Employee perceptions of manager humor orientation ...

Communication Research Reports

ISSN: 0882-4096 (Print) 1746-4099 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcrr20

Employee perceptions of manager humor orientation, assertiveness, responsiveness, approach/avoidance strategies, and satisfaction Kristen L. Campbell , Matthew M. Martin & Melissa Bekelja Wanzer To cite this article: Kristen L. Campbell , Matthew M. Martin & Melissa Bekelja Wanzer (2001) Employee perceptions of manager humor orientation, assertiveness, responsiveness, approach/avoidance strategies, and satisfaction, Communication Research Reports, 18:1, 67-74, DOI: 10.1080/08824090109384783 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08824090109384783

Published online: 06 Jun 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 131

View related articles

Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rcrr20 Download by: [West Virginia University]

Date: 10 May 2016, At: 12:35

Downloaded by [West Virginia University] at 12:35 10 May 2016

Employee Perceptions of Manager Humor Orientation, Assertiveness, Responsiveness, Approach/Avoidance Strategies, and Satisfaction Kristen L. Campbell University of Miami

Matthew M. Martin West Virginia University Melissa Bekelja Wanzer Canisius College

The goal of this study was to learn more about the communication behaviors of managers who use humor. More specifically, this study examined relationships among employees' perceptions of managers' humor orientation, assertiveness, responsiveness, avoidance strategies, approach strategies, and overall manager satisfaction. Participants were 164 individuals that work 30 hours per week. Employees' perception of manager humor orientation (HO) was positively and significantly correlated with perceptions of manager responsiveness, satisfaction, and approach strategies. Manager HO was also negatively and significantly associated with avoidance strategies. Findings from this study were, for the most part, consistent with those from previous humor research in the corporate and educational contexts (Rizzo, Wanzer, & Booth-Butterfield, 2000; Wanzer & Frymier, 1999). Fortunately for many of us, the old saying that "school is school and work is work and play is play" (Napier & Gershenfeld, 1999) is no longer valid. The idea of mixing work and playful behaviors such as humor is not only accepted but also encouraged. For example, it is not uncommon today to find college teachers using humor in the classroom (Frymier &

Kristen L. Campbell (M.A., West Virginia University, 2000) is a doctoral student at The University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124. Matthew M. Martin (Ph.D., Kent State University, 1992) is an Associate Professor of Communication Studies at West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, 26506. Melissa Wanzer (Ed. D., West Virginia University, 1995) is an Assistant Professor of Communication Studies at Canisius College, Buffalo, NY 14208. COMMUNICATION RESEARCH REPORTS, Volume 18, Number 1, pages 67-74


