Technological determinism and discursive closure in organizational mergers

Abstract

In times of organizational change leaders often tell stories that justify publicly the directions in which organizations move. Such stories are always political in nature and often reflect the motives of the storyteller. We observe how leaders in high-tech organizations use the story of technological determinism in organizational settings as a discursive practice through which they invoke the "inevitability" of technology to justify managerial decisions to the public. Rather than taking ownership of certain actions, managers are able to use this story to claim that certain organizational changes are inevitable, and to eliminate alternative stories. We examine this strategy as it appears in the public discourse produced during two mergers in the high-tech and telecommunications industries occurring from 1998 to 2002: US West and Qwest, and AOL and TimeWarner. Finally, we demonstrate that the story of technological determinism performs discursive closure around each merger.Organizational change, often contested, is likely to be even more so in the case of a corporate merger. As Howard and Geist (1995) remark, "The decision to merge provides a dramatic enactment of organizational change" (p. 110). Although merging may affect organizational processes and discourse on all levels, we are concerned with the discourse that, seeking to make sense of the merger, answers the questions "Why should we change?" and "What should we change to?". Following Alvesson (1990), andCheney andChristensen (2001), our concern is with issue management, or the ways in which this discourse positions the new organization within its environment and eliminates controversy and oppositional discourses. We suggest that this discursive positioning can occur through storytelling. While stories certainly make sense of changes (Weick, 1993), in doing so they suppress certain conflicts and mask multiple interpretations of the situation (Martin, 1990), and perform what Deetz (1992) has called "discursive closure". Through elimination of alternative conceptualizations, storytelling discourses deliver political, social, and economic advantages to certain organizational ideologies over others (Deetz, 1992).One of the challenges faced by merging organizations is that of crafting and then communicating a new corporate identity (

A Recursive Perspective on Discursive Legitimation and Organizational Action in Mergers and Acquisitions

“…These studies have shown how the media constructs certain kinds of images of mergers and acquisitions, thereby forming an important arena for the legitimation of these deals (Hirsch 1986, Schneider and Dunbar 1992, Hellgren et al 2002, Kitchener 2003, Tienari et al 2003, Comtois et al 2004, Leonardi and Jackson 2004. On one hand, the media can pick up specific issues and thus promote or question the legitimacy of the merger or acquisition (Hellgren et al 2002, Comtois et al 2004, Leonardi and Jackson 2004. On the other hand, the actors involved can also use the media as an arena for -discursive strategizing,‖ that is, for arguing over the legitimacy or illegitimacy of specific ideas or plans (Tienari et al 2003).…”

Questioning Technological Determinism through Empirical Research

“…Scholars have argued that rhetoric characterized by assumptions of technological determinism can be a powerful discursive strategy for advancing interests or marginalizing dissenting opinions (Cukier et al 2009, Leonardi and Jackson 2004, Leonardi 2008. Selwyn (2010b) held that optimistic rhetoric concerning instructional technology has been a characteristic feature of some educational technology scholarship for decades.…”

“…Empirical research studies provide evidence that technological determinist assumptions about the inevitability of technology can influence the decisions and actions that leaders make on behalf of their organizations (Webster 2013, Webster 2016, Webster 2017, Grant, Hall, Wailes, and Wright 2006, Jackson and Philip 2010, Leonardi 2008, Leonardi and Jackson 2004, Prakash and Sinha 2008. Individuals, including those in leadership roles, faced with an uncertain future or pressures to keep pace with technological change may treat technology as if it were inevitable for cognitive relief (Webster 2013, Leonardi 2008.…”

“…Individuals, including those in leadership roles, faced with an uncertain future or pressures to keep pace with technological change may treat technology as if it were inevitable for cognitive relief (Webster 2013, Leonardi 2008. Discourse characterized by technological determinism and the inevitability of technology can become a powerful element of the organizational narrative (Leonardi and Jackson 2004). Managers may rely on technological determinist rhetoric to shield their decisions, suppress controversy and deflect opinions of the opposition, and portray their actions as uncontestable and inevitable because of technology, rather than take ownership of their decisions (Leonardi and Jackson 2004).…”

“…Discourse characterized by technological determinism and the inevitability of technology can become a powerful element of the organizational narrative (Leonardi and Jackson 2004). Managers may rely on technological determinist rhetoric to shield their decisions, suppress controversy and deflect opinions of the opposition, and portray their actions as uncontestable and inevitable because of technology, rather than take ownership of their decisions (Leonardi and Jackson 2004). Leonardi (2008) concluded that despite the importance of social factors in affecting change, when technology managers employed technological determinist discourse, the tendency was to make the indeterminate state of things appear to be determined because of the perceived inevitability of technological change.…”