See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/314732104

Symbolic Convergence Theory

Chapter · March 2017

DOI: 10.1002/9781118955567.wbieoc202

CITATIONS READS
2 7,372

1 author:

James O. Olufowote
University of Oklahoma
28 PUBLICATIONS   264 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by James O. Olufowote on 11 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Symbolic Convergence Theory
JAMES OLUMIDE OLUFOWOTE
University of Oklahoma, USA

Symbolic convergence theory (SCT) was introduced in the 1970s by Ernest Bormann
and his colleagues at the University of Minnesota. SCT was developed to identify
instances of convergence on consciousness and meanings by interacting members of
small groups (e.g., increased laughter and excitement) and to explain the constitutive
communication processes and consequences of such convergence both within and
beyond the small group. This entry contextualizes SCT in the broader history of
communication studies, remembers SCT’s central ideas, explains SCT’s resonance
with organizational communication studies, identifies organizational communication
criticisms of SCT, discusses how organizational communication theories can bolster
SCT, examines how a reformulated SCT has begun to influence organizational commu-
nication theory and research, and considers future directions for SCT based works in
organizational communication.
SCT holds a significant place in the history of communication studies. It was devel-
oped at a time when the field was using theories – developed in disciplines such as
psychology and sociology – that paid marginal attention to the role of communication.
SCT was not only developed by Ernest Bormann, a communication-trained researcher
and scholar, it offered a communication centered explanation for the sharing of con-
sciousness and meaning. Moreover, because the field is fragmented into (1) different
subfields organized largely by levels of analysis (e.g., interpersonal, small group, organi-
zational, and mass communication) and (2) different research paradigms (e.g., norma-
tive, interpretive), SCT arose as one of the early forces to unite a fragmented field. SCT
united the field by recognizing communication as both creative and discursive logic.
Stated differently, SCT recognized that communication creatively constructs, and is
constrained by, reality. SCT served as a unifying force because it was relevant to commu-
nication processes that transcended levels (e.g., group, sociohistorical), and it appealed
to researchers and scholars trained in interpretive, normative, or rhetorical approaches.
SCT also served as a unifying force because it was amenable to idiographic analyses of
context-bound meanings and broader communication phenomena that transcended
time and space.

Remembering SCT

SCT is perhaps best recognized by a set of defining elements. The stage is set when a
few interacting individuals dramatize events or incidents set in the past. Dramatizing

The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication. Craig R. Scott and Laurie Lewis (Editors-in-Chief),
James R. Barker, Joann Keyton, Timothy Kuhn, and Paaige K. Turner (Associate Editors).
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118955567.wbieoc202
2 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y

can be of either fictitious or real events and can include narrative elements such as
heroes and heroines, plots, scenes, and villains. As individuals exchange dramas, a
drama may resonate so strongly with listeners that a symbolic explosion takes place
both within the group and beyond the group into public consciousness. Symbolic
explosions are usually accompanied by increases in the communion, excitement, and
laughter of individuals in the originating context. Through the sharing of fantasy
themes and fantasy types, the symbolic explosion of a drama can chain into public
consciousness. Fantasy themes and types are recurring stories with similar orientations
toward dramas that are chaining (or spreading) among people within and beyond
an originating context. Fantasy themes are recurring stories that are recounted in
detail in communication contexts where shared meaning is nascent. Fantasy types,
on the other hand, are recurring stories, told at greater levels of abstraction, in
communication contexts where shared meaning is taken for granted. Fantasy types
are also stories that conform to a popular story structure or archetype in society
(e.g., David vs. Goliath; from rags to riches) and can incorporate several fantasy
themes.
Rhetorical visions emerge through the chaining of fantasy themes and fantasy
types. Rhetorical visions are ideological symbolic systems that unify communities
and societies and imbue collective action. Rhetorical visions are more abstract than
fantasy themes and types and have greater time–space depth, stronger systems
of shared meaning, and sociohistorical permeation. Cragan and Shields (1981)
identified three rhetorical visions grounded in the consciousness of communi-
ties: pragmatic, social, and righteous. The pragmatic rhetorical vision is shared
by those of a scientific bent who seek practical and utilitarian goals. The social
rhetorical vision shares consciousness grounded in relationships and seeks unity
and peace. The righteous rhetorical vision is grounded in high morals and oppo-
sition to evil. A rhetorical community is caught up in a rhetorical vision and is
united by collective consciousness and meanings that inspire collective action.
Membership in a rhetorical community can be either formalized through acts such
as payment of dues and member ceremonies or can remain largely ideological and
unobservable.

