Global Journal of Management and Business Research, A: Administration and Management, Volume 23 Issue 1

situation in terms of profitability, financial balance, assets and sustainability and towards third parties who have nothing to do with these arguments. Consider, for example, the case where a group of undergraduates want to carry out field research and need information about the company anonymously. The way the company deals with these students is a form of communication that denotes the presence or absence of politeness. If in the face of an email asking for help, which may take the form of a small questionnaire, the company does not respond and does not answer the questionnaire; the communication can not be described as polite. Communication towards potential employees who send their CVs as a job applications is not courteous. Naturally, after the undersigned had several conversations with the managers and high and middle management, the companies pointed out that if the company responded to all the emails it received, it would no longer have time to manage the business activity for which it was established. In response to this, she pointed out that while it is true what the managers pointed out, it is also true that communication is implemented in how it was presented by the companies, i.e. in response to a specific request. It can be interpreted as a non-communication, which we discussed in the previous pages, implying an exact answer that can be summarised as follows: I am not answering because I do not want to have contact with you. Or it can simply be a rude and unkind attitude towards a person whose response from the company can affect a job that is being carried out (a student carrying out field research) or the very life of the person (when for example, the email is a job application from a person in serious difficulty). I think everyone agrees that companies are not non-profit organisations that must help the community. Businesses' tasks are entirely different: generating income and ensuring fair compensation for workers. This can do by managing the relationship with the community and third parties in a kind manner. Honestly, I do not believe that when an email arrives asking for help from a student to fill out a questionnaire, there is too much time spent on it to be able to say that there is no possibility of filling it out. If this were the case, an email stating that, unfortunately, we cannot help you would be sufficient. I think that an email of this kind, even in the case of job applications, takes 30 seconds of an employee's time, which implies a sort of peace of mind for those who have to receive a reply. It is better to receive a negative response than no reply at all. Kindness is also expressed in these small acts. Communication, therefore, not written but verbal, or written but not in official documents such as the balance sheet sustainability report or other documents, must thus be characterised by kindness only. In this way alone, overall corporate communication will be able to be evaluated positively by the community and third parties outside the company. Various research carried out in the field by the undersigned has shown that companies often very clearly underestimate the concept of politeness in verbal or written communication, but not in the financial statements and accompanying documents, about the overall company situation. Suppose the company is large, quoted on the stock exchange, with thousands of employees. In that case, it must be admitted that even the absence of small acts of kindness towards, for example, those who write and do not receive a reply, eh do not have such an influence on the company's situation because the strength and power of the multinational company overwhelm the small acts that can be performed by those who feel they are being mistreated. The situation changes drastically if the company is small or medium-sized, especially if it lives off the economy derived from the zero-mile community. In these small enterprises, creating communicative conditions towards the society and third parties outside the emphasise that this is especially the case for companies whose economy is primarily aimed at the community living within a 100 km radius of the company itself. In this case, the lack of an act of kindness, such as a reply to an email, can have unexpected consequences on the company's situation. The perceived unfairness of those who expect a response and receive no communication from the company is turned into a topic of conversation between people who live within 100 km of the company and who, directly or indirectly, enable the company to survive or develop. Suppose the company is small but operates in a larger territory. In that case, it might seem that politeness in verbal or written communication but not concerning the balance sheet itself is less critical. this is not the case, especially since the abnormal development of social media. A rude act towards someone who addresses the company can become the subject of a debate involving thousands of people, even distant from each other, as they are close through social media. Politeness, therefore, in verbal communication when there is a direct relationship with a person addressing the company or in written communication that does not concern the balance sheet, is not only desirable for obvious reasons but is an indispensable element for the company to survive or, hopefully, live and develop properly. At this point, one may ask oneself why in the title of this paragraph, one wondered whether, at times, it is not necessary to communicate "in capital letters". In social media and written communications that can send to any individual or employee in a company, the use of capital letters has a meaning that everyone now recognises: using capital letters means shouting out the information one intends to disseminate. The question 38 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( ) A © 2023 Global Journals Communicating through Non-Communication or Over-Communication