CHAPTER 21
CRITICAL THEORY OF COMMUNICATION
IN ORGANIZATIONS
Outline
I. Introduction.
A. Stanley Deetz’ critical communication theory seeks to unmask what he considers
unjust and unwise communication practices within organizations.
II. Corporate colonization and control of everyday life.
A. Deetz views multinational corporations as the dominant force in society.
B. That pervasive influence isn’t necessarily all bad—they can use their clout for good.
C. But corporate control has sharply diminished the quality of life for most citizens.
fairness of business decisions.
III. Information or communication; Transmission or the creation of meaning.
A. Deetz challenges the view that communication is the transmission of information, a
view that perpetuates corporate dominance.
B. He warns, however, that as long as we accept the notion that communication is
merely the transmission of information, we will continue to perpetuate corporate
dominance over every aspect of our lives.
C. Deetz contends that each line item in an annual report is constitutive—created by
corporate decision makers who have the power to make their decisions stick.
D. All corporate communication is an outcome of political processes that are usually
undemocratic and usually hurt democracy.
E. Deetz offers a communication model that emphasizes the role of language in
shaping social reality.
2. Corporations subtly produce meanings and values.
3. Deetz moves even further away from a representational view of language when
he not only says that meanings are in people, but asks us to consider whose
meanings are in people.
F. Like Pearce and Cronen, Deetz considers communication to be the ongoing social
construction of meaning, but unlike CMM’s authors, he emphasizes that the issue of
power runs through all language and communication.
G. Deetz offers a 2 x 2 model that contrasts communication as information vs.
communication as creating reality, and managerial control vs. codetermination.
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the
prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
H. Managerial control often takes precedence over representation of conflicting
interests or long-term company and community health.
I. Co-determination, on the other hand, epitomizes participatory democracy.
J. Public decisions can be formed through strategy, consent, involvement, and
participation—the four cells depicted in the model.
IV. Strategy—overt managerial moves to extend control.
A. Deetz contends that managers are not the problem—the real culprit is
managerialism.
B. Managerialism is a discourse that values control above all else.
C. Forms of control based in communication systems impede any real worker voice in
structuring their work.
V. Consent: Unwitting allegiance to covert control.
A. Through the process that Deetz calls consent, most employees willingly give their
loyalty without getting much in return.
B. Consent describes a variety of situations and processes in which someone actively,
though unknowingly, accomplishes the interests of others in the faulty attempt to
fulfill his or her own interests.
C. Consent is developed through managerial control of elements of corporate culture:
workplace language, information, forms, symbols, rituals, and stories.
D. Systematically distorted communication operates without employees’ overt
awareness.
E. Discursive closure suppresses potential conflict.
VI. Involvement: Free expression of ideas, but no voice.
A. Truth emerges from the free flow of information in an open marketplace of ideas,
and an information transfer model of communication worked well when people
shared values.
2. Persuasion and advocacy were the best ways to reach a good decision.
3. Autonomous individuals could then make up their own minds.
B. The information transfer model does not work well in today’s pluralistic,
interconnected world.
C. Advocacy is not negotiation.
D. Free expression is not the same as having a “voice” in corporate decisions, and
knowledge of this difference creates worker cynicism.
VII. Participation: Stakeholder democracy in action.
A. Meaningful democratic participation creates better citizens and social choices while
providing economic benefits.
E. Since some stakeholders have taken greater risks and made longer-term
investments than stockholders and top-level managers, Deetz believes these
stakeholders should have a say in corporate decisions.
F. Managers should coordinate the conflicting interests of all parties—be mediators
rather than persuaders.
VIII. Politically attentive relational constructivism (PARC).
A. Deetz proposes an extension of his critical theory that describes six types of conflict
that must be addressed in organizations. He labels it politically attentive relational
constructionism (PARC).
2. Because he is just as concerned with the process of construction as he is with
3. Deetz lays out nine conditions that must be met in order for diverse
stakeholders to successfully negotiate for their needs and interests.
B. Deetz uses the term political to refer to the presence of power dynamics in
relationships.
1. He sees power as an ever-present part of our relationships—certainly so in our
organizational lives.
3. An organization’s stakeholders need to recover the conflict that was repressed
so that all interests are on the table and openly discussed.
4. When stakeholders come together to discuss corporate policy, managers should
make sure all areas of conflict are considered. PARC suggests six that are
almost always an issue.
a. Inner life
b. Identity and recognition
c. Social order
d. Truth
e. Life narratives
f. Justice
IX. Avoiding meltdown—Putting theory into practice
A. Given entrenched managerial power and privilege in corporations, most economic
observers are skeptical that the workplace participation Deetz advocates will
become reality.
X. Critique: A quality critical theory, but is workplace democracy just a dream?
A. Applied to organizational life, Deetz’ critical approach is an exemplar of what this
type of interpretive theory should be.
B. He clarifies the harmful values of managerialism, provides a new understanding of
managerial control, sets a reform agenda, offers rich qualitative data, to support his
theory, has generated a wide community of agreement, and presents it with wit and
humor that makes make the theory aesthetically pleasing.
