Scholars of organization tend to apportion organizational phenomena into two distinct levels: micro and macro. In organization studies, efforts to overcome the problems resulting from the micro-macro split focus on locating appropriate microfoundations or engaging in multilevel theorizing, but these approaches ultimately reinforce rather than transcend the divide. In response, I argue that communicative constitution of organization (CCO) theory provides thought leadership that can both reconceptualize the micro-macro relationship and generate novel theoretical directions, with specific attention to three widely employed theories of organization: the knowledge-based theory of the firm, stakeholder theory, and Carnegie School decisional theory. Conceptions of organizing and organization offered by CCO thus hold the potential to foster strengthened relationships between organizational communication and organization theory.
AguileraR. V.RuppD. E.WilliamsC. A.GanapathiJ. (2007). Putting the s back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 836-863.
2.
AlexanderJ. C.GiesenB.MünchR.SmelserN. J. (Eds.). (1987). The micro-macro link. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3.
AlvessonM.KärremanD. (2000). Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36, 136-158.
4.
AlvessonM.KärremanD. (2011). Decolonializing discourse: Critical reflections on organizational disocurse analysis. Human Relations, 64, 1121-1146.
5.
AlvessonM.SpicerA. (in press). A stupidity-based theory of organization. Journal of Management Studies.
6.
AndersenN. A. (2003). The undecidability of decisions. In HernesT.BakkenT. (Eds.), Autopoetic organization theory: Drawing on Miklas Luhmann's social systems perspective (pp. 235-258). Oslo, Norway: Copenhagen Business School Press.
7.
AntebyM.MolnarV. (2012). Collective memory meets organizational identity: Remembering to forget in a firm's rhetorical history. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 515-540.
8.
AshcraftK. L.KuhnT.CoorenF. (2009). Constitutional amendments: “Materializing” organizational communication. In BriefA.WalshJ. (Eds.), The Academy of Management Annals (Vol. 3, pp. 1-64). New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
AstleyW. G.Van de VenA. (1983). Central perspectives and debates in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 355-372.
10.
AxleyS. (1984). Managerial communication in terms of the conduit metaphor. Academy of Management Review, 9, 428-437.
11.
BaeckerD. (2006). The form of the firm. Organization, 13, 109-142.
12.
BargeJ. K.OliverC. (2003). Working with appreciation in managerial practice. Academy of Management Review, 28, 124-142.
13.
BarleyS. R. (2007). Corporations, democracy, and the public good. Journal of Management Inquiry, 16, 201-215.
14.
BarleyS. R.TolbertP. S. (1997). Institutionalization and structuration: Studying the links between action and institution. Organization Studies, 18, 93-117.
15.
BastienD. T. (1992). Change in organizational culture: The use of linguistic methods in a corporate acquisition. Management Communication Quarterly, 5(4), 403-442.
16.
BasuK.PalazzoG. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33, 122-136.
17.
BaumanZ. (1992). Intimations of postmodernity. London: Routledge.
18.
BencherkiN.CoorenF. (2011). Having to be: The possessive constitution of organization. Human Relations, 64, 1579-1607.
19.
BennettJ. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
20.
BlaschkeS.SchoenebornD.SeidlD. (2012). Organizations as networks of communication episodes: Turning the network perspective inside out. Organization Studies, 33(7), 879-906.
21.
BoatrightJ. R. (1996). Business ethics and the theory of the firm. American Business Law Journal, 34, 217-238.
22.
BodenD. (1994). The business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
23.
BrowningL. D.GreeneR. W.SitkinS. B.SutcliffeK. M.ObstfeldD. (2009). Constitutive complexity: Military entrepreneurs and the synthetic character of communication flows. In PutnamL. L.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 89-116). New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
BrummansB. H. J. M. (2006). The Montreal School and the question of agency. In CoorenF.TaylorJ. R.Van EveryE. (Eds.), Communication as organizing: Empirical and theoretical explorations in the dynamic of text and conversation (pp. 197-211). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
BrummansB. H. J. M.CoorenF.RobichaudD.TaylorJ. R. (in press). Approaches in research on the communicative constitution of organizations. In PutnamL. L.MumbyD. K. (Eds.), Sage handbook of organizational communication (3rd ed.). Thousand Laks, CA: Sage.
