Week 3 — Dialogue and Classical Approaches to Management

Dialogue

Chapter 2 ends with a discussion of the concept dialogue and its importance within organizational communication. Within the model of communication as a balance of creativity and constraint, dialogue is balanced communication, or communication in which each individual has a chance to speak and be heard. There are four features of dialogue, each representing an increasing degree of collaboration and respect for the other.

1. Dialogue as mindful communication. Communicates a sense of consciousness and purpose with which we act in organizations and participate in dialogue.
2. Dialogue as equitable transaction. Requires all participants to have the ability to voice their opinions and perspectives.
3. Dialogue as emphatic conversation. Requires communicators to understand or imagine the world from others’ perspectives.
4. Dialogue as real meeting. Uses communication to achieve a genuine communion between people that transcends differences in role or perspective and recognizes a common humanity.

Questions to consider:

• What steps can organizations take to become more mindful?
• What communication technologies support dialogue and how?

Classical Approaches to Management

Chapter 3 focuses on historical communication theories. The most important point to recognize from this chapter is the three P’s: partial, partisan, and problematic. The argument is that all historical writing, maybe even all writing, has these three features. However, none of the three P’s prevent theories from being useful tools for both researchers and practitioners.

What are theories, and why do we need to study them?

Theories of human behavior can be anything from simple ideas to formal systems of hypotheses that aim to explain, predict, and control. Every theory has the following two features:

1. It is historical, meaning that the theory is a product of the time in which it emerged.
2. It is metaphorical, in that it uses language to suggest enlightening comparisons between organizational communication and other processes.

Theories are resources for enhancing our ability to explain and to act on practical issues. Since organizational communication theories are continuously evolving, it is important to recognize a theory’s strengths as well as its limitations. Here’s how the three P’s apply to theories:

1. Theories are partial. Each account only contains part of the story, and there can be no full account or complete story of organizational communication.
2. Theories are partisan. This is because all talk is partisan. The story we tell is one that represents our views in ways that favor our interests.
3. Theories are problematic. The account asks more questions than it can answer, and the answers it provides are based on what is currently known rather than on all that could be known.

Classical and Scientific Theories of Management

Very briefly:

• classical management: a perspective that is represented by a collection of theories that share the underlying metaphor of organizations modeled after efficient machines.
• scientific management: a management-oriented, production-centered view of organizations and communication that emerged from the work of Frederick Taylor.

The questions to consider assume that you have understood these theories of management. If not, pose a question in your responses, and we as a class will try to answer them. Theories of management are complicated, difficult topics, and there is no shame in not understanding them just from reading. Don’t be shy about saying, “I don’t know” or “I don’t understand.” We will help you.

Questions to consider

• What history led to the classical theory of management?
• What narratives do employees of classical management organizations tell? How are those narratives different from employees of scientific management organizations?
• What are the basic principles of scientific management?
• What assumptions does scientific management make about employees?
• Compare Fayol’s 5 elements of classical management with the 6 characteristics of the bureaucracy model. What overlaps do you see? Under what conditions are these two approaches useful for managers?

Watching “I Love Lucy: Job Switching”

This clip, which features Lucy and Ethel wrapping chocolates on the assembly line at a candy factory, offers a humorous critique of the machine metaphor and scientific approaches to organization. It enables a conversation about the need for alternative approaches like human relations and human resources. When is the machine metaphor useful?