C. However, many organizational scholars regard the possibility of managers voluntarily
giving up power as unrealistic.
D. As CCO theorist Robert McPhee (ch. 20) puts it in his ironic summary of Deetz’
theory, “If we just didn’t find it natural and right and unavoidable to hand power over
to managers, everything would be different and all our problems would be solved.”
Key Names and Terms
Stanley Deetz
University of Colorado communication professor and proponent of a critical theory of
organizational communication.
Corporate colonization
Encroachment of modern corporations into every area of life outside the workplace.
Information model
Codetermination
Collaborative decision making; participatory democracy in the workplace.
Managerialism
A systematic logic, set of routine practices, and ideology that values control over all
other concerns.
Consent
The process by which employees actively, though unknowingly, accomplish managerial
interests in a faulty attempt to fulfill their own.
Systematically distorted communication
Operating outside of employees’ awareness, this form of discourse restricts what can
be said or even considered.
Discursive closure
Suppression of conflict without employees’ realization that they are complicit in their
own censorship.
Involvement
Organizational stakeholders’ free expression of ideas that may or may not affect
managerial decisions.
Participation
Principal Changes
This material has been edited for clarity and precision. An example of a corporation
where managers build lasting relationships with workers rather than focusing on control has
been added. The critique section has been revised to highlight the strengths of the theory vis-à-
vis the criteria for good interpretive theory, and now concludes with Deetz’ summary of his life
work.
Kick-off Questions & Interaction Starters
• When have you felt like someone with authority over you was listening? Wasn’t
listening? How could you tell?
• Who should be able to contribute to the decisions that an organization makes?
What are the advantages of expanding the number of who people who can decide?
Disadvantages?
• What does it mean to have a “voice” versus have a “say”?
• Can organizational change be enacted at the level of the individual stakeholder or
does it have to start from the top and trickle down?
• How can organizations promote participation while still being efficient?
Suggestions for Discussion
Contrasting Pacanowsky and Deetz
One good way to begin your discussion of Deetz’s critical theory of organizational
communication is through comparisons to Pacanowsky’s approach as featured in chapter 19.
Both theorists are intrigued by corporate culture, and as noted, both study workplace
language, information, forms, rituals, and stories. It’s significant, however, that although the
tradition from which Pacanowsky stems is wary of influencing the culture one studies, Deetz
demonstrates a strong desire to apply codetermination to reform corporate culture.
Deetz: At the intersection of Marx and Habermas
It seems to me that at the heart of Deetz’s theory is a paradox or tension. On the one
hand, Deetz is a skeptic who attacks conventional manifestations of corporate power and
“business as usual” in American business. On the other hand, he is an eternal optimist when
it comes to the power of communication to bring about positive change in organizations and to
enhance the roles of all stakeholders. This dichotomous stance can be traced directly to two
significant influences on Deetz’s work: Karl Marx, who is featured in the treatment of Hall’s
cultural studies (Ch. 27), and Jürgen Habermas, who was discussed in Chapter 17 on
Functional Theory. Marx’s economic views are manifested in Deetz’s pessimism about
unrestrained capitalism, and Habermas’ “ideal speech situation” (ISS) shapes Deetz’s
The power of communication to bring about change
Students may have interesting reactions to Deetz’ position. Those who see themselves
as future captains of corporate America and who imagine experiencing all the benefits—but
none of the sacrifices and shortcomings of the lifestyle of Lynn’s father in the applicationlog—
may resist Deetz’ message by denying the unsavory aspects of worker consent. Those
students whose parents may represent the organizational elite may resent Deetz’ critical
intended communicative strategies may fail to bring together diverse parties with widely
disparate interests. These issues should stimulate lively discussion.
Stakeholders
If your department has a well-integrated public relations component, your students might be
very familiar with the concept of a stakeholder. If not, you may want to pause for a moment to
discuss this critical idea regarding a corporation’s various constituencies. While a stockholder
has an obvious—and literal—interest in the business, other groups with a vested interest may
include employees, consumers, raw materials suppliers, host communities, and local, state,
Frederick Taylor’s strategy & consent
If you are in search of additional examples of the corporate practices of strategy and
consent, I recommend investigating Frederick Winslow Taylor’s early 20th century book
Principles of Scientific Management.
Sample Application Log
Laura
This theory was a bit difficult to apply to my life; I’ve never worked for a corporation (and I’ve
made it somewhat of a goal never to either. But perhaps this is because I’ve come to view
corporations as Deetz has, and also view them as needing change.)
My aunt has worked for AT&T most of her working life (she’s 45). She moved rather high up
the ladder and had a pretty good, high-ranking job. She was laid off a couple of months ago.
As I understand it, AT&T has been gradually downsizing for awhile now. For over a year, she
has had no job security; she would go into work every day not knowing if this was to be the day
she’s more happy now that she has the prospect of teaching at a university instead. It’s more
her style anyway.)
