Forum: The Case for Reflexive Writing Practices in Management Communication and Organization Studies

IF 1.9 4区 管理学 Q2 COMMUNICATION Management Communication Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-01-27 DOI:10.1177/08933189241227943
Iga Maria Lehman, Janne Tienari, Ken Hyland, Audrey Alejandro
{"title":"Forum: The Case for Reflexive Writing Practices in Management Communication and Organization Studies","authors":"Iga Maria Lehman, Janne Tienari, Ken Hyland, Audrey Alejandro","doi":"10.1177/08933189241227943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following criticism about the quality of writing in management communication and organization studies, this Forum presents arguments for change in how scholarly knowledge is communicated. The expectation today seems to be that, to get published, academic writing requires monologic and complex ways of expression. However, using formulaic and reader-exclusive language in publications limits their accessibility to a wider readership, including not only more diverse members of the disciplinary community—such as non-Anglophone scholars and junior researchers—but also those we study and write about. In our respective contributions, we argue for more meaningful communication between writers and readers achieved through writers adopting reflexive practices when crafting their texts for publication. Specifically, we suggest considering reflexivity through the following concepts: conformity and individuality, socialization, tenderness, and respect. These, we argue, help make our academic writing more accessible and meaningful.","PeriodicalId":47743,"journal":{"name":"Management Communication Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Management Communication Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189241227943","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Following criticism about the quality of writing in management communication and organization studies, this Forum presents arguments for change in how scholarly knowledge is communicated. The expectation today seems to be that, to get published, academic writing requires monologic and complex ways of expression. However, using formulaic and reader-exclusive language in publications limits their accessibility to a wider readership, including not only more diverse members of the disciplinary community—such as non-Anglophone scholars and junior researchers—but also those we study and write about. In our respective contributions, we argue for more meaningful communication between writers and readers achieved through writers adopting reflexive practices when crafting their texts for publication. Specifically, we suggest considering reflexivity through the following concepts: conformity and individuality, socialization, tenderness, and respect. These, we argue, help make our academic writing more accessible and meaningful.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论坛:管理传播与组织研究中的反思性写作实践案例
在对管理传播和组织研究的写作质量提出批评之后,本论坛提出了改变学术知识传播方式的论点。当今的期望似乎是,学术著作要想发表,就必须采用单一而复杂的表达方式。然而,在出版物中使用公式化和读者排他性的语言,限制了其向更广泛的读者群的传播,这不仅包括学科社区中更多样化的成员--如非英语学者和初级研究人员,还包括我们研究和写作的对象。在我们各自的贡献中,我们主张通过作家在撰写出版文本时采用反思性实践,实现作家与读者之间更有意义的交流。具体来说,我们建议通过以下概念来考虑反思性:一致性和个性、社会化、温柔和尊重。我们认为,这些概念有助于使我们的学术写作更易于理解和更有意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
16.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Management Communication Quarterly presents conceptually rigorous, empirically-driven, and practice-relevant research from across the organizational and management communication fields and has strong appeal across all disciplines concerned with organizational studies and the management sciences. Authors are encouraged to submit original theoretical and empirical manuscripts from a wide variety of methodological perspectives covering such areas as management, communication, organizational studies, organizational behavior and HRM, organizational theory and strategy, critical management studies, leadership, information systems, knowledge and innovation, globalization and international management, corporate communication, and cultural and intercultural studies.
期刊最新文献
Technical Anonymity and Employees’ Willingness to Speak Up: Influences of Voice Solicitation, General Timeliness, and Psychological Safety Affective Sensemaking of Relational Precarities: Resilience as Becoming in Pandemic Shifting to Remote Work CSR Communication and the Polarization of Public Discourses: Introduction to the Special Issue From Being to Doing: Exploring the Situated Discourses and Performances of Work Engagement Book Review: Organizational Paradox
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1