Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Methodological and Epistemological Perspectives
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Languages and Linguistics
Discourse Analysis

The SAGE handbook of organizational discourse

Profile image of Paul LuffPaul Luff

2004

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608122.N1
visibility

…

description

36 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

The Handbook is divided into four sections. Part I, Domains of Discourse, focuses on specific discursive domains or 'forms' of organizational discourse. Part II, Methods and Perspectives, plots the contrasting methodological approaches and epistemological views that may be discerned among those studying organizational discourse. Part III, Discourses and Organizing, comprises chapters that draw on a variety of discursive perspectives and approaches in order to show how discursive activity produces and mediates different organizational phenomena. Part IV, the final section of the Handbook, is titled Reflections. It comprises three pieces in which eminent contributors consider the value of organizational discourse to the broader field of organizational studies, reflect on chapters presented in the Handbook and suggest future avenues of research. The remainder of this chapter provides an introductory overview of the field of organizational discourse by using the structure and content of the Handbook to explore what organizational discourse comprises. We then discuss key areas of debate and discussion within the field, and identify some of the challenges it faces. We conclude by highlighting the significance of organizational discourse in terms of its contribution to our understanding of organization. However, we also note that while there has been a recent growth in the number of studies of organizational discourse, it remains a relatively underutilized avenue of enquiry whose contributions have not been fully realized. We assert that there is considerable further scope for its application, and advocate more discourse-focused research on the basis of the potentially considerable insights that it offers. Exploring Organizational Discourse The term 'organizational discourse' refers to the structured collections of texts embodied in the practices of talking and writing (as well as a wide variety of visual representations and cultural artefacts) that bring organizationally related objects into being as these texts are produced, disseminated and consumed (Grant et al., 1998b; Parker, 1992; Phillips & Hardy, 2002). Consequently, texts can be considered to be a manifestation of discourse and the discursive 'unit' (Chalaby, 1996) on which the organizational discourse researcher focuses. They signify collections of interactions, media of communication (i.e., oral, print, electronic), or assemblages of oral and written forms (Putnam & Cooren, 2004). Such a definition demonstrates that those studying organizational discourse are often interested in the social constructionist (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Searle, 1995) effects of language in organizational settings (Phillips & Hardy, 2002). As Mumby and Clair point out: Organizations exist only in so far as their members create them through discourse. This is not to claim that organizations are 'nothing but' discourse, but rather that discourse is the principle means by which organization members create a coherent social reality that frames their sense of who they are. (1997, p. 181) In line with Mumby and Clair's observation, this Handbook shows how the everyday attitudes and behaviour of an organization's members, along with their perceptions of what they believe to be reality, are shaped and influenced by the discursive practices in which they engage and to which they are exposed or subjected. In short, the Handbook highlights the fact that discursive practices in organizations 'do not just describe things; they do things' (Potter & Wetherell, 1987, p. 6). In studying how discourse shapes organizing processes, researchers engage with discourse

Related papers

Discourse analysis as intervention: a case of organizational changing
Pascal Dey

In lieu of an abstract, here a brief extract from the introduction: In recent years, researchers in management and organization studies have devoted considerable attention to discursive research, so it is hardly controversial to claim that discourse analysis is one of the field’s most popular research methodologies. At the risk of simplifying, a key assumption underlying much of the available literature is that discourse analysis is primarily an excellent tool for producing knowledge (Heracleous, 2006) and more generally an analytic mentality (Phillips and Hardy, 2002). This interpretation is noteworthy as it consigns discourse analysis to its epistemological function. Although we agree that discourse analysis is inextricably connected to questions of epistemology (knowledge), in this chapter we seek to transcend this position by demonstrating that it can also be used productively as a means of intervention. Conflating the epistemological and interventionist trajectories of discourse analysis, we build on prior work that conceives of ‘method’ and ‘research’ quite generally as a means for enacting and changing reality instead of ‘only’ representing or interpreting it (Law, 2004; Steyaert, 2011). Following this vein of thinking, we tenta- tively outline the interventionist potential of discourse analysis against the backdrop of organizational changing. Thereby, drawing on Tsoukas (2005), we define organizational changing as the process through which multiple discursive practices unfold, allowing members of organizations to give meaning to the organizational reality of which they are part. Using this approach, and analysing a consultancy project in a large German voluntary organization, we reveal how discourse analysis can be used to intervene in discursive practices that are characterized by tensions and struggle. To this end, we pinpoint how the results from one such analysis were used to break up a contracted conflict via two interrelated steps. First, discursive spaces were created that offered members of the organization an opportunity to vent their frustration and to create awareness of the antagonistic discursive practices that triggered the tensions and conflict. Second, generative dialogue allowed them to foster more affirmative re-interpretations of organizational changing.

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis Organizational Analysis
Robert Chia

Organization, 2000

The question of discourse, and the manner in which it shapes our epistemology and understanding of organization, are central to an expanded realm of organizational analysis. It is one which recognizes that the modern world we live in and the social artefacts we rely upon to successfully negotiate our way through life, are always already institutionalized effects of primary organizational impulses. Social objects and phenomena such as 'the organization', 'the economy', 'the market' or even 'stakeholders' or 'the weather', do not have a straightforward and unproblematic existence independent of our discursively-shaped understandings. Instead, they have to be forcibly carved out of the undifferentiated flux of raw experience and conceptually fixed and labelled so that they can become the common currency for communicational exchanges. Modern social reality, with its all-too-familiar features, has to be continually constructed and sustained through such aggregative discursive acts of reality-construction. The idea that reality, as we know it, is socially constructed, has become an accepted truth. What is less commonly understood is how this reality gets constructed in the first place and what sustains it. For the philosopher William James, our social reality is always already an abstraction. Our lifeworld is an undifferentiated flux of fleeting sense-impressions and it is out of this brute aboriginal flux of lived experience that attention carves out and conception names:. .. in the sky 'constellations', on earth 'beach', 'sea', 'cliff', 'bushes', 'grass'. Out of time we cut 'days' and 'nights', 'summers' and 'winters'. We say what each part of the sensible continuum is, and all these abstract whats are concepts. (James, 1948: 50, emphasis original) It is through this process of differentiating, fixing, naming, labelling, classifying and relating-all intrinsic processes of discursive organization-that social reality is systematically constructed. Discourse, as multitudinal and heterogeneous forms of material inscriptions or verbal utterances occurring in space-time, is what aggregatively produces a particular version of social reality to the exclusion of

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse perspectives on competence in organizations
Tom Van Hout, Katja Pelsmaekers
View PDFchevron_right
The debate about organizational discourse and communication: a rejoinder
Guowei Jian

Discourse & Communication, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
Organizational discourse and communication: the progeny of Proteus
Gail Fairhurst

Discourse & Communication, 2008

As VanDijk(2007) proposed in the nrst issue of Discourse and Communication, the main purpose of this journal is to bridgethe two cross-disciplinesof communication and discourse studies. Giventhis goal, this article sought to help clear the ground for such interdisciplinary developmentby investigating how organizational researchers use the terms 'discourse' and 'communication' and cast discourse-communication relationships. Byreviewing 112 organizational discourse studies from major journals in communication, organizational studies, and interdisciplinary journals published between 1981 and 2006, this study identifieddiverse conceptualizations of these basic concepts. The findings help dispelsome of the misunderstandings that scholars from one research fieldmay possess toward the other and sort through some, if not all. the confusions regarding the terms 'discourse', 'communication', and their relationships.