26.
BrunssonN. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organizations (AdlerN., Trans.). New York, NY: Wiley.
27.
BurrellG. (1997). Pandemonium: Towards a retro-organization theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
ChangB. G. (1996). Deconstructing communication: Representation, subject, and economies of exchange. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
29.
ChiaR. (1998). Exploring the expanded realm of technology, organization, and modernity. In ChiaR. (Ed.), Organized worlds: Explorations in technology and organization with Robert Cooper (pp. 1-17). New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
ChooC. W. (1998). The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
31.
ClarkeT. (2001). Balancing the triple bottom line: Financial, social and environmental performance. Journal of General Management, 26, 16-27.
32.
CohenM. D.BacdayanP. (1994). Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organization Science, 5, 554-568.
33.
CohenM. D.MarchJ. G.OlsenJ. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1-25.
34.
CollinsR. (1981). On the microfoundations of macrosociology. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 984-1014.
35.
ContuA.WillmottH. (2005). You spin me round: The realist turn in organization and management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 1645-1662.
36.
CooperR. (1986). Organization/disorganization. Social Science Information, 25, 299-335.
37.
CoorenF. (2000). The organizing property of communication. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
38.
CoorenF. (2004). Textual agency: How texts do things in organizational settings. Organization, 11, 373-393.
39.
CoorenF. (2010). Action and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation and ventriloquism. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
40.
CoorenF.BrummansB. H. J. M.CharrierasD. (2008). The coproduction of organizational presence: A study of Medicins Sans Frontiers in action. Human Relations, 61, 1339-1370.
41.
CoorenF.FairhurstG. T. (2009). Dislocation and stabilization: How to scale up from interactions to organization. In PutnamL. L.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 117-152). New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
CoorenF.KuhnT.CornelissenJ. P.ClarkT. (2011). Communication, organization, and organizing: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 32, 1149-1170.
43.
CoorenF.TaylorJ. R. (1997). Organization as an effect of mediation: Redefining the link between organization and communication. Communication Theory, 7, 219-260.
44.
CormanS. R. (1997). The reticulation of quasi-agents in systems of organizational communication. In BarnettG. A.ThayerL. (Eds.), Organization communication—emerging perspectives. Vol. 5: The renaissance in systems thinking (pp. 65-82). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
45.
CormanS. R.KuhnT.McPheeR. D.DooleyK. J. (2002). Studying complex discursive systems: Centering resonance analysis of communication. Human Communication Research, 28, 157-206.
46.
CormanS. R.McPheeR. D.IversonJ. O. (2007). “We ought to have . . . gumption”: A CRA analysis of an excerpt from the videotapeCorporation: After Mr. Sam. In CoorenF. (Ed.), Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting (pp. 133-162). New York, NY: Routledge.
47.
CyertR. M.MarchJ. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
48.
CzarniawskaB. (2008). A theory of organizing. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
49.
D’AdderioL. (2011). Artifacts at the centre of routines: Performing the material turn in routines theory. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7, 197-230.
50.
DeanJ. W.SharfmanM. P. (1993). Procedural rationality in the strategic decision making process. Journal of Management Studies, 30, 587-610.
51.
DeetzS. A. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization: Developments in communication and the politics of everyday life. Albany: State University of New York Press.
52.
DeetzS. A. (1996). Describing differences in approaches to organization science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and their legacy. Organization Science, 7, 191-207.
53.
DeetzS. (2003). Reclaiming the legacy of the linguistic turn. Organization, 10, 421-429.
54.
DeetzS.SimpsonJ. L. (2004). Critical organizational dialogue: Open formation and the demand of “otherness.” In AndersonR.BaxterL.CissnaL. (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 141-158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55.
de HolanP. M.PhillipsN. (2004). Organizational forgetting as strategy. Strategic Organization, 2, 423-433.
56.
DenrellJ. (2005). Should we be impressed with high performance?Journal of Management Inquiry, 14, 292-298.
