Stanley Deetz, Business, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Business

Stanley Deetz

Stanley Deetz A Look into Critical Theory of Communication in Organizations The critical theory of communication developed by Stanley Deetz was designed to explore ways to insure the organizations’ health while increasing the representation of diverse human interests. He does this first by showing that corporations have become political as well as economic institutions. Deetz then employs advances in communication theory to point out how communication practices within a corporation can distort decision making. Finally, he outlines how workplaces can become more productive and democratic through communication reforms. Humanists feel that meanings are in people not words. Deetz accepts this but goes another step and wants to know whose meanings are in people. The companies meanings, the CEO’s meanings, the perception the companies give as their meanings, this is what Deetz is looking for. When people use slang in big business, they begin to put corporate values in to play. According to EM Griffin, this theory is critical in that he wants to critique the assumption that “what’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” Furthermore, Deetz feels that most people fall into the norm that is presented to them from corporate America. Companies in today’s society are appearing more democratic. They appear as more focused on the worker, the consumer, and society than their monetary needs. Is this to say that they are not concerned with money? No. The bottom line for the company is cash. However, the latest strategy is perception. How the company is perceived, makes a huge difference in how society interprets them. This theory will help us understand consent practices in the workplace. Corporations tend to make critical decisions for the public, regardless of if they know or not. The four criteria Deetz uses to discuss ways that public and corporate decisions can be made are: strategy, consent, involvement, and participation. These four points are how I am going to evaluate his theory. In the first criteria, strategy, Deetz describes the problem to be managerialism, which he defines as “a kind of systematic logic, a set of routine practices, and ideology”. Managers have one thing on their mind: control. Some employees will conform to the ways of their bosses, however some will reform against them. Deetz uses an example of stockholders facing this same type of problem. They are able to hold or sell their shares. He describes stock options to be “golden parachutes” being that quick and short-term growth is the way up the corporate ladder. Managers in the corporate world are driven by one thing: money. But what else makes people work? They are driven to deal with conflict and not to “openly discuss” it. They are coerced to be able to run things smoothly. This makes things seem like managers only care about how the company is ran rather than ethics and personal feelings. The terms “company policy” and “just doing my job” are ways to explain this criteria. For example, in the movie, Roger and Me, the deputy who is ordered to go around to people’s houses and inform them that they are being evicted from their home, describes his doings as “just doing my job”. He avoids conflict in that he gives a reason for what he has to do, whether it is unethical or if it hurts other peoples feelings. Deetz does say that most corporate success is not an effect of managerial control. Control is costly and creates resentment of workers. This first criteria Deetz discusses is probably the way many organizations are dealt with. However, in the current world that we live in, topics such as sexual harassment and sexism can no longer be taken lightly, or should I say can they be included in “company policy”. Many more companies today are using human resource models of managerialism rather that the traditional model that has been the only form of controlling a company up until the last half of the decade, or maybe even sooner that that. Deetz is right in that money controls almost everything, especially now, but people have to be more sensitive to others' feelings and ethics. This is why I cannot agree totally with this aspect of Deetz’s thoery. The second criteria I am going to use is consent. Deetz, according to Griffin, is convinced that corporations are greedy. This has become only common knowledge in the world today. Although many people have not yet come to terms with that reality. Corporations have expected their workers to respect them and give them their all when they come to work. Deetz says that management insists that loyalty to the company should come before family, friends, church, and community. Although this may sound absurd, it happens in the corporate world when you are relying on your corporation to keep you living. Many corporations nowadays are just like this. If you have ever seen the movie The Firm, there are some aspects of this theory in the film. Many young corporate married men have sacrificed their wife, kids and outside life for the sake of their company. I have firsthand in that perspective since my father is a partner in one of the big six firms. However, his job drove him to divorce and an unhappy life until he had become partner after the 10 required years of hard work, moved away from his wife and was living on his own, now remarried to a woman that he works with and has a child with her. So I can totally relate to this concept because I have seen it happen right in my own family. It may be the fact that men are taught to be workaholics, and that they have to be the best at what they do. When men are tempted by so much, it is almost impossible to say no (which may be used for many other things). There is little time to waste on things that are wasting their precious time, especially when billing by the hour as it is in large firms, especially accounting and law firms. This criteria is probably one of the most important points Deetz makes in his critical theory approach to organizations. Consent, in his view, is something that one does unknowingly to accomplish their own goals while fulfilling those of others. It is basically how the world is being run today in the corporate arena. Although most employees do not even realize this, if they did, they would just respond that it’s the way things are ran, who is to complain when things are running so smoothly and everyone is getting paid? The third criterion Deetz discusses is involvement. Corporate democracy has attempted to hold open forums in order to help the company in the long run. However, he says that this model only works when everyone has similar values, but when is that ever the case? When employees are given the chance to express their views and think that they are going to change an aspect of the company, and nothing seems to come about of their concerned voice, this may, according to Deetz, be a tragedy. This criterion is a smaller aspect of critical theory, but it is definitely a strong part of how companies are organized. Leading on employees to think that they are only given this chance to voice their views, may only disappoint them in the end. The fourth and last criteria, participation, is a way that Deetz thinks corporations give employees free expression. He thinks that there are six stakeholders in the say of corporations. They are: Investors, who want security; Workers, who want a good wage, security and family time; Consumers, who want quality goods and services at the best price; Suppliers, who want a stable demand; Host communities, who want payment for services, stable employment; and the greater society and world community who want the environmental aspect to be taken care of. Deetz says that those who are affected by the corporate decisions often have say in how the decisions are made. If all of these stakeholders were represented at once, who knows what would happen, but Deetz thinks that would be ok. To think that this is the reality of the corporate world would be to agree with Deetz in this aspect of participation. I do not personally agree with this. If all of these stakeholders were to come together, I think that it would be a tragedy. Although many of them do have the same views on how the corporation should be run, there is always the person that disagrees. Stanley Deetz has created a theory that has many truths to it, that most corporate employees would take as a surprise. They do not want to know that this is the reality of their world. What kind of person would want to know that they are being controlled by the people that give them the opportunity to make a living? Most people already realize it. Although most people do not have much of a choice in the matter, I think that most would continue with what they are doing. What is the difference between working at PriceWaterHouseCoopers and Chili’s restaurant, besides the major salary difference. I work at Chili’s, a large corporation with so many rules that you would think I was making more than $2.83 an hour (excluding tips). They dictate the way I communicate to customers, the way I dress and the style of my attire and how I look. They don’t give the impression that work comes before family, but they do expect me to pay them for the meals I eat while at work. Overall, Stanley Deetz has made many good points in evaluating how a corporation is organized. If only people would break away from the corporation, but this is the way we made it, the way our world is run, and it will never be the same again. Bibliography:

Word Count: 1650