首页> 外文期刊>Corporate communications >Doing the right things or doing things right?: Paradoxes and Swedish communication professionals' roles and challenges
【24h】

Doing the right things or doing things right?: Paradoxes and Swedish communication professionals' roles and challenges

机译:做正确的事还是做正确的事?:悖论和瑞典传播专业人士的角色和挑战

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

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.
机译:目的-本文的目的是研究和分析控制沟通专业人员的挑战,目标和角色的普遍理性形式。作者还将探讨合理性的其他形式,并讨论这些形式所隐含的含义。设计/方法论/方法-本文基于欧洲传播监督(ECM)的调查结果以及对瑞典传播经理的定性采访。首先,作者提供了ECM数据和瑞典的采访材料,即作者描述了从业者对他们理解的重要工作任务和角色的看法。访谈的重点是将沟通目标与业务目标联系起来的实际做法。第二,从反思的角度挑战结果,使用悖论转向的理论并质疑企业传播中的“理所当然的思维”。调查结果-ECM数据表明,实践中的主要挑战是“将业务战略与沟通联系起来”。瑞典受访者在“建立和维护信任”方面脱颖而出,因为这几乎同等重要。定性访谈研究增强了ECM中的结果。受访者似乎按照传统的管理议程进行工作-即,他们分解了总体业务目标并将其转化为可衡量的沟通目标。使用悖论理论反映了结果。讨论了两个悖论:在管理主义和专业主义之间,以及战略通才和运营专家之间。研究的局限性/意义-该研究基于通过便利性样本收集的调查数据,而访谈研究是一项试点研究。实际意义-本文着重于规范从业者理想与现实之间的冲突,并帮助从业者反思主流思想。原创性/价值-基于ECM的经验发现,访谈和理论框架,作者得出结论,如果要富有成效地实现“交往组织”的理念,就必须脱离多维理性和质疑。被认为是理所当然的想法。在公司传播研究中,悖论理论和概念(例如功能愚蠢)的使用相当新颖。其他研究可能会进一步探索悖论,以引发对话,这可能会破坏一维思维和功能性愚蠢。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号