View PDFchevron_right
Organizations as Discursive Constructions
Gail Fairhurst

Communication Theory, 2004

In this article we examine the relationship between discourse and organization. It is a relationship of growing interest in the communication literature as organizations are increasingly framed as discursive constructions. However, such framing appears subject to at least 3 interpretations. First, an organization may be cast as an already formed object with features and outcomes reflected in discourse. Second, organizations may be seen in a perpetual state of becoming through the ways that the properties of discourse shape organizing. Finally, organizations may be grounded in action, anchored in social practices and discursive forms. Moreover, each of these 3 orientations provides a different cast to the terms discourse and Discourses. We use these interpretations and different notions about discourse to explore the research traditions on organizational language and social interaction. We contend that all 3 orientations are necessary and should operate simultaneously to reveal a complex view of the organization-discourse relationship.

View PDFchevron_right
Guest editorial: discourse and organizational change
G. Michelson, David Grant, Cliff Oswick

Journal of Organizational Change Management, 2005

Purpose – This paper aims to examine the contribution that discourse analysis can make to understanding organizational change. Design/methodology/approach – It identifies five key contributions. Discourse analytic approaches: reveal the important role of discourse in the social construction of organizational change; demonstrate how the meaning attached to organizational change initiatives comes about as a result of a discursive process of

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis as Intervention: The Case of Organizational Changing
Doerte Resch
View PDFchevron_right
What's cooking in organizational discourse studies? A response to Alvesson and Karreman
Dennis Mumby

Human Relations, 2011

While 'Varieties of Discourse' essay was an important and oft-cited marker in the field of organizational discourse studies, I argue in this response that their rather gloomy, even curmudgeonly, updated reading of the field is not only misplaced but also rooted in their own reductionist conception of discourse -a charge that they themselves level against contemporary organizational discourse research. As a communication scholar who makes his interdisciplinary home in the area of organizational communication/organization studies, I argue that much of Alvesson and Kärreman's critique has its origin in a rather anemic, even wrongheaded, reading of the 'linguistic turn' -a reading that limits the generative and analytic possibilities of postlinguistic turn organizational discourse studies.

View PDFchevron_right
Organizational Discourse and New Organization Development Practices
David Grant

British Journal of Management, 2008

A new ensemble of organization development (OD) practices have emerged that are based more on constructionist, post modern and new sciences premises than the assumptions of the early founders. These include practices associated with appreciative inquiry, large group interventions, changing mindsets and consciousness, addressing diversity and multicultural realities, and advancing new and different models of change. We propose that the emerging field of organizational discourse offers sympathetic concepts and research that could add additional insights and theoretical rigour to the New OD. In particular, studies of organizational discourse based upon social constructionist and critical perspectives offer compelling ideas and practices associated with the establishment of change concepts, the role of power and context in relation to organizational change, and specific discursive interventions designed to foster organizational change.

View PDFchevron_right

References (249)

