Unite the challenges and opportunities social media

Year module

Department of Communication Science

COM4807/101/0/2022

Dear Student

To complete the assignments successfully, read as widely as possible on each topic, because your discussion requires theoretical depth and a logical structure. You will only have the requisite insight to answer the questions successfully if you understand the topics. You can acquire such understanding by consulting the diverse sources outlined per assignment, more importantly, by conducting your own research. The answers to the problems considered in the assignments cannot be derived directly from the material provided. Therefore, your active involvement in the topics, and your interpretation and integration of the sources, are essential for completing the assignments successfully.

The successful completion of your three assignments will serve as vital preparation for your completion of Assignment 04, the portfolio examination, which integrates the content of Assignments 01 to 03.

If you are not yet familiar with how to access and download relevant reading material via Google Scholar or the Unisa Library online database, watch this video, which gives you a step-by-step guide on what to do.

3

Writing your assignments

Once you have downloaded all the recommended articles listed in this tutorial letter, as well as some additional readings that you have selected on your own, you will be ready to begin reading in preparation for completing your assignments.

attention to “Section 3: How to Reference” on the abovementioned website to make sure that you reference all your reading sources correctly, both in the main text of your assignment and in the list of sources consulted, which you must provide at the end of each assignment.

2.2 Outcomes

Once you have completed this module, you should have:

You might work in an organisational environment; if so, it will be to your benefit to apply the theories covered in each assignment to your own organisation. However, those of you who are full-time students may use a fictitious organisation to illustrate salient aspects of your discussion.

We look forward to your contributions to the study of organisational communication theory.

For any administrative enquiries about your honours studies, including Turnitin, contact the departmental postgraduate studies coordinator:
Mrs Soekie van Gass
Tel: +2712 429 6423
E-mail:
Please note, when contacting your lecturers or postgraduate coordinator via email, you have to use your myLife email address. Emails sent from work or private emails accounts will not be addressed.

4.3 University
Contact addresses of the various administrative departments are included in the Study @ Unisa brochure, which is available on myUnisa.

There are no prescribed materials for this course, as you are required to conduct your own research for this module. This can be done by searching the library catalogue for details of academic books, journal articles, dissertations, theses, and any other relevant academic resources that are available for you. You should also watch the video in this link:

Electronic reserves – list of articles available
Agle, BR, Donaldson, T, Freeman, RE, Jensen, MC, Mitchell, RK & Wood, D. 2008. Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(2):153–190.

Bennett, N & Lemoine, G.J. 2014. What a difference a word makes: Understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons, 57: 311–317.

Blaschke, S, Schoeneborn, D & Seidl, D. 2012. Organizations as networks of communication episodes: Turning the network perspective inside out. Organizational Studies, 33(7):879–906. Briones, RL, Kuch, B, Fisher Liu, B & Jin, Y. 2010. Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 37:37–43.

Carrim, NMH & Basson, JS. 2013. Creating a learning climate: A South African study. The Learning Organization, 20(1):6–19.

Chasi, C & De Wet, G. 2008. Towards an ethics perspective on the rational structure tradition of organisational communication. Communicare, 27(1/2):41–60.

Deetz, A & McClellan, JG. 2011. Communication. In M Alvesson, T Bridgman & H Willmott (eds). The Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fortado, B & Fadil, P. 2012. The four faces of organizational culture. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 22(4):283–298.

Hatch, MJ. 2018. Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

9

Kelleher, T. 2009. Conversational voice, communicated commitment, and public relations outcomes in interactive online communication. Journal of Communication, 59:172–188.

Kemp, LJ. 2013. Modern to postmodern management: Developments in scientific management. Journal of Management History, 19(3):345–361.

Laplume, AO, Sonpar, K & Litz, RA. 2008. Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34(6):1152–1189.

Lawrence, TB, Dyck B, Maitlis, S & Mauws, MK. 2006. The underlying structure of continuous change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(4):59–66.

Lemmergaard, J & Muhr, SL. (eds). 2013. Critical perspectives on leadership: Emotion, toxicity, and dysfunction. Cheltenham: Elgar.

Liao, S, Chang, W & Wu, C. 2009. An integrated model for learning organizations with strategic view: Benchmarking in the knowledge-intensive industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(5):3792–3798.

The dimensions of the learning organization questionnaire. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5:132–151.

Mclaggan, E, Bequidenhout, A & Botha, C.T. 2013. Leadership style and organisational commitment in the mining industry in Mpumalanga. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(1): 483–492.

Nothhaft, H. 2010. Communication management as a second-order management function: Roles and functions of the communication executive – results from a shadowing study. Journal of Communication Management, 14(2):127–140.

Overton-De Klerk, N & Verwey, S. 2013. Towards an emerging paradigm of strategic communication: Core driving forces. Communicatio. 39(3): 362–382.