57.
DeroyX.CleggS. (2011). When events interact with business ethics. Organization, 18, 637-653.
58.
DeSanctisG.PooleM. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5, 121-147.
59.
DosiG.NelsonR.WinterS. (Eds.). (2000). The nature and dynamics of. organizational capabilities. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
60.
DriscollC.StarikM. (2004). The primordial stakeholder: Advancing the conceptual consideration of stakeholder status for the natural environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 55-73.
61.
EisenbergE. M. (2006). Karl Weick and the aesthetics of contingencyOrganization Studies, 27, 1693-1707.
62.
EisenbergE. M.PhillipsS. (1991). Miscommunication in organizations. In CouplandN.GilesH.WiemannJ. (Eds.), “Miscommunication” and problematic talk (pp. 244-258). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
63.
FairhurstG. T.PutnamL. L. (2004). Organizations as discursive constructions. Communication Theory, 14, 5-26.
64.
FelinT.FossN. J. (2005). Strategic organization: A field in search of micro-foundation. Strategic Organization, 3, 441-455.
65.
FelinT.FossN. J. (2011). The endogenous origins of experience, routines, and organizational capabilities: The poverty of stimulus. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7, 231-256.
66.
FentonC.LangleyA. (2011). Strategy as practice and the narrative turn. Organization Studies, 32, 1171-1196.
67.
FlanaginA. J.StohlC.BimberB. (2006). Modeling the structure of collective action. Communication Monographs, 73, 29-54.
68.
FossN. J. (2011). Why micro-foundations for resource-based theory are needed and what theymaylook like. Journal of Management, 37, 1413-1428.
69.
FransmanM. (1998). Information, knowledge, vision, and theories of the firm. In DosiG.TeeceD. J.ChytryJ. (Eds.), Technology, organization, and competitiveness: Perspectives on industrial and corporate change (pp. 147-191). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
70.
FreemanR. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
71.
FreemanR. E.PhillipsR. A. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12, 311-349.
72.
FroomanJ. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24, 191-205.
73.
GadamerH.-G. (1975). Truth and method. New York, NY: Seabury Press.
74.
GavettiG. (2005). Cognitiion and hierarchy: Rethinking the microfoundations of capabilities’ development. Organization Science, 16, 599-617.
75.
GavettiG.LevinthalD.OcasioW. (2007). Neo-Carnegie: The Carnegie School’s past, present, and reconstructing for the future. Organization Science, 18, 523-536.
76.
GeigerD.SchröderA. (2012, July). Routines as text and conversation: Toward a semantic understanding of organizational routines. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the European Group for Organization Studies, Helsinki, Finland.
77.
GolantB. D.SillinceJ. A. A. (2007). The constitution of organizational legitimacy: A narrative perspective. Organization Studies, 28, 1149-1167.
78.
GoldspinkC.KayR. (2004). Bridging the micro–macro divide: A new basis for social science. Human Relations, 57, 597-618.
79.
GrantR. M. (1996a). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7, 375-387.
80.
GrantR. M. (1996b). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109-122.
81.
GrantR. M. (2001). Knowledge and organization. In NonakaI.TeeceD. (Eds.), Managing industrial knowledge: Creation, transfer, and utilization (pp. 145-169). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
82.
GronnP. C. (1983). Talk as the work: The accomplishment of school administration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 1-21.
83.
GrossbergL. (1982). Intersubjectivity and the conceptualization of communication. Human Studies, 5, 213-235.
84.
HaasT.DeetzS. (2000). Between the generalized and the concrete other: Approaching organizational ethics from feminist perspectives. In BuzzanellP. M. (Ed.), Rethinking organizational and managerial communication from feminist perspectives (pp. 24-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
85.
HassardJ.KelemenM.CoxJ. W. (2008). Disorganization theory: Explorations in alternative organizational analysis. London: Routledge.
86.
HeckerA. (2012). Knowledge beyond the individual? Making sense of a notion of colective knowledge in organization theory. Organization Studies, 33, 423-445.
87.