  1. Adam, B. (1998) Timescapes of modernity. London: Routledge.
  2. Alvesson, M. (1993) The play of metaphors. In J. Hassard & M. Parker (eds) Postmodernism and organization (pp. 114-31. London: Sage.
  3. Alvesson, M. The meaning and meaninglessness of postmodernism: Some ironic remarks Organization Studies 16 (6) 1995 1047-75 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600606
  4. Alvesson, M. (1996) Communication, power and organization. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. (1996) Critical theory and postmodernism approaches to organizational studies. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. Nord (eds), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 78-99. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608030.
  5. Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. (2000) Doing critical management research. London: Sage.
  6. Alvesson, M. Klrreman, D. Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 (2) 2000a 136-58 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886300362002
  7. Alvesson, M. Klrreman, D. Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis Human Relations 53 (9) 2000b 1125-49 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726700539002
  8. Austin, J. (1962) How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Bakeman, R. & Gottman, J.M. (1986) Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Bakhtin, M.M. (1981) The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M.M. Bakhtin. Edited by C. Emerson & M. Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  11. Bakhtin, M.M. (1986) Speech genres and other late essays. Edited and trans. by C. Emerson & M. Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
  12. Barrett, F.J. Cooperrider, D.L. Generative metaphor intervention: A new behavioral approach for working with systems divided by conflict and caught in defensive perception Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 26 (2) 1990 219-39 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886390262011
  13. Barry, D. Elmes, M. Strategy retold: toward a narrative view of strategic discourse Academy of Management Review 22 (2) 1997 429-52
  14. Barton, L. (1993) Crisis in organizations: Managing and communicating in the heat of chaos. Cincinnati, OH: College Divisions South-Western Publishing.
  15. Beech, N. Narrative styles of managers and workers: A tale of star-crossed lovers Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 (2) 2000 210-28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886300362006 SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004
  16. Benoit, W.L. Brinson, S.L. AT&T: 'Apologies are not enough'. Communication Quarterly 42 1994 75-88 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463379409369915
  17. Berger, P . & Luckmann, T . (1967) The social construction of reality. London: Penguin.
  18. Blum-Kulka, S. (1997) Discourse pragmatics. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction: Discourse studies vol. 2-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 38-63. London: Sage.
  19. Boden, D. (1994) The business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  20. Bohm, D. (1996) On dialogue. Edited by Lee Nichol. New York: Routledge.
  21. Boje, D.M. The storytelling organization: A study of performance in an office supply firm Administrative Science Quarterly 36 1991 106-26 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393432
  22. Boje, D.M. Stories of the storytelling organization: A postmodern analysis of Disney as Tamara-Land Academy of Management Journal 38 (4) 1995 997-1035 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256618
  23. Boje, D.M. (2001) Narrative methods for organizational and communications research. London: Sage.
  24. Boje, D.M., Ford, J. & Oswick, C. (2004) Language and organization: The doing of discourse. Academy of Management Review, forthcoming.
  25. Bourdieu, P . (1991) Language and symbolic power. Trans. G. Raymond & M. Adamson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  26. Brink, T.L. Metaphor as data in the study of organizations Journal of Management Inquiry 2 1993 366-71 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/105649269324008
  27. Broussine, M. & Vince, R. (1996) Working with metaphor towards organizational change. In C. Oswick & D. Grant (eds), Organization development: Metaphorical explorations (pp. 557-72. London: Pitman.
  28. Brown, A. Making sense of inquiry sensemaking Journal of Management Studies 37 (1) 2000 45-75
  29. Brown, A. Authoritative sensemaking in a public inquiry report Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 95-112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038182
  30. Brown, A.D. Humphreys, M. Epic and tragic tales: Making sense of change Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 39 (2) 2003 121-44 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886303255557
  31. Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983) Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Brown, M.H. That reminds me of a story: Speech action in organizational socialization Western Journal of Speech Communication 49 1985 27-42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570318509374179
  33. Brown, M.H. (1990) Defining stories in organizations: Characteristics and function. In S. Deetz (ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 13, pp. 162-90). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  34. Brown, R. (1970) Psycholinguistics: Selected papers. New York: Free Press.
  35. Buber, M. (1958) I and thou (2nd edition). Trans. R.G. Smith. New York: Scribner. (Original work published 1923.)
  36. Burrell, G. (1996) Normal science, paradigms, metaphors, discourses and genealogies of analysis. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. Nord (eds), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 642- 58. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608030.
  37. Burrell, G. (1997) Pandemonium: Towards a retro organization theory. London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221846
  38. Calzs, M. Smircich, L. Past postmodernism? Reflections and tentative directions Academy of Management Review 24 (4) 1999 649-71
  39. Campbell, K.S. Follender, S.I. Shane, G. Preferred strategies for responding to hostile questions in environmental public meetings Management Communication Quarterly 1 1 1998 401-21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318998113003
  40. Carroll, J.S. & Payne, J.W. (1991) An information processing approach to two-party negotiations. In J.S. Carroll & J.W. Payne (eds), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004 3-34. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  41. Chalaby, J.K. Beyond the prison-house of language: Discourse as a sociological concept British Journal of Sociology 47 (4) 1996 684-98 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/591080
  42. Chia, R. (1996) Organizational analysis as deconstructive practice. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
  43. Chia, R. (ed.) (1998) Organized worlds: Exploring the expanded realm of technology, organization and modernity. London: Routledge.
  44. Chia, R. Discourse analysis as organizational analysis Organization 7 (3) 2000 513-18 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073009
  45. Chouliaraki, L. & Fairclough, N. (1999) Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  46. Cissna, K.N. Anderson, R. Theorizing about dialogic moments: The Buber-Rogers position and postmodern themes Communication Theory 8 (1) 1998 63-104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00211.x
  47. Clark, T . & Salaman, G. (1996a) The use of metaphor in the client-consultant relationship: A study of management consultants. In C. Oswick & D. Grant (eds), Organizational development: Metaphorical explorations (pp. 118-40. London: Pitman.
  48. Clark, T . & Salaman, G. (1996b) Telling tales: Management consultancy as the art of storytelling. In D. Grant & C. Oswick (eds), Metaphor and organizations (pp. 166-84. London: Sage. Clegg, S. (1975) Power, rule and domination. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Clegg, S.R. (1989) Frameworks of power. London: Sage.
  49. Collins, R. On the microfoundations of macrosociology American Journal of Sociology 86 (5) 1981 984-1013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/227351
  50. Collinson, D.L. 'Engineering humour': Masculinity, joking and conflict in shopfloor relations Organization Studies 9 (2) 1988 181-99 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084068800900203
  51. Collinson, D.L. (1994) Strategies of resistance: Power, knowledge and subjectivity in the workplace. In J. Jermier, W. Nord & D. Knights (eds), Resistance and power in organizations (pp. 142-60. London: Routledge.
  52. Coombs, W.T. Choosing the right words: The development of guidelines for the selection of the 'appropriate' crisis-response strategies Management Communication Quarterly 8 1995 447-76 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318995008004003
  53. Cooper, R. (1993) Formal organization as representation: Remote control, displacement and abbreviation. In M. Reed & M. Hughes (eds), Rethinking organization: New directions in organization theory and analysis (pp. 254-72. London: Sage.
  54. Cooren, F . Actes de langage et sämionarrativitä: une analyse semiotique des indirections Semiotica 116 1997 339-73
  55. Cooren, F . Applying sociosemiotics to organizational communication: A new approach Management Communication Quarterly 13 (2) 1999 294-304 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0893318999132006
  56. Cooren, F . (2001) The organizing property of communication. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  57. Cooren, F . Taylor, J.R. Organization as an effect of mediation: Redefining the link between organization and communication Communication Theory 7 1997 219-60 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1997.tb00151.x
  58. Cooren, F . Taylor, J.R. The procedural and rhetorical modes of the organizing dimension of communication: Discursive analysis of a parliamentary commission Communication Review 3 (1-2) 1998 65-101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10714429909368574
  59. Crouch, A. Basch, J. The structure of strategic thinking: A lexical content analysis Journal of Applied Management Studies 6 (1) 1997 13-38
  60. Currie, G. Brown, A.D. A narratological approach to understanding processes of organizing in SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004 a U K h o s p i t a l Human Relations 56 (5) 2003 563-86 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726703056005003
  61. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1992) Exploring complex organizations: A cultural perspective. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  62. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1996) Autobiographical acts and organizational identities. In S. Linstead, R. Grafton-Small & P . Jeffcutt (eds), Understanding management (pp. 127-49. London: Sage.
  63. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1997) Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  64. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1998) A narrative approach to organization studies. Newbury Park, CA : Sage.
  65. Deetz, S. (1992) Democracy in an age of corporate colonization. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  66. Deetz, S. (1995) Transforming communication, transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
  67. Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) (2000) Handbook of qualitative research (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  68. Derrida, J. (1976) Of grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  69. Donnellon, A. (1994) Team work: Linguistic models of negotiating differences. In R.J. Lewicki, B.H. Sheppard & R. Bies (eds), Negotiations in organizations (Vol. 4, pp. 71-123). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  70. Drew, P . & Heritage, J. (1992) Analysing talk at work: An introduction. In P . Drew & J. Heritage (eds), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3-65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  71. Drew, P . & Sorjonen, M. (1997) Institutional dialogue. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Discourse studies Vol. 1-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 92-118. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221884.
  72. Du Gay, P . Salaman, G. The cult[ure] of the customer Journal of Management Studies 29 (5) 1992 615-34 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1992.tb00681.x
  73. Dunford, R. Jones, D. Narrative and strategic change Human Relations 53 (9) 2000 1207-26 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726700539005
  74. Dunford, R. & Palmer, I. (1996) Metaphors in popular management discourse: The case of corporate restructuring. In D. Grant & C. Oswick (eds), Metaphor and organization (pp. 95- 109. London: Sage.
  75. Eisenberg, E.M. & Goodall, H.L. (1993) Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. New York: St Martin's Press.
  76. Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  77. Fairclough, N. (1995) Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Language in Social Life Series. London: Longman.
  78. Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (1997) Critical discourse analysis. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction: Discourse studies vol. 2-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 258-84. London: Sage.
  79. Feldman, S.P. Stories as cultural creativity: On the relation between symbolism and politics in organizational change Human Relations 43 (9) 1990 809-28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679004300901
  80. Fisher, S. & Todd, D.D. (1983) The social organization of doctor-patient communication. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
  81. Ford, J. Ford, L. The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations Academy of Management Review 20 (3) 1995 541-70
  82. Forrester, M.A. (1996) Psychology of language: A critical introduction. London: Sage.
  83. Foucault, M. (1965) Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. New SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004 York: Vintage.
  84. Foucault, M. (1973) The birth of the clinic: An archeology of medical perception. New York: Vintage. Foucault, M. (1974) The archeology of knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
  85. Foucault, M. Governmentality I&C 6 1976 5-21
  86. Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  87. Foucault, M. (1978) The history of sexuality (Vol. I). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  88. Foucault, M. (1986) The care of the self: The history of sexuality (Vol. III). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  89. Fowler, R. & Kress, G. (1979) Rules and regulations. In R. Fowler, B. Hodge, G. Kress & T . Trew, Language and Control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  90. Gabriel, Y . Turning facts into stories and stories into facts Human Relations 44 (8) 1991 857- 75 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679104400806
  91. Gabriel, Y . The unmanaged organization: Stories, fantasies, subjectivity Organization Studies 16 (3) 1995 477-501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600305
  92. Gabriel, Y . (1997) The use of stories in organizational research. In D. Symon & N. Cassell (eds), Qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 60-74. London: Sage.
  93. Gabriel, Y . (1998) Same old story or changing stories? Folkloric, modern and post modern mutations. In D. Grant, T . Keenoy & C. Oswick (eds), Discourse and organization (pp. 84-103. London: Sage.
  94. Gergen, K.J. (1992) Organization theory in the postmodern era. In M. Reed & M. Hughes (eds), Rethinking organization: New directions in organization theory and analysis (pp. 62-81. London: Sage.
  95. Gergen, K.J. (1994) Realities and representations: Soundings in social construction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  96. Gergen, K.J. (1999) An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.
  97. Gergen, K.J. McNamee, S. Barrett, F . Toward transformative dialogue International Journal of Public Administration 24 2001 697-707
  98. Gibbs, R.W.Jr. (1993) Process and products in making sense of tropes. In A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd edition, pp. 252-76). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  99. Giddens, A. (1979) Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  100. Giddens, A. (1984) The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  101. Gioia, D.A. (1986) The state of the art in organizational social cognition. In H.P. Sims, Jr., & D.A. Gioia (eds), The thinking organization (pp. 336-56. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  102. Gioia, D.A. Sims, H.P. Jr. Perceptions of managerial power as a consequence of managerial behavior and reputation Journal of Management 9 1983 7-26 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920638300900103
  103. Gioia, D.A. Donnellon, A. Sims, H.P. Jr. Communication and cognition in appraisal: A tale of two paradigms Organization Studies 10 1989 503-30 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084068901000403
  104. Goffman, E. (1963) Behaviour in public places. New York: Free Press.
  105. Graesser, A., Gernsbacher, M. & Goldman, S. (1997) Cognition. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Discourse studies vol. 1-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 292-319. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221884.
  106. Grant, D. HRM, rhetoric and the psychological contract: A case of 'easier said than done'. International Journal of Human Resource Management 10 (2) 1999 327-50 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095851999340585
  107. Grant, D. Hardy, C. Struggles with organizational discourse Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 5-14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038173
  108. Grant, D. & Oswick, C. (1996a) Getting the measure of metaphor. In D. Grant & C. Oswick SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004 (eds), Metaphor and organizations (pp. 1-20. London: Sage.
  109. Grant, D. & Oswick, C. (eds) (1996b) Metaphor and organizations. London: Sage.
  110. Grant, D., Keenoy, T . & Oswick, C. (eds) (1998a) Discourse and organization. London: Sage.
  111. Grant, D., Keenoy, T . & Oswick, C. (1998b) Of diversity, dichotomy and multidisciplinarity. In D. Grant, T . Keenoy & C. Oswick (eds), Discourse and organization (pp. 1-14). London: Sage.
  112. Grant, D. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Organizational discourse: Key contributions and challenges International Studies of Management and Organization 31 (3) 2001 5-24
  113. Greene, J. (1986) Language and understanding: A cognitive approach. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
  114. Grice, H.P. Meaning Philosophical Review 67 1957 44-58
  115. Grice, H.P. (1971) Logic and conversation. In D. Steinberg & L. Jacobovits (eds), Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology (pp. 32-56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  116. Groleau, C. Cooren, F . A sociosemiotic approach to computerization: Bridging the gap between ethnographers and system analysts Communication Review 3 (1-2) 1998 125-64 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10714429909368576
  117. Hacking, I. (2000) The social construction of what? Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
  118. Halliday, M. (1978) Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Baltimore, MD: Edward Arnold.
  119. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold. Hamilton, P.M. Rhetorical discourse of local pay Organization 4 1997 229-54 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050849742005
  120. Hansen, C.D. Kahnweiler, W. Storytelling: An instrument for understanding the dynamics of corporate relationships Human Relations 46 (12) 1993 1391-409 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679304601202
  121. Hardy, C. Researching organizational discourse International Studies of Management and Organization 31 (3) 2001 25-47
  122. Hardy, C., Lawrence, T.B. & Phillips, N. (1998) Talk and action: Conversations and narrative in interorganizational collaboration. In D. Grant, T . Keenoy & C. Oswick (eds), Discourse and Organization (pp. 65-83. London: Sage.
  123. Hardy, C. Lawrence, T . & Grant, D. (2003) Discourse and collaboration: The role of conversations and collective identity. University of Melbourne, working paper.
  124. Hardy, C. Grant, D. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Phillips, N. Organizational discourse Special issue of Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004
  125. Hassard, J. Postmodern organizational analysis: Toward a conceptual framework Journal of Management Studies 31 (3) 1994 303-24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1994.tb00620.x Hawes, L.C. The dialogics of conversation: Power, control, and vulnerability Communication Theory 9 1999 229-64 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00170.x-->
  126. Heath, C. (1986) Body movement and speech in medical interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628221
