The closing of critique, pluralism and reflexivity: A response to Hardy and Grant and some wider reflections

Alvesson, Mats; Kärreman, Dan

doi:10.1177/0018726713477460

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, reflexivity is a meta-theory that can promote new and interesting knowledge for communication professionals. Alvesson and Kärreman (2013) emphasize that the reflexivity approach challenges different dominating perspectives and welcome alternative explanations. A problem with previous approaches to research in public relations/corporate communications is that they camouflage managerial and rationalistic perspectives, which cultivates a certain understanding and dismisses unconventional explanations.…”

Section: Ccij 212mentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Falkheimer

Heide

Simonsson

et al. 2016

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine and analyze the prevailing form of rationality that governs the challenges, goals and roles of communication professionals. The authors will also explore alternative forms of rationality and discuss what these would imply. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on survey results from The European Communication Monitor (ECM) and qualitative interviews with communication managers in Sweden. First, the authors present the ECM data and the Swedish interview material, i.e. the authors depict the practitioners’ perceptions of what they understand as important work tasks and roles. The interviews focus on the actual practices of linking communication goals to business goals. Second, the results are challenged from a reflexive perspective, using theories from the paradox turn and questioning the “taken-for-granted thinking” in corporate communications. Findings – The ECM data show that the main challenge in practice is “linking business strategy and communication.” The Swedish respondents stand out when it comes to “building and maintaining trust” since this is considered to be almost as important. The qualitative interview study strengthens the results in the ECM. The interviewees seem to do their work according to the traditional management agenda – i.e. they break down overall business goals and translate these to measurable communication goals. The results are reflected upon using paradox theory. Two paradoxes are discussed: between managerialism and professionalism, and strategic generalists and operational specialists. Research limitations/implications – The study is based on survey data that have been collected through a convenience sample, and the interview study is a pilot study. Practical implications – The paper focuses conflicts between normative practitioner ideals and reality, and helps practitioners to reflect upon mainstream thinking. Originality/value – Based on the empirical findings in the ECM, the interviews and the theoretical framework, the authors conclude that if the idea of The Communicative Organization is to be fruitfully realized, it is necessary to depart from a multi-dimensional rationality and question ideas that are taken for granted. The use of paradox theory and concepts such as functional stupidity is rather original in corporate communication research. Additional research could further explore paradoxes in order to spark dialogue, which may undermine one-dimensional thinking and functional stupidity.

show abstract

Section: Ccij 212mentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Falkheimer

Heide

Simonsson

et al. 2016

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alvesson and Sveningsson (2003) suggest that focusing on surprises and unanticipated responses is a good methodological rule and effective way to uncover findings that can offer new insights. In sum, my research approach was consistent with the emerging reflexive approach in qualitative enquiry, one in which the researcher seeks to question his or her own values and assumptions, their active role in the fieldwork and the stake they have in the findings and interpretations (Alvesson and Karreman, 2013; Alvesson and Skoldberg, 2009; Buchanan and Bryman, 2007; Cunliffe, 2003; Denzin et al, 2006).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The vulnerability of quasi-professional experts: A study of the changing character of US airline pilots’ work

Fraher

2016

Economic and Industrial Democracy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to ‘sociology of professions’ theory through the study of changes that occurred in US airline pilots’ work. Findings reveal that airline pilots are quasi-professional experts who developed specialized skills based on talent and experience which allowed them to work autonomously and enjoy a correspondingly high sense of trust and prestige for which they were often well compensated. However, results of this study suggest high labour costs and weak professional communities leave quasi-professional experts vulnerable to managerial cost-cutting and work intensification agendas, particularly during periods of merger, downsizing and other forms of industry restructuring. Findings signal a deprofessionalization of some elite fields in which experts’ specialized skills become devalued and the industry-specific nature of their expertise reduces career options and job mobility. Although the present study identifies this trend in aviation, recent changes in a wide range of industries from healthcare to high-tech portend applicability in a variety of domains.

show abstract

“…Some of these debates took the form of discussions of the contributions of particular thinkers and philosophers (e.g. Habermas, Foucault, Bourdieu, Weber); others took the form of academics debating, disagreeing and formulating points and counterpoints and the embedding of respective positions within wider moral-philosophical frameworks (Alvesson and Willmott, 1992;Alvesson and Kärreman, 2013;Boje et al, 2004;Grant et al, 2001;Parker, 1992;Willmott, 1993). 'this profound' science to heart provides food for thought.…”

Section: Institutionalising Translation: Themes and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilingual research, monolingual publications: management scholarship in English only?

Tietze

2018

EJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The closing of critique, pluralism and reflexivity: A response to Hardy and Grant and some wider reflections

Cited by 6 publications

References 44 publications

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Doing the right things or doing things right?

The vulnerability of quasi-professional experts: A study of the changing character of US airline pilots’ work

Multilingual research, monolingual publications: management scholarship in English only?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About