Abstract—Communication is a vehicle and central element in an organization as it and serves many functions in organization. What people in the organization say has a meaningful impact on the total system of the organization. Encouraging subordinates to communicate and participate in decision-making not only can promote commitment among the subordinates, but also increase job satisfaction among people who interact and work interdependently. Based on this belief, this quantitative study was to systematically develop a reliable and valid construct that can facilitate and enhance the different Management Communication Style (MCS) in the Malaysian context. Four dimensions of MCS namely Tell, Sell, Consult and Join were identified through an extensive literature review by following Hinkin’s suggestions for construct development. A survey questionnaire was administered to 388 executives working directly under Human Resource Managers in the state-owned organization known as Government Link Companies (GLCs). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was initially conducted on 20 items to explore the structure underlying the set of questions designed. The results of CFA confirmed that the measurement scale used in this study satisfactorily met the standard of validity and reliability analyses. The MCS construct provides a multi-dimensional assessment tool to diagnose and guide organizational communication. Index Terms—Management communication style, leadership style, communication, decision-making. I. INTRODUCTION MCS of a supervisor within an organization is a function of both the management style imposed on the supervisor by the organization (or chosen by the supervisor within the parameters permitted by the organization) and the communication style of the individual supervisor which that individual brings to the organizational context [1]. The MCS of managers in an organization has evidenced to influence the level of employees’ satisfaction and circumvent conflict at the workplace. MCS is directly and meaningfully linked to employees’ satisfaction [2]. Managers who exercise more employee centered and interactive MCS would increase satisfaction among employees and vice versa [2]. According to Richmond and McCroskey [3], employees’ satisfaction could be directly varied by altering the management style of the organization or selection of a supervisor with a differing communication style. Numorous researchers that have examined elements in the working environment agreed that, communication between supervisors and subordinates and inviting them to participate in decision-making process has Manuscript received April 5, 2013; revised June 5, 2013. The authors are with the Faculty of Business Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Bandar Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia (e-mail: rozilah@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my, Mokhtar413@salam.uitm.edu.my, norlidak@salam.uitm.edu.my). been found to increase employees’ satisfaction [4]. Central to the MCS development, the dimensions and the operationalization of MCS was constructed by Richmond and McCroskey [5]. The instrument was originated from the work of Tannenbaum and Schmidt [6] and the research of Sadler [7], where Tannenbaum and Schmidt [6] postulate a continuum of leadership orientations within an organization from the extreme “boss centered” to the extreme “subordinated centered.” It describes that as a leaser moves from the first extreme to the latter, the use of authority by the manager decreases and the freedom for subordinate increases. Tannenbaum and Schmidt [6] and Sadler [7] also provide a continuum for leadership and involvement that includes an increasing role for employees and a decreasing role for supervisors in the decision process. Although the original conceptualization by the earliest theorists [6], [7] envisioned seven stem along the continuum, Richmond and McCroskey [5] had removed apparently overlapping steps of the continuum and formed a four-step continuum labeled: Tell, Sell, Consul, and Join. The four continuum of MCS includes Tell (manager makes decisions (or receive them from top level management) and announces them to subordinates). Sell: (manager receives decision from the above and is given a little bit of authority to make decisions). Consult: (manager invites subordinates input into a decision while retaining authority to make the final decision herself). Join: (manager usually does not make decision rather the authority to make the decisions is delegated to the subordinates, either in cooperation with the manager or in her or his absence [5]. An examination of these approaches explicitly assumed that relationship between leadership or management style and communication style. Obviously, if all decisions are made by the top management, managers can only decide to use a Tell and Style styles which restrict the communication styles available for use. Conversely if manages are given a great deal of autonomy, suggesting a consult or joint style, they have great flexibility in selecting MCS for interface with employees [4]. Even though, Richmond and McCroskey [5] have systematically developed a valid and reliable 19-point continuum ranging from Tell (1-10), through Sell (11-16), through Consult (17-22), and to Join (23-28), the items were not highlighted. The subjects were simply asked to circle the MCS under which they are working. The scale allowed subjects to record position on the continuum that represent a mixture of MCS [5]. Despite a number of theoretical models describing the degrees of “freedom” that managers grant employees during decision-making and the “communication style” used in decision making, there is still a lack of a clear picture of the forces biasing managers’ use of MCS in Malaysia [8]. Though communication scholars had published articles presenting various views about the nature and the Validity and Reliability of the Management Communication Style Scale Abdul Aziz Rozilah, Mokhtar Muhammad, and Norlida Kamaluddin 390 390 International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 3, No. 4, July 2013 DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2013.V3.268