  127. Hein, N. Wodak, R. Medical interviews in internal medicine Text 7 1987 37-66
  128. Helmer, J. Storytelling in the creation and maintenance of organizational tension and stratification Southern Communication Journal 59 1993 33-44
  129. Heracleous, L. Barrett, M. Organizational change as discourse: Communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation Academy of Management Journal 44 2001 755-78 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069414
  130. Heritage, J. (1984) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  131. Hodge, B. & Kress, G. (1988) Social semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  132. Hodge, B., Kress, G. & Jones, G. (1979) The ideology of middle management. In R. Fowler, SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004
  133. B. Hodge, G. Kress & T . Trew (eds), Language and control (pp. 81-93. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  134. Holmes, M.E. & Rogers, L.E. (1995) Let me rephrase that question: Five common criticisms of interaction analysis studies. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Western States Communication Association. Portland, Oregon.
  135. Huisman, M. Decision making in meetings as talk-in-interaction International Studies of Management and Organization 31 (3) 2001 69-90
  136. Iedema, R. (2003) Discourses of post bureaucratic organization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  137. Iedema, R. Wodak, R. Organizational discourses and practices Discourse and Society 10 (1) 1999 5-20 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926599010001001
  138. Iedema, R. Degeling, P . Braithwaite, J. White, L. 'It's an interesting conversation I'm hearing': The doctor as manager Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 15-34 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038174
  139. Isaacs, W.N. Taking flight: Dialogue, collective thinking, and organizational learning Organizational Dynamics 22 (2) 1993 24-39 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090- 2616%2893%2990051-2
  140. Isaacs, W. (1999) Dialogue and the art of thinking together. New York: Doubleday.
  141. Johnson, M. (1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  142. Keenoy, T . & Anthony, P.D. (1992) HRM: Metaphor, meaning and morality. In P . Blyton & P . Turnbull (eds), Reassessing human resource management (pp. 233-55). London: Sage.
  143. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Organizing textscapes Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 135-42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038184
  144. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Grant, D. Organizational discourses: Text and context Organization 4 (2) 1997 147-57 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050849742001
  145. Keenoy, T . Marshak, R. Oswick, C. Grant, D. The discourses of organizing Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 (2) 2000a 511-12
  146. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Grant, D. Discourse, epistemology and organization: A discursive footnote Organization 7 (3) 2000b 542-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073014
  147. Kilduff, M. Deconstructing organizations Academy of Management Review 18 1993 13-31
  148. Kilduff, M. Mehra, A. Postmodernism and organizational research Academy of Management Review 22 (3) 1997 453-81
  149. Knights, D. Organization theory in the age of deconstruction: Dualism, gender and postmodernism revisited Organization Studies 18 (1) 1997 1-19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069701800102
  150. Knights, D. Morgan, G. Strategic discourse and subjectivity: Towards a critical analysis of corporate strategy in organizations Organization Studies 12 (2) 1991 251-73 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069101200205
  151. Knights, D. Willmott, H. Power and subjectivity at work: From degradation to subjugation in social relations Sociology 23 (4) 1989 535-58 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038589023004003
  152. Kress, G. (1995) The social production of language: History and structures of domination. In P . Fries & M. Gregory (eds), Discourse in society (systemic functional perspectives Vol. L): Meaning and choice in language (Series: Advances in Discourse Processes) (pp. 115-40. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  153. Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T . (1990) Reading images. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press. Kress, G. Threadgold, T . Towards a social theory of genre Southern Review 21 1988 215-43
  154. Kristiansen, M. Bloch-Poulsen, J. The challenge of the unspoken in organizations: Caring container as a dialogic answer? Southern Communication Journal 65 (2-3) 2000 176-90 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940009373166
  155. Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004 Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  156. Latour, B. (2000) We have never been modern. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
  157. Lord, R.G. Kernan, M.C. Scripts as determinants of purposive behavior in organizations Academy of Management Review 12 1987 265-77
  158. Mahler, J. The quest for organizational meaning: Identifying and interpreting the symbolism in organizational stories Administration and Society 20 (3) 1988 344-68 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009539978802000305
  159. Manning, P.K. Metaphors of the field: Varieties of organizational discourse Administrative Science Quarterly 24 1979 660-71 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392371
  160. Marshak, R.J. Managing the metaphors of change Organizational Dynamics 22 1993 44-56 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616%2893%2990081-B Marshak, R.J. (1996) Metaphors, metaphoric fields and organizational change. In D. Grant & C. Oswick (eds), Metaphor and organizations (pp. 147-65. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  161. Marshak, R. Keenoy, T . Oswick, C. Grant, D. From outer words to inner worlds Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 (2) 2000 245-58 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021886300362008
  162. Martin, J. (1992) Cultures in organizations: Three perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
  163. Martin, J.R. Technology, bureaucracy and schooling Cultural Dynamics 6 (1) 1993 84-130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/092137409300600104
  164. Meyer, J.C. Tell me a story: Eliciting organizational values from narratives Communication Quarterly 43 1993 210-44 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463379509369970
  165. Meyerson, D.E. (1991) Acknowledging and uncovering ambiguities in cultures. In P.J. Frost, L.F. Moore, M.R. Louis, C.C. Lundberg & J. Martin (eds), Reframing organizational culture (pp. 254-70. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  166. Moch, M.K., & Fields, W.C. (1985) Developing a content analysis for interpreting language use in organizations. In S.B. Bacharach (ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (4th edition, pp. 81-126). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  167. Morgan, G. Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle-solving in organization theory Administrative Science Quarterly 25 1980 605-22 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392283
  168. Morgan, G. More on metaphor: Why we cannot control tropes in administrative science Administrative Science Quarterly 28 (4) 1983 601-7 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393011
  169. Morgan, G. (1986) Images of organization (1st edition). London: Sage.
  170. Morgan, G. (1996) An afterword: Is there anything more to be said about metaphor? In D. Grant & C. Oswick (eds), Metaphor and organizations (pp. 227-40. London: Sage.
  171. Morgan, G. (1997) Images of organization (2nd edition). London: Sage.
  172. Mueller, F . Sillince, J. Harvey, C. Howorth, C. 'A rounded picture is what we need': Rhetorical strategies, arguments and the negotiation of change in a UK hospital trust Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 75-94 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038181
  173. Mumby, D. The political function of narrative in organizations Communication Monographs 54 (2) 1987 113-27 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758709390221
  174. Mumby, D., & Clair, R. (1997) Organizational discourse. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Discourse studies vol. 2-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 181-205. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221884.
  175. Mumby, D.K. Stohl, C. Power and discourse in organizational studies: Absence and the dialectic of control Discourse and Society 2 1991 313-32 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926591002003004
  176. Muntigl, P . , Weiss, G., Wodak, R. (1999) European Union discourses on unemployment. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  177. Ochs, E. (1997) Narrative. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Discourse studies vol. 1-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 185-207. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221884.
  178. SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004
  179. O'Connor, K.M. Adams, A.A. What novices think about negotiation: A content analysis of scripts Negotiation Journal 15 (2) 1999 135-48 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1571- 9979.1999.tb00187.x
  180. Oswick, C. (2001) Organizational discourse(s): Modes of engagement. Paper presented at the American Academy of Management Conference (Professional Development Workshop), Washington DC (August).
  181. Oswick, C. & Grant, D. (1996a) The organization of metaphors and the metaphors of organization: Where are we and where do we go from here? In D. Grant & C. Oswick (eds), Organization and metaphor (pp. 213-26. London: Sage.
  182. Oswick, C. & Grant, D. (eds) (1996b) Organization development: Metaphorical explorations. London: Pitman.
  183. Oswick, C. Montgomery, J. Images of an organization: The use of metaphor in a multinational company Journal of Organizational Change Management 21 (5) 1999 501-23
  184. Oswick, C. Keenoy, T . Grant, D. Managerial discourses: Words speak louder than actions? Journal of Applied Management Studies 6 (1) 1997 5-12
  185. Oswick, C. Keenoy, T . Grant, D. Discourse, organizations and organizing: Concepts, objects and subjects Human Relations 52 (9) 2000a 1115-24
  186. Oswick, C. Keenoy, T . Grant, D. Marshak, R. Discourse, organization and epistemology Organization 7 (3) 2000b 511-12 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073008
