Strategy as Communicational Practice in Organizations

173

107

This article addresses the concept of "communication" in strategic communication, and proposes a new lens through which to view communication in order to deepen knowledge of strategic communication, as well as to significantly improve the alignment of strategic communication with the demands of today's strategy development process. Looking at modern strategy theory, this article focuses on communication theory as an ongoing process of meaning construction. It posits that communication is a process that is interactive by nature and participatory at all levels. This process is not necessarily two-way but omnidirectional diachronic, with an emphasis on the external and internal arenas of continuous meaning presentations, negotiations, and constructions. Strategic communication, therefore, needs to be conceptualized as an agile management process in which the focus is on feeding these arenas for strategy building and implementation, and on testing strategic decisions by presenting and negotiating these in a continuous loop. Communication theory The term communication theory refers to the body of theories that constitute our understanding of the communication process (Littlejohn, 1983). Theories represent various ways in which observers see their environment, and as Littlejohn claims (1983, p. 12), because theories are abstractions, every theory is partial. Each theory delineates a way of looking and, therefore, its truth value can only be measured in term of how well it is constructed. This is the reason why there is much disagreement about what constitutes an adequate theory of communication. The search for who is doing what in a communication process and with what CONTACT Betteke van Ruler

Section: Communication As a Concept In Strategic Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication Theory: An Underrated Pillar on Which Strategic Communication Rests

Ruler

2018

173

107

“…Microlevel activities have macroeconomic effects, whereas these activities are influenced by macrophenomena such as political, social, and economic institutions (e.g., industry standards). Based on the perception that strategy is something that organizational members create, perform and materialize, rather than just seeing strategy as something an organization has, Marchiori and Bulgacov (2012) argue that we must understand the importance of communication in the creation of strategies. Strategy is thus a communicative practice that is conducted at different levels in an organization as the organization is continuously created and reproduced.…”

Section: Lack Of Meta-theoretical Reflectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the Scope of Strategic Communication: Towards a Holistic Understanding of Organizational Complexity

Heide

Platen

Simonsson

et al. 2018

The purpose of this article is to contribute to the discussion concerning the present position and future directions of strategic communication by looking into the past and offering some proposals and a vision of how to develop and advance the field further. Research in strategic communication has mostly focused on communication professionals working in communication departments or agencies as primary agents of communication. However, this reflects a limited comprehension of organizations. The article addresses the need to focus not only on communicators, but also on managers and coworkers as key actors when trying to understand and theorize the practice of strategic communication.Theoretical approach-broadening the understanding of strategic communicationIn this section, we present a theoretical framework that broadens the understanding of strategic communication. First, there is a need to challenge the traditional understanding of communication and its relation to organizations. It is quite astonishing that our research community sometimes takes communication for granted. One could expect that researchers who have expertise in communication theory, should frequently try to understand and explain different phenomena from a communication perspective and also reflect on communication per se. For the purpose of reflecting on communication and its vital importance for the existence of organizations, we proclaim the use of the CCO perspective. Second, there is also a need to challenge the often taken-for-granted understanding of strategy. For that purpose we use the strategy as practice tradition that is related to the practice turn in strategic communication (cf. Aggerholm & Asmuß, 2016). Finally, to reach a more realistic understanding of the complex organizational realities, we have consulted literature within the organizational paradox and contradiction movement.The CCO perspective has its roots and primary advocators within the discipline of organizational communication. However, we believe that the CCO approach goes hand-in-hand with the basic tenets of strategic communication and that it could enrich our field. It should be noted that CCO is how research could go beyond a more traditional way of approaching and studying strategic communication. We believe that it is difficult to embrace all aspects of strategic communication within a single research project, such as multiple perspectives and theories, but we would like to see more perspectives, also critical, on an aggregated level. In the research that is presented below, we have primarily included communication professionals, managers and coworkers, and we have used both quantitative and qualitative empirical material. Method and materialThe empirical material in this part of the article comes from a three-year-research project, "The Communicative Organization" (2014)(2015)(2016)(2017). The purpose of the project is to increase knowledge about how communication creates value and contributes to organizational goal attainment. A distinguishing characteristic o...

“…(p. 20). Along the same lines Marchiori and Bulgacov (2012) argue that we should see strategy as a communicational practice of and in organizations. Sandhu (2009) advocates an institutional perspective on strategy that is particularly sensitive to how contextual logics influence organizational practices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

In the Wake of New Media: Connecting the Who with the How of Strategizing Communication

Gulbrandsen

Just

2016

In this article we argue that although there has been an intensified exploration of how organizations strategize within the field of strategic communication, there seems to be a key component missing, namely questioning who these organizations are and become in the process of strategizing. Strategic communication implicitly, perhaps even unintentionally, continues to rely on a classical understanding of organizations as "social units (or human groupings) deliberately constructed and reconstructed to seek specific goals" (Etzioni, 1964, p. 3). Assuming rather than exploring who the organization is, we argue, hinders a full explanation of how strategic communication works. Aiming to tackle this issue, we first present three ways in which the classical understanding of organizations is being theoretically challenged by organization studies and empirically challenged by new media, arguing that organizations are networked, sociomaterial, and contingent processes of meaning formation. Then we examine how the reconceptualization of the organization influences the concept of strategic communication, advocating that strategies should be seen as collaborative and networked flows (the how) of shared decision making by both human and nonhuman actors (the who). Finally, we discuss how this affects the notion of strategic action, and hence, strategic communication, asking what strategic action is and who performs it.