Transcript Delivering teaching of discourse analysis as part of an OB course

Teaching Discourse Analysis
Bill Fear
Cardiff Business School
[email protected]
07891469869
Basic Principles, Concepts, and Definitions
•
Introducing Discourse Analysis to Organizational Behaviour
•
What is Discourse Analysis – What is Organizational Discourse Analysis
•
Language, Text, and Context
•
Approaches & Methods…?
Introducing Discourse Analysis to Organizational Behaviour
What is OB and why is DA relevant
Loosely define OB is a field of study concerned with the impact of
individuals, groups and structure on behaviour within organizations, with
the purpose of applying the related knowledge to improve organizational
effectiveness.
DA/Organizational Discourse Analysis (ODA) can be considered the study
of language and texts in relation to the construction of the social
world/reality. ‘Objects’ such as social institutions and taken for granted
ways of behaving are bought into question – they are problematized. In
Critical studies/methods there is a focus on ‘improvement’.
Successful and effective managers spend a lot of time using language and texts
DA can be of use to managers and is relevant to OB; talk and text are heavily
used; both OB and ODA focus on ‘improvement’/’effectiveness’…
The Relationship Between Action and Discourse
Phillips, Lawrence & Hardy (2004). Discourse and Institutions. Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 29, No. 4, 635–652.
Discourse
Need to recognise that discourse in definition and form is not fixed
Michael Stubbs (1983) observed, “Anything at all that is written on
discourse analysis is partial and controversial” (p. 12).
Nonetheless, Talk and text are the central medium of social science
research:
Interviews
Focus groups
Observation
Documents/reports
Questionnaires (eg. How questions are phrased)
Hence we need to know how to analyse it…
“Qualitative research starts from and returns to words, talk, and texts as
meaningful representations of concepts” (2004: 455). Academy of
Management Journal 2009, Vol. 52, No. 5, 856–862.
Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of
natural language. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Discourse
Discourse’ ... refers to language in use, as a process which is socially situated.
However ... we may go on to discuss the constructive and dynamic role of
either spoken or written discourse in structuring areas of knowledge of the
social and institutional practices which are associated with them. In the sense,
discourse is a means of talking and writing about an acting upon worlds, a
means which both constructs and is constructed by a set of social practices
within these worlds, and in so doing both reproduces and constructs afresh
particular social-discursive practices, constraining or encouraged by more
macro movements in the overarching social formation. (Candlin 1997)
“the analysis of discourse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As
such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent
from the purposes or functions which these forms are designed to serve in
human affairs.” (Brown and Yule 1983)
BUT schools of DA are contrasted between language representing reality
(language is a mirror that reflects reality but does not play a functional role)
and re-presenting reality (the use of language or present or share an aspect of
reality) and constructing reality (language is one of the primary means, if not
the primary means, by which we construct and create a social reality)
Organizational Discourse Analysis
ODA is the study of organizations through DA. ODA makes use of
the wider concept of texts. ODA is the study of the production,
distribution and consumption of texts (and how this relates to
something else – the object) (Phillips, Lawrence & Hardy, 2004)
[Loosely speaking] texts and the related processes are the linked set
of IVs and the Object is the DV although these is not necessarily a
causal link in the positivist sense.
Objects include institutions, identities, policy, subjectivities, and
other structures or things or patterns of ‘behaving’; e.g. leadership
can be treated as an object and we can look at discourses of
leadership or the discourses of leaders…
The Relationship Between Action and Discourse
Phillips, Lawrence & Hardy (2004). Discourse and Institutions. Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 29, No. 4, 635–652.
Language, Text, and Context
ODA is the study of language, text and context
Language is focal in the study of organizations since the so called
‘linguistic turn’ in organization and management studies. This is the
consideration that language plays a dominant role in constituting our
social reality. That is, we use language to construct our world.
Many schools of DA focus on the use of language – spoken and
written - How language is used, from words and parts of speech
through grammatical structures to ways of presenting arguments.
Examples include Conversational Analysis (CA), Discursive
Psychology (Potter and Wetherell), the Montreal School, and Critical
Discourse Analysis (CDA; Fairclough)
When the focus is on language then language is the IV
Text and Context
Texts play an important role in DA and especially in ODA.
ODA has been defined as the study of the production, distribution
and consumption of texts (Phillips, Lawrence and Hardy, 2004).