  187. Palmer, I. Dunford, R. Conflicting use of metaphors: Reconceptualizing their use in the field of organizational change The Academy of Management Review 21 (3) 1996 691-717
  188. Parker, I. (1992) Discourse dynamics. London: Routledge.
  189. Parker, M. 'The less important sideshow': The limits of epistemology in organizational analysis Organization 7 (3) 2000 519-23 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073010
  190. Pearce, W. & Cronen, V . (1979) Communication, action and meaning: The creation of social realities. New York: Praeger.
  191. Phillips, N. Telling organizational tales: On the role of narrative fiction in the study of organizations Organization Studies 16 (4) 1995 625-49 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600408
  192. Phillips, N. Hardy, C. Managing multiple identities: Discourse legitimacy and resources in the m Organization 4 (2) 1997 159-85 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050849742002
  193. Phillips, N. & Hardy, C. (2002) Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  194. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T . & Hardy, C. (2004) Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review (forthcoming).
  195. Pomerantz, A. & Fehr, B.J. (1997) Conversation analysis: An approach to the study of social action as sense making practices. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction: Discourse studies vol. 1-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 64-91. London: Sage.
  196. Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. (1987) Discourse and social psychology. London: Sage.
  197. Psathos, G. (1995) Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage. Putnam, L. Dialectical tensions and rhetorical tropes in negotiations Organization Studies 25 (1) 2004 35-54 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840604038179
  198. Putnam, L.L. Cooren, F . Textuality and agency: Constitutive elements of organizations Organization 1 1 (3) 2004
  199. Putnam, L. & Fairhurst, G. (2001) Discourse analysis in organizations: Issues and concerns.
  200. In F.M. Jablin & L. Putnam (eds), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research and methods (pp. 235-68. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  201. Putnam, L.L. Jones, T.S. Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction Communication Monographs 49 1982 171-91 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758209376080 SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004
  202. Putnam, L.L., Phillips, N. & Chapman, P . (1996) Metaphors of communication and organization. In S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. Nord (eds), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 375-408. London: Sage.
  203. Putnam, L.L. Wilson, S.R. Turner, D.B. The evolution of policy arguments in teachers negotiations Argumentation 4 1990 129-52
  204. Reed, M. The limits of discourse analysis in organizational analysis Organization 7 (3) 2000 524-30 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073011
  205. Roloff, M.E., Tutzauer, F.E. & Dailey, W.O. (1989) The role of argumentation in distributive and integrative bargaining contexts: Seeking relative advantage but at what cost? In M.A. Rahim (ed.), Managing conflict: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 109-19. New York: Praeger. Rose, N. (1990) Governing the self: The shaping of the private self. London: Routledge.
  206. Rosen, M. Myth and reproduction: The conceptualization of management theory, method and practice Journal of Management 21 (3) 1984 303-22
  207. Rosen, M. Breakfast at Spiro's: Dramaturgy and dominance Journal of Management Studies 1 1 (2) 1985 31-48
  208. Sackmann, S. The role of metaphors in organization transformation Human Relations 42 1989 463-85 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872678904200601
  209. Sacks, H. Schegloff, E.A. Jefferson, G. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn- taking for conversation Language 50 1974 696-735 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/412243
  210. Salzer-Morling, M. (1998) As God created Earth… A saga that makes sense? In D. Grant, T . Keenoy & C. Oswick (eds), Discourse and organization (pp. 104-18. London: Sage.
  211. Schama, S. (1995) Landscape and memory. London: Harper Collins.
  212. Schegloff, E. (1984) On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds), Structures of social action: Studies in emotion and social interaction (pp. 28-51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  213. Schegloff, E. (1996) Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. Schegloff & S. Thompson (eds), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52-133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002
  214. Schiffrin, D. (1987) Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  215. Schiffrin, D. (1994) Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  216. Schwandt, T.A. (1997) Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  217. Searle, J.R. (1969) Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press.
  218. Searle, J.R. (1979) Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
  219. Searle, J.R. (1995) The construction of social reality. London: Allen Lane.
  220. Segerdahl, P . Scientific studies of aspects of everyday life: The example of conversation analysis Language and Communication 18 1998 275-323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0271- 5309%2898%2900009-3
  221. Silverman, D. (1987) Communication and medical practice. London: Sage.
  222. Silverman, D. (1993) Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage.
  223. Silverman, D. (1999) Warriors or collaborators: Reworking methodological controversies in the study of institutional interaction. In S. Sarangi & C. Roberts (eds), Talk, work and the institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings (pp. 401-25. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110208375.4.401
  224. Srivastva, S. Barrett, F . The transforming nature of metaphors in group development: A study i n g r o u p t h e o r y Human Relations 41 (1) 1988 31-64 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872678804100103
  225. Tannen, D. (1986) That's not what I meant. New York: Ballantine Books. SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004
  226. Tannen, D. The power of talk: Who gets heard and why Harvard Business Review 74 (5) 1995 138-48
  227. Taylor, J.R. & Van Every, E.J. (1993) The vulnerable fortress: Bureaucratic organization in the information age. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto.
  228. Taylor, J.R. & Van Every, E.J. (2000) The emergent organization: Communication as its site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  229. Taylor, J.R. Cooren, F . Giroux, N. Robichaud, D. The communicational basis of organization: Between the conversation and the text Communication Theory 6 (1) 1996 1-39 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00118.x
  230. Thatchenkery, T.J. & Upadhyaya, P . (1996) Organizations as a play of multiple and dynamic discourses: An example from a global social change organization. In D.J. Boje, R.P. Gephart & T.J. Thatchenkery (eds), Postmodern management and organization theory (pp. 308-30. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  231. Thibault, P . (1991) Social semiotics as praxis. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
  232. Tsoukas, H. The missing link: A transformational view of metaphors in organizational science Academy of Management Review 16 1991 566-85
  233. Tsoukas, H. False dilemmas in organization theory: Realism or social constructivism? Organization 7 (3) 2000 531-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/135050840073012
  234. Tsoukas, H. Chia, R. Organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change Organization Science 13 (5) 2002 567-82 http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.5.567.7810--> Van Dijk, T.A. (1997a) The study of discourse. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Discourse studies vol. 1-A multidiciplinary introduction (pp. 1-34. London: Sage http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221884.
  235. Van Dijk, T.A. (1997b) Discourse as interaction society. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as social interaction: Discourse studies vol. 2-A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 1-38. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  236. Van Leeuwen, T . (1993) Language and representation. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Sydney.
  237. Wallemacq, A. & Sims, D. (1998) The struggle with sense. In D. Grant, T . Keenoy & C. Oswick (eds), Discourse and organization (pp. 119-33. London: Sage.
  238. Warner-Burke, W. Metaphors to consult by Group and Organization Management 17 (3) 1992 255-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059601192173005
  239. Washbourne, N. Dicke, W. Dissolving organization theory? A narrative analysis of water management International Studies of Management and Organization 31 (3) 2001 91-112
  240. Watson, T.J. (1994) In search of management: Culture, chaos and control in managerial work. London: Routledge.
  241. Watson, T.J. Rhetoric, discourse and argument in organizational sense making: A reflexive tale Organization studies 16 (5) 1995 805-21 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600503
  242. Weick, K.E. (1995) Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  243. Westenholz, A. Paradoxical thinking and change in the frames of reference Organizational Studies 14 1993 37-58 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/017084069301400104
  244. Westley, F . Middle managers and strategy: The microdynamics of inclusion Strategic Management Journal 1 1 1990 337-51 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250110502-->
  245. Westley, F . Mintzberg, H. Visionary leadership and strategic management Strategic Management Journal 10 (1) 1989 17-32 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100704
  246. White, H. (1978) Tropics of discourse. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  247. Witten, M. (1993) Narrative and the culture of obedience at the workplace. In D.K. Mumby (ed.), Narrative and social control: Critical perspectives (pp. 97-118. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  248. Wodak, R. (1996) Disorders of discourse. London: Longman.
  249. Wodak, R. Matouschek, B. We are dealing with people whose origins one can clearly tell just by looking: Critical discourse analysis and the study of neo-racism in contemporary Austria SAGE SAGE Reference Editorial selection and Introduction © David Grant, Cynthia Hardy, Cliff Oswick and Linda L. Putnam 2004

