Regina Salmu

12.06.1961
reginas@ut.ee

Teenistuskäik

Töökohad ja ametid
01.01.2015–03.10.2016    Sotsiaalkindlustusamet, Kommunikatsiooninõunik (1,00)
2012–2016    Tartu Ülikool, Doktorant (1,00)
01.01.2010–31.12.2015    Novaway OÜ kommunikatsioonikonsultant
 
 
Haridustee
2005–2008    Tallinna Tehnika Ülikool, Tartu Ülikool

Kvalifikatsioon

 
 
Teadustöö põhisuunad
VALDKOND: 2. Ühiskonnateadused ja kultuur; 2.14. Kommunikatsiooni- ja infoteadused; CERCS ERIALA: S265 Meedia ja kommunikatsiooniteadused
 
 
Lisainfo
Ettekanne rahvusvahelisel kommunikatsioonistiilide konverentsil Krosnos, Poolas 13.- 16. oktoober 2013
Ettekande teema: From individualistic enthusiasm towards bureaucratic rationalism: ICT organizations’ communication styles within the product development process

Konverentsi teesid Kaunas oktoober 2014 (Cultural Institutions and Communication: Towards Creative Participation
Vytautas Magnus University Kaunas, Lithuania
23-24 October 2014)

Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?
Regina Salmu
University of Tartu
In order to assess and improve the innovative potential of organisations, the analysis of communication procedures, tools, actors involved and the general structural preconditions shaping the communication process is crucial. However, research focusing on holistic interrelationships between an organisation’s communication policies and practices and its innovative potential is rather rare. Numerous studies on innovation focus on creativity, efficiency, openness, information traffic, communication climate, meeting interaction etc., examining those attributes separately, but the conditions for the creation of innovation should be studied comprehensively and in a concrete environment.
My empirical base is a large ICT company, the first mobile operator in Estonia: a symbol of Estonia’s rapid technological development. I explored the process of altering a company’s communication style and organisational culture in the context of a changed model of services development over two decades (1991-2013). This analysis explains why the replacement of the open innovation model by a closed innovation model also inevitably brought about structural level changes that altered communication related to the development of new services. Namely, “open communication” became dominated by “closed communication”, characterized by top-down, formal information flows with no or minimal opportunities for feedback and free exchanges of information. Assuming that both models can achieve innovation but in different ways, I ask how innovation can be created and maintained under the conditions of closed communication.
By using the ethnographic approach, I studied one particular innovative service development process during a one-year period. This was based on participant observation field notes from thirty meetings. I aimed to identify the connections between the practices of communication and moments of creativity, and map situations where creativity was impeded by such communication procedures as “information scattering points” and interaction barriers between participants.
I discuss whether a (closed) communication system should be altered or improved by the development of a smart combination of open and closed communication.

Konverentsiteesid ECREA Lissabon november 2014 - Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?
The ethnographic study of a new service development process in ICT organisation
In order to assess and improve the innovative potential of organisations, the analysis of communication procedures, tools, actors involved and the general structural preconditions shaping the communication process is crucial. However, research focusing on holistic interrelationships between an organisation’s communication policies and practices and its innovative potential is rather rare. Numerous studies on innovation focus on creativity, efficiency, openness, information traffic, communication climate, meeting interaction etc., examining those attributes separately, but the conditions for the creation of innovation should be studied comprehensively and in a concrete environment.
Approaching the issue from the concept that organisations are constituted in and through human communication (CCO approach; Cooren at al 2011; Ashcraft et al 2009; Kuhn 2008 etc.), this contribution aims to enrich the academic debate on the communicative constitution of innovation within the organisational context.
My empirical base is a large ICT company, the first mobile operator in Estonia: a symbol of Estonia’s rapid technological development. I explored the process of altering a company’s communication style and organisational culture in the context of a changed model of services development over two decades (1991-2013). This analysis explains why the replacement of the open innovation model by a closed innovation model (Chesbrough 2006) also inevitably brought about structural level changes that altered communication related to the development of new services. Namely, “open communication” became dominated by “closed communication”, characterized by top-down, formal information flows with no or minimal opportunities for feedback and free exchanges of information. Assuming that both models can achieve innovation but in different ways, I ask how innovation can be created and maintained under the conditions of closed communication.
By using the ethnographic approach, I studied one particular innovative service development process during a one-year period. This was based on participant observation field notes from thirty meetings. Informed and inspired by extensive research on meetings as integral parts of contemporary working life (Cohen et al 2011; Kauffeld & Lehmann-Willenbrock 2012; Padilha & Carletta 2002; Stachowski et al 2009), I aimed to identify the connections between the practices of communication and moments of creativity, and map situations where creativity was impeded by such communication procedures as “information scattering points” and interaction barriers between participants.
I discuss whether a (closed) communication system should be altered or improved by the development of a smart combination of open and closed communication.
References
Cooren, François; Kuhn, Timothy; Cornelissen Joep P.; Clark Timothy Communication, Organizing and Organization: An Overview and Introduction to the Special Issue Organization Studies 2011 32: 1149

Artikli publikatsioon: Culture’s Software - Communication Styles Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Modification of a communication style within an organisation
Regina Salmu
Triin Vihalemm
Ettekanne "Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?" konverentsil 12th Conference of European Sociological Association, Differences, Inequalities and Sociological Imagination, 25-18.august, 2015 Praha

Regina Salmu

12.06.1961
reginas@ut.ee

Career

Institution and occupation
01.01.2015–03.10.2016    Estoanian Social Security Board, Communication advisor (1,00)
2012–2016    University of Tartu, Doctoral student (1,00)
01.01.2010–31.12.2015    Novaway OÜ communication consultant
 
 
Education
2005–2008    Tallinn Technical University, University of Tartu

Qualifications

 
 
Field of research
FIELD OF RESEARCH: 2. Culture and Society; 2.14. Communication and Information Sciences; CERCS SPECIALTY: S265 Press and communication sciences
 
 
Additional information
Cultural Institutions and Communication: Towards Creative Participation
Vytautas Magnus University Kaunas, Lithuania
23-24 October 2014

Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?
Regina Salmu
University of Tartu
In order to assess and improve the innovative potential of organisations, the analysis of communication procedures, tools, actors involved and the general structural preconditions shaping the communication process is crucial. However, research focusing on holistic interrelationships between an organisation’s communication policies and practices and its innovative potential is rather rare. Numerous studies on innovation focus on creativity, efficiency, openness, information traffic, communication climate, meeting interaction etc., examining those attributes separately, but the conditions for the creation of innovation should be studied comprehensively and in a concrete environment.
My empirical base is a large ICT company, the first mobile operator in Estonia: a symbol of Estonia’s rapid technological development. I explored the process of altering a company’s communication style and organisational culture in the context of a changed model of services development over two decades (1991-2013). This analysis explains why the replacement of the open innovation model by a closed innovation model also inevitably brought about structural level changes that altered communication related to the development of new services. Namely, “open communication” became dominated by “closed communication”, characterized by top-down, formal information flows with no or minimal opportunities for feedback and free exchanges of information. Assuming that both models can achieve innovation but in different ways, I ask how innovation can be created and maintained under the conditions of closed communication.
By using the ethnographic approach, I studied one particular innovative service development process during a one-year period. This was based on participant observation field notes from thirty meetings. I aimed to identify the connections between the practices of communication and moments of creativity, and map situations where creativity was impeded by such communication procedures as “information scattering points” and interaction barriers between participants.
I discuss whether a (closed) communication system should be altered or improved by the development of a smart combination of open and closed communication.

ECREA
Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?
The ethnographic study of a new service development process in ICT organisation
In order to assess and improve the innovative potential of organisations, the analysis of communication procedures, tools, actors involved and the general structural preconditions shaping the communication process is crucial. However, research focusing on holistic interrelationships between an organisation’s communication policies and practices and its innovative potential is rather rare. Numerous studies on innovation focus on creativity, efficiency, openness, information traffic, communication climate, meeting interaction etc., examining those attributes separately, but the conditions for the creation of innovation should be studied comprehensively and in a concrete environment.
Approaching the issue from the concept that organisations are constituted in and through human communication (CCO approach; Cooren at al 2011; Ashcraft et al 2009; Kuhn 2008 etc.), this contribution aims to enrich the academic debate on the communicative constitution of innovation within the organisational context.
My empirical base is a large ICT company, the first mobile operator in Estonia: a symbol of Estonia’s rapid technological development. I explored the process of altering a company’s communication style and organisational culture in the context of a changed model of services development over two decades (1991-2013). This analysis explains why the replacement of the open innovation model by a closed innovation model (Chesbrough 2006) also inevitably brought about structural level changes that altered communication related to the development of new services. Namely, “open communication” became dominated by “closed communication”, characterized by top-down, formal information flows with no or minimal opportunities for feedback and free exchanges of information. Assuming that both models can achieve innovation but in different ways, I ask how innovation can be created and maintained under the conditions of closed communication.
By using the ethnographic approach, I studied one particular innovative service development process during a one-year period. This was based on participant observation field notes from thirty meetings. Informed and inspired by extensive research on meetings as integral parts of contemporary working life (Cohen et al 2011; Kauffeld & Lehmann-Willenbrock 2012; Padilha & Carletta 2002; Stachowski et al 2009), I aimed to identify the connections between the practices of communication and moments of creativity, and map situations where creativity was impeded by such communication procedures as “information scattering points” and interaction barriers between participants.
I discuss whether a (closed) communication system should be altered or improved by the development of a smart combination of open and closed communication.
References
Cooren, François; Kuhn, Timothy; Cornelissen Joep P.; Clark Timothy Communication, Organizing and Organization: An Overview and Introduction to the Special Issue Organization Studies 2011 32: 1149

Publication: Culture’s Software - Communication Styles Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Modification of a communication style within an organisation
Regina Salmu
Triin Vihalemm
Presentation "Can there be any innovation in “closed” communication conditions?" on 12th Conference of European Sociological Association, Differences, Inequalities and Sociological Imagination, 25-18.august, 2015Prague
  • Leitud 1 kirjet
ProgrammNumberNimiProjekti algusProjekti lõppVastutav täitjaAsutusRahastamine kokku
ETFETF9017Muutuste kommunikatsioon ja sotsiaalsed praktikad01.01.201231.12.2015Margit KellerTartu Ülikool, Sotsiaal- ja haridusteaduskond69 600,00 EUR
  • Leitud 1 kirjet
PublikatsioonKlassifikaatorFail
Salmu, Regina; Vihalemm, Triin (2015). Modification of an organization’s communication style upon a change in innovation model. In: Brzozowska, D. Chłopicki, W. (Ed.). Culture’s Software: Communication Styles (243−271). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.3.1.