COM 574 Reading Guide Questions for February 23 - Irwin Mallin, IPFW Communication

COM 574, Spring 2012 – Reading Guide Questions for February 23

For Smith & Eisenberg

1. Bottom p. 367-top p. 368: What is the “interpretive turn” in organizational studies? What do Smith and Eisenberg say is the significance of the interpretive turn for conflict studies?

2. Middle p. 369: They argue that two of the central dialectics of organizing are stability-change and autonomy-coordination. How have each of these manifested themselves where you work?
For those of you who’ve had grad or undergrad courses in interpersonal communication or personal relationships: What similarities do you see between these and relational dialectics?

3. pp. 372-373: What exactly does it mean to say “Disneyland = Drama?” And if “Disneyland = Drama,” then “Disneyland employees = _____________?”

4. pp. 373-374: What did it mean for management to say “Disneyland = Family ?” What did it mean for employees? And if “Disneyland = Family,” then “Disneyland employees = _____________?”

5. pp. 374-375: What were the consequences of the diverging interpretations of “Disneyland = Family?”

For Putnam (2001)

1. What does it mean to frame conflicts in terms of power? In terms of rights? In terms of interests? (p. 13) On p. 14 she notes that interest-based approaches tend to be privileged in formal dispute systems. Do you think it’s always preferable to frame conflict in terms of interests, rather than in terms of power or rights? When might it not be?

2. What’s her complaint about individualizing disputes on the top of p. 15? Do you agree?

3. What does she mean by hidden conflict (mid p. 15)? How does hidden conflict manifest itself where you work?

4. What does she mean by conflict orchestration? By transformation?

5. What do you think of the process used in the grade dispute case on pages 17 and 18? How do the different ways the dispute is framed affect the possible outcomes?

For Kassing

1. In leader-member exchange theory (LMX), what's the distinction between leadership (in-group) and supervisory (out-group) relationships? What's the significance of that distinction?

2. Does LMX make sense in terms of your own organizational experience? Who is the in-group and the out-group where you work? Do you see the same differences between in-group and out-group behavior and attitudes as reported in the literature cited by Kassing?

3. What's the distinction among articulated, latent, and displaced dissent? What does the literature Kassing cites say about how employees decide which of these dissent strategies to use? Is that consistent with your own workplace experience?

4. So what are the hypotheses in this study? How'd he do the study? And what did he find? Are the results consistent with your own workplace experience?