"communication managers" occupied certain kinds of
positions, usually associated with human resource
development/management or public relations/marketing types
of functions.

     The view espoused in the adult communication management
perspective is that all individuals within systems exercise
some form of communication management, albeit in varying
degrees of intensity, opportunity, or skill.  Clearly, some
people, because of the nature of their jobs, spend
relatively large proportions of their time in interacting
with others.  Alternatively, there are inevitably persons
who, by virtue of the tasks assigned to them, are not
required to meet as frequently with colleagues from other
departments, divisions, or sections of their particular
systems.

     Regardless of these evident differences, every
individual within a system is potentially a "communication
manager".  This is a bit like saying that any person within
a system is potentially a leader when the system provides
opportunities for worker participation in corporate
decision-making.  As it has been suggested, "anyone who
contributes in any way to the accomplishment of the goals of
the system participates in system-oriented individual
leadership" (Egan, 1985, p. 195).  Like participative
leadership, therefore, communication management within
systems is characterised by the interdependence of all
members of the system.

                   Underlying Assumptions

     There are several important assumptions upon which the
conceptual framework of adult communication management
theory rests.  In part, these assumptions relate to ways in
which adults learn about and perceive their social worlds.
Complementing these, however, are assumptions about the
nature and performance of communication management by people
within systems.

Assumptions about Adult Learning and Perception

     Whilst it may be true, as has already been suggested,
that hypothesised distinctions between the ways adults and
non-adults learn are less convincing today than two decades
ago, there are grounds for assuming that adults perceive
their worlds differently from the ways children do.  The
noted genetic epistemologist Jean Piaget, for example,
developed a collection of data to substantiate his claim
that the child's construction of reality is qualitatively
different from that of the adult (Piaget, 1929).  In part,
this difference could be accounted for by the powerful
tendency of children to think animistically when confronted
with seemingly mysterious and inexplicable phenomena or
events, whereas adults would typically look for a "logical"
or commonsense reason.  Assumption 1, therefore, is that in
general adults view their worlds differently from the ways
in which children do.

     The Piagetian literature also emphasises the
developmental nature of thinking.  According to Piaget,
individuals progress through stages of cognitive development
from infancy to adulthood.  Each stage is characterised by
qualitatively different ways of reasoning and of viewing the
world.  Thus, whereas children typically explain their
experience of their worlds egocentrically and through
concrete modes of thought, the thinking of adults is
characterised by reciprocity, or the ability to see things
from someone else's viewpoint as well as from one's own.  In
addition, adults are assumed to have reached the stage of
"formal operations" in which one's thinking is determined by
the ability to exercise logic and to reason in propositional
form.

     In theory, therefore, adults differ from children in
the ways they reason and think.  This notion is supported by
people like Ennis, Millman and Tomko (1985) who developed
separate critical thinking tests for children and for
adults.  Thus, Assumption 2 is that adults are able to
reason and think in ways which do not typify the reasoning
and thinking of children.  Whilst it is not denied that some
children may be capable of reasoning in relatively
sophisticated ways, in general, children's thinking is
assumed to be more concrete rather than abstract in nature.

     Another critical difference between the ways adults and
children learn and perceive their worlds relates to the
significance of personal experience as a basis for knowing,
acting, and communicating.  It is probably true that all
people learn a great deal through experience.  The more
experience people have, the more they are able to capitalise
on it and use it to guide their communication with and
behaviour toward others.  Obviously, children rely on a more
limited range of experiences than adults do.  For this
reason, Assumption 3 is that adults rely considerably more
on experience as a basis for learning than do children.

     Whilst there is a strong relationship between
experience and learning, particularly in the case of adults,
the connection between learning and communication suggests
that experience influences the ways in which individuals
communicate.  Especially for adults, experience provides a
means for both learning and communicating.  In the latter
case, adults use their interpersonal experiences to form
impressions of individuals who enter their social worlds.
These experiences become part of a cognitive structure which
enables communicating individuals to establish, stabilise,
develop, or terminate relationships with others.

     Finally, it should be noted that a legitimate goal of
adult learning is the attainment of some form of autonomy
and self-direction.  Whilst the communicative behaviour of
adults may broadly be categorised in terms of needs for
interdependence, adult learning may be said to be
progressing in a direction from facilitator or teacher
control to that of personal or self-control.  It has been
argued, moreover, that personal control is strongly
associated with the notion of "communicator" (or
"communicative") competence (Parks, 1977; 1985).  Assumption
4, therefore, is that a major goal of adult learners is the
development of their ability to be self-directed.

