Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

Introduction: Organizational Discourse: Exploring the Field

A growing disillusionment with many of the mainstream theories and methodologies that underpin organizational studies has encouraged scholars to seek alternative ways in which to describe, analyse and theorize the increasingly complex processes and practices that constitute ‘organization’. One outcome of this search has been that ‘organizational discourse’ has emerged as an increasingly significant focus of interest. It is now difficult to open a management or organizational journal without finding that it contains some sort of discursive-based study, and there has been a recent flurry of books, edited collections and journal special issues dedicated to the topic (Boje et al, 2004; Grant et al, 1998a, 2001; Hardy et al., 2004; Iedema & Wodak, 1999; Keenoy et al., 1997, 2000a; Oswick et al., 1997, 2000a, 2000b; Phillips & Hardy, 2002; Putnam & Cooren, 2004). Interest also extends to the establishment of a biennial International Conference on Organizational Discourse, which has been running since 1994, and the creation of an International Centre for Research in Organizational Discourse, Strategy and Change2 that links organizational researchers worldwide.

The growth in interest in organizational discourse has seen researchers apply a range of discourse analytic approaches to language and other symbolic media that are discernible in organizations. In so doing, they have been able to analyse, engage with and interpret a variety of organization-related issues in ways that would not have been otherwise achievable. At the same time, some have observed that this growth appears to have been achieved through the widespread use of broad, nonspecific definitions and a bewildering array of methods, approaches and perspectives. In short, how people talk about and analyse organizational discourse varies considerably.

The variation in the way that researchers talk about and analyse organizational discourse can, in part, be attributed to its theoretical and disciplinary antecedents emanating from the broader domain of discourse analysis: discourse analysis is informed by a variety of sociological, sociopsychological, anthropological, linguistic, philosophical, communications and literary-based studies (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2000a, 2000b; Grant et al., 1998b, 2001; Keenoy et al, 2000a; Oswick et al., 2000a; Potter & Wetherall, 1987). Within the broader social sciences, it has [Page 2]been used in order to promulgate various positivist, social constructivist and postmodern perspectives about a range of social phenomena (Brown & Yule, 1983; Fairclough, 1995; Potter & Wetherell, 1987; Schiffrin, 1987; Silverman, 1993; Van Dijk, 1997a, 1997b). Despite some integration of work in, for example, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, sociology and ethnography, discourse analysis in the social sciences for the most part remains disparate and fragmented, and characterized by a number of debates and tensions. As Van Dijk (1997a, p. 3) puts it, ‘given the different philosophies, approaches and methods in their various “mother disciplines”, the various developments of discourse analysis [have] hardly produced a unified enterprise’.

The field of organizational discourse has borrowed extensively from the wider discourse analytic literature and exhibits similar characteristics. Unlike Van Dijk, however, we do not see this as problem. Rather, we see the diversity of approaches and perspectives as indicative of organizational discourse as a plurivocal project and argue that such an approach is the best way of ensuring that the field makes a meaningful contribution to the study of organizations. Accordingly, the purpose of this Handbook is to demonstrate the plurivocal nature of organizational discourse for the benefit of those who wish to familiarize themselves with the field or who are contemplating utilizing a discursive approach to the study of organizational phenomena for the first time, as well as those already carrying out organizational discourse research, and who wish to enhance their understanding of it.

...