Globalization is in the title of the text for this class. More than just a buzz word, globalization impacts how organizations today function and organizations impact the process of globalization.
Several years ago the faculty in my department identified four cornerstones for the program: democracy, diversity, globalization, and technology. We defined globalization as "the interconnectedness, integration, fragmentation, and conflict within human societies and cultures in global contexts." I'm more interested in the pragmatics of globalization and the extent to which ideas, organizations, money, people, and the like move freely (or not) around the globe.
The authors of your text define globalization in the context of organizational communication as "the process through which the global economy becomes increasingly interconnected, through which global and domestic organizations merge, and through which communication technologies blur traditional spatial and temporal boundaries" (p. 382). There are many plusses to globalization, such as an increased ability for organization members to collaborate without regard to physical proximity. On the minus side, organizations have been able to outsource labor to cheaper locations.
As the authors of your text point out in Chapter 13, treaties, laws, and agreements related to globalization privilege property (and organizations) over individuals, especially labor. Globalization is here to stay, but we must consider the impact it has on local economies and the ability of workers to move as easily across borders as goods and products do.
~ Professor Cyborg
You've probably heard people say, "That's just a theory." Yet as the authors of your text point out, theories are practical, taking "us beyond particulars toward universals" (p. 11). A good theory helps explain why things are the way they are. In organizational communication, good theories help explain how and why people organize.
Students often want to know which theory is the best. There is no one best theory, but some theories are better than others in their explanatory power, elegance, application, utility, relevance, and creativity. One criticism of many communication theories, including those in organizational communication, is their Western bias. That is, most theories of communication are grounded in Western culture, especially the dominant U.S. culture. This is why the authors of the text include "relevant to different cultures and historical periods" as a criterion for a good organizational communication theory.
You'll likely find it easy to critique early theories of organization, yet it's important to consider the historical context in which those theories--and any theory--are embedded. For example, human relations and human resources arose in response to criticism of classical management theories. Yet classical management theories provided the first systematic view of organizations, so their importance should not be neglected.
If you've taken courses in business or industrial psychology many of the theories discussed in the text will be familiar. As you read the chapters, however, consider the differences between a business or psychology approach to organization and a communication approach. The research questions organizational communication scholars posed (examples listed in Chapter 1) should give you some insights into those differences.
~ Professor Cyborg
Chapter 1 in the Cheney et al. book introduces the notion of metaphor in examining organizational communication, providing a list of possible metaphors on page 5. I find the notion of metaphors intriguing because they tend to go unnoticed, yet impact how you think and act.
In 1980 Lakoff and Johnson published Metaphors We Live By. The authors argued that metaphors embedded in the language communicators use shape how they interpret and create messages--that is, how individuals respond to their worlds. SJSU lecturer Dr. Janice E. Patten provides a useful summary of the book's key points on her website, The Literary Link.
About 10 years ago one of communication studies faculty tried to impose a metaphor on the department--a village. While that action seems innocuous, metaphors influence how you think about organizations (and other things as Lakoff and Johnson argue, such as love, war, and ogres--Shrek says to Donkey, "Ogres are like onions") and, in turn, the process of organizing. For example, if you think of organizations as machines, then you just replace parts (people) when they're broken. It doesn't matter who the person is, just as long as you have someone for each part of the machine. In contrast, if you think of organizations as organisms, then you become concerned with the organization's health, and the health of the people who make up the organization.
In the "village" case, faculty members not only thought that the metaphor was inappropriate, but that having someone dictate the metaphor certainly didn't reflect a cooperative sort of village. (Maybe something closer to a fiefdom.) As another example, one faculty member I know at a university in the midwest unmentioned referred to his department
as a "pit of vipers." That strong metaphor speaks volumes about faculty relationships.
At a conference I heard someone describe the internet as more of a city than an unknown space. I like that metaphor for organization as well. "City" suggests the complexity of organization, with parts that you know well (your neighborhood), parts you somewhat know, and parts you really don't know at all. City also suggests diversity in people, activities, ways of transiting, and ways of communicating. There's structure, but not necessarily rationale or logical reasons for that structure. Cities are in continual flux, embedded in (and often in power struggles with) larger social structures such as counties, regions, states, and countries. Different cities have different rhythms--Santa Cruz sort of eases into the day, San Francisco is awake all night, and Seattle settles in for an early evening to start at dawn the next day. Finally, cities have their charms, but also their dark sides.
Although metaphors are useful in understanding organizing, organizations, and organizational communication, these linguistic devices always foreground some things while hiding others.
~ Professor Cyborg
Summer officially ended yesterday with the first faculty duty day. I spent the morning beta testing the new website builder for SJSU that will allow faculty to (fairly) easily develop webpages and make course information accessible to students. The pages will listed at people.sjsu.edu, a much friendlier URL than the previous one. And the URLs for the faculty sites will be more logical as well. My beta site is up for the next 2 weeks. I'm not doing too much with it because I'll lose all the work when beta testing is over. The system is far better than Spartan web wizard, which is completely nonintuitive.
At noon yesterday the new SJSU president, Jon Whitmore, spoke. He's started his own blog, although there's no way to comment on it. It's really just a webpage that SJSU's PR office calls a blog. But maybe this does indicate his desire to move SJSU into the 21st century.
The last part of the day was the department faculty meeting. With all the lecturers and TAs, we fill the COMM Lab. Once that group leaves, tho, there are just over a handful of tenure-track faculty. Administrators like a faculty with a high percentage of lecturers, but because only a few have service duties, it puts a tremendous burden on the tenure-track faculty. We simply don't have the number of faculty we need to complete all the tasks that need to get done.
Today is our second duty day. The college meeting was this morning. Not many faculty there; everyone's getting ready for the start of classes next week. With SJSU facing record enrollments, Monday will be hectic. I'll be home in Santa Cruz, teaching online.
~ Professor Cyborg
