Systematic and organisational barriers to communication are the structures or norms within organisations or systems that impede the transfer of messages between individuals. They may affect communication between levels, or between individuals at the same level. Organisations can be thought of as systems, but there are also other systems in society, such as how we organise politics and power.

These barriers to communication are often about differential power, for example within hierarchies, or when different groups of professionals are involved. However, they can also be caused by inadequate or inappropriate communication channels. Sometimes they may even arise because people do not understand how to communicate using the systems that are in place.

This page discusses some of the most common organisational and systematic barriers to communication. It also explains how these can be overcome, which usually requires organisation-wide action.

Defining Organisational and Systematic Barriers to Communication

There is no absolute definition of organisational or systematic barriers to communication.

However, most definitions tend to share certain common features (see box).

The definition of systematic barriers therefore goes slightly wider than that of organisational barriers. In general, organisational barriers can be thought of as a large subset of systematic barriers to communication. There are systems that are not organisations—but a huge number of 'systems' are also organisations.

Types of Organisational Barriers to Communication

There are many different ways to categorise anything in organisations or systems, and barriers to communication are no exception. There is therefore no definitive list of types of organisational barriers to communication. However, there are some overarching issues that most experts agree can interfere with communication within both organisations and systems.

These include:

• Hierarchical structures

  Hierarchies within organisations or systems can disrupt communication in several ways. First, the number of layers can affect how easily messages move through organisations.

  Each time a message is transmitted, there is potential for it to be altered in some way. This means that as messages are transmitted through more layers of a hierarchy, there are more opportunities for them to be scrambled or confused. This is especially true of downwards communication about policy, because people make unconscious assumptions about other people's knowledge, based on their own.

  Organisations with more layers of hierarchy are therefore more likely to encounter communication problems.

  Second, people are often reluctant to communicate honestly, especially to those higher in the hierarchy than them. It is very hard to tell your manager that there is a problem, especially if you don't know where the idea has originated, and your job might be affected. This means that messages of pain are often softened as they move upwards through the hierarchy (see box).

  A cautionary tale

  ---

  In the beginning, there was a plan, and then came the assumptions. And the assumptions were without form, and the plan without substance, and the darkness was upon the face of the workers. And they spoke among themselves saying, "It is a crock of shit and it stinks."

  And the workers went unto their Supervisors and said, "It is a pile of dung, and we cannot live with the smell."

  And the Supervisors went unto their Managers saying, "It is a container of excrement, and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it."

  And the Managers went unto their Directors saying, "It is a vessel of fertilizer, and none may abide by its strength."

  And the Directors spoke among themselves saying to one another, "It contains that which aids plants' growth, and it is very strong."

  And the Directors went to the Vice Presidents saying unto them, "It promotes growth, and it is very powerful."

  And the Vice Presidents went to the President, saying unto him, "This new plan will actively promote the growth and vigour of the company, with very powerful effects."

  And the President looked upon the Plan and saw that it was good, and the Plan became Policy.

  
  

  In some organisations, there may also be a professional hierarchy.

  Here, assumptions may be made about which professionals have more knowledge. This can lead to a reluctance to challenge people higher up the 'knowledge hierarchy', therefore hindering communication across levels.

  For example, it is difficult for nurses to challenge doctors, because doctors are assumed to know 'more'. However, they often have less knowledge about individual patients and their needs. Similarly, it may be hard for paralegals to challenge lawyers about points of practice because they are assumed to know less. However, a paralegal may have been reading up on cases in a particular area to provide a briefing. They may therefore be more familiar with the details.

• Inadequate or inappropriate communication channels

  Some organisations and systems may not have adequate or appropriate ways for information to move around the organisation.

  This may happen, for example, in organisations that have grown rapidly. Where once everyone shared a single office—and therefore knew what was going on because of hearing phone calls or discussions—now there may be several buildings, or perhaps more staff work remotely. However, systems may not have caught up with the changing structure and organisation of the company.

  Problems may also arise where organisations have too many communication channels, and a lack of clarity about what should be shared where.

  Under these circumstances, people often become so overloaded with information that they simply stop reading emails or other communications. Those at the top are confident that they have communicated—but those lower down remain unaware of the message.

• Organisational policies, processes and procedures

  Inadequate or opaque organisational policies, processes and procedures can also obstruct clear communication.

  This is particularly true if organisational policies are not clear about the responsibilities for communicating particular pieces of information. However, it can also lead to difficulties in deciding how and when to communicate.

  Excessive rigidity about how to communicate can also prevent the casual interactions that often spark creativity and innovation. People may find workarounds by introducing their own systems that then fragment communication still further.

---

---

Overcoming Systematic and Organisational Barriers to Communication

The solutions to systematic and organisational barriers to communication are generally to break them down.

That is, you can either directly address the barrier itself, or find a good way around it. For example, if as a senior manager, you think that there are hierarchical barriers within your organisation, you can either reduce the number of layers, or work out ways to communicate more directly across all layers. A workaround is often easier in the short term, but may be less effective in the longer term.

Some helpful ideas that will generally improve organisational communication include:

• Clear and direct communication

  Don't rely on layers of management to communicate messages that are organisation-wide.

  Instead, set up direct communication channels such as 'town hall' meetings, where directors speak directly to everyone, and take questions. A regular email from the Chief Executive can also be a helpful way to get key messages out to everyone in the same form. Anonymous feedback or suggestion boxes can enable people to pass messages back without fear of reprisals.

  Crucially, remember that communication needs to be two-way. It is not enough for managers to get information down the hierarchy. There must also be a system for truthful and honest feedback to flow back—and for it to be heard, discussed and considered, not just discarded.

• A communication policy that sets out expectations

  Organisations need a communication policy that is clear about responsibilities and channels for communication.

  However, this must not be so rigid that new channels cannot be considered and added, or so that innovation is stifled. This is a fine line to tread, meaning that the policy should be discussed and developed involving people across all levels, not just the top managers.

• Communication audits to check the transmission of messages

  Communication audits are a relatively easy way to check how clearly messages have been transmitted.

  They are also a good way to assess any areas where communication could be better, including points where it is delayed or gets scrambled. This can then enable changes to be made to improve communication and further break down any barriers.

• Appropriate use of technology

  An integrated communication platform can reduce the barriers to communication.

  Systems like Teams and Slack enable rapid messaging, document sharing and discussion across locations and teams. They can therefore break down some of the communication barriers in organisations.

  However, use of technology can also create other problems, such as information overload. It is therefore important to be aware of how channels are perceived and used, and avoid 'making work'.

  You can find out more about how you can use technology appropriately without creating other barriers to communication in our page on Physical Barriers to Communication.

• A culture that allows challenge at all levels

  Open and honest two-way communication is much more likely in a culture that values challenge and curiosity.

  Some of the ways in which managers can build this culture are by being open about their own mistakes, welcoming questions about new policies and ideas, and passing feedback up the line as well as down. This is generally known as 'inclusive leadership' because it sees collaboration and cooperation as key to organisational functioning. Part of this is also taking time to build an inclusive workplace where everyone's ideas are welcome.

  Organisations may also need to actively educate people about how to identify and overcome unconscious biases. This will enable the organisation as a whole to move past issues such as hierarchical structures, and become more accepting of everyone's contributions.

  This culture may take considerable time and effort to create but it is extremely worthwhile.

  It is likely to improve organisational performance, and also support employee engagement and retention.

---

A Final Thought

Organisational and systematic barriers to communication are, by their nature, often structural and very deeply embedded.

This means that overcoming them tends to be a long-term process. It is not something that can be addressed by a single change. Instead, it needs commitment, particularly from the senior managers within the organisation. It is hard for those lower down to have much impact—and nor should they be expected to drive this particular change.

---