Masculinity(s), the Agrarian frontier myth, and cooperative ways of organizing: Contradictions and tensions in the experience and enactment of democracy

Journal of Applied Communication Research

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 89-118

  Harter, Lynn M ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Agrarianism; Cooperative Forms of Organizing; Democratic Ideologies; Masculinities; Organizational Irrationalities

Indexed keywords

EID: 2642583368     PISSN: 00909882     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0090988042000210016     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4, 139-158.
2. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422-436.
3. Anderson, R. A., Baxter, L. A., & Cissna, K. N. (2004). Texts and contexts of dialogue. In R. A. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 1-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Ashcraft, K. (2000). Empowering professional relationships: Organizational communication meets feminist practice. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 347-392.
5. Ashcraft, K. (2001). Feminist organizing and the construction of "alternative" community. In G. Shepherd & E. W. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), Communication and community (pp. 79-110). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
6. Ashcraft, K., & Mumby, D. (2004). Reworking gender. A feminist communicology of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7. Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1992). The good society. New York: Vintage.
8. Buzzanell, P. M. (1994). Gaining a voice. Feminist organizational communication theorizing. Management Communication Quarterly, 7, 449-383.
9. Buzzanell, P. M., Ellingson, L., Silvio, C., Pasch, V., Dale, B., Mauro, G., et al. (1997). Leadership processes in alternative organizations: Invitational and dramaturgical leadership. Communication Studies, 48, 285-310.
10. Buzzanell, P. M., Sterk, H., & Turner, L. H. (2004). Introduction: Challenging common sense. In P. M. Buzzanell, H. Sterk, & L. H. Turner (Eds.), Gender in applied communication contexts (pp. xiii-xxii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Cheney, G. (1995). Democracy in the workplace: Theory and practice from the perspective of communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 167-200.
12. Cheney, G. (2000). Values at work: Employee participation meets market pressure at Mondragon. New York: Cornell University.
13. Cheney, G. (2001). Forms of connection and "severance" in and around the Mondragon worker-cooperative complex. In G. Shepherd & E. W. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), Communication and community (pp. 111-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Creswell, J. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Czarniawska, B. (1997). Narrating the organization: Dramas of institutional identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16. deTocqueville, A. (1956). Democracy in America (R. D. Heffner, Ed.). New York: New American Library, (original work published 1835)
17. Deetz, S. (1992). Democracy in an age of corporate colonization. Albany: State University of New York Press.
18. Deetz, S., & Simpson, J. (2004). Critical organizational dialogue: Open formation and the demand of "otherness." In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue. Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 141-158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. Athens: Ohio University Press.
20. Dewey, J. (1980). Theory of the moral life. New York: Irvington. (Original work published 1908)
21. Dewey, J. (1999). Individualism: Old and new. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. (Original work published 1929)
22. Ferguson, K. (1984). The feminist case against bureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
23. Ferree, M. M., & Martin, P. Y. (Eds.). (1995). Feminist organizations: Harvest of the new woman's movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
24. Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage.
25. Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and method (G. Barden & J. Cummings, Eds. & Trans.). New York: Seabury.
26. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
27. Gottfried, H., & Weiss, P. (1994). A compound feminist organization: Purdue University's Council on the Status of Women. Women and Politics, 14, 23-44.
28. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon.
29. Hagstrom, J., & Norton, S. (2002, April 8). Collins sees slow rebound for U.S. farm exports. Congress Daily, pp. 6-8.
30. Handy, C. (1995). The age of paradox. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
31. Harter, L. M., Edwards, A., McClanahan, A., Hopson, M., & Carson-Stern, E. (in press). Organizing for survival and social change: The case of StreetWise. Communication Studies.
32. Harter, L. M., & Krone, K. J. (2001). The boundary-spanning role of a cooperative support organization: Managing the paradox of stability and change in non-traditional organizations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 248-277.
33. Hearn, J. (1992). Men in the public eye: The construction and deconstruction of public men and public patriarchies. New York: Routledge.
34. Hyde, M. J. (2004). The ontological workings of dialogue and acknowledgment. In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. 57-74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. Kanter, R. M. (1983). Dilemmas of managing participation. Organizational Dynamics, 11, 5-27.
36. Kelsey, T. W. (1994). The agrarian myth and policy responses to farm safety. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 1171-1177.
37. Lindlof, T. (1995). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38. Locke, J. (1975). An essay concerning human understanding (P. H. Nidditch, Ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Original work published 1690)
39. Maguire, M., & Mohtar, L. F. (1994). Performance and the celebration of a subaltern counterpublic. Text and Performance Quarterly, 14, 238-252.
40. Mansbridge, J. (1973). Time, emotion, and inequality: Three problems of participatory groups. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 9, 351-368.
41. McMillan, J., & Hyde, M. J. (2000). Technological innovation and change: A case study in the formation of organizational conscience. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 86, 19-47.
42. Montmarquet, J. A. (1990). The idea of agrarianism. Moscow: University of Idaho Press.
43. Morgan, D. (1996). The gender of bureaucracy. In D. L. Collinson & J. Hearn (Eds.), Men as managers, managers as men: Critical perspectives on men, masculinities, and managements (pp. 43-60). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
44. Mumby, D. K. (1996). Feminism, postmodernism, and organizational communication studies: A critical reading. Management Communication Quarterly, 9, 259-295.
45. Mumby, D. K. (1998). Organizing men: Power, discourse, and the social construction of masculinity(s) in the workplace. Communication Theory, 8, 164-182.
46. Papa, M. J., Auwal, M. A., & Singhal, A. (1995). Dialectic of control and emancipation in organizing for social change: A multitheoretic study of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. Communication Theory, 5, 189-223.
47. Peterson, T.R. (1990). Jefferson's yeoman farmer as frontier hero: A self-defeating mythic structure. Agriculture and Human Values, 7, 9-19.
48. Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organizational theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562-578.
49. Poole, M. S., & Walther, J. B. (2002). Communication: Ubiquitous, complex, consequential. Washington, DC: National Communication Association. Retrieved August 1, 2003, from www.natcom.org/research/monograph.pdf
50. Richards, T. J., & Richards, L. (1998). Using computers in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 211-245). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51. Rothschild-Whitt, J., & Whitt, J. A. (1986). The cooperative workplace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52. Rushing, J. H. (1983). The rhetoric of the American western myth. Communication Monographs, 50, 14-32.
53. Rushing, J. H. (1989). Evolution of "the new frontier" in Alien and Aliens: Patriarchal co-optation of the feminine archetype. The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75, 1-24.
54. Shepherd, G. (2001). Community as the interpersonal accomplishment of communication. In G. Shepherd & E. W. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), Communication and community (pp. 25-36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
55. Slotkin, R. (1985). The fatal environment: The myth of the frontier in the age of industrialization. New York: Atheneum.
56. Spitzack, C. (1998). The production of masculinity in interpersonal communication. Communication Theory, 8, 143-163.
57. Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14, 349-407.
58. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 158-183). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59. Thompson, P. (1990). Agrarianism and the American philosophical tradition. Agriculture and Human Values, 7, 3-8.
60. Trethewey, A. (1999). Isn't' it ironic: Using irony to explore the contradictions of organizational life. Western Journal of Communication, 63, 140-167.
61. Weber, M. (2002). The protestant ethic and the "spirit" of capitalism (P. Baehr & G. C. Wells, Trans.). New York: Penguin.
62. Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63. Wood, J. (2004). Forward: Entering into dialogue. In R. Anderson, L. A. Baxter, & K. N. Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing difference in communication studies (pp. xv-xxiii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.