Page 68 - Communication Research Reports/Winter 2001

Wanzer, 1999; Gorham & Christophel, 1990; Wanzer & Frymier, 1999), physicians and emergency personnel using humor with their patients (Levinson, Roter, Mullooly, Dull, & Frankel, 1997; Rosenberg, 1998), professors of medicine using humor in medical teaching (Ziegler, 1998), and managers using humor with their employees (Farrell, 1998; Rizzo et al., 2000). Humor is an effective communication strategy that managers, teachers, and health care practitioners can all use to establish a rapport with others in the workplace. Recent research indicates that not only are managers who use humor liked more than those who did not, but they are also perceived as more effective (Rizzo, et al., 2000). The purpose of this study was to learn more about the communication behaviors of managers who use humor. More specifically, this study explored employees' perceptions of managers' humor orientation (HO) in relationship to perceptions of assertiveness and responsiveness and approach/avoidance strategies. Humor has been studied in a variety of contexts from both a source and receiver perspective. In this study, we were primarily interested in individual differences in communication behaviors linked to humor orientation. Humor orientation (HO) refers to an individual's propensity to use humor frequently and effectively. Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (1991) conceptualized the term humor orientation (HO) as a communication trait which can be measured via a self-report instrument known as the Humor Orientation scale. This scale measures the extent to which individuals use humor as well as the effectiveness of their humorous enactments. Individuals scoring high on the HO scale use humor more frequently and effectively than those scoring low, and are viewed by others as funnier (Wanzer, BoothButterfield, & Booth-Butterfield, 1995). Researchers have found HO to be related with other individual differences. For example, high HOs are viewed as more socially attractive, less lonely (Wanzer, BoothButterfield, & Booth-Butterfield 1996a), and more communicatively competent (Wanzer, et al., 1995). Additionally, high HOs are more conscious of their emotions and often use emotions to guide their communication (Wanzer et al., 1995). Research in the health care context indicates that high HO nurses, more so than low HO nurses, are more likely to use humor as a coping mechanism and indicated that they are more effective in coping with stress (Wanzer, Booth-Butterfield, & Booth-Butterfield, 1996b). In sum, high HO individuals seem to be more communicatively competent, more effective in dealing with stress, less lonely, and more popular. Similar to nurses, individuals in corporate contexts also use humor to cope with work stress (Rizzo, 1997). Release or relief theories hold that humor is one way to relieve physical, emotional or cognitive life stresses (Robinson, 1991). Additionally, Martin and MaeGayle (1999) found that organizational leaders use humor as part of their overall management style. Managers reported using jokes, storytelling, and anecdotes as ways to build cohesion within groups. Rizzo, Wanzer, Booth-Butterfield and Booth-Butterfield (2000) found that high HO employees viewed managers' use of humor as more appropriate in the workplace than their low HO counterparts. Managers' use of humor may create a more enjoyable or fun environment where employees are less stressed and more productive. One reason that high HO managers may be viewed as more effective by their employees (Rizzo, et al., 2000) could be because they are also viewed as more communicatively competent (Wanzer et al, 1995). To date, the relationship between employee perceptions of manager HO and communication competence has not been tested. In this study, we speculate that employees will perceive high HO managers as more communicatively competent than low HO managers.


Humor - Page 69

Two communication traits related to communication competence are assertiveness and responsiveness. Assertive people are able to initiate, maintain, and terminate conversations with respect to their interpersonal goals. Responsiveness involves being considerate of others and their feelings. Responsive communicators listen and try to understand how others are feeling and are very sensitive to their needs (McCroskey & Richmond, 1996). Wanzer and Frymier (1999b) found that competent (high responsive and high assertive) teachers were perceived as higher in humor orientation. They also found that assertiveness and responsiveness were each positively and significantly associated with immediacy. The current study proposed that, similar to the instructional findings, high HO managers would also be perceived as more communicatively competent than low HO managers. Thus, the following hypotheses were advanced: HI: Employees' perceptions of managers' HO will be positively related to responsiveness. H2: Employees' perceptions of managers' HO will be positively related to assertiveness. Employees' satisfaction is based in part on their communication with their managers. For example, employees have greater satisfaction and commitment to their organizations when they perceive their managers as being nonverbally immediate (Duncan, 1996; Lamude, Daniels, & Smilowitz, 1995). Immediacy involves communicating closeness to another through verbal and nonverbal messages. Gorham and Christophel (1990) argued that using humor could be considered an immediacy behavior. Heald and Girton (1999) found that people who reported having positive communication exchanges with their managers also reported greater job satisfaction. Because humor can be considered a positive communication exchange, the following hypothesis was forwarded: H3: Employees' perceptions of their managers' HO will be positively related to their satisfaction with their managers. In 1998 Mottet and Richmond introduced a typology of verbal approach/avoidance strategies. Approach strategies include personal recognition, inclusiveness, self-disclosure, and compliments. Avoidance strategies include abruptness, exclusiveness, offensiveness, and condescension. Another avoidance strategy was offensive communication, which includes inappropriate profanity or derogatory jokes. Since humor, in general, is viewed as a positive and pro-social form of communication, it was expected that humor orientation would be positively related to approach strategies and negatively related to avoidance strategies. Therefore, the following hypotheses were advanced: H4: Employee perceptions of manager HO will be positively related to employee perceptions of managers' use of approach strategies. H5: Employee perceptions of manager HO will be negatively associated with employee perceptions of managers' use of avoidance strategies.

METHOD Participants

There were 164 participants in the study. For inclusion in the study, people had to work at least 30 hours a week and be supervised by a manager. The sample was made up of 65 men and 97 women, with two people not reporting their sex. Participants' mean age was 34.02 (SD = 11.59). Respondents reported on a total of 95 male managers and 66 female managers. Three people did not report manager gender. The mean number of years that the employees worked at their present job was 5.37 (SD = 6.33). The mean number of hours per week the


participants worked was 40.71 (SD =11.43). The mean number of hours the participants worked with their current manager per week was 3.19 (SD =3.67). Participants were enrolled in graduate level organizational communication classes. Participants were asked to complete the questionnaire based on their relationship with their managers and were provided with two additional questionnaires to have co-workers or friends complete. Additional questionnaires were given to undergraduates in a communication studies course to give to their parents to complete. Participation was voluntary and confidential. Participants completed a questionnaire that included measures of: humor orientation, assertiveness, responsiveness, and verbal approach/avoidance strategies and superior satisfaction. To ensure confidentiality, participants placed completed questionnaires in sealed envelopes and returned via the students.


Instruments

Humor was measured using the Humor Orientation Scale (M. Booth-Butterfield & S. Booth-Butterfield, 1991). The scale assesses how likely a person is to produce humorous messages such as funny stories and jokes. It is a 17 item, 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from Strongly Agree (5) to Strongly Disagree (1). This scale was adapted to measure participants' perceptions of their immediate manager's production of humor. For example, instead of reading, "I cannot tell a joke", it read "He/She cannot tell a joke". The mean was 53.27 (SD = 12.71). The coefficient alpha was .93. Assertiveness and responsiveness was measured using the Socio-Communicative Orientation measure (Richmond & McCroskey, 1990). The measure consists of 20 items. Ten items measure responsiveness while the other ten items measure assertiveness. Participants were asked to indicate the degree that each of the items applied to their immediate supervisor. The responses range from Strongly Agree (7) to Strongly Disagree (1). The means in this study were 47.58 (SD = 12.25) for assertiveness and 43.68 (SD = 13.51) for responsiveness. The coefficient alphas were .91 for assertiveness and .96 for responsiveness. Approach and avoidance strategies were measured using the Verbal Approach/Avoidance Scale (Mottet & Richmond, 1998). This 19-item scale measures the extent to which an individual uses verbal approach/avoidance strategies. For each strategy, participants are provided with a variety of verbal statements such as, "I'll call and talk to you soon" and "Do you want to go with us?". It is a 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from Never (0) to Very Often (4). The means in this study were 26.03 (SD=9.40) for approach and 9.80 (SD = 6.68) for avoidance. The coefficient alphas were .87 for approach and .89 for avoidance. The Supervisor Satisfaction Scale measures subordinates' perceptions of their satisfaction with their superior. Responses indicate the general attitude a person has toward their supervisor. The scale consists of six, seven-point semantic differentials: bad-good, rightwrong, unfair-fair, beneficial-harmful, negative-positive, wise-foolish (see McCroskey & Richmond, 1989, for a review of the reliability and validity of bipolar scales in measuring attitudes and beliefs). The mean was 29.88 (SD = 8.05). The coefficient alpha was .93.

RESULTS All hypotheses were tested using Pearson Correlations. Hypothesis one predicted that employees' perceptions of their managers' HO would be positively related to employees' perceptions of their managers' responsiveness. The correlation between humor orientation and responsiveness was r = .53, p< .01. Thus, hypothesis one was supported.


Humor - Page 71

Hypothesis two predicted that employees' perceptions of their managers' HO would be positively related to employees' perceptions of managers' assertiveness. The correlation between humor orientation and assertiveness was r = .03, p > .05. Thus, hypothesis two was not supported. Hypothesis three predicted that employees' perceptions of their managers' HO would be positively related to employees' perceptions of their managers' satisfaction. The correlation between humor orientation and superior satisfaction was r = .52, p < .01. Thus, hypothesis three was supported. Hypothesis four predicted that employees' perceptions of their managers' HO would be positively related to employees' perceptions of their managers' approach strategies. The correlation between HO and approach strategies was r = .49, p < .01. Thus hypothesis four was supported. Hypothesis five predicted that employees' perceptions of their managers' HO would be negatively related to employees' perceptions of their managers' avoidance strategies. The correlation between HO and avoidance strategies was r = - .36, p < .01. Thus, hypothesis five was supported. In addition to running the correlations to test the hypothesis, several post hoc analyses were conducted by computing partial correlations between humor orientation and the other variables controlling for employee sex and manager sex. Employee sex and manager sex did not appear to influence the relationship between humor orientation and the other variables.

