agree with each other on a certain subject. This agreement strengthens the bonds of the members of the organization, which in turn will result in a more unified and collective action that must reflect to the success of the organization. In this study, it is important to know how the respondents communicate to each other, what attitudes they express toward a certain subject, and how they come up with one idea despite the differences in ideologies and personal biases.
To support the first theory, this study will also be using Discourse theory and analysis. Since Organizational Co-Orientation theory deals with conversations, it is also important to go deeper within these conversations as to how each actor formulates their ideas based on their
…show more content…
It starts with two actors engaging themselves into a conversation, and in this process, mutual understandings about a certain subject (e.g. their attitudes toward their boss, the organization itself, etc.) is formed. Using this approach in studying large groups, companies, and organizations, researches continue a line of work that highlights the importance of communication in the process of organizing.
Organizational co-orientation theory is a more reflex explanation of the Co-Orientation theory, where “communication, in its essence, serves two ends, to establish a common orientation of two (or more) individuals with respect to each other and, simultaneously, to link them to a shared object of concern” (Newcomb, 1953). Co-orientation theory is basically the foundation of this theory, with an additional purpose of having it as a basis of the creation of
…show more content…
As Gregory Bateson had noted in 1935, there are three possibilities of co-orientation (although he did not use this term): symmetry, which, unlike in Newcomb’s reading, implies competing claims to authority and thus tends to lead to conflict, complementarity, which implies the submission of one actor to the other, and reciprocity, which supposes a multilayered system of exchange, leading to a more differentiated kind of relationship.
Discourse Theory and Analysis
Discourse Theory and Analysis, according to Littlejohn and Foss, suggests that an interaction, a conversation, or simply a discourse does not only mean an exchange of thoughts, ideas, expressions, and information; it serves as an avenue to showcase ideologies and to make meanings out of it. The theory refers to institutionalized rules that govern the way a certain topic—sexuality, hysteria, romantic love, punishment, and imprisonment—can be meaningfully talked
Within an organization one of the key tools that they use is that of: communication. Communication is a primary key to any organization and without it there is no cohesion, no leadership, and no functionality. As communication begins to diminish, so does the organization – as one article puts it: “These new economic…. imperatives have significantly contributed to the demise of the old classic command-and-control bureaucracy…” (Tiernan et al, 2002, 47-48). From what this article states, the lack of communication has led to a semi-collapse of the mechanistic structure of an organization. Though communication does seem like a huge factor of an organization, communication does not come without its troubles within the inter-organizations; if there is communication going on in a company, there is going to also be a lack of communication. When a company has employed thousands of people (or maybe just a small amount) they are hiring a whole selection of individuals to work as whole group in unity – though this does seem like an amazing idea, these sets of individuals will have quite ...
Communication is the process of transmitting information or messages from one person to another. It’s a process by which individuals or groups or organizational units undertake transactions in a variety of ways and within different areas with the aim of carrying out organizational goals (Griffin,
Millions… millions of discourse communities exist all around us each and every day. Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, Tumblr, and Group Me are just a few of the many examples of the functional discourse communities that our world consists of today. A discourse community is a group of people who share a set of discourses that are agreed upon as basic values and expectations and use communication to achieve set goals. There are six requirements to have a true discourse community. They must include: a community of people who share the same goals, regular communication, steady feedback and advice from one another, at least one means of communication that will assist in achieving an aspired goal, a lexis which is a
Boje, D. M. , Luhman, J. T. , and Cunliffe, A. L. “ A Dialectic Perspective on the Organization
To examine various discourses, it is crucial that the idea of discourse and the way in which discourses operate is clear. A discourse is a language, or more precisely, a way of representation and expression. These "ways of talking, thinking, or representing a particular subject or topic produce meaningful knowledge about the subject" (Hall 205). Therefore, the importance of discourses lies in this "meaningful knowledge," which reflects a group’s ideolo...
People who want to have a successful organization in business world; first they should be able to define OB which helps the organizations to be more effectively. “Organizational behavior is a study and an application of knowledge about how people, individuals and groups act in organizations” (Clark, 2000). Frankly, OB can help to indentify people behavior and to have a work relationship among the worker. Moreover, it can affect an organization to enhance its profitability and innovation by showing organization resources which can depends on customers. As well, it helps to achieve a job satisfaction by understanding the importance elements of motivation, communication and leadership.
Gibson, James L., John M. Ivancevich, and James H. Donnelly, Jr. Organization: Behaviour, Structure, Processes. 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000.
Each organizational element relates to one another. They have a building block effect where each element depends on the one before it in order to exist. The "organizational efforts (inputs and processes) contribute to organizational results (products and outputs) and these contribute to societal consequences and payoffs (outcomes)" (Strategic Planning in Education, 23).
Individuals have their own personalities that can influence their enthusiasm and productivity within an organization. In addition, individuals also form groups and are part of teams that work together to reach a common goal within organization. According to Gibson, Ivancevich, Donnelly, and Konopaske (2009) dedicated and cohesive teams can have a tremendous impact on organizations effectiveness and the global market. However, all of this happens within the frame-work of office politics and can hinder or enhance the organization’s effectiveness. Therefore, it is important to not only understand individuals, but also groups, teams and office politics within the organization. This will help leaders to plan, organize and motive individuals and groups for the best possible outcome for the organization.
The role of communication on cohesion development cannot be captured simply by looking at the frequency of communication. While communicating with an individual is essential for cohesion development, what is also critical to the formation of cohesion is the perceived source from which communication is occurring over time. The appraisal of the source of communication can be positive, such as advice, or negative, such as hindrance. Individuals seen as a source of advice can be seen as helpful to task completion. These sources of advice can be viewed as individuals that facilitate the accomplishing of goals in the workplace. These team members may see these sources of advice as appropriate for work assistance, and may view these individuals as resources for work tasks. Over time, individuals seen as a source of advice will further foster positive feelings with the other team member. As the relationship develops, these individuals will continue experiencing positive associations regarding task and goal completion, and over time will result in higher ratings of cohesion. Individuals seen as a source of hindrance, however, can be seen as harmful to task completion. Sources of hindrance are individuals that are perceived to be preventing work tasks and goals. Over time, there is an expected relationship between individuals that reflects this source of appraisal.
When studying organizational theory, two different belief systems help to determine which theory stream that each individual person follows. These are a person’s ontological beliefs or epistemological beliefs. It is important to recognize how both Ontology and Epistemology apply to organizational theory, and for each person to decide where they fit inside these branches.
Stephen Robbins and A.J.B UBRIN think organisational behavior (OB) includes three interrelated influence and contact area of research: the behavior of the individual level, the group level and the organisational level behavior.
According to Hatch and Cunliffe (2006), there are three major perspectives about the study of organization theory (OT): modern, symbolic interpretive, and postmodern. Each of these perspectives comes with its own assumptions and methodologies. Hatch and Cunliffe provided an introduction text about the concepts and characteristics of the three OT perspectives. Tsoukas and Knudsen also compiled a comprehensive handbook summarizing all facets of the meta-theoretical perspectives. In this post the writer will discuss the basic concepts of three perspectives, present Hatch and Cunliffe’s reasons why a multiple perspectives approach to organization theory is important, and compare Tsoukas and Knudsen’s introduction to the Hatch and Cunliffe introduction in their books.
Communication helps the organizational members to make both personal and organizational goals. And also help them to co-ordinate on the internal activities of the organization. To the extent the less effective communication of any organization is the less e...
attitudes and values, such as those found in teams with diverse members. If not managed