Assumptions about the Contexts in which Adults Communicate

     Much of the adult communication management perspective
is focused on how adults communicate with each other in the
workplace.  Just as children spend a substantial portion of
their normal days in school rooms, adults occupy most of
their salaried or career time in different kinds of
organisations and work settings.  The nature of these
occupational systems to a large extent affect the type of
interpersonal communication which is likely to eventuate
amongst the members of these systems.  On this basis,
Assumption 5 is that the communication between adults in
work settings differs qualitatively from the communication
between children in formal instructional settings.

     It is equally important, however, to recognise that
adult-adult communication will differ from one kind of
system or organisational setting to another.  The extent to
which systems are open, flexible, hierarchical or "flat" in
their management structures constitutes a basis for
identifying the nature and effectiveness of communication
among the adults in those particular systems.  Thus,
Assumption 6 is that communication between adults in one
system or organisation may differ both qualitatively and
quantitatively from patterns or forms of communication
between adults in other systems.

     Although there are characteristics common to all
interpersonal systems, the differences relate to the amount
of communication between adults and the quality of that
communication.  Organisations whose mission statements focus
on productivity to the exclusion of "quality of life"
considerations, very often create a climate of adversarial
and competitive communication.  On the other hand, systems
whose focus is on people and their needs, are often
perceived by persons both from within and beyond as
encouraging constructive and profitable dialogue among
members.

Assumptions about the Nature of Communication

     Whilst some scholars continue to refer to "acts" of
communication, adult communication management theory prefers
to regard communication as a process.  An "act of
communication" suggests that the communicative event is very
much self-contained with, moreover, a clear beginning and a
definable point of conclusion.  Not all communicative
events, however, fall neatly into the classification of
"acts".  Alternatively, where they can be identified as
"acts", the sum of several such acts could well be seen as
forming a chain within a more global process.

     Such a global process, moreover, may not have an
evident endpoint.  Instead, the communication process may be
presumed to continue beyond the point of one's ability to
experience it.  The communication process, therefore, may
consist of episodes of interpersonal contact at certain
times.  Nevertheless, the likelihood of future interpersonal
encounters suggests that the communication process is
continuous rather than a discrete unit of dialogue between
interacting individuals.

     Take the example of a group facilitator leading a
collection of adult learners in a question and answer
session.  Each interchange between the facilitator and some
individual learner could be construed as a single, separate
"act" of communication.  Nevertheless, when a sequence of
such acts is put together, it is possible to conceptualise
this sequence as one instructional episode consisting of
interactions between combinations of different people
present at the time.  In addition, the possibility of future
interactions is not precluded since it is very likely that
there will be future meetings between the learner and
facilitator.  Such future meetings would naturally link
strongly with the sequences of previous interpersonal
encounters and experiences.

     Adult communication management theory does not aim to
atomise human communication or behaviour.  It is not a
theory supportive of the notion of "frames of human
behaviour" as the units of analysis.  Instead, the focus is
essentially on communication as a holistic process.  In
other words, understanding the nature of human communication
involves an appreciation of the context in which individuals
relate and the location of that relationship within the
complex of all possible relationships between people in
their particular systems.  Hence, Assumption 7 is that human
communication is conceived as a continuous process rather
than as a discrete act.

     Adult communication management theory also accepts the
well established notions that interpersonal communication is
inevitable (Watzlawick, Beavin & Jackson, 1967) and that it
is the most pervasive of all forms of communication (Parks,
1985).  Whilst these notions are seen as axiomatic, they do
signal the all-embracing nature of interpersonal
communication which may be explained and understood in terms
of many generalisable, comprehensive principles, concepts,
and rules.  Based on this line of reasoning, Assumption 8 is
that interpersonal communication is at the core of all forms
of human communication.

     Arguably, therefore, contemporary scholarly literature
and research in interpersonal communication should be
incorporated in the rationale of any human communication
theoretical perspective.  Consistent with this claim, adult
communication management acknowledges, within its conceptual
framework, the centrality of interpersonal communication
theory.  It is emphasised, however, that such a theoretical
core must be complemented by a mechanism or structure for
understanding the nature and effects of contextual variables
on how interacting adults manage communication processes.
Thus, Assumption 9 is that human communication processes
need to be understood in terms of the contexts in which they
occur.

   Conceptual Framework of Adult Communication Management

     There are three significant contributing perspectives
to adult communication management theory.  The first is the
interpersonal perspective which represents the theoretical
core since it is fundamental to all forms of human
communication.  It is assumed, moreover, that the
interpersonal communication processes described in this
section, apply to all situations where individuals interact
with other persons and where people's communication and
behaviours are largely shaped by their perceptions of the
quality of their relationships and communication with
others.  Essentially, the interpersonal perspective derives
from the social cognition domain, and more particularly from
concepts central to constructivist theory.

     The second contributing perspective focuses on the
context of human communication.  Within this orientation, it
is possible to determine both how the setting can influence
the way individuals communicate with others, and how
individuals, by the ways they communicate, can influence the
nature and culture of their organisations or systems.  To
this extent, people in systems are not simply victims of
environmental forces.  The "people-in-systems" perspective
recognises that people can become active agents of change
within their systems or organisations through interventions
based on sound understandings of contemporary happenings in
those systems.  Such understandings should include a grasp
not only of the overt culture of systems but also of the
hidden dimensions or "shadow side" (Egan, 1993).

     Communication competence represents the third of the
perspectives on which adult communication management theory
is founded.  This perspective has been the subject of
considerable scholarly inquiry in interpersonal
communication literature (Parks, 1985, 1977; Spitzberg,
1989; Spitzberg & Cupach, 1984; Wiemann, 1977; Wiemann &
Backlund, 1980).  Effectively, the competence perspective
relates to both the interpersonal and people-in-systems
bases of adult communication management theory, since
competence in this sense may refer not only to abilities to
relate to other persons but also to the abilities to shape
environments so that interpersonal communication is
optimised.

The Interpersonal Communication Contributing Perspective

     "Communication" is a much abused term, partly because
popular writers have tended to restrict its meaning almost
exclusively to the exchange of messages, and partly because
scholars have broadened its meaning to include anything from
direct interpersonal contact to mediated monologue such as
radio or television broadcasting.  At the heart of all these
different conceptions, however, is the conviction and
reality that communication is basically a cognitive process.
In practice, all people tend to act and communicate on the
basis of how they interpret their worlds and their
experiences.

     Within the literature of contemporary communication
theory, the constructivist approach offers a powerful and
robust explanation of how interacting individuals interpret
and act upon their communication.  Perhaps the best known
articulation of the constructivist approach can be found in
the now classic work of Delia, O'Keefe and O'Keefe (1982).
These authors defined interpersonal communication as the
reciprocal construction of meaning.  In their view, people's
communication with others is significantly influenced by how
they perceive their relationships with those others.

     According to constructivist theory, individuals create
these perceptions and impressions of others and of their
relationships with other people, through the application of
interpersonal construct systems.  "Constructs" are something
like mental building blocks individuals use to develop
images of other people.  They are traditionally seen as
bi-polar adjective pairs like "sincere-insincere" or
"expert-inexpert".  Constructs may be "physical", such as
"tall-short" or "bearded-clean shaven", or they may be
"psychological", for instance "friendly-unfriendly" or
"trustworthy-untrustworthy".

     The constructivists argue that the more psychological
interpersonal constructs individuals use in forming
impressions or images of others, the more cognitively
complex they become (Crockett, 1965; Crockett, Mahood and
Press, 1975; O'Keefe & Delia, 1982; O'Keefe & Sypher, 1981;
Sypher, 1984).  In this sense, cognitive complexity has been
traditionally measured by means of the Role Category
Questionnaire (RCQ) (Crockett, 1965).  Over recent years,
the intellectual legitimacy and integrity of the cognitive
complexity concept has been vigorously challenged.
Essentially, critics of constructivist theory have proposed
that cognitive complexity is nothing more than loquacity or
verbosity (Beatty and Payne, 1984a, 1984b, 1985; Rubin and
Henzl, 1984; Powers, Jordan and Street, 1979).  Despite this
criticism, no useful alternative to the RCQ measure has to
date been proposed.

     As is evident, the notion of cognitive complexity is
crucial to the rationale of constructivism.  People form
impressions of other individuals on the basis of the
constructs they typically use.  Guided by these impressions,
people then make "strategic choices" about how to
communicate with and act toward others.  This process
strongly suggests that the accuracy of these impressions and
perceptions becomes an important issue.  Misperceptions or
misinterpretations of others' intentions may lead to
unnecessary deterioration or destabilisation of potentially
worthwhile interpersonal relationships.  This point is
particularly relevant to the context of formal learning,
where effective learner-facilitator relationships and
communication are closely associated with desired learning
outcomes.