Politis, JD. 2001. The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge management. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(8):354–364.

Riaz, S. 2009. The global financial crisis: An institutional theory analysis. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 5(1/2):26–35.

Stewart, D. 2001. Reinterpreting the learning organisation. The Learning Organization, 8(4):141–152.

Ströh, U & Jaatinen, M. 2001. New approaches to communication management for transformation and change in organisations. Journal of Communication Management,6(2):148–165.

12

COM4807/101/0/2022

Wittenbaum, GM, Hollingshead, AB, Paulus, PB et al. 2004. The functional perspective as a lens for understanding groups. Small Group Research, 35(1):17–43.

Wright, C. 1960. Functional analysis and mass communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24:605–620.

Since you are required to do your own research for this module, it is extremely important to know how to obtain sources via the Unisa Library catalogue. Refer to the CMNHONE Tutorial Letter 301/2022 for additional information, as it contains some useful guidelines on how to navigate the databases.

14

There is no practical work for this module.

16

COM4807/101/0/2022

All honours assignments MUST be submitted electronically via myUnisa. The Department of Communication Science requires all students registered for the BA (Hons): Communication to submit their assignments electronically via myUnisa.

The reason for this is twofold:

If you experience trouble with or have queries about the electronic submission of assignments, please direct them to or assistance.

A tutorial letter/information document will be made available under Additional Resources on myUnisa. This document will offer specific details regarding the Turnitin submission process and procedure.

a low similarity index. You will have to interpret the report yourself, noting areas (especially large areas) of flagged text.

In the Turnitin tutorial letter/information document, we explain that incidental similarity is to be expected, but that you need to pay attention to – and adjust – any similarity that falls outside of that. Again, please study this document in detail.

NOTE: We reserve the right to penalise you accordingly if you do not adhere to the above rules pertaining to Turnitin submission. In cases where the perceived severity merits such action, we might even refer your case to Unisa’s Student Discipline Department for further action.

19

DECLARATION FOR HONOURS MODULES

When you submit your assignments via the online submission portal on myUnisa you may be asked to agree to an honesty declaration before you can proceed with your submission. While we are aware of this, the Department of Communication Science ALSO requires you to include a Declaration within your assignment.

This DECLARATION and all the related documents will be available on myUnisa at the beginning of each academic year. Look under Additional Resources.

The DECLARATION will be available for you to download as a PDF and an MS Word file. You must fill it in, sign it and submit it as part of each assignment.

DECLARATION OF OWN WORK
I, [YOUR NAME and SURNAME]

confirm that

✓ I have submitted the ENTIRE Turnitin report (not just the digital receipt)
✓ I have familiarised myself with WRITING FOR ACADEMIC INTEGRITY at


✓erstood the PLAGIARISM POWERPOINT FOR
POSTGRADUATE STUDIES (available under ADDITIONAL SOURCES on myUnisa) ✓ I have familiarised myself with the library guides offered by Unisa’s Library at

✓ t Infringement and
PlagiarismANDI am aware that plagiarism is punishable in terms of the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. I have also read the regulations of the University of South Africa in this respect, which are available online at

_________________
STUDENT NUMBER

21

9.6 Assignments for 2022

genres, media convergence, and organisation as communication.

Considering the above statements:

Recommended study material

Al-Haddad, S & Kotnour, T. 2015. Integrating the organizational change literature: A model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2):234–262.

Demers, C. 2008. Organizational change theories. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

22

Kietzmann, JH, Hermkens, K & McCarthy, IP. 2011. Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54:241–251.

Lawrence, TB, Dyck B, Maitlis, S & Mauws, MK. 2006. The underlying structure of continuous change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(4):59–66.

Naeem, M. 2020. Using social networking applications to facilitate change implementation processes: insights from organizational change stakeholders. Business Process Management Journal, 26(7): 1979–1998.

Ozuem, W, Howell, KE & Lancaster, G. 2008. Communicating in the new interactive marketspace. European Journal of Marketing, 42(9/10):1059–1083.

Treem, JW & Leonardi, PM. 2012. Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence and association. Communication Yearbook, 36:143–189.

23

Woodman, RW. 2014. The science of organizational change and the art of changing organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 50(4):463–477.

contingency determines structure” (Donaldson 2001:8).

24

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT 01

“dehumanising” the study of communication, although doing so soon proved to be impossible, if not injudicious. As a result of the above, more humanistic traditions started to emerge that considered the ways in which human beings tend to shape organisational reality, largely using comparatively interpretivist ways of understanding communication.

