Zhou's question 9.9

These readings of this week are pretty much self-explanatory. Through the redefining of those metaphors by Putnam & Boys, we have the chance to see how these 8 metaphors depict theory development in the organizational communication. My questions are

1) What are the main schools in the field of organization communication in those recent years (e.g., positivism, post-positivism, and functionalism)? Do scholars who belong to different schools usually tend to have different choices of those metaphors when they look at the development of organizational communication?
2) What will be the main guide in an organizational communication research when researchers with different school stances and metaphors carry out one research together? Or to say, can a certain research be conducted by researchers having different school stances?

In the Taylor, Flanagin, Cheney and Seibold’s, they said that since the boundary of organizational communication is fluid, in the future study of it, it can be applied to the relationships both in the work and at home (p.125), and also they want to see the infusion of organizational communication in any area of social inquiry (p.127). My question in this is

1) Are scholars in organizational communication worried about the blurred frontier between organizational communication and other fields of study, not only within the communication study but also others like sociology, anthropology? If organizational communication develops as what they wished, how can scholars in the future label that the study is still built on the basis of organizational communication?