Contingency in Corporate Communications. Risk Perception in Organisational Change

Introduction This working paper explores the problem of contingency in corporate communications using theoretical contributions in the field of organisational communication. The central argument presented here is that contingency in corporate communications cannot be reduced because of the unpredictability of human behaviours or future events. On the contrary, individual risk perceptions are reduceable by means of adaptations to changing work environments. Following a meso-level of analysis one can argue that organisational forces (macro-level) mesh with human activity of decision agents (micro-level). So far, there are reciprocal interrelations between environmental pressures due to unpredictable events and own perceptions of employees and managers who perceive risks because of the unknown future. Theoretical framework will be applied to a case of merger between two American multinational corporations, 'Procter & Gamble' and 'The Gillette Company'. This inter-organisational collaboration has been chosen as an example of instability in organisational change. The practical importance of this investigation relates to the implications on learning new skills, behaviours and growth for managers active in negotiating under risk conditions. The exploration of a range of ways in which managers respond to environmental threats is crucial to understand how to reach consensus in changing organisational settings. The illustration outlines some managerial efforts in building up a new corporate culture in post-merger implementation. Corporate values, decision making models as well as corporate oral and written communication are being adapted to fit in the new corporate culture of the combined corporation. This study can serve as a starting point for further investigations and research applications aiming to understand how managers react to environmental threats and overcome perceptions of risk. According to Schmidt the contingencies in communication exist because of two causes: first of all agents have cognitively autonomous minds when they select an option from different alternatives. Then, agents have to mediate between their autonomous mind and the social reality around them. It is in this mediation that social agents become reflexive by observing themselves in their relationship with the environment or the reality around them. The result of these contingencies is an uncertain communicative interaction because in the exchange alter-ego there are different interpretations of intentions and meanings of communicative appeals. Luhmann notes 'What is jointly interpreted can mean something quite different for each participant " (Luhmann 1995, p. 113). Cognitive autonomy is necessary to guarantee an autonomous selection of options in communicative interaction, which excludes a 'communalization between interactants' (Schmidt …