A text is something that can be read. It does not have to be a
written text; a document per se. The wider use of texts has long
been recognised in disciplines such as advertising, marketing, and
environmental psychology.
Ricoeur (1971) published a seminal paper on text. He pointed out
that any event leaves a trace. These traces can be read as patterns.
These patterns form a discourse. The discourse is inscribed in a
text. Discourse in language ceases to exist unless it is inscribed in a
text; memory, a pattern of actions, a document.
Once a text has been created it can, and will, be interpreted in
ways other than intended by the author. This is saying that there
are unintended consequences.
SOCIAL PRACTICE
DISCURSIVE PRACTICE
TEXT
Processes of text production, distribution & consumption
Social structures, power relations, material interests etc
Andrea Whittle, Cardiff Business School
Text and Context
The importance of texts is twofold. First, they are important in their
own right as objects and can be used as objects. Second, texts
contain discourses which can be analysed.
A text can contain multiple discourses.
Different levels of discourse are useful in terms of considering
context - how we consider context is affected by the level at which
we consider/analyse text/discourse/use of language.
Alvesson and Karreman, (2000, 2004)
Alvesson, M. & Karreman, D. (2000) Varieties of Discourse: On the
Study of Organizations through Discourse Analysis. Human Relations,
53(9), 1125-1149
Alvesson and Kärreman (2000) provide useful
distinction between:
Capital ‘D’ = Foucauldian notion of Discourse:
“general and prevalent systems for the formation and
articulation of ideas in a particular period of time …
functioning as a powerful ordering force” (p. 1126-7)
“standardized ways of
referring to/constituting a certain kind of phenomenon” (p.
1134)
“forms of institutionalized intelligibility” (Wetherell, 1998:
394)
Lower-case ‘d’ = Close-range micro-interaction
approaches
eg. CA, Potter & Wetherell, which focus on how people
actually use language, how people talk about things in
conversations
Approaches and Methods…?
The ‘method’ of Discourse Analysis will depend on the approach taken initially
in relation to ODA
If we think about OB then DA is relevant right from the level of conversation
through to the level of written documents (e.g. policy documents, strategy,
corporate documents) as what DA tells us is that discourse is an IV for
behavioural outcomes (the DV)
‘The theory and research challenge is to ascertain and trace the dialogue
across fragmented discourses from the local into the situated social,
historical, and economic contexts.’
Boje, Oswick and Ford (2004), LANGUAGE AND ORGANIZATION: THE DOING
OF DISCOURSE, Academy of Management Review Vol. 29, No. 4, 571–577
Approaches and Methods…?
• foci of engagement—we can use language as a vehicle for analyzing and
exploring organizations and organizing (language as a means to an end) or
treating organizations as sites for language analysis (language as an end in itself);
• methods of engagement—there is a rich array of methodological alternatives
available, including conversation analysis, ethnomethodology, content analysis,
deconstruction, narrative analysis, intertextuality, and critical discourse analysis;
• levels of engagement—it is possible to think of analyses operating at different
levels, ranging from “micro” (e.g., discrete organizational episodes or
conversations) through “meso” (e.g., broader patterns and networks of
organizational interaction) to “macro” (e.g., grand narratives and metadiscourses
with wider social implications); and
• modes of engagement—we can interrogate organizations and organizing
processes by privileging monologic, dialogic, or polyphonic perspectives.
Approaches and Methods
Andrea Whittle Cardiff Business School
Ongoing developments
Recently ODA has come to prominence in the field of organizational change.
This has helped throw some of the approaches in views into contrast.
Good example of this development is:
Heracleous and Barrett. Organizational change as discourse: Communicative
actions and deep structures in the context of IT implementation. AMJ
Conclusions
A discourse is a network of relations between objects – it is: how
one thing is defined and recognised relative to another thing; how
artefacts/objects are used; understanding of meaning and the
role and use of meanings…
It is Relativist perspective and a Social Constructionist perspective
– contrasted to a Neo-Positivist/Critical Realist and/or Essentialist
ontology
The social world, the reality we live in, is constantly constructed
and reconstructed and does not have a fixed state.
That doesn’t mean we can’t use DA to study what are assumed to
fixed objects by other ontologies – e.g. Institutions, identities,
Organizations, Subjectivities, Policy, and so on.
But we should appreciate the pre-requisite variety. We need to
remember that we are not demonstrating causal links, even
though we can talk about IVs and DVs.