     It has been further suggested that people use their
interpersonal construct systems to attribute meaning to the
behaviour and communication of others (Irwin, 1983).
Additionally, since attribution theory attempts to explain
how people ascribe reasons for the ways in which others
communicate and act, the nature and number of constructs
individuals use to attribute cause for others' communication
assume critical importance.

     Based on their interpretations of why certain people
act and communicate as they do, individuals develop their
own preferred ways of communicating with others.
Nevertheless, since interacting persons construct images of
each other and of the state of their relationship, their
communication is optimal when they share, coordinate, and
clarify their perceptions.  This kind of reciprocity usually
ensures that any misattributions of intent or disposition
surface before they become the basis for future
communication and behaviour.

The People-In-Systems Contributing Perspective

     Although, in one sense, human communication principles
may be regarded as generic, it is difficult to argue against
the notion that the systems in which people communicate do
have some influence on the nature and quality of that
communication.  Consistent with this line of reasoning, Egan
and Cowan (1979) developed the people-in systems
perspective.  It has been subsequently elaborated and
refined, mainly through the introduction of a change
management focus (Egan, 1985, 1988a, 1988b, 1993).

     The essence of the people-in-systems approach is that
the design elements of the system -- for example the goals
of the system, or the structure of the system -- have an
impact on the quality and amount of communication between
people in the system.  There is a recurrent theme in Egan's
change management writings that "communication is the
lifeblood of systems" (e.g., Egan, 1985, p. 175; 1988a, p.
157).  In Egan's view, however, communication is virtually
synonymous with "feedback".  Feedback may be either
corrective or confirmatory.  In either case it is necessary
for the growth and development of effective systems.
Implicit in this imperative is the notion that absence of
feedback or communication leaves one in a state of
uncertainty.  As is now well established, the reduction of
uncertainty provides one basis for the development of
improved communication (Berger & Calabrese, 1975).

     Egan's view of communication-as-feedback leads one to
speculate as to whether communication in a more global sense
could still be regarded as "the lifeblood of systems".
Adult communication management theory holds that this is so,
especially as the focus in Egan's work is not on systems per
se, but rather on people in systems.  A focus on people,
moreover, is consistent with the substance of any study of
people viz. their communication and behaviours.

     As has been already argued, the communication and
behaviour of people can be affected by the nature and
structure of the system in which they happen to be situated.
The term "system" effectively means more than
"organisation", since it refers to anything from a nuclear
family to a community.  There are all kinds of systems.
Schools, hospitals, and prisons are systems.  Local sporting
clubs, professional societies, and PTA groups are also
systems.  All these systems differ in their effectiveness
and manner in which they operate.  In recent times, serious
attempts have been made to identify the qualities which
distinguish effective from ineffective systems (Peters and
Waterman, 1984; Peters & Austin, 1989).

     For understanding and managing change within systems,
the people-in-systems perspective emphasises the need for
change agents to recognise the presence of a "shadow side"
in any system.  The shadow side is typified by happenings
which are not sanctioned as or considered to be part of the
overt culture of a system.  Included here are the hidden
agendas, the unwritten rules, the informal norms and
practices, and generally, anything which can "mess up" a
system.  In short, the shadow side is characterised by
events that are unpredictable and often undiscussable.  The
word "arationality" has also been used to refer to the
shadow side of systems, since shadow side occurrences cannot
be readily explained in terms of logic or the absence of it.

     Overall, the people-in-systems perspective consists of
two parts or "models".  The more recently developed version
of Model A (Egan, 1988a) is concerned with mapping a system
by examining the "current scenario (or story)" and
postulating a "preferred scenario (or story)".  In this
sense, it has a certain strategic quality because it is
future-oriented.  The scenarios focus noticeably on factors
affecting the behaviour and communication of people in their
systems.  For example, in any scenario one might consider
such issues as role clarity (or confusion), responsibilities
and accountabilities, levels of professional relationships,
flat or hierarchical management structures, and status and
power differentials.  It also takes cognisance of the
"leverage" people in systems have in order to effect change.
Some principles of leverage include time, financial
resources, market forces, and current levels of staff
competence.  Once the degree of leverage has been
considered, one is able to develop a strategy to move from
the current to the preferred state.

     Coincidentally, this model was developed before the
more recent move toward understanding the phenomenon of
"storytelling" in organisational settings (Boje, 1991;
Wilkins & Thompson, 1991; Jones, 1991; Gephart, 1991; Hawes,
1991; Vance, 1991; Browning, 1991).  This concept of
"storytelling" refers essentially to the ways in which
people construct meanings about other individuals with whom
they interact and the systems in which they operate.  It has
also been suggested that changes in storytelling may lead to
changes in systems.  Thus, it has been noted that people

     think of organisations as mansions with many rooms
     where people engage in conversation to do their
     work. people will tell stories to make sense of,
     and to effect change within and outside, that
     mansion.  If we can change the stories that are
     told and who gets invited to a conversation room
     to tell stories, then we can change that
     organisation (Boje, 1991, p. 5).

To this extent, the "storytelling" concept is not only
consistent with Model A but also sheds some light on the
process of understanding systems.

     The implementation of desired or necessary change
strategies identified in Model A may then be planned
according to Model B (Egan, 1988b).  Just as Model A is
about the assessment of needed changes, Model B is about
making these changes happen.  Thus, whilst Model A may
assist one in determining how interpersonal communication
may be improved within a system, Model B enables one to
develop a mechanism for ensuring that there is actual
improvement in communication between people in that system.

The contributing perspective of competence

     Whilst the interpersonal communication perspective is
at the core of the adult communication management framework,
the concept of competence has been specifically introduced
to address issues of how effectively people in systems
communicate with each other.  According to Parks (1985),
"communicator (or "communicative") competence" has been
explained in three different ways.  Firstly, it has been
understood as the ability of people to maximise the
achievement of their goals.  Thus, communicator competence
"represents the degree to which individuals perceive they
have satisfied their goals in a given social situation
without jeopardising their ability or opportunity to pursue
their other subjectively more important goals" (Parks, 1985,
p. 175).  This definition seems to place communicator
competence within the framework of thinking and action
associated with personal control, a notion at the heart of
nearly all conceptualisations of communicator competence.

     Communicator competence may alternatively be described
in terms of the component abilities or skills which
collectively represent the competence domain (e.g., Cushman
& Craig, 1976).  One problem with this approach is the
difficulty of deciding which skills are the most essential,
both from the point of view of present survival and future
development.  Listening appears to be the component skill
most often emphasised (Bostrom, 1991, 1990; Storey &
McQuillen, 1991; Cooper, 1991; Husband, Cooper & Monsour,
1988; Wolvin & Coakley, 1988; Rubin, 1982).  It is closely
followed by references to assertiveness (Bryan & Gallois,
1992; Fensterheim & Baer, 1989; Bolton, 1979), the
expression and interpretation of nonverbal cues (Woolfolk,
1981; Kaye, 1986), negotiation (Fisher & Ury, 1986),
conflict resolution (Bolton, 1979; Morrill & Thomas, 1992;
Kaye, 1992) and overcoming communication apprehension
(McCroskey, 1977; Hansford & Hattie, 1982; Buller, 1987;
Kaye, 1992).  As applied to educational settings,
"questioning" has become seen, in recent times, as a very
important communication skill for teachers (Hansford, 1988;
Dillon, 1990).

     In addition to considerations of goal achievement and
interpersonal skills, a third approach to understanding and
developing communicator competence involves the evaluation,
by someone like an observer or supervisor, of an
individual's communication and actions.  The evaluation of
communicator competence is usually based on the following
criteria:  "(1) the ability to formulate and achieve
objectives; (2) the ability to collaborate effectively with
others i.e. to be interdependent; and (3) the ability to
adapt appropriately to situational or environmental
variations" (Bochner & Kelley, 1974, p. 288).

     Regardless of which approach one uses to understand and
develop communicator competence, there are three important
points which need to be kept in mind.  Firstly, competence
implies more than the possession of "skill".  Competence
involves a combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes and
values which distinguish professionals from technicians.
"Competence", in essence, presupposes one's ability to
operate at sophisticated levels of reasoning and thinking.
This notion is brought out in Peter's (1975) claim that the
professional's actions and communication are based on
"higher-level abstractions".

     A second point about the nature of competence is that
there are varying degrees of excellence associated with
performance of particular professional roles.  For example,
individuals may be minimally competent, moderately
competent, or highly competent.  Despite the fact that these
gradations are both idiosyncratic and arbitrary, they serve
to illustrate the point that competence does not simply
equal some ultimate point of excellence.  On this basis, it
seems reasonable to suggest that the development and
refinement of competence is potentially a lifelong process.
In theory, adults can manage their communication with others
more effectively as a result of systematic and mature
reflection on personal and interpersonal experiences.

