3.4.3.4 Stakeholders as recipients of information regarding decisions

Breadshare was found to have a close relationship with its customers, suppliers and volunteers, who were encouraged to provide informally and on a regular basis any feedback regarding operational affairs through social media and email communication. However, the requested feedback did not concern the content of pending decisions to be taken by the governing bodies of Breadshare, i.e. the strategic decisions. Nevertheless, stakeholders were easily informed concerning the company’s products, new developments in business, and organised events from the company’s website and social media. Information directly communicated to the company’s employees.

Other than this, Breadshare developed a group of (inactive) members and registered stakeholders, who received regular newsletters electronically and who were annually invited to attend the general meeting. Breadshare’s newsletters were provided on the company’s website. The newsletter was developed to have an informative character that communicated the company’s news regarding decisions to CIC members and community stakeholders. Regular communication was also taken place with the employees concerning operational issues of daily business activities rather than issues that were pending to be decided.

Direct communication regarding decisions took place on an ad hoc basis only concerning specific activities. One interviewee mentioned that the communication between employees and decision-makers regarding daily operations was regular, direct (on a one-to-one basis) and informal. He mentioned that there were issues that remained unknown regarding decisions. He mentioned that:

Breadshare was also engaged in regular, informal and direct weekly communication with suppliers. Such communication regarded operational issues rather than issues pending to be decided by the board. The informal communication was mostly conducted by phone. The communication with the company’s customers, which was also informal, regular and direct, was conducted in a similar manner. One interviewee said that ‘we have a diverse range of community activities that we would do all the time and we do them regularly (…) We receive feedback from the customers’ (A interview, 19 February 2016). It was thereby understood that communication regarding operational issues between the directors of Breadshare and its members with community stakeholders and employees was part of the company’s regular business activities and it was regular, informal and direct. However, directors would not communicate the content of pending decisions. Additionally, not all Breadshare members communicated on a regular basis. As was previously mentioned, many of the Breadshare members were not involved in the company’s affairs due to inactive membership.

The communication between the company and its clients was regular. Feedback from the clients was collected in the form of surveys but also through regular telephone calls during which complaints or essential operational issues were discussed. The feedback was collected and documented on a weekly basis by the company’s board. The board’s decisions were communicated to the company’s clients. The managers and directors provided information to the employees and clients via phone calls or email.

The interviews revealed that there was regular communication among employees from different organisational levels regarding the board’s decisions. An interviewee confirmed that he receives extensive information by the decision-makers regarding all matters. He noted that ‘I think because at the moment I’m informed on everything so apart from the financial matters, which I don’t need to know about, I’m involved with all the clients, I’ve met all the clients’ (G interview, 18 February 2016). Another interviewee mentioned that ‘Yeah, I get informed about all the decisions before anybody I either get a phone call or I receive an email by the manager, by the director-manager, who’s the one who’s in charge’ (F interview, 18 February 2016).