Resonance of SCT in organizational communication studies

SCT resonates with organizational communication because of its interrelated foci on

subjects such as narrative and storytelling, rhetoric, shared meanings, and the rela-
tionship between little “d” and big “D” discourse. As a communication centered for-
mulation, SCT attends to the elements of narratives (e.g., plot, scene, saga, heroines,
villains) and the storytelling processes by which narratives infiltrate public conscious-
ness. Such foci have had an enduring legacy in organizational communication studies,
particularly in the study of organizational culture. For example, Bormann (1988) used
SCT to reinterpret Pacanowsky’s (1988) findings of W. L. Gore & Associates’ organiza-
tional culture as consisting of fantasy themes about the leader asking employees if they
had fun and made money, and in employees’ references to the lattice organizational
 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y 3

structure. In another example, Bormann, Pratt, and Putnam’s (1978) study of a zero-
history organization discovered fantasy themes such as the “black widow spider” and
“the Godfather.” The black widow drama featured a male spider fertilizing a female spi-
der and then being killed shortly after walking away. The Godfather story was about
dictatorial rule by men. Bormann, Pratt, and Putnam (1978) argued that these and
other fantasy themes of the zero-history organization culminated in a rhetorical vision
of “battle of the sexes.”
SCT resonates with organizational communication and lays further claim to being
a communication centered theory because of its attention to rhetoric. Rhetorical
approaches to organizational communication have been particularly influential
in research on organizational identification and unobtrusive and concertive con-
trol. In SCT, the symbolic explosion of a drama can be partly explained by the
rhetorical skill of a speaker (Bormann, 1985). Furthermore, rhetorical visions are
not strictly ideological but persuade audiences into taking particular action. For
example, Bormann’s (2001) study of rhetoric by New England Puritan ministers
discovered fantasy themes of salvation and damnation, the pilgrim’s holy war as
involving trials and tribulations, and the Christian as soldier overcoming trials to do
God’s will.
SCT further resonates with organizational communication because it prefigured and
was part and parcel of the interpretive turn in organizational communication studies
(Bormann, 1983a; Putnam & Pacanowsky, 1983). The interpretive turn ushered in an
understanding of communication as the intersubjective property of shared and col-
lective meanings. SCT was largely preoccupied with discovering the process by which
social actors within and beyond the small group converged on meanings and conscious-
ness (in the form of dramas). Bormann (1983b) wrote: “[S]ymbolic convergence creates,
maintains, and allows people to achieve empathic communion as well as meeting of the
minds” (p. 102).
SCT also resonates with organizational communication because it can be regarded
as one of the very first formulations to introduce communication from both the per-
spective of little “d” and big “D” discourse. The initial exchange of dramas within a
small group can be understood as little “d” discourse that is largely concerned with
conversation and talk-in-interaction. Rhetorical visions or abstract dramas that encap-
sulate communities and societies are akin to big “D” discourse that is concerned with
reigning systems of thought or ideas in a specific historical era. For example, Kroll’s
(1983) study showed how the dramatic orientations in the initiating small group con-
text of a woman’s movement (e.g., woman as known sufferer and victim) chained into
the public consciousness of a midwestern US metropolis. In another example, Bor-
mann (1973) tracked the spread of fantasy about a presidential candidate’s fitness for
office, when it was discovered that he was receiving electric shock treatment, from
the small-group setting of the network newsroom, to the media, and then to public
consciousness.
4 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y

Rousing and redirecting SCT: Organizational

communication criticisms of SCT

Despite SCT’s early popularity in communication studies, Olufowote (2006) pointed to