DISCUSSION The results of this study provide further evidence for considering humor orientation to be a constructive communication trait. Similar to the findings of Frymier and Wanzer (1999b) in the instructional setting, there was a positive relationship between employee perceptions of manager HO and responsiveness. This could be explained, in part, by the manager's ability to be competent in understanding the appropriate situation and audience for humorous messages. However, unlike the findings of Frymier and Wanzer, employee perceptions of manager HO and assertiveness were not related. One explanation for this finding may be that in the instructional setting, teachers are spending more of their time in the classroom with the students. However, in this study, the mean number of hours the subordinates spent with their superior was three hours a week. Since there is very limited time that the manager spends with the employee, perhaps the assertive manager is not allotted many opportunities to be humorous. Hypothesis three predicted that employee perceptions of manager HO would be positively related to manager satisfaction. This hypothesis was supported. This finding suggests a linear relationship between a manager's humor orientation and an employee's satisfaction. This can be related to past research in the instructional setting where Bryant, Crane, Cominsky, and Zillman, (1980) found a positive relationship between teachers' use of humor and teacher evaluations. Moreover, these findings are similar to Rizzo's who found a positive relationship between employee perceptions of manager HO and liking and a positive relationship between employee HO and job satisfaction (Rizzo et al., 1998). Thus, based on these findings and others, high HOs seem to make better managers than low HOs. In light of these findings and others, humor may be a means of reducing workplace stress, and facilitating communication. Finally, high HO managers, who are also viewed as highly



responsive, may be more open and willing to communicate and establish relationships with their employees. As expected, humor orientation was positively related to the use of approach strategies while negatively related to the use of avoidance strategies. According to Mottet and Richmond (1998) when individuals want a relationship to develop, they increase their use of approach verbal strategies. This intuitively makes sense, because if a person makes jokes with us, we perceive that they enjoy our company and want to continue the relationship. On the other hand, avoidance strategies include using only task-oriented communication or using offensive communication. With increasing support that HO is a constructive communication behavior with the potential of facilitating interpersonal relationships, it is not surprising that HO is negatively related to avoidant strategies. Future studies in this area should examine the specific types of humorous behaviors viewed as most and least appropriate in the workplace. Rizzo's (1997) work in the area of appropriate and inappropriate humor behaviors is preliminary and warrants further investigation. Additionally, another interesting outcome of managers' use of humor may be persuasiveness. Future studies in this area could investigate the persuasiveness of high HO versus low HO managers as well as the specific types of humor strategies enacted to gain compliance at work. This study has several limitations. First, it is based on employee perceptions of manager communication behaviors as opposed to managers' reports of their humor use at work. Also, employees' most recent experiences with their managers, either good or bad, may have affected their responses to the questions about their managers. For example, what if an employee just received a raise earlier that day from a manager or, alternately, what if a manager reprimanded him or her? There is no way to determine the impact of daily events on employee perceptions of managers without collecting longitudinal data. However, this study provides us with results that are consistent to similar humor research and offers valuable information on positive manager communication traits.

REFERENCES Booth-Butterfield, M. & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1991). Individual differences in the communication of humorous messages. Southern Communication Journal, 56, 32-40. Bryant, J., Crane, J. S., Cominsky, P. W., & Zillman, D. (1980). Relationship between college teachers' use of humor in the classroom and students' evaluations of their teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 511-519. Duncan, R. R. (1996). Immediacy and uncertainty in superior-subordinate communication relationships. (Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, 1996). Dissertation Abstracts International, 57, 1911. Farrell, L. (1998). You've got to be kidding: Humor as a fundamental management tool. ARMA Records Management Quarterly, 32, 3-8. Frymier, A. B. & Wanzer, M. B. (1999, April). Being funny in the classroom: Appropriate and inappropriate humor behaviors. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Communication Association convention, Charleston, WV. Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1990). The relationship of teachers' use of humor in the classroom to immediacy and student learning. Communication Education, 39, 46-62.