HeideggerM. (1971). A dialogue on language (HertzP. G., Trans.) On the way to language. New York, NH: Harper and Row.
88.
HelfatC. E.FinkesteinS.MitchellW.PeterafM. A.SingH.TeeceD. J. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
89.
HendryJ. (2000). Strategic decision making, discourse, and strategy as social practice. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 955-978.
90.
HiningsC. R.GreenwoodR. (2002). Disconnects and consequences in organization theory?Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 411-421.
91.
HoK. (2009). Liquidated: An ethnography of Wall Street. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
92.
Howard-GrenvilleJ. A. (2005). The persistence of flexible organizational routines: The role of agency and organizational context. Organization Science, 16, 618-636.
93.
HuyQ. H. (1999). Emotional capability, emotional intelligence, and radical change. Academy of Management Review, 24, 325-345.
94.
IntronaL. D.WhittakerL. (2003). The phenomenology of information systems evaluation: Overcoming the subject/object dualism. In WynnE. H.WhitleyE. A.MyersM. D.DeGrossJ. I. (Eds.), Global and organizational discourse about information technology (pp. 155-178). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
95.
JarzabkowskiP.FentonE. (2006). Strategizing and organizing in pluralistic contexts. Long Range Planning, 39, 631-648.
96.
JonesT. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404-437.
97.
JonesC.MunroR. (2005). Organization theory, 1985-2005. In JonesC.MunroR. (Eds.), Contemporary organization theory (pp. 1-15). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
98.
KapteinM.Van TulderR. (2003). Toward effective stakeholder dialogue. Business and Society Review, 108, 203-224.
KleinK. J.DansereauF.HallR. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195-229.
101.
KleinK. J.KozlowskiS. W. (2000). From micro to meso: Critical steps in conceptualizing and conducting multilevel research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 211-236.
102.
KogutB.ZanderU. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383-397.
103.
KogutB.ZanderU. (1996). What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7, 502-518.
104.
KoschmannM. A. (2013). The communicative constitution of collective identity in interorganizational collaboration. Management Communication Quarterly.
105.
KoschmannM. A.KuhnT.PfarrerM. (2012). A communicative framework of value in cross-sector parterships. Academy of Management Review, 37, 332-354.
106.
KuhnT. (2008). A communicative theory of the firm: Developing an alternative perspective on intra-organizational power and stakeholder relationships. Organization Studies, 29, 1227-1254.
107.
KuhnT.AshcraftK. L. (2003). Corporate scandal and the theory of the firm: Formulating the contributions of organizational communication studies. Management Communication Quarterly, 17, 20-57.
108.
KuhnT.CormanS. R. (2003). The emergence of homogeneity and heterogeneity in knowledge structures during a planned organizational change. Communication Monographs, 70, 198-229.
109.
KuhnT.DeetzS. A. (2008). Critical theory and corporate social responsibility: Can/should we get beyond cynical reasoning? In CraneA.McWilliamsA.MattenD.MoonJ.SiegelD. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 173-196). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
110.
KuhnT.JacksonM. (2008). Accomplishing knowledge: A framework for investigating knowing in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 21, 454-485.
111.
LammersJ. C. (2011). How institutions communicate: Institutional messages, institutional logics, and organizational communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 25, 154-182.
112.
LaplumeA. O.SonparK.LitzR. A. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34, 1152-1189.
113.
LawJ. (2002). Objects and Spaces. Theory, Culture and Society, 19, 91-105.
114.
LawrenceT.HardyC.PhillipsN. (2002). Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 281-290.
115.
LenzR. T. (1981). “Determinants” of organizational performance: An interdisciplinary review. Strategic Management Journal, 2, 131-154.
116.
LeonardiP. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35, 147-167.
117.
LevinthalD. A.MarchJ. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95-112.
118.
LewisL. K. (2006). Collaborative interaction: Review of communication scholarship and a research agenda. In BeckC. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 30 (pp. 197-247). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
119.
LoewensteinJ.OcasioW.JonesC. (2012). Vocabularies and vocabulary structure: A new approach linking categories, practices, and institutions. In WalshJ. P.BriefA. (Eds.), Academy of Management Annals (pp. 41-86). New York, NY: Routledge.
