Part of my engagement research involves the relationship between the quality of the workplace communication environment and employee engagement. There are several definitions of communication quality but they tend to include the elements of trust, comprehensibility, and an action-orientation.
For example, Eriksson (2000) lists five criteria for communication quality:
C1 - Communication with a relevant and comprehensible information content
C2 - Communication with a relevant and understandable action aspect
C3 - Comprehensible communication
C4 - Trustworthy communication
C5 - Communication that can be criticized, controlled, and defended
Notice how comprehensible is part of the first three criteria with trust being the fourth criteria. What interests me is the fifth criterion which Eriksson relates to the sincerity of the communication. What aspects of project communication have the necessity for being criticized and defended? The initial project plan? The work breakdown structure? The communications with the stakeholders?
Eriksson refers to his model as the "generic communication quality criteria." I believe these criteria relate to project management communications but I also want to add two other criteria.
C6 - Communication that supports the project planning process and project control process
C7 - Communication that contains risk detection and mitigation information content
What do you think? How would you measure the quality of the project management communication environment?
Reference:
Eriksson, O. (2000). Communication quality: Towards an intersubjective understanding of quality. Reports on Business and Informatics.