So, how do these authoritarian companies command such loyalty? Corporate colonization of
everyday life. They offer goodies. My aunt obviously got good telephone rates, as well as all
the latest technologies AT&T had to offer. My grandpa worked for them all his life and has a
nice pension or retirement account (whichever) now. I’m sure my aunt was looking forward to
Exercises and Activities
Deetz on Main Street , USA.
In the local community where my college is located, the downtown sector is a short 10
minute walk from campus. To foster community and residence life, first-year students are not
allowed a car on campus (after the first year, some students have cars and others don’t). As a
result, walking to downtown on a weekend is the only viable option for some students who
want an off-campus experience. In this town, there used to be a small theater. Originally, it
was a live performance space that showcased a theater troupe; then over the years it changed
to a movie theater, and then a second-run, bargain theater before closing for good. It’s an
When corporate practices fly below the conscious radar
One of Deetz’ most thoughtful and provocative claims is that the force of organizational
practice is strongest when it is unrecognized or associated with common sense. Encourage
your students to test the veracity of this assertion with examples from their own lives. Aspects
of your college or university’s culture such as the importance placed on letter grades, the
manner in which admission standards are determined, the use of graduate student TAs or
What’s your students’ base of knowledge?
If you are inclined towards interactive classroom response systems (“clickers”), they
might be put to good use here. Though we traditionally think of stakeholders as employees or
owners, Deetz is more inclusive. Stakeholders range from those who make decisions to those
who consume products or legislate process. You might consider including some interactive
slides to illuminate what types of organizations your students have been stakeholders in. Ask
students what was/is the field or industry of the primary breadwinner in their families (i.e.
finance/banking, education, health care, management, military, religious service, science/
technology, skilled/semi-skilled labor). From this starting place, explore how their experiences
as a dependent child colored their interpretations. Do they think Deetz’ theory applies to these
organizations? How would they have changed their parents’ workplaces if they (or their
parent) had more involvement in decision-making?
Media and feature film examples
You may be familiar with Michael Moore, the colorful and controversial filmmaker. His
films include Roger & Me (1989), Bowling for Columbine (2002), Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004),
Sicko (2007) or Capitalism: A Love Story (2009). In each film, he tackles how an industry might
not be responsive to the needs of its stakeholders. In each case, Moore takes an in-your-face
approach at exposing government and corporate disenfranchisement of people. Like Vermont
progresses until his situation is eventually rectified. Based on this movie’s cult status, many
students may be very familiar with it, and as such, may become engaged in a lively discussion
about Peter’s move through Deetz’ model of organizational decision-making. A strong
argument could be made that the film illustrates each of the four styles—strategy, consent,
involvement, participation.
For a less traditional example of Deetz’ theory, consider these two clips from Jurassic
World (2015). Early on, the higher-ups of the theme park administration refer to focus groups
as they develop new attractions. What do members or the focus groups want? Bigger, scarier,
and more teeth. The result? The Indominus—the antagonist for the remainder of the film. It
only came about because that’s what stakeholders wanted. In a later scene, after betraying
Firing Shannon and Weaver
A final challenge for your students: relatively early in the chapter, the authors state that
“a majority of human communication scholars now dismiss Shannon and Weaver’s information
theory.” If this is true, ask students why this source→message→channel→receiver model is
included in almost every introductory communication text (and probably in their public
Further Resources
Theoretical considerations
Stanley Deetz, “Critical Theory,” in Engaging Organizational Communication Theory: Multiple
Perspectives, Steve May and Dennis K. Mumby (eds.), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2004,
pp. 85- 112.
Applied contexts for Critical Theory in Organizations
Stanley Deetz, “Engagement as Co–Generative Theorizing,” Journal of Applied Communication
Research, Vol. 36, 2008, pp. 289-297.
Laurie K. Lewis, Amy M. Schmisseur, Keri K. Stephens, and Kathleen E. Weir, “Advice on
Communicating During Organizational Change: The Content of Popular Press Books,”
Writings by Deetz
Deetz is a very prolific writer. Just a sampling of his works include:
Stanley Deetz, “Resistance: Would struggle by any other name be as sweet?,” Management
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 21, 2008, pp. 387-392.
Stanely Deetz and Maria Hegbloom, “Situating the Political Economy and Cultural Studies
Stanley Deetz and Jennifer Simpson, “Critical Organizational Dialogue: Open Formation and
the Demand of ‘Otherness’,” in Dialogue: Theorizing Difference in Communication
Organizational Communication, Dennis Tourish and Owen Hargie (eds.), Routledge,
New York, 2004, pp. 172-187.
Tanni Haas and Stanley Deetz, “The Politics and Ethics of Knowledge Construction in
Corporations: Dialogic Interaction and Self-Other Relations,” in The Foundations of
Additional teaching ideas
Amy Franzini, “A Final Organizational Communication Project: Using the Television Series The
Office to Engage College Students,” Communication Teacher, Vol. 21, 2007, pp. 133-
136.
Cerise L. Glenn, “Activism or ‘Slacktivism?’: Digital Media and Organizing for Social Change,”