Q: I work at a company where the job titles seem to be clearly stated with no crossover. That is not, however, what takes place in reality. When there's an issue, a problem usually starts with a person not communicating the entire situation to the boss. Then others get involved who seemingly have no decision-making authority. They get copied on memos and the confusion grows as more and more people are notified in the process of trying to clear it up. It's absurd. I get emails with names of employees I don't know — people who are outside of the department who have nothing to do with the problem and should have nothing to do with the solution. By the time all the emails are flying back and forth, up to 20 people seem to be involved, and more than half are not informed, educated, or qualified to make decisions. How on earth does this get corrected?

A: It sounds like employees either don't know a chain of command exists or are ignoring your company's chain of command. Regardless of what individuals think of the military, the chain of command exists in all the branches for a good reason. It stops confusion before it can start.

There should be a director, a manager, a boss or a supervisor for every department in a company. The employees who work for that person should bring all problems, issues and concerns to that person alone. It is then up to that department head to involve those he or she thinks should be involved. That head, whether a vice president, director, manager, or supervisor, is the one who should direct all communications to those involved.

Communications get muddied when people who have no decision-making power get involved. Their roll is to report to their boss only. It is then up to that boss whether he or she wants to incorporate that employee's information into the communication. If a boss doesn't communicate clearly to his or her employees about the procedures to follow, the problem of massive miscommunications will grow. Another problem is that people treat memos like text messages — incomplete conversations where sound bites are traded between people.

The answer to the question as to how to stop or solve this is complicated. Print copies of all the emails you receive regarding one problem. Separate the critical messages from the ones with incomplete information, questions or irrelevant comments sent by those with no decision-making authority. Armed with evidence, you can now show the massive stack of emails to your boss and explain the time it took away from important work. It's awkward, if not inappropriate, to tell a boss that he or she should be the leader directing the communications. But that is the indirect message you're delivering by showing the many irrelevant emails. After presenting the proof, it's the boss' responsibility to state the chain of command to all his or her direct reports. If that person in authority doesn't understand or recognize the problem, your company may be destined to continue on its confusing path.

You, on the other hand, can file away the garbage messages and deal only with those worthwhile. Turning the incomplete or inappropriate communicators to clear, efficient ones may not be a task worth taking without your boss' approval.

Email your questions to workplace expert Lindsey Novak at [email protected] and follow her on Twitter @TheLindseyNovak. To find out more about Lindsey Novak and to read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Website at www.creators.com.