Building an organizational change communication theory

The difficulty of communicating during organizational change has intensified with the prevalence of continuously changing organizations (Buchanan, Claydon & Doyle, 1999). The difficulty faced by managers is compounded by the lack of studies examining organizational communication within a context of organizational change (Eisenberg, Andrews, Murphy, & Laine-Timmerman, 1999; Lewis & Seibold, 1996). Not surprisingly then, is there a paucity of organizational change theory to guide further research and practitioners. This paper addresses the lack of organizational change communication research and contributes to theoretical development of communication during organizational change. A model of change communication during continuous change is presented from the analysis of two longitudinal empirical studies. Central constructs of the model are the monologic change communication, the dialogic change communication and the background talk of change. Further Van de Ven and Poole's (1995) Process Theories of Change are extended to consider the sequencing of the three constructs. The findings suggest that the sequencing of the dominant change communication approaches is informed by an alignment of individual communication competences and organizational change communication expectations.

In search of a theory of integrated marketing communication

For the most part, the literature base for Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) has developed from an applied or tactical level rather than from an intellectual or theoretical one. Since industry, practitioner and even academic studies have provided little insight into what IMC is and how it operates, our approach has been to investigate that other IMC community, that is, the academic or instructional group responsible for disseminating IMC knowledge. We proposed that the people providing course instruction and directing research activities have some basis for how they organize, consider and therefore instruct in the area of IMC. A syllabi analysis of 87 IMC units in six countries investigated the content of the unit, its delivery both physically and conceptually, and defined the audience of the unit. The study failed to discover any type of latent theoretical foundation that might be used as a base for understanding IMC. The students who are being prepared to extend, expand and enhance IMC concepts do not appear to be well-served by the curriculum we found in our research. The study concludes with a model for further IMC curriculum development.