Cover not available
Article published In:
Practices of Dialogue, Dialogues in Practice
Edited by Alain Létourneau, Geneviève Boivin and Nicolas Bencherki
[Language and Dialogue 13:2] 2023
► pp. 155–180

A critique of the adjacency pair dogma

The organization of interaction and the emergence of organized forms from basic organizing units

| Université de Montréal
| Université de Montréal
| Université de Montréal
Drawing inspiration from key authors such as Weick, Taylor and Van Every, Greimas, Goffman, Sbisà, and Tsui, we propose to explore what we call the basic organizing unit, in other words, the minimal form that a sequence of action must take in order to claim a certain degree of organizationality. In order to empirically test this proposition, we purposively analyze interactions taking place outside of a classical organizational context, i.e., street hypnosis sessions. What interests us is not only how these sessions are organized, but also how they organize themselves. Our aim, therefore, is to identify key moments when a certain organizationality seems to express itself, an organizationality that we propose to detect through the identification of these basic organizing units. This leads us to show that the adjacency pair model, which has been historically defined as a fundamental unit of conversational organization should, in fact, be replaced by our triadic model of interaction.
Keywords: organizationality, adjacency pair, organizing, hypnosis, sequentiality, speech acts, conversation analysis
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The basic organizing unit
  • 3.From the basic organizational unit to organization
  • 4.The case of street hypnosis sessions
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 1 August 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00145.coo
References (74)
References
Ahrne, Göran and Nils Brunsson. 2011. “Organization outside organizations: the significance of partial organization.” Organization 18(1): 83–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Organization outside Organizations: The Abundance of Partial Organization in Social Life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ahrne, Göran, Nils Brunsson, and David Seidl. 2016. “Resurrecting organization by going beyond organizations.” European Management Journal 341: 93–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alcadipani, Rafael and Islam Gazi. 2017. “Modalities of opposition: Control and resistance via visual materiality.” Organization 24(6): 866–891. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Althusser, Louis. 1971. “Ideology and ideological state apparatuses.” Lenin and philosophy and other essays, 127–186. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
Austin, John L. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Balay, Matthieu, François Cooren, and Frédéric Dion. 2021. “Processus organisants et formes organisées : Le cas de séances d’hypnose de rue.” Communication et organisation. Revue scientifique francophone en Communication organisationnelle 591: 91–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas and Alaric Bourgoin. 2019. “Property and organization studies.” Organization Studies 40(4): 497–513. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas and François Cooren. 2011. “Having to be: The possessive constitution of organization.” Human Relations 64(12): 1579–1607. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas, Frédéric Matte, and François Cooren (eds). 2019. Authority and power in social interaction. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas and James P. Snack. 2016. “Contributorship and partial inclusion: A communicative perspective.” Management Communication Quarterly 30(3): 279–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benoit-Barné, Chantal, and François Cooren. 2009. “The accomplishment of authority through presentification: How authority is distributed among and negotiated by organizational members.” Management Communication Quarterly 23(1): 5–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blagoev, Blagoy, Jana Costas, and Dan Kärreman. 2019. “We are all herd animals: Community and organizationality in coworking spaces. Organization 26(6): 894–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boden, Deirdre. 1994. The business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, Jerome. 1991. “The narrative construction of reality.” Critical Inquiry 181: 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burawoy, Michael. 1982. Manufacturing consent: Changes in the labor process under monopoly capitalism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Callon, Michel. 1986. “Some elements of a sociology of translation: The domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” In Power, Action and Belief, ed. by John Law, 196–233. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Cnossen, Boukje and Nicolas Bencherki. 2019. “The role of space in the emergence and endurance of organizing: How independent workers and material assemblages constitute organizations.” Human Relations 72(6): 1057–1080. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Combe, Jean-Emmanuel. 2013. La voix de l’inconscient. Paris: Street Hypnose.Google Scholar
Cooren, François. 2000. The organizing property of communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Textual agency: How texts do things in organizational settings.” Organization 11(3): 373–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
. 2010. Action and agency in dialogue: Passion, incarnation, and ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Organizational discourse: Communication and constitution. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Cooren, François and David Douyère. 2013. “Pour une approche incarnée de la communication organisationnelle: Une critique de l’usage de la notion de “réification”.” In Communication and organisation: Perspectives critiques, ed. by Thomas Heller, Romain Huët, and Bénédicte Vidaillet, 155–165. Lille: Presses universitaires du Septentrion. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooren, François and Gail T. Fairhurst. 2004. “Speech timing and spacing: The phenomenon of organizational closure.” Organization 11(6): 793–824. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Dislocation and Stabilization: How to Scale Up from Interactions to Organization.” In The Communicative Constitution Of Organization: Centering Organizational Communication, ed. by Linda L. Putnam and Anne M. Nicotera, 117–152. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cooren, François and Frédérik Matte. 2021. “Between media studies and organizational communication: Organizing as the creation of organs.” In Media: A transdisciplinary inquiry, ed. by Jeremy Swartz and Janet Wasko, 100–114. Bristol, UK: Intellect.Google Scholar
Coulthard, Malcolm. 1986. An introduction to discourse analysis. London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Deetz, Stan. 2008. “Resistance: Would struggle by any other name be as sweet?” Management Communication Quarterly 21(3): 387–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1988. Limited Inc. Chicago, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Dion, Frédéric and Jacinthe Dupuis. 2022. Organizing self: A hauntological approach to communication constitutive of personhood. Paper presented at the 108th Annual convention of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, United States.
Dobusch, Leonhard and Dennis Schoeneborn. 2015. “Fluidity, identity, and organizationality: The communicative constitution of Anonymous.” Journal of Management Studies, 52 (8): 1005–1035. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 2002. Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Oxford, UK: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1976. “Replies and responses.” Language in society 5(3): 257–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greimas, Algirdas J. 1987. On meaning: Selected writings in semiotic theory. London, UK: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Heller, Thomas, Romain Huët, and Bénédicte Vidaillet. 2013. “Communication et organisation: Perspectives critiques.” Lille: Presses universitaires du Septentrion. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Howe, Christine and Manzoorul Abedin. 2013. “Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research.” Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3): 325–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacquin, Anthony. 2008. Reality is plastic: The art of impromptu hypnosis. Derbyshire, UK: Anthony Jacquin.Google Scholar
James, Eric P. and Heather M. Zoller. 2018. “Resistance training: (Re)shaping extreme forms of workplace health promotion. Management Communication Quarterly 32(1): 60–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Kobin H., Penelope Brown, Mark Dingemanse, Simeon Floyd, Sonja Gipper, Kaoru Hayano, Elliott Hoey, Gertie Hoymann, Elizabeth Manrique, Giovanni Rossi, and Stephen C. Levinson. 2020. “Sequence organization: A universal infrastructure for social action.” Journal of Pragmatics 1681: 119–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2005. Le discours en interaction. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 2013a. An inquiry into modes of existence: An anthropology of the moderns. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 2013b. ““What’s the story?” Organizing as a mode of existence.” In Organization and organizing: Materiality, agency, and discourse, ed. by Daniel Robichaud and François Cooren, 37–51. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lemke, Jay L. 1990. Talking science: Language, learning and values, Norwoord, NJ: AblexGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leydon, Geraldine, and Rebecca K. Barnes. 2020. “Conversation analysis”. In Qualitative research in health care ed. by Catherine Pope and Nicholas Mays, 135–150. Oxford, UK: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lien, Marianne E. and Gísli Pálsson. 2021. “Ethnography beyond the human : The ‘other-than-human’ in Ethnographic Work.” Ethnos 86(1): 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 2018. Organization and decision. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McPhee, Robert D. and Pamela Zaug. 2000. “The communicative constitution of organizations: A framework for explanation.” The Electronic Journal of Communication / La revue électronique de communication 10(1/2): 1–16.Google Scholar
Mehan, Hugh. 1979. ““What time is it, Denise?”: Asking known information questions in classroom discourse.” Theory Into Practice 18(4): 285–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mumby, Dennis K. 2005. “Theorizing resistance in organization studies: A dialectical approach.” Management Communication Quarterly 19(1): 19–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newcomb, Theodore M. 1953. “An approach to the study of communicative acts.” Psychological Review 501: 393–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peräkylä, Anssi. 2016. “Conversation analysis.” In The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology. ed. by George Ritzer. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rasche, Andreas, Frank G. A. de Bakker, and Jeremy Moon. 2013. “Complete and partial organizing for corporate social responsibility.” Journal of Business Ethics (115): 651–663. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossano, Federico. 2013. “Sequence organization and timing of bonobo mother-infant interactions.” Interaction Studies 14(2): 160–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language 501: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 2003. “Cognition and narrativity in speech act sequences.” In Rethinking Sequentiality, ed. by Anita Fetzer and Christiane Meierkord, 71–97. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. and Harvey Sacks. 1973. “Opening up closings.” Semiotica 71: 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schoeneborn, Dennis, Timothy R. Kuhn, and Dan Kärreman. 2019. “The Communicative Constitution of Organization, Organizing, and Organizationality.” Organization Studies 40(4): 475–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John M. and R. M. Coulthard. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, William R. 2022. “On Relationality and Organizationality: Degrees of durability, materiality, and communicatively constituting a fluid social collective.” Organization Studies 43(11): 1815–1837. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, James R. and Elizabeth J. Van Every. 2000. The emergent organization. Communication as site and surface. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. 2011. The situated organization: Case studies in the pragmatics of communication. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2014. When organization fails: Why authority matters. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, Sarah. 2000. “Becoming a character for commerce.” Management Communication Quarterly 14(1): 90–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsui, Amy B. M. 1989. “Beyond the adjacency pair.” Language in Society 18(4): 545–564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. English conversation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weick, Karl E. 1979. The Social Psychology of Organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Weick, Karl E. 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Wilhoit, Elizabeth D. and Lorraine G. Kisselburgh. 2015. “Collective action without organization: The material constitution of bike commuters as collective.” Organization Studies 36(5): 573–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar