View Item 

Show simple item record

A Competing Values Framework for Analyzing Presentational Communication in Management Contexts
dc.contributor.authorQuinn, Robert E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHildebrandt, Herbert W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRogers, Priscilla S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorThompson, Michaelen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-14T14:06:46Z
dc.date.available2010-04-14T14:06:46Z
dc.date.issued1991en_US
dc.identifier.citationQuinn, Robert; Hildebrandt, Herbert; Rogers, Priscilla; Thompson, Michael (1991). "A Competing Values Framework for Analyzing Presentational Communication in Management Contexts." Journal of Business Communication 28(3): 213-232. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/68906>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0021-9436en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/68906
dc.description.abstractCommunication specialists have long been interested in analyzing messages. More recently, they have stressed the need for evaluative tools that account for situational ex pectations and constraints. Drawing from the literature on organizational and managerial effectiveness, we constructed an empirical model applicable to presenta tional communication. Over 100 communication professors evaluated the relevance of descriptors for six different types of business presentations: three oral and three writ ten. Their judgments were used to create similarity scores, which were submitted to multidimensional scaling. A three-dimensional model emerged. This "competing values model" illustrates the dynamic interplay between the highly contrasting charac teristics of four general types of presentational communication: relational, information al, instructional, and transformational. In conclusion, we discuss the benefits of the model and suggest its usefulness as an evaluative tool, particularly for the training of managers.en_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent1047294 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen_US
dc.titleA Competing Values Framework for Analyzing Presentational Communication in Management Contextsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelCommunicationsen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelManagementen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEconomicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelBusinessen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherBrigham Young Universityen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68906/2/10.1177_002194369102800303.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/002194369102800303en_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Business Communicationen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBillig, M. (1989).Arguing and thinking:A rhetorical approach to social psychology Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown, R.L., & Herndl, C.C. (1986). An ethnographic study of corporate writing: Job status as reflected in written texts. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing: Research perspectives (pp.11-28). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarroll, J.D., & Chang, J.F. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an N-way generalization of Eckhart Young decomposition. Psychometrika, 35, 283-319.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1981). Acceptance, yielding and impact: Cognitive processes in persuasion. In R.E. Petty et al. (Eds.). Cognitive responses in persuasion (pp.339-359). Hinsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHagge, J. (1989). The spurious paternity of business communication principles. The Journal of Business Communication, 26, 33-55.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.C. (1987). Multivariate data analysis (2nd ed). New York: Macmillan.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern, J.W. (1988). Getting in deep: Using qualitative research in business and technical communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2(2), 22-43.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHinks, D.A.G. (1940). Tisias and Corax and the invention of rhetoric. Classical Quarterly, 34(1,2), 61-69.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHovland, C.I., Janis, I.L., & Kelly, H.H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuckin, T.N., & Hutz, L. (1987). Existential "there." (CDC Technical Report No. 36). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJanis, J.H. (1973). The writing behavior of businessmen. Journal of Communication, 15, 1965, 81-88.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKennedy, G.A. (1959). The earliest rhetorical handbooks. American Journal of Philology, 80(2), 169-178.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKruskal, J.B., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonge, P.R. (1973). Theory construction in the study of communication: The system paradigm. Journal of Communication, 23, 5-16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMonge, P.R., Backman, S.G., Dillard, J.P., & Eisenberg, E.M. (1983). Communicator competence in the workplace: Model testing and scale development. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 5 (pp. 505-528). New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO'Keefe, B.J., & Mc Cornack, S.A. (1987). Message design logic and message goal structure: Effects on perceptions of message quality in regulative communication situations. Human Communication Research, 14, 68-92.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQuinn, R.E. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQuinn, R.E., Faerman, S.R., Thompson, M.P., & Mc Grath, M.R. (1990). Becoming a master manager: A competency framework. New York: Wiley.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQuinn, R.E. & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363-377.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRogers, P.S. (1988). Distinguishing public and presentational speaking. Management Communication Quarterly, 2, 102-115.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRogers, P.S. (1989). Choice-based writing in managerial contexts: The case of the Dealer Contact Report. The Journal of Business Communication, 26, 197-216.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith, R.G. (1968). Public speaking models: Process and response. Southern Speech Journal, 33, 316-327.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpitzberg, B.H. (1983). Communication competence as knowledge, skill and impression. Communication Education, 32, 323-329.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSypher, B.D., & Sypher, H.E. (1984). Seeing ourselves as others see us: Convergence and divergence in assessments of communication behavior. Communication Research, 11(7), 97-115.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
10.1177_002194369102800303.pdf
Size:
1022.KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.