120.
LuhmannN. (1986). The autopoiesis of social systems. In GeyerF.van der ZouwenJ. (Eds.), Sociocybernetic paradoxes (pp. 172-192). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
121.
LuhmannN. (1990). The paradox of system differentiation and the evolution of society. In AlexanderJ.ColomyP. (Eds.), Differentiation theory and social change: Comparative and historical perspectives (pp. 409-440). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
122.
LuhmannN. (1995). Social systems (BednarzJ. J., with BaeckerD., Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
123.
Lutgen-SandvikP.McDermottV. (2008). The constitution of employee-abusive organizations: A communication flows theory. Communication Theory, 18, 304-333.
124.
Lynch-WoodG.WilliamsonD. (2007). The social licence as a form of regulation for small and medium enterprises. Journal of Law and Society, 34, 321-341.
125.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: John Wiley.
126.
MarchJ. G.SuttonR. I. (1997). Organizational performance as a dependent variable. Organization Science, 8, 698-706.
127.
MarshakR. J. (1998). A discourse on discourse: Redeeming the meaning of talk. In GrantD.KeenoyT.OswickC. (Eds.), Discourse and organization (pp. 15-30). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
128.
McPheeR. D. (2004). Text, agency, and organization in the light of structuration theory. Organization, 11, 355-371.
129.
McPheeR. D.IversonJ. O. (2009). Agents of constitution in communidad: Constitutive processes of communication in organizations. In PutnamL. L.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 49-88). New York, NY: Routledge.
130.
McPheeR. D.ZaugP. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation. The Electronic Journal of Communication/La Revue Electronique de Communication, 10. Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/www/ejcmain.htm
131.
MillerS. J.WilsonD. C. (2006). Perspectives on organizational decision-making. In CleggS.HardyC.LawrenceT. B.NordW. R. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization studies (2nd ed., pp. 469-484). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
132.
MilneM. J.TregidgaH.WaltonS. (2009). Words not actions! The ideological role of sustainable development reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 22, 1211-1257.
133.
MintzbergH. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
134.
MongeP.ContractorN. S. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
135.
MorgesonF. P.HofmanD. A. (1999). The structure and function of collective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theory development. Academy of Management Review, 24, 249-265.
136.
MumbyD. K. (2011). What’s cooking in organizational discourse studies? A reply to Alvesson and Kärreman. Human Relations, 64, 1147-1161.
137.
MumbyD. K.StohlC. (1996). Disciplining organizational communication studies. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 50-72.
MunroR. (2003). Disorganization. In WestwoodR.CleggS. (Eds.), Debating organization: Point-counterpoint in organization studies (pp. 283-297). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
140.
MunshiD.KurianP. (2005). Imperializing spin cycles: A postcolonial look at public relations, greenwashing, and separation of publics. Public Relations Review, 31, 513-520.
141.
NelsonR. R.WinterS. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
142.
Ordeix-RigoE.DuarteJ. (2009). From public diplomacy to corporate diplomacy: Increasing corporations’ legitimacy and influence. American Behavioral Scientist, 53, 549-564.
143.
OrlikowskiW. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13, 249-273.
144.
OrlikowskiW. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28, 1435-1448.
145.
OrlitzkyM.SchmidtF. L.RynesS. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24, 403-441.
146.
ParmarB. L.FreemanR. E.HarrisonJ. S.WicksA. C.PurnellL.de ColleS.(2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. In WalshJ.BriefA. (Eds.), The Academy of Management Annals (Vol. 4, pp. 403-445). Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
147.
ParsonsT. (1956). Suggestions for a sociological approach to the theory of organizations—I. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1, 63-85.
148.
PentlandB. T. (2011). The foundation is solid, if you know where to look: Comment on Felin and Foss. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7, 279-293.
149.
PentlandB. T.FeldmanM. S. (2005). Organizational routines as a unit of analysis. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14, 793-815.
150.
PerrowC. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
151.
PerrowC. (2000). An organizational analysis of organizational theory. Contemporary Sociology, 29, 469-476.
152.
PhillipsN.OswickC. (2012). Organizational discourse: Domains, debates, and directions. In WalshJ. P.BriefA. (Eds.), The Academy of Management Annals (pp. 435-481). New York, NY: Routledge.
153.
PorterA. J. (2012, July). A “disorganization” approach to theorizing the communicative confluence of organizations. Paper presented at the European Group for Organization Studies conference, Helsinki, Finland.
154.
PowellW. W.ColyvasJ. A. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SuddabyR.SahlinK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276-298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
155.
PutnamL. L.BoysS. (2006). Revisiting metaphors of organizational communication. In CleggS.HardyC.LawrenceT.NordW. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organization studies (pp. 541-576). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
156.
PutnamL. L.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.). (2009). Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication. New York, NY: Routledge.
157.
QuinnR. W.DuttonJ. E. (2005). Coordination as energy-in-conversation. Academy of Management Review, 30, 36-57.
158.
QuinnR. W.WorlineM. C. (2008). Enabling courageous collective action: Conversations from United Airlines Flight 93. Organization Science, 19, 497-516.
159.
RansonS.HiningsB.GreenwoodR. (1980). The structuring of organizational structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 1-17.
160.
RiceR. E.CooperS. (2010). Organizations and unusual routines: A systems analysis of dysfunctional feedback processes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
161.
RicoeurP. (1981). Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action, and interpretation (ThompsonJ. B., Trans.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
162.
RobertsJ. (2003). The manufacture of corporate social responsibility: Constructing corporate sensibility. Organization, 10, 249-265.
163.
RobichaudD.GirouxH.TaylorJ. R. (2004). The metaconversation: The recursive property of language as a key to organizing. Academy of Management Review, 29, 617-634.
164.
RoloffJ. (2008a). A life cycle model of multi-stakeholder networks. Business Ethics: A European Review, 17, 311-325.
165.
RoloffJ. (2008b). Learning from multi-stakeholder networks: Issue-focussed stakeholder management. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 233-250.
166.
RortyR. (Ed.). (1967). The linguistic turn: Recent essays in philosophical method. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
167.
RowleyT. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, 22, 887-910.
168.
SchererA. G.PalazzoG. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48, 899-931.
169.
SchneiderS. C.DunbarR. L. M. (1992). A psychoanalytic reading of hostile takeover events. Academy of Management Review, 17, 537-567.
170.
SchoenebornD. (2011). Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 25, 663-689.
171.
SchoenebornD.SchererA. G. (2012). Clandestine organizations, al Qaeda, and the paradox of (in)visibility: A response to Stohl and Stohl. Organization Studies, 33, 963-971.
172.
SchulzM. (2008). Staying on track: A voyage to the internal mechanisms of routine reproduction. In BeckerM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational routines (pp. 228-257). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
173.
ScottS. G.LaneV. R. (2000). A stakeholder approach to organizational identity. Academy of Management Review, 25, 43-62.
174.
SeidlD. (2005). Organization and interaction. In LuhmannNiklas (Ed.), Organization studies (pp. 145-170). Oslo, Norway: Copenhagen Business School Press.
175.
SeidlD.BeckerK. H. (2006). Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization, 13, 9-35.
176.
ShepherdG. J. (1999). Advances in communication theory: A critical review. Journal of Communication, 49, 156-164.
177.
SillinceJ. A. A. (2007). Organizational context and the discursive construction of organizing. Management Communication Quarterly, 20, 363-394.
178.
SillinceJ. A. A.BarkerJ. R. (2012). A tropological theory of institutionalization. Organization Studies, 33, 7-38.
179.
SillinceJ. A. A.BrownA. D. (2009). Multiple organizational identities and legitimacy: The rhetoric of police websites. Human Relations, 62, 1829-1856.
180.
SillinceJ. A. A.JarzabkowskiP.ShawD. (2012). Shaping strategic action through the rhetorical construction and exploitation of ambiguity. Organization Science, 23, 630-650.
181.
SimonH. A. (1997). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organizations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
182.
SimsekZ. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 597-624.
183.
SmithD. R. (1970). The fallacy of the “communication breakdown.”Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56, 343-346.
184.
SmithD. E. (2001). Texts and the ontology of organizations and institutions. Studies in Cultures, Organizations, and Societies, 7, 159-198.
185.
SmithD. B.SchneiderB.DicksonM. W. (2006). Meso organizational behavior: Comments on the third paradigm. In CleggS.HardyC.LawrenceT.NordW. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organziation studies (2nd ed., pp. 149-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
186.
SoaresC. (2008). Corporate legal responsibility: A Levinasian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 545-553.
187.
SpeeA. P.JarzabkowskiP. (2011). Strategic planning as a communicative process. Organization Studies, 32, 1217-1246.
188.
SpenderJ.-C. (1994). Knowing, managing, and learning: A dynamic managerial epistemology. Management Learning, 25, 387-412.
189.
SpenderJ.-C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 45-62.
190.
SpenderJ.-C. (2002). Knowledge, uncertainty, and an emergent theory of the firm. In ChooC. W.BontisN. (Eds.), The strategic management of intellectual capital and organizational knowledge (pp. 149-162). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
191.
StarbuckW. H. (2003). The origins of organization theory. In TsoukasH.KnudsenC. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organization theory (pp. 143-182). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
192.
StarkD. (2011). The sense of dissonance: Accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
193.
StawB.SuttonR. I. (1993). Macro organizational psychology. In MurninghanK. (Ed.), Social psychology of organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 350-384). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
194.
SternR. N.BarleyS. R. (1996). Organizations and social systems: Organization theory’s neglected mandate. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 146-162.
195.
SydowJ.WindelerA. (1998). Organizing and evaluating interfirm networks: A structurationist perspective on network processes and effectiveness. Organization Science, 9, 265-284.
196.
TaylorJ. R. (2000). Thinking about organization in a new way: An inquiry into the ontological foundations of organization. Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(1). Retrieved from http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/v10n1200.htm
197.
TaylorJ. R. (2009). Organizing from the bottom up? Reflections on the constitution of organization in communication. In PutnamL. L.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 153-186). New York, NY: Routledge.
198.
TaylorJ. R. (2011). Organization as an (imbricated) configuring of transactions. Organization Studies, 32, 1273-1294.
199.
TaylorJ. R.CoorenF.GirouxN.RobichaudD. (1996). The communicational basis of organization: Between the conversation and the text. Communication Theory, 6, 1-39.
200.
TaylorJ. R.Van EveryE. J. (2000). The emergent organization: Communication as its site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
201.
TeeceD. J. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55-79.
202.
TeeceD. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319-1350.
203.
TosiH. L. (2009). About theories of organization. In TosiH. L. (Ed.), Theories of organization (pp. 3-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
204.
TownleyB.CooperD. J.OakesL. (2003). Performance measures and the rationalization of organizations. Organization, 24, 1045-1071.
205.
TretheweyA.AshcraftK. L. (2004). Practicing disorganization: The development of applied perspectives on living with tension. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 32, 81-88.
206.
TsoukasH. (1996). The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 11-25.
207.
TsoukasH. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20, 941-957.
208.
WalshJ. P.MeyerA. D.SchoonhovenC. B. (2006). A future for organization theory: Living in and living with changing organizations. Organization Science, 17, 657-671.
209.
WalshJ. P.UngsonG. R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16, 57-91.
210.
WeickK. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
211.
WeickK. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
212.
WhittingtonR. (2010). Giddens, structuration theory and strategy as practice. In GolsorkhiD.RouleauL.SeidlD.VaaraE. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 109-126). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
213.
WinterS. G. (2011). Problems at the foundation? Comments on Felin and Foss. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7, 257-277.
214.
WittgensteinL. (1953). Philosophical investigations (AnscombeG. E. M., Trans.).New York, NY: Blackwell.
215.
ZbarackiM. J.BergenM. (2010). When truces collapse: A longitudinal study of price-adjustment routines. Organization Studies, 21, 955-972.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
