ABSTRACT

Responsiveness to emergence is often depicted as key to successful communication. According to extant research, deliberate planning and emergence can become mutually enriching if agile strategizing is embraced. The transition towards such mindset, however, might prove more difficult to attain than extant research suggests. In this paper, I explore the perseverance of the deliberate planning model despite cases of emergence that question its usefulness. Drawing on theory of organizational reform practice, I discuss why recurrent discrepancies between deliberate models and strategizing practice might never lead practitioners to challenge such models. Specifically, the study argues that communication strategizing needs to be approached as a dialogic practice shaped not only by complementarity, but also by processes of competition and antagonism. The contribution of the paper is two-fold; it increases awareness that emergence does not necessarily lead practitioners to challenge the deliberate model and it provides a research agenda that can advance knowledge of the coexistence of the deliberate model and emergence.

摘要

对出现的反应通常被描述为成功沟通的关键。根据现有的研究，如果采用敏捷战略，深思熟虑的计划和出现可以相互丰富。然而，向这种心态的转变可能比现有研究表明的更难实现。在本文中，我探讨了深思熟虑的规划模型的持久性，尽管出现了质疑其有用性的案例。借鉴组织改革实践的理论，我讨论了为什么深思熟虑的模型和战略实践之间反复出现的差异可能永远不会导致从业者挑战这些模型。具体而言，该研究认为，沟通策略需要被视为一种对话实践，不仅由互补性塑造，而且由竞争和对抗过程塑造。这篇论文的贡献是双重的；它提高了人们对涌现并不一定会导致从业者挑战刻意模型的认识，它提供了一个研究议程，可以促进对刻意模型和涌现共存的认识。