Constitutive Approaches to the Study of Organizational Paradoxes, Contradictions, and Dialectics

• In Event: Theorizing the Research on Organizational Paradoxes, Contradictions, and Dialectics

Abstract

Recent literature reviews on the communicative constitution of organizations show that this emerging field of inquiry comprises three main approaches: McPhee’s Four Flows Model, the Montréal School, and Luhmannian Systems Theory (see Brummans, Cooren, Robichaud, & Taylor, 2014; Cooren, Kuhn, Cornelissen, & Clark, 2011; Schoeneborn et al., 2014). But how do scholars affiliated with these schools of thought study organizational paradoxes, contradictions, and dialectics? Since the aforementioned reviews do not address this question, I will briefly compare and contrast different ways of conceptualizing and operationalizing organizational paradoxes, contradictions, and dialectics associated with each school in this presentation. In particular, I will focus on the structure-agency dialectic in McPhee’s Four Flows Model (see McPhee & Zaug, 2000); Cooren’s ventriloqual view of organizational tensions (see Cooren, Matte, Benoit-Barne, & Brummans, 2013); and Schoeneborn’s idea that organizational constitution is inherently paradoxical (see Schoeneborn, 2011).

References:
Brummans, B. H. J. M., Cooren, F., Robichaud, D., & Taylor, J. R. (2014). Approaches to the communicative constitution of organizations. In L. L. Putnam & D. K. Mumby (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (3rd ed., pp. 173-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Cooren, F., Kuhn, T., Cornelissen, J. P., & Clark, T. (2011). Communication, organizing and organization: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 32(9), 1149-1170. doi: 10.1177/0170840611410836

Cooren, F., Matte, F., Benoit-Barne, C., & Brummans, B. H. J. M. (2013). Communication as ventriloquism: A grounded-in-action approach to the study of organizational tensions. Communication Monographs, 80(3), 255-277. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2013.788255

McPhee, R. D., & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation. Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(1/2). http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/010/1/01017.html

Schoeneborn, D. (2011). Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(4), 663-689. doi: 10.1177/0893318911405622

Schoeneborn, D., Blaschke, S., Cooren, F., McPhee, R. D., Seidl, D., & Taylor, J. R. (2014). The three schools of CCO thinking interactive dialogue and systematic comparison. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), 285-316. doi: 10.1177/0893318914527000

Author

• Boris H. J. M. Brummans, University of Montreal