Critical/Cultural Studies
Power is central to the critical/cultural approach toward conflict. In this perspective, conflict is seen as embedded in the power structures of the societies in which it occurs, whether the nature of the conflict is economic, political, social, cultural, or ideological.
As an integral part of the construction of those power structures, conflict becomes a locale for investigating how power is constituted and normalized, which greatly influences how researchers and practitioners understand social structures, interpret cultural symbols, and ideologies, and might potentially reshape them. Whether rooted in political economy, critical theory, cultural studies, feminism, postcolonialism, critical race theory, or queer theory, a critical/cultural approach toward conflict is interested in examining how material and ideological forces prevent or distort discursive reflection on the part of conflict participants. A commitment to confronting and revealing power structures and social inequalities in conflict so that wrongs can be righted, social justice can be restored, and the state of human affairs can be improved is generally shared among researchers of this paradigm.Critical conflict researchers are concerned that communication perceived only as a conduit (see Axley, 1984; see also Putnam & Boys, 2006) is flawed and incomplete. In examining multiple axes of power, oppression, domination, and resistance, critical/cultural scholars often emphasize interdisciplinarity and multiple identities; they defy clear-cut boundaries between communicative contexts and social identities, such as race, gender, sexuality, nationality, and ability (Ono, 2009). Different from other approaches, critical research also subscribes to praxis or reflective social action for social change.
As one example, Cloud’s (2005) narrative analysis of newsletters by locked-out workers during an industrial conflict calls attention to the limits of symbolic agency in the labor movement and questions the overemphasis on discursive power and lack of focus on materiality in organizational communication and social movement research.
The conflict between employer and union is viewed as both economic and discursive that manifests itself on the ground of power in the workers’ narratives. Workers discursively positioned themselves in conflict scenarios as warriors and heroes and later as victims, refugees, and martyrs as the movement faltered. Power is construed in this case not only discursively but also alternatively as economic and repressive force wielded by capitalists. Organizational dialogue and workplace democracy, the study implies, is impossible if one does not question the underlying unjust economic arrangements in capitalist organizations and the coercive power they hold.Although prominent in analyses and findings, “conflict” may not be explicitly used as a key word or even mentioned in texts consistent with the critical/cultural studies tradition. For instance, D’Enbeau and Buzzanell (2011) utilized a grounded theory approach to analyze field notes, 38 interview transcripts, and documents from “Moxie,” a cuttingedge independent media organization that also sponsors community events to promote social change. Inherent tensions between and within feminist ideology and viability are articulated throughout individual, group, and organizational discourses and embodied by members in their self-presentations and everyday practices. Participants worked through their ideological and financial viability tensions and reported workplace conflicts by equating viability with ideology or by submitting to the force of viability (economic feasibility). For instance, staff members expressed disagreement over advertisements for some products that they considered unhealthy and not aligned with principles that they equated with feminism. They sometimes discussed contradictions but, as Gwen said in her capacity as the expert on marketing and advertisement: “I think it’s directly in opposition to the way that I look at my place in society. And what I believe in. I fucking hate it.
... it’s consumerism, but it has to be paid for” D’Enbeau & Buzzanell, 2011, p. 41).
Gwen reflects on voiced conflicts and the unresolved tensions that reemerge because of defaults to viability arguments. In this and other investigations in the critical/cultural studies, tradition, ideological, and material resource conflicts are intertwined but not necessarily labeled as such.