Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organisations- trifft Kommunikationsforschung: Der Beitrag der „Communication Constitutes Organization“-Perspektive (CCO)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Organisationskommunikation und Public Relations

Zusammenfassung

This article introduces one emergent theoretical perspective from the North American research field of organizational communication that has come to be called “communication constitutes organization“ (CCO). The CCO perspective ascribes to communication a fundamental role in the constitution of organizations: Organizations basically consist of interconnected events of communication.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Aakerstroem Andersen, N. 2003. The undecidability of decisions. In Autopoietic organization theory: Drawing on Niklas Luhmann’s social systems perspective, hrsg. T. Bakken, and T. Hernes, 235-258. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahrne, G., und N. Brunsson 2011. Organization outside organizations: The signifi cance of partial organization. Organization 18 (1): 83-104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, K. L., T. R Kuhn, und F. Cooren 2009. Constitutional amendments: ‘Materializing’ organizational communication. Academy of Management Annals 3 (1): 1-64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axley, S. 1984. Managerial communication in terms of the conduit metaphor. Academy of Management Review 9 (3): 428-437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisel, R. S. 2010. A communicative ontology of organization? A description, history, and critique of CCO theories for organization science. Management Communication Quarterly 23 (1): 124–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheney, G., und L. T. Christensen,2001. Organizational identity: Linkages between internal and external communication. In The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods, hrsg. F. M Jablin, und L. L. Putnam, 231-269. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F. 2004. Textual agency: How texts do things in organizational settings. Organization 11 (3): 373-394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F. 2006. The organizational world as a plenum of agencies. In Communication as organizing. Empirical and theoretical explorations in the dynamic of text and conversations, hrsg. F. Cooren, J. R. Taylor, und van E. J. Every, 81-100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F. 2007. Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F., B. H. Brummans, und D Charrieras. 2008: The Coproduction of Organizational Presence: A Study of Médicins Sans Frontieres in Action. Human Relations 61 (10): 1339-1370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F., T. R. Kuhn, J. P., Cornelissen, und T. Clark 2011. Communication, Organizing, and Organization. Organization Studies 32 (9): 1149-1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F., und G. T Fairhurst. 2009. Dislocation and stabilization: How to scale up frominteractions to organization. In Building theories of organization: the constitutive roleof communication, hrsg. L. L. Putnam, und A. M. Nicotera, 117-152. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooren, F., Taylor, J. R., und van Every, E. J. (Hrsg.). 2006. Communication as organizing. Empirical and theoretical explorations in the dynamic of text and conversations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, R. T. 1999. Communication theory as a fi eld. Communication Theory 9 (2): 119-161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. 2005. On Gorgon Sisters: Organizational action in the face of paradox. In Niklas Luhmann and organization studies, ed. D. Seidl, und K. H. Becker, 127-144. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 1988. Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL. DGPuK. 2011. Fachgruppe PR und Organisationskommunikation: Selbstverständnis.http://www.dgpuk.de/organisationskommunikation.

