The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Argument and Narration in Organizational Communication
Abstract
This review highlights the relevance of argumentation and narration for organizational communication, which is the exchange of information among organizational participants from which meaning is inferred. The links between argument and organizational rationality and between the narrative paradigm and organizational storytelling are discussed. Organizational and communication variables are viewed as mutually relevant. As the mixtures of argumentation and narration change, interaction changes, and different organizational structures are created. These processes have implications for both scholars and practicing managers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument
Fisher, W. R. (1984) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637758409390180 · Cited by 1,807
That's Interesting!: Towards a Phenomenology of Sociology and a Sociology of Phenomenology
Davis, M. S. (1971) · Philosophy of the Social Sciences · doi:10.1177/004839317100100211 · Cited by 1,219
Cited by
Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building
Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1990.4310758 · Cited by 1,426
Complex Thinking, Complex Practice: The Case for a Narrative Approach to Organizational Complexity
Tsoukas, H., & Hatch, M. J. (2001) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726701548001 · Cited by 489
Coordination as Energy-in-Conversation
Quinn, R. W., & Dutton, J. E. (2005) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2005.15281422 · Cited by 381
Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2014) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2014/38.3.10 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Weick, K. E., & Browning, L. D.
- Venue
- Journal of Management
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1986-06
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 243-259
- ISSN
- 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-1211
- OpenAlex
- W2118659205
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
