Discursive Closure and Discursive Openings in Sustainability

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Sustainability is an ambiguous and open-ended concept with many different meanings. Researchers as well as practitioners often express frustration with this fact and frequently call for more consistent, measurable, and univocal definitions of sustainability to ensure agreement, mutual understanding, and collective action (Jahdi & Acikdilli, 2009; Kolk, 2003). This essay, by contrast, explores the potential of appreciating and embracing ambiguity in the sustainability arena. We argue that lack of a clear-cut sustainability definition has potential to mobilize stakeholders to challenge existing understandings and explore new ideas and practices. Accepting conceptual ambiguity, in other words, is not necessarily to evade responsibility or critique. Whereas discursive closure may bind the concept to the past and make an organization blind to new and unexpected issues of sustainability problems, an open-ended conceptualization may stimulate sensitivity, quick adaption, and innovative solutions. We refer to this practice as “license to critique.” Instead of presuming to provide final answers to sustainability issues, sustainability program can, as a license to critique, authorize and invite stakeholders to participate, challenge, and debate.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftManagement Communication Quarterly
Vol/bind29
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)135-144
Antal sider10
ISSN0893-3189
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2015

Citer dette

@article{cf49fc3fe755473f857f0accd34f963d,
title = "Discursive Closure and Discursive Openings in Sustainability",
abstract = "Sustainability is an ambiguous and open-ended concept with many different meanings. Researchers as well as practitioners often express frustration with this fact and frequently call for more consistent, measurable, and univocal definitions of sustainability to ensure agreement, mutual understanding, and collective action (Jahdi & Acikdilli, 2009; Kolk, 2003). This essay, by contrast, explores the potential of appreciating and embracing ambiguity in the sustainability arena. We argue that lack of a clear-cut sustainability definition has potential to mobilize stakeholders to challenge existing understandings and explore new ideas and practices. Accepting conceptual ambiguity, in other words, is not necessarily to evade responsibility or critique. Whereas discursive closure may bind the concept to the past and make an organization blind to new and unexpected issues of sustainability problems, an open-ended conceptualization may stimulate sensitivity, quick adaption, and innovative solutions. We refer to this practice as “license to critique.” Instead of presuming to provide final answers to sustainability issues, sustainability program can, as a license to critique, authorize and invite stakeholders to participate, challenge, and debate.",
author = "Christensen, {Lars Th{\o}ger} and Mette Morsing and Ole Thyssen",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1177/0893318914563574",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "135--144",
journal = "Management Communication Quarterly",
issn = "0893-3189",
publisher = "Sage Publications, Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Discursive Closure and Discursive Openings in Sustainability. / Christensen, Lars Thøger; Morsing, Mette; Thyssen, Ole.

I: Management Communication Quarterly, Bind 29, Nr. 1, 2015, s. 135-144.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Discursive Closure and Discursive Openings in Sustainability

AU - Christensen, Lars Thøger

AU - Morsing, Mette

AU - Thyssen, Ole

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Sustainability is an ambiguous and open-ended concept with many different meanings. Researchers as well as practitioners often express frustration with this fact and frequently call for more consistent, measurable, and univocal definitions of sustainability to ensure agreement, mutual understanding, and collective action (Jahdi & Acikdilli, 2009; Kolk, 2003). This essay, by contrast, explores the potential of appreciating and embracing ambiguity in the sustainability arena. We argue that lack of a clear-cut sustainability definition has potential to mobilize stakeholders to challenge existing understandings and explore new ideas and practices. Accepting conceptual ambiguity, in other words, is not necessarily to evade responsibility or critique. Whereas discursive closure may bind the concept to the past and make an organization blind to new and unexpected issues of sustainability problems, an open-ended conceptualization may stimulate sensitivity, quick adaption, and innovative solutions. We refer to this practice as “license to critique.” Instead of presuming to provide final answers to sustainability issues, sustainability program can, as a license to critique, authorize and invite stakeholders to participate, challenge, and debate.

AB - Sustainability is an ambiguous and open-ended concept with many different meanings. Researchers as well as practitioners often express frustration with this fact and frequently call for more consistent, measurable, and univocal definitions of sustainability to ensure agreement, mutual understanding, and collective action (Jahdi & Acikdilli, 2009; Kolk, 2003). This essay, by contrast, explores the potential of appreciating and embracing ambiguity in the sustainability arena. We argue that lack of a clear-cut sustainability definition has potential to mobilize stakeholders to challenge existing understandings and explore new ideas and practices. Accepting conceptual ambiguity, in other words, is not necessarily to evade responsibility or critique. Whereas discursive closure may bind the concept to the past and make an organization blind to new and unexpected issues of sustainability problems, an open-ended conceptualization may stimulate sensitivity, quick adaption, and innovative solutions. We refer to this practice as “license to critique.” Instead of presuming to provide final answers to sustainability issues, sustainability program can, as a license to critique, authorize and invite stakeholders to participate, challenge, and debate.

UR - http://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=960238898529&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

U2 - 10.1177/0893318914563574

DO - 10.1177/0893318914563574

M3 - Journal article

VL - 29

SP - 135

EP - 144

JO - Management Communication Quarterly

JF - Management Communication Quarterly

SN - 0893-3189

IS - 1

ER -