Damned If I Do and Damned If I Don’t: How Structurational Divergence Strips Actors of Agency and What to Do About It

• In Event: On the Various Ways of Studying Agency in Organizational Communication: A Roundtable Discussion

Abstract

Structurational divergence (SD) theory (Nicotera, Mahon, & Zhao, 2010) extends structuration theory (Giddens, 1984) by explicating recurrent conflict cycles stemming from the interpenetration of contradictory but equally compelling structures (demanding simultaneous mutually oppositional actions), which creates a spiral: Unresolved conflict→ immobilization→ erosion of development perpetuating the conflict→ spiraling back. SD renders communication patterns incomprehensible and untransformable, diminishing agency (Nicotera & Mahon, 2013). The (re)production of structures is the heart of structuration, agency the driving force. Human capacity for agency is enabled by knowledgeability of structure (Sewell, 1992). Knowing structure enables doing structure, but in SD such knowledge is hidden or contradictory. Previous theory does not address what happens to agency under the simultaneous impact of equally compelling contradictory structures. Without meaning coherence, agency is impotent. In this essay, I will show how conceptualizing SD as loss of efficacy gives important insight into the development of training interventions to mitigate SD.

Author

• Anne M Nicotera, George Mason University