Contributions to the theory of the CCO from the perspective of integral communication
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The essay presents a synthesis of the main postulates of the three schools of organizational thinking known as the Theory of the Communicative Constitution of Organizations (CCO), a vanguard proposal that has drawn strength from three nuclei or groups of researchers better known as the School of Montreal, the School of Four Communication Flows and the School of Social Systems. The work makes critical comments about the very conception of Language in the School of Montreal, non-human agents in the contributions of the perspective of Social Systems, and the very conception of communication in the three. It emphasizes the richness of the contribution on the relationship between organization and communication that these theories make. The central argument of the paper is that while it is possible to highlight the CCO as a novel contribution to the nature of organizations and their interactions with communication, then there are factors that are necessary components for the creation and maintenance of organizations, this perspective of the CCO does not take into account such as: external factors such as legal, cultural, the power with which the organization originates; internal factors such as economic capital, human capital and technological components. He concludes the paper by pointing out some guidelines for taking the CCO's proposals from the proposal of the Comprehensive Communication for Organizations (CIO). This points the way towards greater research efforts required to strengthen the CCO itself.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R., & Van Every, E. J. (Eds.). (2006) Communication as organizing: Empirical and theoretical explorations in the dynamic of text and conversations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrance Erlbaum.
Craig, R. T. (1999, mayo) Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory, 9 (2), 119-161. Recovered from http://www.stesapes.med.ulg.ac.be/Documents_electroniques/MET/METCOM/ELE%20MET-COM%20A-8191.pdf
Deetz, S. A. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Deetz, S. A. (1994). Future of the discipline: The challenges, the research, and the social contribution. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 17 (pp. 565-600). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Deetz, S. A. & Mumby, D., (1990) In Putnam, L., Mumby, D., (2014) Communicative Constitution of Organizations. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Communication. Advances in Theory, Reaearch, and Methods, (3th Ed.) (p.31), SAGE Publications, Inc.
Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: 4 history. In C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of Communication Science (pp. 20-98). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Gunn, J., In Littlejohn, S. & Foss, K., A. (2009). Encyclopedia of communication theory, (p. 27) SAGE Publications, Inc.
Hawking, S. (2014, diciembre, 2) Stephen Hawking: "La inteligencia artificial augura el fin de la raza humana", BBC. Recovered from http://www.bbc.com/mundo/ultimas_noticias/2014/12/141202_ultnot_hawking_inteligencia_artificial_riesgo_humanidad_egn
Maturana, H., Varela, F., (1998). De máquinas y seres vivos. Autopóiesis: La organización de lo vivo, Santiago de Chile, Editorial Universitaria.
McPhee, R., & Zaug, P., (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 10 (1 and 2).
Peters, J. D. (1989). John Locke, the individual, and the origin of communication. Quarterly Journa1of Speech, 7 (5), 387-399.
Peters, J. D. (1993). Genealogical notes on “the field”. ]ourna1 of Communication, 43 (4), 132-139.
Rebeil, M. A. y Arévalo, R. I. (2017). Las organizaciones y sus procesos de comunicación: una visión integral. En Arévalo, R. I. y
Guillén, G. (coords.), La comunicación para las organizaciones en México. Evolución, teoría y práctica (pp. 25-40). México: Tirant Lo Blanch-Universidad Anáhuac México-AMIPCO.
Rebeil, M. A. y Moreno, M. (2014). Comunicación integral y responsabilidad social empresarial: más allá de la sustentabilidad. Memorias del XXVI Encuentro Nacional AMIC (pp. 1076-1080). Disponible http://www.amicmexico.org/portal_amic/descargas/libroamic_2014.pdf
Rebeil, M. A. y Sánchez, C. (2012). La responsabilidad social organizacional en Iberoamérica: avances e implicaciones para la comunicación integral. En Rebeil, M. A. (coord.). Responsabilidad social organizacional (pp. 31-51). México: Trillas.
Schoeneborn, Blaschke, Cooren, McPhee, Seidi & Taylor, (2014). The Three Schools of CCO Thinking: Interactive Dialogue and Systematic Comparison. Management Communication Quartely, 28 (2), pp. 285.316.
Taylor, J. R., & Cooren, F. (1997). What makes communication “organizational”? How the many voices of a collectivity become the one voice of an organization. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 409-438.
Weick, K., (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.) Reading: Addison-Wesley. p. 133.