Extending civic values in architectures of listening: Arendt, Mouffe and the pluralistic imperative for organizational listening

ABSTRACT

This conceptual paper introduces the concept of civic listening to augment organizational listening theory and practice. Drawing from critical theorists Arendt and Mouffe, it centers pluralism, agonism, deliberation, and reflection as central to listening and delineates the functions and values of civic listening to add to existing architectures. In doing so it provides additional guidance to help organizations (1) listen for what might be challenging for leaders to hear, (2) ensure values of deliberation and pluralism are enacted in listening contexts, and (3) help better triangulate organizational awareness among a diverse constellation of other organizations and stakeholders. Building on organizational listening scholarship that addresses the potential for the concept’s contributions to democratic society, this new perspective points toward deeper, more nuanced, and more equitable organizational engagement in civic discourse and firmer ground for contentious issue involvement. It introduces five critical values within an architecture of civic listening to guide practice: “other” orientation, pluralistic engagement, harmony over consensus, reflective processes, and social problem-solving focus.

KEYWORDS:

• Organizational listening
• architectures of listening
• civic listening
• pluralism
• Hannah Arendt
• Chantal Mouffe

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the scholars and administrators of the Arthur W. Page Center, particularly to Dr. Denise Bortree and Dr. Katie Place, for their insights, support, funding, and encouragement of this project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2022.2127728

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. See, Macnamara (2016a, p. 151) for a full description of the grounding of ethical listening in multiple research traditions, building on the work of the International Listening Association (ILA).

2. International Association for the Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (AMEC), Chartered Institute for Public Relations (CIPR), European Public Relations Education and Research Association (EUPRERA), International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), Institute for Public Relations (IPR), Public Relations Institute of Australia (PRIA), and Public Relations Society of America (PRSA).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Page Legacy Scholar Grant from the Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication at the Donald P. Bellisario College of Communications at The Pennsylvania State University. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do no necessarily reflect the views of Penn State.