Related papers

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field
David Grant, Cliff Oswick

The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Discourse, 2004

View PDFchevron_right
Organizational Discourse: Domains, Debates and Directions
Nelson Phillips

Academy of Management Annals, 2012

Interest in the analysis of organizational discourse has expanded rapidly over the last two decades. In this article, we reflect critically on organizational discourse analysis as an approach to the study of organizations and management, highlighting both its strengths and areas of challenge. We begin with an explanation of the nature of organizational discourse analysis and outline some of the more significant contributions made to date. We then discuss existing classifications of approaches to the study of organizational discourse and suggest that they fall into two main categories: classifications by level of analysis and classifications by type of method. We argue that both of these approaches are inherently problematic and present an alternative way to understand the varieties of approaches to the analysis of organizationaldiscourse based on within domain and across domain characterizations. We conclude with a discussion of the challenges that remain in the development of organizational discourse as an area of study and point to some of the opportunities for important and unique contributions to our understanding of organizations and management that this family of methods brings.

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis and the Study of Organizations
David Grant

Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 2000

In this paper we provide an overview of research into organisational discourse, making a tentative distinction between organisational discourse studies (emerging from organisation and management theory) and organisational discourse analysis (emerging from more linguistic-oriented research) (Iedema 2003). Our primary aim is to focus on organisational discourse studies in a fashion that complements, rather than replicates, previous overviews of the field. In so doing we suggest that organisational discourse research tends to be too complex and multi-variate to be neatly pigeon-holed into categories such as 'managerialist' or 'postmodernist'. Further, abstracting the multiplicity of these research endeavours into two single dimensions runs the risk of losing some of this richness. We aim to provide insight into the complexity of organisational discourse and the philosophical and methodological richness that it embodies, by recognising and highlighting that commentators often straddle a number of analytical-practical positions. To this end, we propose five dimensions by which to map this rich domain of research. Our concluding argument is that organisational discourse studies and organisational discourse analysis would do well to combine the former's normative and the latter's analytical stance with attention to practitioner situated problematics and struggles. We highlight recent research that has begun to adopt this approach.

View PDFchevron_right
The organization of organizational discourse
Craig Prichard

2007

'Discourse', as Norman Fairclough and his co-editors noted in the introduction to their new journal, Critical Discourse Studies, (2004), is now well established as category in social sciences. And yet, as they also note, there are significant differences as to what 'discourse' and 'discourse analysis' refers. These differences are, they argue, due to different theoretical, academic and cultural traditions and how they 'push discourse in different directions' (2004:4). In this review essay I sketch out the key direction that 'discourse' has been pushed or pulled in organization studies (see also Alvesson and Karreman, 2000; Chia, 2000; Grant et al, 2004; Fairhurst and Putnam, 2004; Prichard et al, 2004). To set the scene for this I review two books that seek to advance our understanding of discourse and language analysis in organization studies. Each has its strengths but both are relatively disengaged from the journal literature in the same field. In response to this weakness I will present a brief citation-based analysis of 'discourse analysis' in the management and organization studies field. This analysis brings to light eight different streams of work that are underway. Various forms of language analysis do feature among these. But the most prominent form is concerned with the analysis of knowledge and practice (particularly the distribution and character of various forms of management knowledge). I conclude by arguing that this, rather than forms of language analysis, is the distinctive form of discourse analysis in organization studies. In other words, and following on from the point by Fairclough and his colleagues, the dominant approach to 'discourse' in organization studies takes a distinctive form. There are many examples of this kind of work (see for example Westwood and Clegg, 2003), and among the most cited (see table 2) are those that provide critical analysis of management discourse (Du Gay,1994; Townley, 1993; Kerfoot and Knights, 1998). The approach has some distinctive features including ambivalence over the particular 'media' in which (by which) it is articulated, performed or 'No, you don't, Vic.' 'I've been in love with you for weeks'. 'There's no such thing', she says. 'It's 'a rhetorical device' and a 'bourgeoisie fantasy'. 'Haven't you ever been in love, then?' 'When I was younger,' she says, 'I allowed myself to be constructed by the discourse of romantic love for a while yes.' 'What the hell does that mean?' 'We aren't essences, Vic. We aren't unique individual essences existing prior to language. There is only language'. 'What about this?' he says, sliding his hand between her legs. 'Language and biology', she says, opening her legs wider. 'Of course we have bodies, physical needs and appetites. My muscles contract when you touch me there-feel?' 'I feel, 'he says.

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis in Organizational Studies
Norman Fairclough

Although studies of organization certainly need to include analysis of discourse, one prominent tendency within current research on organizational discourse limits its value of for organizational studies through a commitment to postmodernism and extreme versions of social constructivism. I argue that a version of critical discourse analysis based upon a critical realist social ontology is potentially of greater value to organization studies, and I refer in particular to the contribution it can make to research on organizational change.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Discourse Analysis
  • Sociology
  • Critical Discourse Analysis
  • Business and Management
  • Civil Discourse

    • Cited by

    The Don Draper complex: Consuming work, productive leisure and marketer boundary work
    Lauren Gurrieri

    Journal of Marketing Management, 2012

    Although the identities of brands and consumers have been extensively explored, less is understood about the subjectivity of marketers themselves. In the ambiguous and dynamic exchange process of marketing, the articulation of identities is fundamental to demarcate the activities and actions that take place between market actors. In recent times, growing importance has been placed on a different breed of marketer in these exchanges – the cultural intermediary. For these marketing practitioners, knowledge about the interplay between culture and economy generates the cultural capital that legitimises their expertise and value. Yet, this simultaneously gives rise to the difficult navigation and accomplishment of boundaries between their work and pleasure. Through a case study of two coolhunting agencies, this paper examines how marketers discursively perform boundary work in the construction of their identities. The findings show that, for coolhunters, a tension exists in drawing on discourses of renegadism and professionalism to construct their identities, resulting in their engagement in chameleon-like identity work. The research proposes that the tensions pervading the construction of boundaries and identities for marketers can be usefully understood through a paradox lens, and offers the metaphor of the nomad as a theoretical representation of interwoven identity conflicts for marketers.

    View PDFchevron_right
    ‘Our iceberg is melting’: Story, metaphor and the management of organisational change
    Victoria Pagan

    Culture and Organization, 2011

    This article offers two contrasting readings of the business novel Our iceberg is melting: Changing and succeeding under any conditions (J. Kotter and H. Rathgeber. 2005. Basingstoke: Pan Macmillan), which was written to advocate Kotter's approach to organisational change management. The orthodox reading draws on the modernist paradigm which assumes that organisational change can be actively managed. This reading analyses how the structure, themes, tropes and metaphoric representations employed in the book reinforce its underlying message. It assumes that readers will accept this message and adopt the advocated change management approach. The alternative reading is more critical. It questions the idealistic representations of characters' roles and behaviours, and demonstrates how organisational actors may subvert the book's story and metaphoric representations to resist change. This article demonstrates through the two readings that story and metaphor as tools to facilitate organisational change open up space for differing interpretations, which may not match the authors' intent. It concludes that story and metaphor can reinforce a book's underlying message, but that their ambiguity and interpretative flexibility always allow for unintended, dissenting and potentially subversive interpretations.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Keeping things moving': space and the construction of middle management identity in a post-NPM organization
    Susan Ainsworth, David Grant

    Discourse & Communication, 2009

    A B S T R A C T Reforms associated with New Public Management (NPM) have led to changes in the management of work and organization that challenge the stability, durability and linearity of the managerial hierarchy in contemporary public sector workplaces. Against this background, this article considers the ways in which two clinician-managers who work in a large metropolitan teaching hospital speak about their organizational roles. Reflecting the complexity of their part of the organization, the emergency department, the interviewees position themselves as operating at the interstice between the competing and contradictory spatial logics of locality and mobility. With their identities strongly anchored in emergency as locality, the clinician-managers intervene in the flows of meanings and resources that affect its processes in ways that require intra-and inter-organizational mobility and which are incommensurate with traditional perceptions of middle managers. In regarding the interviews as 'practical authoring' , we note our own spatial ambiguity as academic researchers interested in organizations other than our own and suggest that our insider-outsider positionings are reflected in the interviews' complex spatialities. We conclude that the interviewees' boundary-spanning and cross-spatial self-positionings are indicative of the hybrid roles that workers under NPM increasingly embody and are in contrast to traditional perceptions of how the provision and management of public service work is carried out. K E Y W O R D S : identity, middle management, New Public Management, space

    View PDFchevron_right
    Business Ethics as Practice
    Stewart Clegg

    British Journal of Management, 2007

    In this article we develop a conceptualization of business ethics as practice. Starting from the view that the ethics that organizations display in practice will have been forged through an ongoing process of debate and contestation over moral choices, we examine ethics in relation to the ambiguous, unpredictable, and subjective contexts of managerial action. Furthermore, we examine how discursively constituted practice relates to managerial subjectivity and the possibilities of managers being moral agents. The article concludes by discussing how the 'ethics as practice' approach that we expound provides theoretical resources for studying the different ways that ethics manifest themselves in organizations as well as providing a practical application of ethics in organizations that goes beyond moralistic and legalistic approaches.

    View PDFchevron_right
    The implementation evaluation of primary care groups of practice: a focus on organizational identity
    Charo Rodriguez, Marlei Pozzebon

    BMC Family Practice, 2010

    Background: Since 2002 the Health Ministry of Québec (Canada) has been implementing a primary care organizational innovation called 'family medicine groups'. This is occurring in a political context in which the reorganization of primary care is considered necessary to improve health care system performance. More specifically, the purpose of this reform has been to overcome systemic deficiencies in terms of accessibility and continuity of care. This paper examines the first years of implementation of the family medicine group program, with a focus on the emergence of the organizational identity of one of the pilot groups located in the urban area of Montreal.

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved