1) Martin (1992) described how the Fragmentation perspective focuses on ambiguity as the essence of organizational culture, and Carlone and Taylor (1998) proposed a “working relationship between organizational communication and cultural studies that would allow each of the field’s strengths to complement the other’s limitations” (p. 362).
- In what ways does recognition of the permeable boundaries between organizations and cultures create a space for dialogue and collaboration across these and other disciplines?
- How does the Fragmentation (or dialogical) perspective help us to better understand the problematic of the "organization-society relationship" (Mumby, 2000)?
2) Taylor (2005) discussed five central claims of postmodern organizational communication scholars: (1) organizations are (inter-)texts, (2) organizational cultures and identities are fragmented and de-centered, (3) organizational knowledge, power, and discourse are inseparable and their relationships should be deconstructed, (4) organizational communication involves complex relations of power and resistance, and (5) knowledge of organizational communication is representational; communication should thus be reflexive.
I LOVED reading this chapter, and as I reflected on the questions posed by the author in its conclusion, I wondered about your answers to the following questions (taken directly from Taylor, 2005, p. 135):
- In what ways are you powerful in your organization?
- In what ways are you powerless?
- How could changes in your communication transform these conditions?
No comments:
Post a Comment