1. From this week’s readings, I got the sense that Organizational Communication has gone through different phases of development to establish itself as a distinct discipline of study by way of situating communication as “a principal constitutive element in the process of organizing”. According to Mumby and Stohl (1996) one of the steps Org. Comm. has taken is moving back to the origins of the discipline in rhetoric and the realm of symbolic discourse. I was wondering how this move affects the effort by organizational communication scholars to form and maintain disciplinary identity.
2. Both the Mumby and Stohl and Taylor et al. articles talk about viewing organizations as sites for democratic participation and decision making. Mumby and Stohl also include Org. Comm scholars are not concerned with “how participatory practices can improve organizational efficiency, but rather with how a communication approach to workplace democracy can enhance our senses of community and identity (p.67). I can see the long-term gain that “sense of community and identity” brings to organizations. My question, however, is: how long does it take Org. Comm. scholarship to affect real life organizational practices? How does its stance of giving no or little attention to profit affect its impact on organizations and hence achieve acceptance out of the academic circle?
No comments:
Post a Comment