INTRODUCTION TO THE THEORETICAL LENS

This section now continues with an introduction to the theoretical framework and this includes some background and context to the approach known as the communicative constitution of organisation (CCO) followed by a review of the extant literature that applies a CCO approach to explore cross-sector collaboration or other forms of inter-organisational relationships such as coalitions.

A discussion of the framework of cross-sector partnership value that is presented by Koschmann et al. (2012) is included in Chapter 4 at Section 3.

3.22.1 Different schools of CCO thinking

It should be noted at the outset, that one of the consequences of choosing the framework of cross-sector partnership as presented by Koschmann et al. (ibid), is that the version of CCO that was used for this research is the one that is used by them.

The principle of the communicative constitution of organising (CCO) is used by different scholars in different ways theoretically and so there are distinct and different schools of CCO thinking. These are described and compared by Schoeneborn, Blaschke, Cooren, Mcphee, Seidl and Taylor (2014) in a discussion involving scholars from each of the three main schools of CCO thinking. These three schools or streams of CCO thinking are as follows:

i) The four flows method (McPhee & Zaug, 2000) based on the Anthony Gidden’s structuration theory (Giddens, 1986).

ii) The Montreal School derived from speech act theory and developed by scholars such as Taylor, Cooren, Giroux and Robichaud (1996). The Montreal School conceptualises organisation as being constituted in the relational interactions of conversation and text.

iii) A more recent approach to organisation as communication based on Luhmann’s social system theory (Luhmann, 2006) as explained by Schoeneborn (2011).

While there is literature on each of these streams of research, only one of these is discussed in this dissertation and this is the Montreal School approach because it is the approach applied by Koschmann et al. (ibid) and is the basis of their framework of cross-sector partnership value.

Unless otherwise noted, all references to CCO thinking in this dissertation refer to the Montreal School.

3.22.2 Presenting the CCO literature

This chapter positions CCO thinking with the field of organisational communication studies and provides a brief historical background.

This is then followed by the literature that combines cross-sector collaboration with the CCO literature and related discursive literature that adopts the concepts of conversation and text as the basis of organisation.

In Chapter 4 there is a further discussion on the theoretical framework of cross-sector collaboration and vale creation. This theoretical discussion also introduces the basic concepts of the Montreal School of CCO thinking.

3.22.3 The collaborative turn in organisational communication studies

In considering future avenues for organisational communication studies, Deetz and Eger (2014) identified “the collaborative turn” as an issue that could “direct the future of organisational

communication studies”. They described this as “a concern with collaborative and emergent forms of decision making based on quite different models and motives for human interaction”.

They contended that the current interest in more “polycentric organisational forms and various modes of collaborative and stakeholder-based decision making” was already highlighted by Habermas’ distinction between strategic and communicative action. Further, they concluded that

“the role of collaborative organising could continue to become more consequential in organisational communication research in future decades”. Deetz and Eger offered an example of a paper by Koschmann, Lewis and Isbell (2011: 4) in which it is suggested that “there is a need for new forms of knowledge about collaboration” since communication is a fundamental aspect of collaborative activity. Koschmann et al. (2011: 5) also highlighted that much of the research on collaboration relies on the transmission view of communication, which “fails to account for the emergent potential of communication as a complex process of meaning construction and negotiation that constitutes our social world”. They suggested that new models of communication and collaboration are needed, in particular, to deal with “the complex meta-problems that confront our society in the twenty-first century”.

In addition to Koschmann et al. (2011), Deetz and Eger also drew attention to recent research on cross-sector collaboration published in the Harvard Business Review (Nidumolu et al., 2014) and by Elinor Ostrom (Poteete, Janssen & Ostrom, 2010). They concluded that it is an area that could become more consequential.

3.22.4 A communicative approach to cross-sector collaboration

Hardy and Phillips (1998) and Lawrence et al. (1999) presented a communicative perspective on inter-organisational collaboration that they described as discursive. This work connects with the literature already presented, such as Trist (1983) and Gray (1989), and is developed further towards a discursive perspective, which introduces collaboration as a communicative process situated within a social or institutional context.

The discursive approach depends on three critical concepts, namely conversation, text and discourse (Hardy et al., 2005), where discourse is a set of interrelated texts. The theoretical foundation of the discursive approach connects “processes of social construction and negotiation with the social contexts in which they are embedded” and it “highlights the role of context in the ongoing production of collaboration and the effect of collaboration on its context” (Lawrence et al., 1999: 480). Furthermore, the unit of analysis is the inter-organisational domain or organisational field and it also explores inter-organisational collaboration as an institutional field (Phillips et al., 2000).

The connection between collaboration and discourse is further developed by exploring collaboration as a process, which highlights the role of conversation and language. Hardy et al.

(2005: 59) argued that “a discursive approach facilitates the development of theory and research

that attend to the multiple levels on which collaboration occurs” including individuals and organisations while drawing on “discourses operating at organisational and societal levels”. This theoretical approach is “attuned to the complex interrelationships among these levels”.

The discursive approach presented here views collaboration as a communicative process (Hardy et al., 2005; Lawrence et al., 2002; Lawrence et al., 1999). As a communicative approach, Hardy et al. (2005) connected discourse and organisation theory with communication theory; and more specifically they connected the research on conversation and text to the so-called Montreal School of CCO thinking.

The communicative approach adopted by Koschmann et al. (2012) has similar assumptions regarding the role of conversation in creating collective agency and/or value creation. It is also based on the Montreal School of CCO and the work of Taylor and colleagues, who explored the theoretical foundation of organisation and organising in the generative processes of communication (Taylor et al., 1996). The CCO approach extends the underlying constructionist thinking to include textual agency or how texts can be active agents in organising.