Theorizing Communication Exam 3

theory of organizing

organizations are formed through communication and shared sense-making that reduces uncertainty

Equivocality

situations are unclear and ambiguous

sensemaking

interpreting cues to make sense of what is happening

shared meaning

people communicate to align their interpretations of the situation

coordinated action

action based on shared meanings that creates organizational order

enactment

noticing and defining the situation

selection

choose an interpretation from available options

retention

save lessons for future situations

choice point

decide whether to return to issues they chose not to focus on earlier

behavior cycles

the small back and forth interactions that produce meaning inside meetings, conversations, and decision-making

assembly rules

sets of criteria such as who speaks and what counts as valid input used to decide how to reduce equivocality

organizational culture

organizations are cultures shaped by communication patterns that shape outcomes

narrative lens

stories that shape meaning and reinforce values

textual lens

Text that expresses what the organization says about itself

power + politics lens

examines who is benefitted and harmed by organizational practicess

technology lens

tools that shape how organizations work and communicate

symbolic performance

the repeated actions that perform organization's culture

discourse of suspicion

be aware of communication practices that make power look normal

hegemony

when people accept a system that may work against them usually because they believe they have no other choice

why do people accept systems that are bad for them

need the job, want future opportunities, fear retaliation, everyone else seems to accept it

Corporate Colonization

corporate values can spread beyond work and shape everyday life

naturalization

treating a workplace practice as normal or unavoidable making choices seem like facts

neutralization

presenting decisions as neutral, technical, or data-driven hiding human choice

legitimation

treating certain voices are more authoritative deciding what view of reality is official

socialization

training people to accept organizational norms

ways to change corporate colonization

small interactions that move toward allowing all voices to be heard and have a say in decisions

gendered organizations

gender shapes who is seen as professional, credible, and leadership material

why are gendered organizations problematic

operate in double standards, praising males for same traits they critique women for

how does gendered organizations theory tie into fit

the right fit for a job is shaped by societal views rather than actual ability

race in organizations

race shapes organizational life through norms, networks, and definitions of fit

situational crisis communication

organizations should match response to how responsible people think they are and work to rebuild trust

crisis responsibility

who is responsible for a crisis

crisis history

has the organization experienced a similar crisis before

Prior Relational Reputation

how well or poorly an organization has or is perceived or trusted by its stakeholders

victim cluster

organization is also a victim of the crisis

accident cluster

unintentional harm caused by an accident or unpredictable error

preventable cluster

organization knowingly puts people at risk, takes inappropriate action, or violates a law

crisis response strategies

deny, diminish, rebuild, bolster

deny

suggest there is no crisis or organization is not responsible

diminish

excuses or justifications that suggest organization did not mean to do harm or harm is minimal

rebuild

improve reputation by apologizing or offering compensation

bolster

remind customers of good record or thank them for their support

bad crisis communication includes

delayed response, legalistic language, blaming others too quickly, minimizing harm

good crisis communication includes

speed, accuracy, empathy, responsibility, concrete action

corporate social responsibility

organizations have responsibility beyond profit to addressing environmental and social changes

shareholder value theory

CSR matters if it helps make a profit or follows laws

corporate social performance

businesses have economic and social responsibilities

corporate citizenship

corporations are members of communities and should promote good will among stakeholders

Stakeholder Theory

corporations owe responsibility to more than stakeholders

CSR as communication

CSR it creates a public story of what a corporation stands for

greenwashing

making a company seem more environmentally responsible than it actually is

downsides of CSR

can create conflict when corporation has different values or beliefs than customers

criteria for CSR

transparent, credible, specific

personal health communication

communication between individuals

organizational health communication

communication within healthcare systems

public health communication

large-scale health messaging

Extended Parallel Process Model

the effectiveness of fear appeals depends on perceived threat and efficacy

perceived threat

am I actually at risk

perceived risk

can I actually do something about it

fear appeal - no response

low threat + any efficacy

fear appeal - fear control

high threat + low efficacy

fear appeal - danger control

high threat + high efficacy

fear control

control emotions instead of danger: denial, joking, hopelessness

danger control

taking protective action: behavior change, prevention

factors of perceived threat

severity, susceptibility

severity

how bad would outcomes be

susceptibility

how likely is this to happen to me

factors of perceived efficacy

response + self efficacy

response efficacy

will the recommendation work

self efficacy

can i personally do this

main idea of extended parallel processing model

fear appeals work best when people understand the danger and believe they can successfully respond

inoculation theory

Presenting a small dose of a competing argument will build resistance to future persausion

supportive inoculation

strengthens pre-existing beliefs but does not necessarily prepare for a counter-argument

Refutational Inoculation

exposes people to weak counter arguments and refutes them preparing people for real world persausion

how does inoculation work

people become more confident resisting persuasion because they have already mentally practiced responding

stages of inoculation

warning people will try to persuade you, weak counter arguments, active defense

factors that influence inoculation

repetition, source credibility, personal relevance

managing meanings of embodied experiences

health is shaped through communication, culture and lived experiences

embodiment

we experience "health" through our bodies shaping emotions, identity, and behavior

intersubjectivity

people create meanings about health through the exchange of thoughts and feelings (communication)

being

how you define your health identity

doing

actions connected to health identity

directed becoming

reinterpreting health identity over time

patient-centered communication

patient-provider communication increases understanding of symptoms, treatments, improves emotional and psychological health

high-context communication

focus on implicit, unspoken, nonverbal messages

data gathering

help patient fully explain their experience

patient education + counseling

help patient understand conditions and options using simple language, avoiding jargon, explaining risks clearly, and checking understanding

partnership building

patients actively participate in decisions about care

emotional responsiveness

degree to which provider understands and reflects patients emotions without judgement

risk perception attitude framework

identify groups that respond differently to health risks based on risk perception and efficacy perception

risk perception

belief about vulnerability to various diseases and risk factors

efficacy perception

degree to which a person believes they can do something about the risk

responsive group

high risk and high efficacy - sees a real problem and does something about it

what is the most effective group for behavior change

responsive group

anxious group

high risk and low efficacy - worried and overwhelmed

indifferent group

low risk and low efficacy - disconnected, dismissive

what group is least likely to change behavior

indifferent group

proactive group

low risk and high efficacy - feel they can protect themselves from risk and take preventative action

risk and crisis communication management

how organizations communicate during a crisis shapes trust, panic, behavior, cooperation, and public safety

prevention

actions that reduce risks before a crisis happens