This paper shows how an agribusiness in a remote agrarian village in the Philippines has been organized in traditional ways amid technological advancements and the free market. The paper draws on the Montreal School’s CCO approach, which holds that organizing begins at the level of interaction and that nonhumans make a difference in social formation. Through analyzing the text exchanges between farm actors, the paper surfaces the agencies of the most ventriloquized agricultural actants within their talks. Imagined in Bakhtin’s dialogical world, multiple voices were made to interplay across time and space creating tensions, on one hand, and facilitating the assimilation of similar qualities of ideologically differing voices, on the other. This paper stresses that the ideological difference of interplaying voices can be blurred in the process of assimilation or in the constitution of an organization. The “intertextual play of power” of multiple voices offers a postcolonial perspective in examining power in organization studies.
AllenA. M. (2011). Negotiating worlds, managing subjectivities, and redefining selves: The lived 26 experiences of African American undergraduate females at predominately white institutions. [Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University]. (ProQuest LLC).
2.
BakhtinM. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. (HolquestM. Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). University of Texas Press.
3.
BakhtinM. M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. University of Minnesota Press.
4.
BakhtinM. M. (2004). Discourse in the novel. In RivkinJ.RyanM. (Ed.), Literary theory: An anthology (trans, 2nd ed.). Blackwell. (Original work published 1981).
5.
BankoffG. (2014). ‘For the good of the barrio’ Community associations and the state in the rural Philippines 1935-1965. In BogaertsE.RabenR. (Eds.), Beyond empire and nation: The decolonization of African and Asian societies, 1930s–1970s (pp. 167–188). KITLV Press.
6.
BrownS.CapdevilaR. (1999). Perpetuum mobile: Substance, force and the sociology of translation. In LawJ.HassardJ (Eds.), Actor network theory and after (pp. 26–50). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03481.x
CapizzoL. (2018). Reimagining dialogue in public relations: Bakhtin and open dialogue in the public sphere. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.007
9.
CharmazK. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–536). Sage.
10.
CleggS. (2010). The state, power, and agency: Missing in action in institutional theory?Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492609347562
11.
ConnorS. (2000). Dumbstruck: A cultural history of ventriloquism. Oxford University Press.
12.
CoorenF. (2006). The organizational world as a plenum of agencies. In CoorenF.TaylorJ. R.Van EveryE. J. (Eds.), Communication as organizing (pp. 81–100). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13.
CoorenF. (2012). Communication theory at the center: Ventriloquism and the communicative constitution of reality. Journal of Communication, 62(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01622.x
CoorenF.FairhurstG. (2009). Dislocation and stabilization: How to scale up from interactions to organization. In PutnamL.NicoteraA. M. (Eds.), Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication (pp. 117–144). Routledge.
16.
CoorenF.KuhnT.CornelissenJ.ClarkT. (2011). Communication, organizing and organization: An overview and introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 9(32), 1149–1170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611410836
17.
CoorenF.SandlerS. (2014). Polyphony, ventriloquism, and constitution: In dialogue with Bakhtin. Communication Theory, 24(3), 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12041
18.
DemetrioF. R. (1978). Towards an understanding of Philippine myths. Asian Folklore Studies, 37(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/1177582
19.
EllisC. (2004). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Altamira.
EnriquezV. (2010). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Filipino experience. University of the Philippine Press.
22.
EnriquezV. (2014). Kapwa and the struggle for justice, freedom, and dignity. In TolentinoR.CamposP.SolisR. J.PangilinanC. (Eds.), Communication and media theories (pp. 440–451). University of the Philippine Press.
23.
EvensenL. S. (2004). From dialogue to dialogism: The confessions of a writing researcher. In BustardF.BrandistC.EvensenL. S.FaberH. C. (Eds.), Bakhtinian perspectives on language and culture: Meaning in language, art and new media (pp. 147–159). Palgrave Macmillan.
24.
FaircloughN. (2003). Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge.
HumphreysM.BrownA. D. (2002). Dress and identity: A Turkish case study. Journal of Management Studies, 39(7), 927–952. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00318
27.
IletoR. (1979). Pasyon and revolution: Popular movements in the Philippines, 1840-1910. Ateneo de Manila University Press.
28.
JamiasJ.F. (1993). A holistic approach to development and communication. UP Los Baños Journal, 3(1&2), 12–21.
29.
LachmannR. (2004). Rhetoric, the dialogical principle and the fantastic in Bakhtin’s thought. In BostardF.BrandistC.EvensenL. S.FaberH. C. (Eds.), Bakhtinian perspective on language and culture. Meaning in language, art and new media. Palgrave Macmillan.
30.
LarkinJ. (1982). Philippine history reconsidered: A socioeconomic perspective. The American Historical Review, 87(3), 595–628. https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/87.3.595
LatourB. (2004). Politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Harvard University Press.
33.
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the social. An introduction to Actor-network theory. Oxford University Press.
34.
LawJ. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5(4), 379–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01059830
35.
LernerD. (1958). The Passing of traditional society: Modernizing the Middle East. Free Press.
36.
MelkoteS. R.SteevesL. H. (2001). Communication for development in the third world: Theory and practice for empowerment (2nd ed.). Sage.
OngkikoI. V. C.FlorA. (2003). Introduction to development communication. UP Open University and SEAMEO Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture.
RafaelV. (1987). Confession, conversion, and reciprocity in early Tagalog colonial society. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 29(2), 320–339. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0010417500014535
42.
RogersE. (1969). Modernization among peasants: The impact of communication. Holt Rinehart & Winston.
RouseJ. (1996). Engaging science: How to understand its practices philosophically. Cornell University Press.
45.
ScottJ. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.
46.
TaylorJ. (2000). Thinking about organization in a new way: An inquiry into the ontological foundations of organization. Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(1).
47.
TaylorJ. R.CoorenF.GirouxN.RobichaudD. (1996). The communicational basis of organization: Between the conversation and the text. Communication Theory, 6(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1996.tb00118.x