Three traditions specifically dominate the literature, namely the positional, the relational, and the cultural traditions. Although both the positional and the relational traditions consider the ways in which human interaction shapes organisational functioning, it is the cultural tradition that truly scrutinises the phenomenon. In this assignment, you must discuss the ways in which the study of symbols in an organisation can be approached by way of the cultural network tradition. Your discussion should outline how the study of organisational symbols through the cultural network tradition is interpretivist, rather than positivist. Your discussion should contain an appropriate balance of theory and application. Herein, you should make use of an organisation, or organisations, of your choice to apply the theoretical assertions that you make (on the basis of the literature studied).

Christensen, LT & Cornelissen, J. 2011. Bridging corporate and organizational communication: Review, development and a look to the future. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(3):383–414.

26

Schultz, H. 2003. Communication in the information age. In H Schultz (ed). Organisational behaviour: A contemporary South African perspective. Pretoria: Van Schaik: 118–138.

Schultz, M. 1995. On studying organizational cultures: Diagnosis and understanding. New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Yanow, D & Ybema, S. 2009. Interpretivism in organizational research: On elephants and blind researchers. In DA Buchanan & A Bryman (eds). The Sage handbook of organizational research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage: 39–60.

When writing specifically about the ways in which researchers can uncover the nature of organisational communication, Littlejohn (2008) argues that such communication should be described from a network of theoretical perspectives. The network integrates the three traditions of organisational studies which, in turn, relate to the process of communication in the organisation.

The three traditions are identified as being the positional, the relational and the cultural.

COM4807/101/0/2022

Kondra and Hurst (2009), in writing about the institutional processes of organisational culture, give a balanced view of the phenomenon, distinguishing between its tangible and sublimated elements. Tangible organisational culture elements (such as logos and policies), the researchers expound, can be rationally/positivistically managed, so as to reach a desired outcome for the organisation, whereas sublimated aspects of organisational culture cannot. These do not respond well to rational/positivist management, because their construction does not lie with management (alone) – rather, it is the outcome of a collective, socially constructed reality created by all the organisational members concerned. Organisational symbols exemplify the sublimated aspect of the organisational culture.

Organisational symbolists chiefly make use of interpretive and critical research paradigms in their empirical enquiries (Brewis & Jack 2011, Frost 1985, Stablein & Nord 1985). The paradigms treat organisations as the social constructions of reality, whose meaning is collectively negotiated. The main aim of an organisational symbolist perspective, in the present instance, is to understand the ways in which symbols contribute to such negotiated meanings. Furthermore, the interpretivism paradigm realises that employees’ behaviour can be neither rationally nor functionally controlled or managed, seeing that the organisational members construct their own reality based on their subjective understanding of the nature of symbols (Neher 1997; Yanow & Ybema 2009). Following an interpretivist perspective, organisational symbolists thus try to discover and understand the meaning created by the employees of an organisation, and, in so doing, their interpretation of the organisational culture elements concerned (Neher 1997; Yanow & Ybema 2009).

Provide an applied academic discussion, showcasing how the study of symbols in an organisation, from a cultural network tradition, is interpretivist in nature. Your discussion should also show the ways in which such a study is not positivist. To apply your understanding of theory, focus on an organisation or organisations of your choice. Throughout your discussion, you should apply the theoretical discussions that you offer to the organisation or organisations selected.

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT 02

30

9.6.3 Assignment 03

the leadership approaches, theories or styles that best describe the leaders in the organisation; and make a recommendation on the most applicable leadership approach, theory, or style for the particular organisation. Lastly, explain how the specific leadership approach, theory, or style impacts on organisational culture.

Recommended study material

Christensen, LT & Cornelissen, J. 2011. Bridging corporate and organizational communication: Review, development and a look to the future. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(3):383–414.

Coulson-Thomas, C. 2018. Organisational leadership for challenging and changing times. Effective Executive XXI(3): 14–37.

Mclaggan, E, Bequidenhout, A & Botha, CT. 2013. Leadership style and organisational commitment in the mining industry in Mpumalanga. SA Journal of Human Resource Management 11(1): 483–492.

Schultz, H. 2003. Communication in the information age. In H Schultz (ed). Organisational behaviour: A contemporary South African perspective. Pretoria: Van Schaik: 118–138.

32

COM4807/101/0/2022

to, specifically, focus on communication challenges. Based on your theoretical discussion, explain

the challenges facing the managers and leaders in the organisation that you have chosen

communication and roles. Next, a critical theoretical discussion of the different leadership

approaches, theories and styles are required, followed by an explanation of the leadership approach(es), theories, or styles that best describe the leaders in the organisation that you have

specific leadership style or approach impacts on organisational culture.

Management and leadership are important for any organisations as they are powerful influences on all aspects of organisational life and functions while guiding organisations through communication to organisational success (Shockly-Zalabak 2015).