a noticeable decline in its uses by organizational communication researchers and schol-
ars. To improve SCT’s viability and subsequent uses in organizational communication
studies, Olufowote identified problems with SCT – explanatory weaknesses and overly
restrictive assumptions – that prevented its applicability to complexities in the commu-
nicative constitution of organizations. Moreover, Olufowote argued that organizational
communication theories were uniquely capable of improving SCT’s usefulness, thereby
positioning a reformulated SCT for greater relevance to more complex organizational
communication processes.
Olufowote (2006) uncovered three major problems with SCT: insufficient expla-
nations for why humans dramatize and share fantasy, a restrictive convergence
ideology, and restrictive characterizations of membership in rhetorical communi-
ties. First, although Olufowote applauded SCT based works for discovering factors
that facilitated the sharing of fantasy, he argued SCT did not sufficiently explain
why humans dramatize the past and coalesce around particular dramas. Second,
Olufowote suggested SCT’s convergence ideology created blind spots that prevented
analysts from fully considering complexities in the communicative constitution
of organizations. He unpacked SCT’s convergence ideology by revealing several
problematic assumptions: an implicit prosocial bias, egalitarian assumptions, and a
conflict-free characterization of rhetorical visions. Olufowote argued that a proso-
cial bias in SCT, which celebrated processes of convergence, was problematic in
instances of antisocial symbolizing (malicious and vicious stories). He also sug-
gested the assumption that initiates into a drama gain equal benefits is erroneous
when the speaker and the storyteller (such as a cult leader) benefit more from
listeners being caught up in a particular drama. He further contended that SCT’s
characterization of rhetorical visions as coherent and unified elided deep-structure
ideological struggles within visions and related processes of ideological domination and
marginalization.
Third, Olufowote (2006) contended that SCT’s characterization of membership
in rhetorical communities failed to capture the dynamic nature of membership. He
pointed out that SCT’s assumption of homogenous member identities in rhetorical
communities failed to acknowledge heterogeneity created by members’ multiple
identities and the ensuing identity and relational conflicts members of rhetorical com-
munities may experience.

Rousing and redirecting SCT: Bolstering by organizational

communication theories

To address SCT’s problems and position it to capture complexities in the communica-

tive constitution of organizations, Olufowote (2006) recommended SCT incorporate
ideas from Karl Weick’s model of sensemaking, critical organizational communication
 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y 5

theory, the bona fide group perspective, and advances in organizational identification
research.
To develop SCT’s explanation for why humans share fantasy and why people partici-
pate in dramas, Olufowote (2006) suggested a sensemaking explanation. Weick’s (1995)
model of sensemaking, which depicts the social actor as immersed in equivocality
(multiplicity of meanings), is essentially concerned with how social actors create reality
(out of equivocality) and achieve an understanding of lived experience. Weick wrote
that sensemaking is triggered when the social actor’s experience of shock or novelty
demands he or she step out of the stream of lived experience and become reflexive
about past and passing experiences. The actor brackets cues from past and passing
experiences and constructs particular meanings of them. In so doing, the social actor
manages equivocality and achieves a particular understanding of lived experience.
Drawing on Weick’s model of sensemaking, Olufowote argued that human sharing of
fantasy is essentially an artistic verbal articulation of sensemaking processes designed
to manage equivocality. People coalesce around, and participate in, dramas in order
to reach shared meanings of an equivocal past and a collective understanding of lived
experience. The symbolic explosion of drama represents initial collective agreement
about an equivocal past.
To relax and complement SCT’s convergence ideology, Olufowote (2006) suggested
SCT recognize ideas from critical organizational communication theory (Mumby,
2001). This perspective suggests that socially constructed meanings are integral to
the societal status quo and, as such, prevent us from thinking otherwise. Yet critical
reflection on the status quo has the capacity to expose meaning formations and the
formation of meaning as nonneutral in the sense that particular groups (e.g., race,
class, gender), interests, and ideologies are dominant in ways that are antithetical to
notions of democratic and egalitarian societies. Stated differently, meaning formations
and the formation of meaning, through critical interrogation, can be understood
politically as instantiating (and unfolding through) relations of power. These power
relations tend to maintain a societal status quo that privileges (and marginalizes)
groups and ideologies in undemocratic fashion. Analysts are to expose the power
relations embedded in socially constructed meanings and to advocate for social
change and alternative arrangements. In adapting ideas from critical organizational
communication theory, Olufowote argued that SCT’s restrictive convergence ideology
can be relaxed by acknowledging antisocial dramas (malicious and vicious stories),
speaker storytelling for self-benefit and control, obscured ideological struggle and
ideological dominance in rhetorical visions, and member challenges to visions.
To relax and complement SCT’s assumptions of homogeneous rhetorical commu-
nities, Olufowote (2006) turned to the bona fide group perspective (Putnam & Stohl,
1990) and advances in research on organizational identification (Scott et al., 1999).
Putnam and Stohl encouraged researchers to move from studying zero-history groups
in laboratories to naturalistic groups. They recommended this move be accompanied
by revised assumptions about groups’ boundaries (fluidity and permeability), the
importance of their social context, and their interdependence with social context. One
important contribution of this perspective is members’ simultaneous membership
in multiple groups or members’ multiple identity targets such as race, gender, team,
6 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y

organization, and profession. Putnam and Stohl suggested that membership in multiple
groups or members’ multiple targets of identity can create divided loyalties and identity
conflicts. Olufowote wrote that the bona fide group perspective provided a more
heterogeneous and dynamic understanding of rhetorical communities than SCT,
demanding that analysts acknowledge commitment, identity, and relational conflicts
in rhetorical communities.

Redirecting SCT: Influence in contemporary organizational

communication studies

Contemporary organizational communication theory and research has taken up SCT

in a way that challenges its restrictive assumptions and ideas. For example, the theory of
language convergence/meaning divergence (LC/MD) has appeared in multiple research
reports in communication studies and has a promising future in organizational com-
munication and the larger discipline. LC/MD furthers the agenda of challenging the
overly restrictive assumptions of convergence in SCT (Dougherty et al., 2009). LC/MD
is a grounded theory that was developed from research demonstrating that participants
converging on the same or very similar language choice and word usage can diverge in
important ways on the fundamental meanings of those terms such that an illusion of
shared meaning is created among conversational partners when none really exists.
Another challenge to SCT’s overly restrictive assumptions of convergence can be
found in Broom and Avanzino’s (2010) study of a community coalition that was formed
to combat neighborhood problems in Palermo, California. They discovered the pres-
ence of two rhetorical visions – “we can make a difference” and “failure is their fault.” In
challenging the restrictive assumptions of convergence over the “failure is their fault”
vision, the authors pointed to the antisocial nature of its fantasies, which vilified and
scapegoated outsiders. The researchers wrote they were unable to find any coalition
fantasies that cast community members positively. They also argued that the “failure is
their fault” vision was grounded in an ideology that not only marginalized outsiders
but hindered the coalition’s ability to recruit and retain newcomers.

Future directions

SCT is unique as a communication centered framework in its focus on narratives and

stories. Because narratives anchor the development of shared meanings and collective
consciousness, future uses of SCT should continue to keep a focus on narratives (e.g.,
heroines, plot, scene, saga, villains), whether they are being exchanged in the initiating
small-group context, whether they are chaining as fantasy themes and types, or whether
they have matured into abstract and encompassing rhetorical visions.
Besides a focus on narratives, SCT is particularly relevant to organizational commu-
nication studies because of its ability to transcend multiple levels of analysis. The analyst
can simultaneously consider, for example, the form or structure of a particular narra-
tive, individual-level factors that facilitated the sharing (or taking up) of fantasy, the
 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y 7

process of storytelling in small groups, the explosion of fantasy within organizations and
between organizations and their publics, and rhetorical visions encompassing multiple
organizations.
In light of the prevalence of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter,
future uses of SCT may consider social media as initiating contexts for dramatizing the
past, as a vehicle for the chaining of fantasy themes and types, and as sites that instantiate
as well as preserve traces of broader cross-organizational rhetorical visions.
In studying narratives in the form of fantasy and visions, analysts can continue to
complement SCT’s convergence ideology by distinguishing between antisocial (mali-
cious and vicious stories) and prosocial dramas. Further, narratives, understood as dis-
cursive artifacts of a societal status quo, can be interrogated for ideological struggles and
dominance. Whether narratives are chaining as fantasy or have developed into visions,
they have the capacity to privilege (and marginalize) particular groups (e.g., race, class,
gender), interests, and ideologies. Moreover, fantasies and visions cannot only sustain
an undemocratic status quo, they also have the capacity to resist and challenge such a
status quo. Future uses of SCT can ascertain the degree to which fantasies and visions
resist an undemocratic or problematic status quo.

SEE ALSO: Critical Approaches; Groups and Teams in Organizations; Identification,

Organizational; Interpretive Approaches; Micro/Meso/Macrolevels of Analysis; Narra-
tive and Storytelling; Rhetorical Approaches

References

Bormann, E. G. (1973). The Eagleton affair: A fantasy theme analysis. Quarterly Journal of Speech,
59, 143–159. doi:10.1080/00335637309383163
Bormann, E. G. (1983a). Symbolic convergence: Organizational communication and culture. In
L. L. Putnam & M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive
approach (pp. 99–122). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Bormann, E. G. (1983b). The symbolic convergence theory of communication and the creation,
raising, and sustaining of public consciousness. In J. Sisco (Ed.), The Jensen lectures: Contem-
porary communication studies. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.
Bormann, E. G. (1985). Symbolic convergence theory: A communication formulation. Journal
of Communication, 35, 128–138. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1985.tb02977.x
Bormann, E. G. (1988). “Empowering” as a heuristic concept in organizational communication.
In J. A. Anderson (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 11, pp. 391–404). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Bormann, E. G. (2001). The force of fantasy: Restoring the American dream. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Bormann, E. G., Pratt, J., & Putnam, L. (1978). Power, authority, and sex: Male response to female
leadership. Communication Monographs, 45, 119–155. doi:10.1080/03637757809375959
Broom, C., & Avanzino, S. (2010). The communication of community collaboration: When
rhetorical visions collide. Communication Quarterly, 58, 480–501. doi:10.1080/01463373
.2010.525701
Cragan, J. F., & Shields, D. C. (1981). Applied communication research: A dramatistic approach.
Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
 8 SY M B O L I C C O N V E R G E N C E TH E O R Y

Dougherty, D. S., Kramer, M. W., Klatzke, S. R., & Rogers, T. K. K. (2009). Language convergence
and meaning divergence: A meaning-centered communication theory. Communication Mono-
graphs, 76, 20–46. doi:10.1080/03637750802378799
Kroll, B. S. (1983). From small group to public view: Mainstreaming the women’s movement.
Communication Quarterly, 31, 139–147. doi:10.1080/01463378309369497
Mumby, D. K. (2001). Power and politics. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook
of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 585–623).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Olufowote, J. O. (2006). Rousing and redirecting a sleeping giant: Symbolic convergence theory
and complexities in the communicative constitution of collective action. Management Com-
munication Quarterly, 19, 451–492. doi:10.1177/0893318905280326
Pacanowsky, M. E. (1988). Communication in the empowering organization. In J. A. Anderson
(Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 11, pp. 356–379). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Putnam, L. L. & Pacanowsky, M. E. (1983). Communication and organizations: An interpretive
approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Putnam, L. L., & Stohl, C. (1990). Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context.
Communication Studies, 41, 248–265. doi:10.1080/10510979009368307
Scott, C. R., Connaughton, S. L., Diaz-Saenz, H. R., Maguire, K., Ramirez, R., Richardson,
B., … Morgan, D. (1999). The impacts of communication and multiple identifications on
intent to leave: A multimethodological exploration. Management Communication Quarterly,
12, 400–435. doi:10.1177/0893318999123002
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Further reading

Bormann, E. (1972). Fantasy and rhetorical vision: The rhetorical criticism of social reality.
Quarterly Journal of Speech, 58, 396–407. doi:10.1080/00335637209383138
Coopman, S. J., & Meidlinger, K. B. (2000). Power, hierarchy, and change: The stories of
a Catholic parish staff. Management Communication Quarterly, 4, 567–625. doi:10.1177/
0893318900134002
Duffy, M. E. (2003). Web of hate: A fantasy theme analysis of the rhetorical vision of hate groups
online. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 27, 291–312. doi:10.1177/0196859903252850
Jackson, B. G. (2000). A fantasy theme analysis of Peter Senge’s learning organization. Journal of
Applied Behavioural Science, 36(2), 191–207. doi:10.1177/0021886300362005
McKewon, E. (2012). Talking points ammo. Journalism Studies, 13, 277–297. doi:10.1080/
1461670x.2011.646403

James Olumide Olufowote is assistant professor in the Department of Communication

at the University of Oklahoma. His research at the intersection of health communica-
tion and organizational communication focuses on physician preparation and practice
of ethical communication and communication by nonprofit organizations (such as
faith based organizations and nongovernmental organizations) during public health
crises. In a 2012 Management Communication Quarterly publication, he was recog-
nized as one of eight “emerging scholars” in the field of organizational communication.
Among his noteworthy publications is the 2016 Communication Quarterly article
“Identity constructions and inter-organizational collaboration: Islamic faith-based
organizations and the polio vaccination stoppage in Northern Nigeria.”

View publication stats