The Three Schools of CCO Thinking: Interactive Dialogue and Systematic Comparison
Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet
Standard
The Three Schools of CCO Thinking : Interactive Dialogue and Systematic Comparison. / Schoeneborn, Dennis; Blaschke, Steffen; Cooren, François et al.
in: Management Communication Quarterly, Jahrgang 28, Nr. 2, 05.2014, S. 285-316.Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The Three Schools of CCO Thinking
T2 - Interactive Dialogue and Systematic Comparison
AU - Schoeneborn, Dennis
AU - Blaschke, Steffen
AU - Cooren, François
AU - McPhee, Robert D.
AU - Seidl, David
AU - Taylor, James R.
PY - 2014/5
Y1 - 2014/5
N2 - The idea of the communicative constitution of organizations (CCO) has gained considerable attention in organizational communication studies. This rather heterogeneous theoretical endeavor is driven by three main schools of thought: the Montreal School of Organizational Communication, the Four-Flows Model (based on Giddens's Structuration Theory), and Luhmann's Theory of Social Systems. In this article, we let proponents of all three schools directly speak to each other in form of an interactive dialogue that is structured around guiding questions addressing the epistemological, ontological, and methodological dimension of CCO as a theoretical paradigm. Based on this dialogue, we systematically compare the three schools of CCO thinking and identify common grounds as well as key differences.
AB - The idea of the communicative constitution of organizations (CCO) has gained considerable attention in organizational communication studies. This rather heterogeneous theoretical endeavor is driven by three main schools of thought: the Montreal School of Organizational Communication, the Four-Flows Model (based on Giddens's Structuration Theory), and Luhmann's Theory of Social Systems. In this article, we let proponents of all three schools directly speak to each other in form of an interactive dialogue that is structured around guiding questions addressing the epistemological, ontological, and methodological dimension of CCO as a theoretical paradigm. Based on this dialogue, we systematically compare the three schools of CCO thinking and identify common grounds as well as key differences.
KW - Management studies
KW - communication as constitutive of organizations
KW - organization theory
KW - organizational communication
KW - paradigms
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899691799&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0893318914527000
DO - 10.1177/0893318914527000
M3 - Journal articles
C2 - 95801708
AN - SCOPUS:84899691799
VL - 28
SP - 285
EP - 316
JO - Management Communication Quarterly
JF - Management Communication Quarterly
SN - 0893-3189
IS - 2
ER -