Shockley-Zalabak (2015) and Botha et al. (2020) describe different approaches, theories, and styles to and of leadership. These include trait approaches, which aim to explain leadership in terms of specific traits, characteristics, or qualities (Botha et al. 2020:337) that make them effective. This approach accepts that leaders are born with the ability to lead, and that leadership cannot be developed. The behavioural approach to leadership focuses on the behaviour of leaders in terms of effectivity. Botha et al. (2020:338) explain that successful leaders behave differently from unsuccessful leaders. The style approaches to leadership consider leaders as making use of specific approaches to influence goal achievement. These approaches include autocratic, democratic, laissez faire, charismatic, transactional, and transformational leadership (Botha et al. 2020:348) and are thus based on the leader’s assumptions about what motivates people to accomplish goals. The situational approaches or contingency approaches focus on

explaining leaders’ interaction with followers and how the environmental requirements impact on

pivotal importance. The significance of making such a move is underpinned by different theories of leadership, such as trait, style and contingency theories, and the transformational leadership

model, as mentioned above (Miller 2012:182–184). Evaluating the role of, and the manner in

approaches as being a symbolic action that is performed by means of conducting

“transformational leadership”. Such leadership emphasises the role of “followership” (Mumby

Adopting a cultural approach towards organisational communication is significant, in that it emphasises an alternative way of thinking about the “relationship between communication and

organization” (Mumby 2013:133). Communication in the organisation is, thus, argued as

Furthermore, Jimenez-Jimenez and Sanz-Valle (2011:55) and Carrim and Basson (2013:8) believe that the organisational culture makes a significant contribution to innovation, knowledge sharing, the functioning of the organisation, and creativity in communication and problem-solving. Regarding knowledge sharing, creativity in communication, and problem-solving, the value of the organisational culture should be given its full due.

Organisational culture thus contributes to organisational communication, leadership processes and managerial functions, thereby impacting differently in different types of organisations. The organisational culture’s significance is further evidenced by the manner in which a group of people

Ethical conduct for leaders is essential, also in terms of excellence and the encouragement of opposing viewpoints. Information should be presented openly and fairly, and the complexity of issues should be explored (Shockly-Zalabak 2015). In their communication endeavours, leaders and managers should mind message distortion and share motivations or biases that may influence positions (Shockly-Zalabak 2015).

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT 03

COM4807/101/0/2022

organisational communication with reference to the paradigmatic shifts from ‘monologue

to dialogue’ and ‘top-down communication to bottom-up communication’. Provide examples from an organisation of your choice to substantiate your discussion.

38

COM4807/101/0/2022

[10] TOTAL: 100 marks

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLETING ASSIGNMENT 04

No other assessment methods, apart from the assignments and the examination, are used in this module.

41

not count towards your final mark (see rule 4.13 of Unisa’s assessment policy).

The Advocacy and Resource Centre for Student with Disability ARCSWiD) provides an opportunity for staff to interact with new and returning students with disabilities.

Most of the frequently asked questions for this module have already been answered in this tutorial letter. However, you are welcome to contact us should you have any other content- or module-related questions.

Angelopulo, GC & Schoonraad N. 2006. Communication and the organisation. In R Barker & G Angelopulo (eds). Integrated organisational communication. Cape Town: Juta: 3–38.

Brewis, J & Jack, G. 2011. Culture: Broadening the critical repertoire. In M Alvesson, T Bridgman & H Willmott (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 232–250.

Burton, RM, Eriksen, BH, Håkonsson, DD, Knudsen, T & Snow, CC. 2008. Designing organizations: 21st-century approaches. New York: Springer.

DeSanctis, G & Poole, MS. 1994. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2):121–147.

Donaldson, L. 2001. The contingency theory of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Du Plessis, TC. 2004. IT/computer mediated communication. In Tutorial 101 MAKOR2F. Pretoria: University of South Africa, Department of Communication.

Jamali, D, Khoury, G & Sahyoun, H. 2006. From bureaucratic organizations to learning organizations: An evolutionary road map. The Learning Organization, 13(4):337–352.

Jimenez-Jimenez D. & Sanz-Valle, R. 2011. Innovation, organizational learning and performance. Journal of Business Research,64:408–417.

44

COM4807/101/0/2022

Neher, WW. 1997b. Organizational communication: Challenges of change, diversity and continuity. London: Allyn & Bacon.

Parker, M. 2000. Organizational culture and identity: Unity and division at work. London: Sage.

Stablein, R & Nord, W. 1985. Practical and emancipatory interest in organizational symbolism: A review and evaluation. Journal of Management, 11(2):13–28.

Thompson, JD. 2007. Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General systems theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: Braziller.

45

Please visit myUnisa regularly, as important announcements will be made on the site. Also, note that a specific lecturer will be assigned to each assignment. The relevant information will be communicated to you on myUnisa, and on our Facebook page.