Linda Putnam’s Contributions Toward the Building of Cross-Disciplinary Relationships

Brummans B. H. J. M. Putnam L. L. Gray B. Hanke R. Lewicki R. J. Wiethoff C. (2008). Making sense of intractable multiparty conflict: A study of framing in four environmental disputes. Communication Monographs, 75(1), 25-51.

Grant D. Hardy C. Oswick C. Putnam L. L. (2004). The Sage handbook of organizational discourse. London: Sage.

Grant D. Hardy C. Putnam L. L. (2011). Organizational discourse studies (3-volume set): Sage major works series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Knapp M. L. Putnam L. L. Davis L. J. (1988). Measuring interpersonal conflict in organizations: Where do we go from here? Management Communication Quarterly, 1(3), 414-429.

Kolb D. M. Putnam L. L. (1992). Introduction: The dialectics of disputing. In Kolb D. M. Bartunek J. (Eds.), Hidden conflict in organizations: Uncovering behind-the-scenes disputes (pp. 1-31). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kolb D. M. Putnam L. L. (1997). Through the looking glass: Negotiation theory refracted through the lens of gender. In Gleason S. E. (Eds.), Workplace dispute resolution: Directions for the 21st century (pp. 231-257). East Lansing: Michigan State Press.

Kolb D. M. Putnam L. L. (2005). Negotiation through a gender lens. In Moffit M. Bordone R. C. (Eds.), The handbook of dispute resolution (pp. 135-149). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kolb D. M. Putnam L. L. (2006). Gender is more than who we are. In Schneider A. K. Honeyman C. (Eds.), The negotiator’s fieldbook (pp. 315-322). Washington, DC: American Bar Association.

Putnam L. L. (1985). Bargaining as task and process: Multiple functions of interaction sequences. In Street J. R. L. Capella N. (Eds.), Sequence and pattern in communicative behavior (pp. 225-242). London: Edward Arnold.

Putnam L. L. (1988). Communication and interpersonal conflict in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 1(3), 293-301.

Putnam L. L. (2001). The language of opposition: Challenges in organizational dispute resolution. In Eadie W. Nelson P. (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 10-20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Putnam L. L. (2003). Dialectical tensions and rhetorical tropes in negotiations. Organization Studies, 25(1), 35-53.

Putnam L. L. (2005). Discourse analysis: Mucking around with negotiation data. International Negotiation, 10(1), 17-32.

Putnam L. L. (2010). Negotiation and discourse analysis. Negotiation Journal, 26(2), 145-154.

Putnam L. L. Fairhurst G. (2001). Discourse analysis in organizations: Issues and concerns. In Jablin F. M. Putnam L. L. (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 78-136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Putnam L. Grant D. Michelson G. Cutcher L. (2005). Discourse and resistance: Targets, practices, and consequences. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(1), 5-18.

Putnam L. L. Jones D. (1982a). The role of communication in bargaining. Human Communication Research, 8(3), 262-280.

Putnam L. L. Jones T. S. (1982b). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs, 49, 171-191.

Putnam L. L. Casali A. M. (2009). Introduction: A Brazilian story on the development of organizational communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 22(4), 642-647.

Putnam L. L. Nicotera A. M. (2009). Communicative constitution of organization is a question: Critical issues for addressing it. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 158-165.

Putnam L. L. Pacanowsky M. E. (Eds.). (1983). Communication and organization: An interpretive perspective. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Putnam L. L. Poole M. S. Seibold D. R. (1997). Organizational communication in the 21st century. Management Communication Quarterly, 11(1), 127-138.

Putnam L. L. Wilson S. R. (1989). Argumentation and bargaining strategies as discriminators of inegrative outlcomes. In Rahim M. A. (Eds.), Managing conflict: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 121-141). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Real K. Putnam L. L. (2005). Ironies in the discursive struggle of pilots defending the profession. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(1), 91-119.