  • Dron, J. 2006. The way of the termite: A theoretically grounded approach to the design of e-learning environments. International Journal of Web-Based Communities 2 (1): 3-16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairhurst, G. T. 2008. Discursive leadership: A communication alternative to leadership psychology. Management Communication Quarterly 21 (4): 510-521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. D., und L. W. Ford 1995. The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review 20 (3): 541-570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halfmann, J. 1996. Die gesellschaft liche „Natur“ der Technik. Eine Einführung in die soziologische Theorie der Technik. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, T. 2008. Understanding organization as process: theory for a tangled world. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, T., und T. Bakken 2003. Implications of self-reference: Niklas Luhmann’s autopoiesis and organization theory. Organization Studies 24 (9): 1511-1535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. 2011. Strategy and Powerpoint: An inquiry into the epistemic culture and machinery of strategy making. Organization Science, 22(2): 320-346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, A. 1998. Über die allmähliche Verfertigung der Organisation beim Reden. Industrielle Beziehungen 5 (1): 45-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, M. 2005. Displacing the paradox of decision making. In Niklas Luhmann and organization studies, ed. D. Seidl, und K. H. Becker, 107–126. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The structure of scientifi c revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. 2008. A communicative theory of the fi rm: Developing an alternative perspective on intra-organizational power and stakeholder relationships. Organization Studies 29 (8-9): 1227-1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaCour, A., S. Vallentin, H. Højlund, O Th yssen, und B Rennison. 2007. Opening systems theory: A note on the recent special issue of Organization. Organization 14 (6): 929-938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J., und J. Hassard (Hrsg.). 1999. Actor network theory and aft er. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Luhmann, N. 1984. Soziale Systeme: Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 1986. The autopoiesis of social systems. In Sociocybernetic paradoxes: Observation, control and evolution of self-steering systems, hrsg.Geyer, F., und J. vanZouwen, 171-192. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 1988. Organisation. In Mikropolitik. Rationalität, Macht und Spiele in Organisationen, hrsg. W. Küpper, und G. Ortmann, 165-185. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 2000. Organisation und Entscheidung. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., und H. A. Simon 1958. Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H. R. und F. J. Varela 1987. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of understanding. Boston, MA: Shambhala.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPhee, R. D., und P. Zaug 2000. The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation. Electronic Journal of Communication 10 (1/2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohe, M., und D., Seidl. 2011. Theorizing the client-consultant relationship from the perspective of social-systems theory. Organization 18 (4): 3-22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassehi, A. 2005. Organizations as decision machines: Niklas Luhmann’s theory of organized social systems. Sociological Review 53 (1): 178-191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. 2007. Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. L., und A. M. Nicotera (Hrsg.). 2009. Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. L., und A. M. Nicotera 2010. Communicative constitution of organization is a question: Critical issues for addressing it. Management Communication Quarterly 23 (1): 158-165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. L., N. Phillips und P Chapman. 1996. Metaphors of communication and organizations. In Handbook of organization studies, ed. S. R. Clegg und W. R Nord, 375- 408..Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. 1981. Hermeneutics and the human sciences: Essays on language, action and interpretation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robichaud, D., H. Giroux, und J. R. Taylor 2004. The metaconversation: The recursive property of language as a key to organizing. Academy of Management Review 29 (4): 617-634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röttger, U. 2010. Public Relations - Organisation und Profession. Öffentlichkeitsarbeit als Organisationsfunktion. Eine Berufsfeldstudie. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R. 1989. Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sandhu, S. 2009. Strategic communication: An institutional perspective. International Journal of Strategic Communication 3 (2): 72-92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeneborn, D. 2008. Alternatives considered but not pursued: The ambiguous role of Power- Point in cross-project learning. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoeneborn, D. 2011. Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly 25 (4): 663-689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreyögg, G. und Sydow, J. 2010. Organizing for fl uidity? Dilemmas of new organizational forms. Organization Science 21 (6): 1251-1262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, D. 2005a: The basic concepts of Luhmann’s theory of social systems. In Niklas Luhmann and organization studies, hrsg. D. Seidl, und K.H. Becker, 21-53. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, D. 2005b. Organization and interaction. In Niklas Luhmann and organization studies, ed. D. Seidl, und K.H. Becker, 145-170. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, D., und K. H. Becker (Hrsg.) 2005. Niklas Luhmann and organization studies. Kopenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidl, D., und K. H. Becker. 2006. Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization 13 (1): 9-35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sillince, J. A. A. 2010. Can CCO theory tell us how organizing is distinct from markets, networking, belonging to a community, or supporting a social movement? Management Communication Quarterly 23 (1): 132-138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spee, A. P., und P. Jarzabkowski. 2011. Strategic planning as communicative process. Organization Studies 32 (9): 1217-1245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R. 2001. The ‘rational’ organization reconsidered: An exploration of some of the organizational implications of self-organizing. Communication Theory 11 (2): 137-177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R. 2004. Organizational communication: Is it a discipline? Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap (Dutch Journal of Communication) 32 (1): 3-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R. 2009. Organizing from the bottom up? reflections on the constitution of organization in communication. In Building theories of organization: The constitutive role of communication, ed. L.L. Putnam, und A.M. Nicotera, 153-186. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R., und F Cooren. 1997. What makes communication ‘organizational’? How the many voices of a collectivity become the one voice of an organization. Journal of Pragmatics, 27 (4): 409-438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R., und van Every, E. J. 2000. The emergent organization. Communication as its site and surface. London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theis-Berglmair, A. M. 2003. Organisationskommunikation. Theoretische Grundlagen und empirische Forschungen. 2. Aufl. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tompkins, P. K., und G. Cheney 1983. Account analysis of organizations: Decision making and identification. In Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach, hrsg. L. L. Putnam, und M. E. Pacanowsky, 123-146. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tompkins, P. K., und G. Cheney. 1985. Communication and unobtrusive control in contemporary organizations. In Organizational communication: Traditional themes and new directions, hrsg. R. D. McPhee, und P. K. Tompkins, 179-210. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Foerster, H. 1992. Ethics and second-order cybernetics. Cybernetics & Human Knowing 1 (1): 9-19. Weber, M. 1958. Bureaucracy. In From Max Weber: Essays in sociology, ed. H. H. Gerth, und C. W. Mills, 196-244. New York, NY: Galaxy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeier, S. 2006. Dancers in the dark: The myth of rationality in public relations. Public Relations Review 32 (3): 213-220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeier, S. 2008. Communication management, organizational communication and public relations: Developments and future directions from a German perspective. In Public relations research, ed. A. Zerfass, B. van Ruler, und K. Sriramesh, 219-231. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations: Foundations for organizational scienceThousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliff e, K. M., und Obstfeld, D. 2005. Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science 16 (4): 409-421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerfaß, A. 2004. Unternehmensführung und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit: Grundlegung einer Theorie der Unternehmenskommunikation und Public Relations. 2. Aufl. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fachbereich Organisationsforschung, Universität Zürich, Zürich, Deutschland

    Dr. Dennis Schoeneborn

Authors
  1. Dr. Dennis Schoeneborn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis Schoeneborn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Burgstr. 21, Leipzig, 04109, Germany

    Ansgar Zerfaß

  2. Belgradstr. 33, München, 80796, Germany

    Lars Rademacher

  3. Greifswald, Germany

    Stefan Wehmeier

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schoeneborn, D. (2013). Organisations- trifft Kommunikationsforschung: Der Beitrag der „Communication Constitutes Organization“-Perspektive (CCO). In: Zerfaß, A., Rademacher, L., Wehmeier, S. (eds) Organisationskommunikation und Public Relations. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18961-1_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18961-1_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-531-18098-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-531-18961-1

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation