Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why We Need Business Communication Theories

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Fundamental Theories of Business Communication

Part of the book series: New Perspectives in Organizational Communication ((NPOC))

  • 1173 Accesses

Abstract

This theory lays out the need for strong theory in the field of business communication. A set of strong, widely recognized theories can improve the field in many ways. Theory helps improve research in the field by giving us a uniting scaffold that we can build upon. The chapter also describes how such a set of theories can help the field’s reputation, cohesiveness, pedagogy, and application.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abbott, A. (2014). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, B. J. (2005). Social constructionism. In S. May & D. K. Mumby (Eds.), Engaging organizational communication theory and research: Multiple perspectives (pp. 35–53). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almaney, A. (1974). Communication and the systems theory of organization. Journal of Business Communication,12(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194367401200106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2007). Constructing mystery: Empirical matters in theory development. Academy of Management Review,32(4), 1265–1281. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.26586822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ana, O. S., & Parodi, C. (1998). Modeling the speech community: Configuration and variable types in the Mexican Spanish setting. Language in Society,27(1), 23–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C., & Brion, S. (2014). Perspectives on power in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,1(1), 67–97. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argenti, P. A. (2017). Strategic communication in the c-suite. International Journal of Business Communication,54(2), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488416687053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arundale, R. (1999). An alternative model and ideology of communication for an alternative to politeness theory. Pragmatics,9, 119–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augier, M. (2005). Behavioral economics: The Carnegie School. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (pp. 145–149). Elsevier. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B7GG1-4FV52TR-3P/2/08427332881a84f28425c316298bad92.

  • Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications (4th ed.). Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belcher, B. M., Rasmussen, K. E., Kemshaw, M. R., & Zornes, D. A. (2016). Defining and assessing research quality in a transdisciplinary context. Research Evaluation,25(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, B. K. (2001). Private issues and public policy: Locating the corporate agenda in agenda-setting theory. Journal of Public Relations Research,13(2), 91–126. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1302_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackman, A. (2006). Graduating students’ responses to recruitment advertisements. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 43(4), 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943606291705.

  • Boedhoe, P. S. W., Heymans, M. W., Schmaal, L., Abe, Y., Alonso, P., Ameis, S. H., Anticevic, A., Arnold, P. D., Batistuzzo, M. C., Benedetti, F., Beucke, J. C., Bollettini, I., Bose, A., Brem, S., Calvo, A., Calvo, R., Cheng, Y., Cho, K. I. K., Ciullo, V., … Twisk, J. W. R. (2019). An empirical comparison of meta- and mega-analysis with data from the ENIGMA Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Working Group. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 12(102). https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00102.

  • Borg, I., & Shye, S. (1995). Facet theory: Form and content. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boumans, M. (2005). Economics, strategies in social sciences. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (pp. 751–760). Elsevier. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B7GG1-4FV52TR-86/2/128e65085e13fc66cf36f16f466b305f.

  • Bradley, G. L., & Campbell, A. C. (2016). Managing difficult workplace conversations: Goals, strategies, and outcomes. International Journal of Business Communication,53(4), 443–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488414525468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz, R. D., Ash, R. A., & Dreher, G. F. (1989). Do people make the place? An examination of the attraction-selection-attrition hypothesis. Personnel Psychology,42(3), 561–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1989.tb00669.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzzanell, P. M., & Houston, J. B. (2018). Communication and resilience: Multilevel applications and insights. Journal of Applied Communication Research,46(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, C. E., & McCombs, M. (2003). Agenda-setting effects of business news on the public’s images and opinions about major corporations. Corporate Reputation Review,6(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cascio, W. F. (1993). Downsizing: What do we know? What have we learned? The Executive,7(1), 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cascio, W. F. (2000). Costing human resources: The financial impact of behavior in organizations (4th ed.). South-Western College Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., & Tjosvold, D. (2012). Shared rewards and goal interdependence for psychological safety among departments in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,29(2), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-010-9201-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal,50(6), 1281–1303. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2007.28165855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. (2016). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (5th ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, J. P., Durand, R., Fiss, P. C., Lammers, J. C., & Vaara, E. (2015). Putting communication front and center in institutional theory and analysis. Academy of Management Review,40(1), 10–27. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, G. C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberalization of reliability theory. British Journal of Statistical Psychology,16(2), 137–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1963.tb00206.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delbridge, R., & Fiss, P. C. (2013). Editors’ comments: Styles of theorizing and the social organization of knowledge. Academy of Management Review,38(3), 325–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, C. (2011). State of the art in assessing research impact: Introduction to a special issue. Research Evaluation,20(3), 175–179. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X13118583635918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du-Babcock, B., & Chan, A. C. K. (in press). A commentary on the use of simulated settings in business communication research. International Journal of Business Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419878863.

  • Dubin, R. (1978). Theory building (2nd ed.). Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, S. L., Weber, M., & Segovia, J. (2011). Using communication theory to analyze corporate reporting strategies. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 48(2), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943611399728.

  • Feferman, S. (1977). Categorical foundations and foundations of category theory. In R. E. Butts & J. Hintikka (Eds.), Logic, foundations of mathematics, and computability theory: Part One of the Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, London, Ontario, Canada-1975 (pp. 149–169). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1138-9_9.

  • Fielden, J. S., & Dulek, R. E. (1990). Principles of business communication. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fort, C. (1975). The complete books of Charles Fort. Dover Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, C., & Mosco, V. (2012). Introduction: Marx is back—The importance of Marxist theory and research for critical communication studies today. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 10(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v10i2.421.

  • Grabo, A., Spisak, B. R., & van Vugt, M. (2017). Charisma as signal: An evolutionary perspective on charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,28(4), 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.05.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2012). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research,39(6), 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211416646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hug, S. E., Ochsner, M., & Daniel, H.-D. (2013). Criteria for assessing research quality in the humanities: A Delphi study among scholars of English literature, German literature and art history. Research Evaluation,22(5), 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvt008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kankaanranta, A., & Planken, B. (2010). BELF competence as business knowledge of internationally operating business professionals. Journal of Business Communication,47(4), 380–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, S. M., & Marple, S. L. (1981). Spectrum analysis—A modern perspective. Proceedings of the IEEE,69(11), 1380–1419. https://doi.org/10.1109/PROC.1981.12184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennamer, J. D. (1990). Self-serving biases in perceiving the opinions of others: Implications for the spiral of silence. Communication Research. http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1990-28205-001.

  • Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., & Hall, R. J. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review,19(2), 195–229. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1994.9410210745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, M. E. D. (1983). Bibliometric indicators versus expert opinion in assessing research performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,34(2), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630340207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohl, J., Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2004). Human resource regulation and legal issues: Web sites for instructional and training development. Journal of Education for Business,79(6), 339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). Structure of scientific revolutions, the (3rd ed.). University Of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, K. J., Boer, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2017). From listening to leading: Toward an understanding of supervisor listening within the framework of leader-member exchange theory. International Journal of Business Communication,54(4), 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415572778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, A. (1999). Codeswitching, speech community membership, and the construction of ethnic identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics,3(4), 461–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, C. (2003). Pedagogy, connectivity, multimodality, and interdisciplinarity. Reading Research Quarterly,38(3), 397–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2012). National culture and infrastructure development: A comparison among four cultural typologies. Competitiveness Review,22(5), 396–410. https://doi.org/10.1108/10595421211266285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2013). Developing your organization with models and simulations. Development and Learning in Organizations,27(5), 11–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-04-2013-0010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2019a). The diffusion process of strategic motivating language: An examination of the internal organizational environment and emergent properties. International Journal of Business Communication,56(3), 366–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488416629093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2019b). Notes from the co-editors. International Journal of Business Communication,56(3), 452. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419843429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Kohl, J. (2005). Useful web sites for international business communication education: New information sources for an expanding field. Journal of Teaching in International Business,16(4), 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M. (1994). Dyadic coordination: An examination of the leader member exchange model at a group level (Unpublished Dissertation). University of Alabama.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M. (2009). Sparking worker creativity: Cultures where garden variety creativity can flourish. Development and Learning in Organizations,23(5), 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777280910982924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2012). Logoleadership: Breathing life into loyalty. Development and Learning in Organizations,26(2), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777281211201178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2017). “What’s past is prologue”: A look at past leadership communication research with a view toward the future. International Journal of Business Communication,54(2), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488416687050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2018a). Measurement and generalizability. In J. Mayfield & M. Mayfield (Eds.), Motivating language theory: Effective leader talk in the workplace (1st ed., pp. 111–135). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66930-4_9.

  • Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2018b). Motivating language coordination. In J. Mayfield & M. Mayfield (Eds.), Motivating language theory: Effective leader talk in the workplace (1st ed., pp. 65–73). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66930-4_9.

  • Mayfield, M., & Mayfield, J. (2018c). Comments from the editors: Looking forward with the International Journal of Business Communication. International Journal of Business Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488418810253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M., Mayfield, J., & Kohl, J. (2005). Industrial relations web sites: Innovative media for labor relations education. Central Business Review,24(1–2), 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayfield, M., Mayfield, J., & Lunce, S. (2008). Increasing tacit knowledge sharing with an HRIS. In T. Torres-Coronas & M. Arias-Oliva (Eds.), Encyclopedia of human resources information systems: Challenges in e-HRM: Vol. II. Information Science Reference (an imprint of Idea Group Inc).

    Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B. (2003). The rated importance, scientific validity, and practical usefulness of organizational behavior theories: A quantitative review. Academy of Management Learning and Education,2(3), 250–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational behavior 1: Essential theories of motivation and leadership. M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (2001). To err is human, to correct for it divine: A meta-analysis of research testing the functional theory of group decision-making effectiveness. Small Group Research,32(3), 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plowman, M. (1932, December). Keyserling’s challenge. The Adelphi (New Series), 212–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J. L. (1997). Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18(4/5/6), 305–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly,48(2), 240–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3556658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reggia, J. A., & Peng, Y. (1987). Modeling diagnostic reasoning: A summary of parsimonious covering theory. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine,25(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2607(87)90048-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2017). Communication: Sine qua non of organizational leadership theory and practice. International Journal of Business Communication,54(1), 12–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488416675447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott-Phillips, T. C. (2008). On the correct application of animal signalling theory to human communication. In The Evolution of Language (Vols. 1–0, pp. 275–282). WORLD SCIENTIFIC. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812776129_0035.

  • Sebastian Chitpin, J., & Chitpin, S. (2017). Questioning clerkship: Applying Popper’s evolutionary analysis of learning to medical student training. The International Journal of Educational Management,31(3), 332–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 371–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Origin of the Bunsen Burner | Journal of Chemical Education. (n.d.). Retrieved June 22, 2020, from https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ed082p518#.

  • van Leunen, M.-C. (1992). A handbook for scholars (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 385–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willmott, H. (1994). Social constructionism and communication studies: Hearing the conversation but losing the dialogue. Annals of the International Communication Association,17(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1994.11678875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Texas A&M International University, Laredo, TX, USA

    Milton Mayfield & Jacqueline Mayfield

  2. Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Robyn Walker

Authors
  1. Milton Mayfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacqueline Mayfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robyn Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacqueline Mayfield .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mayfield, M., Mayfield, J., Walker, R. (2020). Why We Need Business Communication Theories. In: Fundamental Theories of Business Communication. New Perspectives in Organizational Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57741-4_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation