University of Tartu Institute of Philosophy and Semiotics Department of Semiotics Auli Viidalepp Self-description and phatic function in organisation culture: the case of Ouishare Master’s Thesis Supervisor: Mari-Liis Madisson (PhD) Tartu 2019 I have written the Master’s Thesis myself, independently. All of the other authors’ texts, main viewpoints and all data from other resources have been referred to. Author: Auli Viidalepp .............................................................. (signature) .............................................................. (date) I permit the thesis to be defended. Supervisor: Mari-Liis Madisson .............................................................. (signature) .............................................................. (date) Table of Contents Introduction...............................................................................................................................5 1. Historiographies....................................................................................................................9 1.1 Organisational culture: static, dynamic, and integrated approach....................................9 1.2 Models of organisations.................................................................................................11 1.3 Semiotics and the study of organisations.......................................................................13 2. Semiotic metalanguage for analysing organisations in network sociality.....................16 2.1 Network sociality as a wider framework for sociocultural context................................16 2.1.1 Community as a constructed identity for common goals.......................................19 2.1.2 Information as the locus of power..........................................................................20 2.1.3 Structure of social relationships in the network.....................................................21 2.2 Semiotic models for analysing organisational culture...................................................23 2.2.1 Self-description and semiosphere...........................................................................23 2.2.2 Phatic dominant in digitally mediated communication..........................................27 3. Method.................................................................................................................................32 3.1 Interview questions and process.....................................................................................33 3.2 Method for analysing interviews....................................................................................35 4. Analysis of Ouishare with the semiotic models................................................................37 4.1 A brief history of Ouishare as an unconventional organisation.....................................38 4.2 Ouishare as a community, network, or organisation......................................................40 4.2.1 The people of Ouishare as the digitally educated new elite...................................42 4.2.3 Ouishare self-description........................................................................................44 4.2.4 Ouishare semiosphere.............................................................................................46 4.3 Five dominants of Ouishare organisational culture........................................................49 4.3.1 Trust........................................................................................................................50 4.3.2 Movement...............................................................................................................51 4.3.3 Unpredictability resilience......................................................................................52 4.3.4 Curiosity and experimentation................................................................................55 4.3.5 Affect......................................................................................................................56 4.4 The function of phatic technologies in Ouishare communication culture......................59 4.4.1 Temporality of digital tools and protocols in Ouishare..........................................60 4.4.2 Information and relationships as a commodity in Ouishare network.....................61 4.4.3 Emoji use in Ouishare: trends and meanings..........................................................63 Conclusion................................................................................................................................65 References................................................................................................................................70 Kokkuvõte................................................................................................................................77 Annexes....................................................................................................................................79 Annex 1. List of interviewees...............................................................................................80 Annex 2. Interview questions...............................................................................................81 2.1 Questions on identity and self-description................................................................81 2.2 Questions on phatic communication..........................................................................81 Annex 3. Ouishare overview................................................................................................82 3.1 Legal bodies...............................................................................................................82 3.2 Ouishare values 2012 & 2018....................................................................................83 Annex 4. Interview citations: coded results of identity and self-description.......................85 4.1 Citations for network sociality...................................................................................85 4.2 Citations and codes for Ouishare self-description.....................................................89 4.3 Citations for identity: Ouishare vs Other...................................................................91 4.4 Citations for Ouishare five dominants in Self–Other dichotomies............................93 Annex 5. Interview citations: phatic communication.........................................................100 Introduction “[F]or Lotman, the ability to deliberately distance oneself to the ‘periphery’, where self-reflexivity is put into dialogue with the Other, enables the achievement of an estranged perspective that, in turn, represents the possibility of an unpredictable, innovative and, most importantly, free action, that enables and empowers the individual—the ‘Creative personality’.” (Ibrus & Torop 2015: 5, see also Mandelker 2006) Recent approaches in organisational behaviour have made an increasing effort to understand dynamic phenomena in work settings, such as processes of self-regulation, the role of emotions, employee well-being and integration problems (Wang, Zhou, & Zhang 2016). Most of them still depart from structuralist and computational terminology, working through detailed observation data toward models for simulation. Studies of similar topics have been typically carried out in the fields of sociology, business management, organisational behaviour and psychology. On the other hand, organisational culture studies usually take the anthropological approach, focusing on analysing norms, values, rites and traditions in a given organisation. Figuratively, the behavioural approaches describe organisations in a static metalanguage in an attempt to formulate a system, and cultural approach addresses the dynamic elements but nevertheless lacks understanding of the organisation as a whole. The tension between the structuralist and dynamic views has also been articulated in concerns over the dominance of quantitative methods in organisational studies (Van Maanen 1979a, 1979b). Undoubtedly there are benefits to both types of approaches, but as the analyses focusing on dynamic and qualitative aspects seem to be few or lacking, it is a great opportunity to contribute in this area, and offer a fresh and a balancing viewpoint. This study aims to take a step toward offering a semiotic approach to organisations as holistic, dynamic entities. The semiotic models enable generalising and modelling dynamics in culture without the need to record data on each element separately. This work will construct tools for a more integrated outlook on organisations, grounded in the Tartu-Moscow school of cultural semiotics, notably Yuri Lotman’s concepts of self-description and ​ semiosphere (Lotman 2001, 2005, 2009). I will apply these models in my study of Ouishare, ​ an international network that somewhat challenges the typical organisational models. Ouishare is an international entity which, in the latest edition of its website, is defined no further than “an experiment and quest to do more meaningful work and challenge the status quo”1. As a group with highly informal culture and undefined work roles, it resembles the hybrid organisations of our times, as well as groups that combine volunteer and paid positions in their daily work. Such different levels of engagement call for respective communication and management patterns to ensure the successful integration of every member. Ouishare