     The final point to be made about communication
competence is that there have been very few attempts to
apply understandings of communication competence to
workplace settings (Monge, Backman, Dillard & Eisenberg,
1982, p. 505).  This has certainly been true of educational
workplace settings.  The subfield of instructional
communication appears to have operated somewhat
independently of the subfields of interpersonal or
organisational communication.  For predictable reasons, the
three subfields continue to maintain relatively separate
identities.

     In summary, the three contributing perspectives which
inform adult communication management theory at present,
logically integrate in a particular way.  The core,
represented by the interpersonal communication perspective,
is embedded within the people-in-systems conceptual
framework.  Thus, interpersonal communication or, "the
lifeblood of systems", is understood in terms of how system
members influence or are influenced by forces shaping
particular systems.  Finally, competent communicators are
those who are able to exercise a measure of control over
their social environments.  To this extent, their competence
may be conceived as a form of leadership which has the
potential to bring about personal, interpersonal, and
organisational change.

                         Conclusion

     Judging by the increasing interest of postgraduate
scholars in adult communication management, it would seem
that adult vocational educators see adult communication
management theory not simply as a selective pot-pourri of
fashionable contemporary theories of human communication.
Instead, adult communication management is seen as an
appropriate theoretical framework for developing an
epistemology of practice.  Hopefully, there will be other
opportunities for the adult communication management
perspective to develop and be refined as a result of
constructive and intellectually challenging criticism from
contemporary scholars in applied communication theory and
research.


                            Note

[1]  This is a modified version of a paper presented at the
     International Communication Association Conference, May
     1992, Miami, USA.


                         References

Beatty, M.J., & Payne, S.K.  (1984a).  Loquacity and
     quantity of constructs as predictors of social
     perspective-taking.  Communication Quarterly, 32,
     207-210.

Beatty, M.J., & Payne, S.K.  (1984b).  Listening
     comprehension as a function of cognitive complexity:  A
     research note.  Communication Monographs, 51, 85-89.

Beatty, M.J., & Payne, S.K.  (1985).  Is construct
     differentiation loquacity?  A motivational perspective.
     Human Communication Research, 11, 605-612.

Berger, C.R., & Calabrese, R.J.  (1975).  Some explorations
     in initial interaction, and beyond: Toward a
     developmental theory of interpersonal communication.
     Human Communication Research, 1, 99-112.

Bochner, A., & Kelley, C. (1974).  Interpersonal competence:
     Rationale, philosophy, and implementation of a
     conceptual framework.  Speech Teacher, 23, 279-301.

Boje, D.M.  (1991).  Introduction and editorial:  Consulting
     and change in the storytelling organisation.  Journal
     of Organisational Change Management, 4, 4-17.

Bolton, R. (1979).  People skills:  How to assert yourself,
     listen to others, and resolve conflicts.  New York:
     Simon & Schuster.

Bostrom, R.N.  (1991).  Listening:  Recent theory and
     research.  Paper presented to the Australian
     Communication Association Annual Conference, University
     of Technology, Sydney, July 1991.

Bostrom, R.N.  (1990).  Listening behaviour:  Theory and
     research.  New York; Guilford.

Browning, L.D.  (1991).  Organisational narratives and
     organisational structure.  Journal of Organisational
     Change Management, 4, 59-67.

Bryan, A., & Gallois, C. (1992).  Rules about assertion in
     the workplace:  effects of status and message type.
     Australian Journal of Psychology, 44, 51-59.

Buller, D.B.  (1987).  Communication apprehension and
     reactions to proxemic violations.  Journal of Nonverbal
     Behaviour, 11, 13-25.

Cooper, L.O.  (1991).  Toward a theory of listening
     competency:  The development of a two-factor model of
     listening in organisations.  Unpublished Ph.D
     dissertation, Department of Speech Communication,
     University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Crockett, W.H.  (1965).  Cognitive complexity and impression
     formation.  In B. A. Maher (Ed.), Progress in
     experimental personality research (Vol.2) (pp. 47-90).
     New York:  Academic Press.

Crockett, W.H., Mahood, S.M., & Press, A.N.  (1975).
     Impressions of a speaker as a function of set to
     understand or to evaluate, of cognitive complexity, and
     of prior attitudes.  Journal of Personality, 43,
     168-178.

