Page 98 - Parimad teadustööd 2013/2014

TALLINNA ÜLIKOOLI ÜLIÕPILASTE 2013/2014. ÕPPEAASTA PARIMAD TEADUSTÖÖD / ARTIKLITE KOgUMIK SOTSIAALTEADUSED
with the brand (Randazzo 2006) is the kind of destination most communication professionals would like their target audiences to drive to. Cultivating this shared space, pattern, linkage between customers and organizations has a growing potential. In my model of corporate branding and identity management process, a similar area is marked (by X) as a centerpiece of the target situation and I have suggested that organizations’ archetypical identity could be this glue that connects the organization and customers. The shift from the conduit model of communication to meaning creation on the receiver level requires a broader understanding of how knowledge is created and whether there are some constructions people have in common that a corporate communicator could benefit from, as they have to target various groups and being very precise towards each target in communication planning would make delivering the mes- sage impossible or hardly achievable. In order to find this common ground, a better understanding of the biological structure of receivers is needed, and Maturana and Varela are a good source to obtain it. According to the authors (1987) information cannot be biologically transformed, but behavioral coor- dination takes place every time in the realm of structural coupling. And if during this coordination the sender pushes a button already existing in the unconscious level of the receiver, the message would have far more potential to be adopted and understood. Based on Maturana and Varela (1987), Jung (1991), Mark and Pearson (2001) and Randazzo (2006) I may claim that archetypes are part of our mental archi- tecture, although people are not aware of the historic texture behind linguistic and biologic coherence. All in all, I will conclude by highlighting the core points that can be derived from my thesis: (1) Organi- zations are complex and it would be highly advisable to keep in mind that the pieces separately are not as valuable as the same pieces in interaction, a system, where their true nature comes to life and mean- ings are created. (2) Managing meaning is a much-needed skill for communication professionals and comprehending the strong emphasis on the target as a cognitive system is needed here. If audiences do not perceive your message and are not able to adapt it to their existing patterns, information will flow by and will not make sense to the receiver. And (3) to avoid the chance of being ineffective with your com- munication, it would be reasonable to adopt archetypal identity construction, as archetypes are part of our collective unconsciousness.
References
Balmer, J. M. (2012). Strategic corporate brand alignment: perspectives from identity based views of corporate brands. − European Journal of Marketing, 46 (7/8), 1064−1092.
*Buhl, C. (1991). The consumer’s ad: the art of making sense in advertising. − H. Larsen, d. Mick, C. Alsted (Eds). Marketing and Semiotics. Selected Papers from the Copenhagen Symposium. Copenhagen: Handelshøjskolens Forlag, 104−127.
Christensen, L. T., Firat, A. F., Cornelissen, J. (2009). New tensions and challenges in integrated communications. − Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14 (2), 207−219.
Gershenson, C. (2013). Facing Complexity: Prediction vs. Adaption. − Á. Massip-Bonet, A. Bastardas- Boada (Eds). Complexity Perspectives on Language, Communication and Society. New York dordrecht London: Springer Heidelberg, 3−14.
Hall, W. P. (2005). Biological nature of knowledge in the learning organisation. − The Learning Organisation , 12 (2), 169−188.
*Holland, J. (1995). Hidden order. How adaption builds complexity. New York: Basic Books.
Jung, C. G. (1991). The archetypes and the collective unconscious. 2nd edition, reprinted. London: Routledge.
Mark, M., Pearson, C. S. (2001). The Hero and the Outlaw. Building Extraordinary Brands Through the Power of Archetypes. New York, uSA: McGraw-Hill.
Martin-Vallas, F. (2013). Are archetypes transmitted or emergent? A response to Christian Roesler. − Journal of Analytical Psychology , 58 (2), 278−285.
98