The challenge of the unspoken in organizations: Caring container as a dialogic answer?

Kristiansen, Marianne; Bloch-Poulsen, Jørgen

doi:10.1080/10417940009373166

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, they require careful deconstruction (Derrida, 1976) in order to reveal the concealed and marginalized elements within them and thereby open them up for alternative interpretations (Calás & Smircich, 1999;Putnam & Fairhurst, 2001). Studies adopting this approach examine the texts represented in a variety of discursive domains, including dialogue and conversation (Cissna & Anderson, 1998;Cooren, 1997Cooren, , 1999Cooren, , 2001Cooren & Taylor, 1997Eisenberg & Goodall, 1993;Groleau & Cooren, 1998;Isaacs, 1993Isaacs, , 1999Kristiansen & Bloch-Poulsen, 2000;Taylor & van Every, 2000) and narratives and stories (Boje, 1995(Boje, , 2001Czarniawska-Joerges, 1996;Gabriel, 1991Gabriel, , 1995Gabriel, , 1997Gabriel, , 1998.…”

Section: Observesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

Grant¹,

Hardy²,

Oswick³

et al. 2004

The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Discourse

168

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Observesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

Grant¹,

Hardy²,

Oswick³

et al. 2004

The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Discourse

168

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Thus, the understanding of the other includes seeing differences, dissensus and even conflicts as a positive energy. Dialogue is unpredictable, depends on timing, relationships and contexts, and always runs the risk of breaking down (Kristiansen and Bloch-Poulsen, 2000). Dialogue has little space in organisations, as organisations focus on results and efficiency, whereas dialogue does not focus on immediate results in the usual sense, but on increased employee participation and autonomy, which could actually clash with productivity (Schein, 2009).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple balances in workplace dialogue: experiences of an intervention in health care

Grill

Ahlborg

Wikström

et al. 2015

Journal of Workplace Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – This paper aims to illuminate and analyse the participants’ experiences of the influences of a dialogue intervention. Cooperation and coordination in health care require planning of dialogically oriented communication to prevent stress and ill health and to promote health, well-being, learning and efficiency in the organisation. Design/methodology/approach – An intervention method based on dialogue theory, with Socratic provocations and concrete workplace examples enhanced authenticity of conversations. A qualitative study, using qualitative content analysis, entailed interviews with 24 nurses, assistant nurses and paramedics, strategically selected from 156 intervention participants. Findings – Two themes emerged, dialogue-learning processes and dialogue-promoting communicative actions. The first includes risk-taking to overcome resistance and fear of dialogue, expressing openly thoughts and feelings on concrete issues and taboo subjects, listening to and reflecting on one’s own and others’ perspectives and problematising norms and values. The second comprises voicing opinions, and regarding one’s own limits; requesting support and room for manoeuvre; and restraining negative emotions and comments in the interest of well-being. Findings depict strengthened awareness and readiness regarding dialogue and multiple balancing of dialogue at work. Research limitations/implications – This study implies further observing and examining of communicative patterns during workplace dialogue. Practical implications – A useful approach to communication development for occupational health and personnel in health care and other workplace contexts. Originality/value – Previously, arenas have been created for dialogue, but close-process studies of dialogue in health-care work are scarce. This study provides insights into how workplace communication can develop towards dialogue.

show abstract

“…The participants were the managerial group and some of their employees. The research process is described and documented in Kristiansen and Bloch-Poulsen (1998, 2000a, 2000b. By dialogic action research we understand a particular approach to organizational development work that has dialogue as both its object and its method.…”

Section: Frame and Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-referentiality as a power mechanism

Kristiansen

Bloch-Poulsen

2004

Action Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThe article is a first-and second-person inquiry into power relations between action researchers and participants based on a dialogic action research project with a group of managers at Bang & Olufsen, Denmark. It focuses on discrepancies between our espoused values of dialogue and our theories-in-use characterized by self-referentiality. This concept emerged during the process and describes a non-dialogic way of transforming the perspectives of the other into your own a priori categories and ways of relating. It denotes a power mechanism imposing our regime of truth on participants so that their reality does not count. First-and second-person reflection on self-referentiality is a process of mutual vulnerability and seems to enhance the quality of third-person action and research.

show abstract

The challenge of the unspoken in organizations: Caring container as a dialogic answer?

Cited by 10 publications

References 6 publications

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

Multiple balances in workplace dialogue: experiences of an intervention in health care

Self-referentiality as a power mechanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About