Cushman, D.P., & Craig, R.T.  (1976).  Communication
     systems:  Interpersonal implications.  In G.R.  Miller,
     (Ed.)  Explorations in interpersonal communication.
     Beverly Hills, Ca.:  Sage.

Delia, J.G., O'Keefe, B.J., & O'Keefe, D.J.  (1982).  The
     constructivist approach to communication.  In F. E. X.
     Dance (Ed.)  Human communication theory:  Comparative
     essays (pp. 145-191).  New York:  Harper & Row.

Dillon, J.T.  (1990).  The practice of questioning.  London:
     Routledge.

Egan, G. (1993).  Adding value:  A blueprint for taking
     management & leadership seriously.  San Francisco:
     Jossey-Bass.

Egan, G. (1988a).  Change agent skills A:  Assessing and
     designing excellence.  San Diego:  University
     Associates.

Egan, G. (1988b).  Change agent skills B:  Managing
     innovation and change.  San Diego:  University
     Associates.

Egan, G. (1985).  Change agent skills in helping and human
     service settings.  Monterey, Ca.:  Brooks/Cole.

Egan, G., & Cowan, M.A. (1979).  People in systems:  A model
     for development in the human-service professions and
     education.  Monterey, Ca.:  Brooks/Cole.

Ennis, R.H., Millman, J., & Tomko, T. (1985).  Cornell
     critical thinking tests Level X and Level Z. Pacific
     Grove, Ca.:  Midwest Publications.

Farace, R.V., Monge, P.R., & Russell, H.M.  (1979).
     Communicating and organizing.  Reading, Mass.:
     Addison-Wesley.

Fensterheim, H., & Baer, J. (1989).  Don't say 'yes' when
     you want to say 'no'.  London:  Futura Publications.

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1986).  Getting to yes:  Negotiating
     agreement without giving in.  London:  Hutchinson
     Business.

Gephart, R.P.  (1991).  Succession sensemaking and
     organisational change:  A story of a deviant college
     president.  Journal of Organisational Change
     Management, 4, 35-44.

Hansford, B. (1988).  Teachers and classroom communication.
     Sydney:  Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Hansford, B. , & Hattie, J. A. (1982).  Communication
     apprehension:  an assessment of Australian and United
     States data.  Applied Psychological Measurement, 6,
     225-233.

Hawes, L.C.  (1991).  Organizing narratives/codes/poetics.
     Journal of Organisational Change Management, 4, 45-51.

Husband, R.L., Cooper, L.O., & Monsour, W.M.  (1988).
     Factors underlying supervisors' perceptions of their
     own listening behaviour.  The Journal of the
     International Listening Association, 2, 97-111.

Irwin, H. (1983).  Attribution, constructivism and images in
     interpersonal communication.  The Communicator, 13,
     62-79.

Jones, M.O. (1991).  What if stories don't tally with the
     culture?  Journal of Organisational Change Management,
     4, 27-34.

Kaye, M. (1992).  Communication competence.  In A. Gonczi
     (Ed.), Developing a competent workforce (pp. 80-104).
     Adelaide:  National Centre for Vocational Education
     Research.

Kaye, M. (1988).  Parsley, sage, rosemary, and thyme?  Is
     contemporary communication theory relevant for
     practising professionals?  Australian Communication
     Review, 9, 43-54.

Kaye, M. (1986).  Nonverbal communication in lecturing:  A
     constructivist perspective.  Higher Education Research,
     & Development, 5, 15-29.

Knowles, M.S. (1980).  The modern practice of adult
     education:  From pedagogy to andragogy (rev. ed.).
     Chicago:  Follett.

McCroskey, J. (1977).  Oral communication apprehension:  A
     summary of recent theory and research.  Human
     Communication Research, 4, 78-96.

Monge, P.R., Backman, S.G., Dillard, J.P., & Eisenberg, E.M.
     (1982).  Communicator competence in the workplace:
     Model testing and scale development.  In M. Burgoon
     (Ed.)  Communication Yearbook 5 (pp. 505-527).  New
     Brunswick:  Transaction Books.

Morrill, C., & Thomas, C.K.  (1992).  Organisational
     conflict management as disputing process:  The problem
     of social escalation.  Human Communication Research,
     18, 400-428.

O'Keefe, B.J., & Delia, J.G.  (1982).  Impression-formation
     and message production.  In M.E. Roloff & C. R. Berger
     (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 33-72).
     Beverly Hills, Ca.:  Sage.

O'Keefe, D.J., & Sypher, H.E.  (1981).  Cognitive complexity
     measures and the relationship of cognitive complexity
     to communication.  Human Communication Research, 8,
     72-92.

Parks, M.R. (1985).  Interpersonal communication and the
     quest for personal competence. In M. L. Knapp & G. R.
     Miller (Eds.)  Handbook of Interpersonal Communication
     (pp. 171-201).  Beverly Hills, Ca.:  Sage.

Parks, M.R. (1977).  Issues in the explication of
     communication competency.  Paper presented to the
     Western Communication Association Convention, Phoenix.

Peter, L.J.  (1975).  Competencies for teaching:  Teacher
     education.  Belmont, Ca.:  Wadsworth.

Peters, T.J., & Austin, N. (1989).  A passion for
     excellence:  The leadership difference.  Glasgow:
     Fontana/Collins.

Peters, T.J., & Waterman, R.H.  (1984).  In search of
     excellence:  Lessons from America's best-run companies.
     Sydney:  Harper & Row.

Piaget, J. (1929).  The child's conception of the world.
     London :  Paladin.

Powers, W.G., Jordan, W.J., & Street, R.L.  (1979).
     Language indices in the measurement of cognitive
     complexity:  Is complexity loquacity?  Human
     Communication Research, 6, 69-73.

Rubin, R.B.  (1982).  Assessing speaking and listening
     competence at the college level:  The communication
     competency assessment instrument.  Communication
     Education, 31, 19-32.

Rubin, R.B., & Henzl, S.A.  (1984).  Cognitive complexity,
     communication competence, and verbal ability.
     Communication Quarterly, 32, 263-270.

Spitzberg, B.H.  (1989).  Issues in the development of a
     theory of interpersonal competence in the intercultural
     context.  International Journal of Intercultural
     Relations, 13, 241-268.

Spitzberg, B.H., & Cupach, W.F.  (1984).  Interpersonal
     communication competence.  Beverly Hills, CA:  Sage.

Storey, J.L., & McQuillen, J.S.  (1991).  The effects of
     evaluative feedback on speakers' perceived level of
     communication apprehension.  Paper presented to the
     Instructional Division of the International
     Communication association Annual Convention, Chicago,
     May 1991.

Sypher, B.D.  (1984).  The importance of social cognitive
     abilities in organisations. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.)
     Competence in communication:  A multi-disciplinary
     approach (pp. 103-127).  Beverly Hills, Ca.:  Sage.

Tennant, M. (1986).  An evaluation of Knowles' theory of
     adult learning.  International Journal of Lifelong
     Education, 5, 113-122.

Ticehurst, B., Walker, G., & Johnston, R. (1991).  Issues in
     communication management in Australian organisations.
     Australian Journal of Communication, 18, 81-97.

Vance, C.M.  (1991).  Formalising storytelling in
     organisations:  A key agenda for the design of
     training.  Journal of Organisational Change Management,
     4, 52-58.

Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D.D.  (1967).
     Pragmatics of human communication.  New York:  W.W.
     Norton & Co.

Wiemann, J.M.  (1977).  Explication and test of a model of
     communicative competence.  Human Communication
     Research, 3, 195-213.

Wiemann, J.M., & Backlund, P. (1980).  Current theory and
     research in communicative competence.  Review of
     Educational Research, 50, 185-199.

Wilkins, A.L., & Thompson, M.P. (1991).  On getting the
     story crooked (and straight).  Journal of
     Organisational Change Management, 4, 18-26.

Wolvin, A., & Coakley, C.G.  (1988).  Listening (3rd ed.)
     Dubuque,Iowa:  Wm.  C. Brown.

Woolfolk, A.E.  (1981).  The eye of the beholder:
     Methodological considerations when observers assess
     nonverbal communication.  Journal of Nonverbal
     Behaviour, 5, 199-204.
------------------------------------------------------------
Correspondence: Michael Kaye
                School of Adult Vocational Education
                University of Technology, Sydney
                PO Box 123 Broadway 2007
                Australia
                M.kaye@uts.edu.au
                Bus. Phone: 02 330 3801
                fax: 02 330 3838
------------------------------------------------------------
                      Copyright 1993
   Communication Institute for Online Scholarship, Inc.

     This file may not be publicly distributed or reproduced
without written permission of the Communication Institute
for Online Scholarship, P.O.  Box 57, Rotterdam Jct., NY
12150 USA (phone:  518-887-2443).