ABSTRACT
Steffen Blaschke The idea of a communicative constitution of organization (CCO) implies both
a micro-level and a macro-level perspective on organizing and organization. The emergence of an organization may always trace back to a first decision made in a single communication event, but it requires a myriad of communication episodes to proverbially talk the organization into existence on a daily basis. Bridging this gap between the micro and the macro is notoriously difficult in both theory and practice. Unfortunately, recent works on the microfoundations (e. g., Teece, 2007) or multi-level theories (e. g., Klein & Kozlowski, 2000) of organizing and organization reinforce rather the transcend the micro-macro gap. On the one hand, scholars draw on, for example, the micro-level behavior of individuals to explain organizations or societies on the macro level. On the other hand, they propose isomorphic structures and dynamics across levels of analysis. Both attempts to bridge the gap between the micro and the macro, however, “rely on a dualism between subject [e. g., action] and object [e. g., structures] that prevents their transcendence of it” (Kuhn, 2012, p. 546 f.).
