Mining the Discourse: Strategizing During BHP Billiton's Attempted Acquisition of Rio Tinto

Abstract

Using a discourse‐analytic approach, we examine the strategizing that occurred during an attempted acquisition in 2007/08 of Rio Tinto by BHP Billiton. In doing so, we contribute to discursive studies of mergers and acquisitions in two significant respects. First, we show the importance of studying how actors external to, as well as those internal to BHP, exerted influence over the acquisition process and outcome. Their influence can be attributed, in part, to their use of rhetorical strategies during the negotiation of the meanings of three constructs that were central to the acquisition discourse. Second, our study shows how these rhetorical strategies were put into effect using not only linguistic, but also non‐linguistic modes of discourse such as imagery, indicators, and location. We conclude that obtaining a comprehensive understanding of the role of discourse in relation to a strategic activity – in this case an attempted acquisition – requires consideration of the multi‐modal rhetorical strategies brought to bear by both external and internal actors.

Being different and being the same: Multimodal image projection strategies for a legitimate distinctive identity

“…Recent organization studies have begun to investigate the interaction between visual and verbal modes for different aims. Cornelissen et al (2012) studied the combination of individuals’ speech and gestures for new ventures’ legitimation; Cornelissen et al (2014) explored how material and visual cues interact with verbal cues in the collective meaning construction of a social crisis; Floris et al (2013) added visual discourse to the study of discursive struggles during mergers and acquisitions; and finally, Lefsrud et al (2014) applied multimodal rhetoric to study the construction of illegitimate social categories. These studies argued that visual and verbal cues may interact by reinforcing or contradicting each other, with consistent effects on audiences’ interpretations of projected messages (Cornelissen et al, 2014; Lefsrud et al, 2014).…”

Mapping the Terrain

“…Other researchers created and analyzed annotated transcripts (Boje, 1991; Darr & Pinch, 2013; Heracleous & Jacobs, 2008; Meisiek & Barry, 2007), which were verbatim transcripts that were augmented by other audible or visible information from the video—for example, notes about the intonation of what was said or notes about what gestures people made. Last, some researchers worked directly with the video (Blackler & Regan, 2006; Cunliffe, 2001; Floris, Grant, & Cutcher, 2013), which made the full richness of the audible and visible information recorded on video available to researchers. To show this range of approaches, I discuss three studies in more detail to demonstrate how researchers drew on the affordances of video to study rhetoric by using verbatim transcripts (Burris, 2012), annotated transcripts (Darr & Pinch, 2013), and coding directly from video (Floris et al, 2013).…”

Chapter 7 A Discourse Perspective on Creating Organizational Knowledge: The Case of Strategizing

“…After twelve months of a very public and hostile discourse, BHP walked away from the attempted acquisition as the obstacles seemed too great, in part due to the Global Financial Crisis, which created additional risks for the transaction. Here, we analyze BHP's acquisition discourse in order to show how time and context were enacted in the discourse (for more details on the research underlying this case, see Floris, 2014;Floris, Grant, & Cutcher, 2013). The discourse was structured around three key constructs that would determine if the acquisition would proceed.…”

“…It also connects with the idea of a 'textscape' (Keenoy & Oswick, 2004), which considers how texts that relate to another time are woven into the current discourse of an organization. This involves weaving together different discourses to negotiate meanings of key constructs that appear 'coherent, plausible, and acceptable' (Kaplan and Orlikowski, 2013, p.965) through persuasion and negotiation (Floris et al, 2013). Discursive practices that relate to a more distant future have a greater potential to recast current discourse and explore 'barely conceivable alternatives' (Kaplan & Orlikowski, 2013, p.991).…”