Humor - Page 73

Heald, G.R. & Girton, M.K. (1999, November). The impact of managementemployee relations and communication exchanges on nurses' job satisfaction, and nurses' near-term versus long-term job retention plans. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association convention, Chicago. Lamude, K. G., Daniels, T. D., & Smilowitz, M. (1995) Subordinates' satisfaction with communication and managers' relational messages. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81, 467-471. Levinson, W., Roter, D. L., Mullooly, J. P., Dull, V. T., & Frankel, R. M. (1997). Physician-patient communication. The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA, 277, 553-559. Martin, D. M. & MaeGayle, B. (1999). It isn't a matter of just being funny: Humor production by organizational leaders. Communication Research Reports, 16, 72-80. McCroskey, J. C , & Beatty, M. J. (1998). Communication apprehension, In J. C. McCroskey, J. Daly, M. Martin, & M. Beatty (Eds.), Communication and personality (pp. 215-231). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press. McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. (1989). Bipolar scales. In P. Emmert & L.L. Barker (Eds.) Measurement of communication behavior (154-167). White Plains, NY: Longman. McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. (1996). Fundamentals of human communication: An interpersonal perspective. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. McCroskey, J. C. & Richmond, V. P. (1998). Willingness to communicate. In J. C. McCroskey, J. Daly, M. Martin, & M. Beatty (Eds.), Communication and personality (119-131). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Merrill, D.W., & Reid, R.H. (1981). Personal styles and effective performance. Radner, PA: Chilton. Mottet, T. P. & Richmond, V. P. (1998). An inductive analysis of verbal immediacy: Alternative conceptualization of relational verbal approach/avoidance strategies. Communication Quarterly, 46, 25-40. Myers, S. A., & Avtgis, T. (1997). The impact of socio-communicative style and relational context on perceptions of nonverbal immediacy. Communication Research Reports, 14, 339-349. Napier, R. W., & Gershenfeld, M. K. (1999). Groups: Theory & practice. Houghton Mifflin: Boston, MA. Richmond, V. P. & McCroskey, J. C. (1990). Reliability and separation of factors on the assertiveness-responsiveness measure. Psychological Reports, 67, 449-450. Richmond, V. P. & McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Organizational communication for survival. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Richmond, V. P., & Martin, M. M. (1998). Sociocommunicative style and sociocommunicative orientation. In J. McCroskey, J. Daly, M. Martin, & M. Beatty (Eds.), Communication and personality (133-148). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Rizzo, B. J. (1997). A source and receiver-oriented view of humor in the workplace. Unpublished masters thesis. Canisius College, Buffalo, NY. Rizzo, B. J., Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (2000). Individual differences in managers' use of humor: Subordinate perceptions of



managers' humor orientation, effectiveness, and humor behaviors. Communication Research Reports, 16, 360-369. Robinson, V. (1991). Humor and the health care professions: The therapeutic use of humor in health care. (2nd Edition). Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated. Rosenberg, L. (1998). A qualitative investigation of the use of humor by emergency personnel as a strategy for coping with stress. Journal of Emergency Nursing, 17, 197-202. Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1995). The funny people: A source orientation to the communication of humor. Communication Quarterly, 43, 142-154. Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996a). Are funny people popular? An examination of humor orientation, loneliness, and social attraction. Communication Quarterly, 44, 42-52. Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996b, November). Combating stress in the health-care setting: Analysis of humor orientation and perceived coping effectiveness. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Association meeting, San Diego, CA. Wanzer, M., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1996c, November). "If we didn't use humor, we'd cry": Predispositional and situational influences on humorous coping communication in health care settings. Paper presented at the National Communication Association meeting, Chicago, IL. Wanzer, M., & Frymier, A. B. (1999). The relationship between student perceptions of instructor humor and student learning. Communication Education, 48, 4862. Zajdman, A. (1995). Humorous face-threatening acts: Humor as strategy. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 325-339. Zeigler, J. B. (1998). Use of humor in medical teaching. Medical Teacher, 20, 341-348.