what is the difference between Coordinated Management of Meaning and Symbolic Interactionism?

Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) and Symbolic Interactionism are two theoretical frameworks used in the field of communication studies. While they share some similarities, there are distinct differences between the two.

Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) is a communication theory developed by W. Barnett Pearce and Vernon Cronen. It focuses on how individuals create and manage meaning in their interactions with others. CMM takes into account the social contexts in which communication occurs, emphasizing the co-creation of meaning through the coordination and interpretation of symbols.

To understand the difference between CMM and Symbolic Interactionism, let's start by explaining Symbolic Interactionism briefly. Symbolic Interactionism is a sociological perspective developed by George Herbert Mead and Charles Horton Cooley that examines the way people interact and interpret symbols as they attach meanings to objects, events, behaviors, and others. It explores how individuals construct their social reality through shared symbols and language.

Now, to differentiate between the two theories:

1. Focus: While both theories study communication and meaning-making, CMM primarily focuses on communication patterns and how meaning is created and managed by individuals in social contexts. Symbolic Interactionism, on the other hand, focuses more broadly on the role of symbols and interactions in constructing social reality.

2. Levels of Analysis: CMM operates at the interpersonal and societal levels, analyzing how individuals and groups coordinate meaning in their communication. It looks at the patterns of interaction and the relationships between individuals. Symbolic Interactionism, however, operates at the micro level, examining the processes of individual interaction and how meanings are constructed in everyday situations.

3. Systemic Approach: CMM has a systemic approach, emphasizing the interconnectedness of individuals and the influence of cultural and societal factors on communication. It explores how larger contexts shape meanings and interpretations. Symbolic Interactionism, on the other hand, focuses more on individual agency and self-reflection. It places importance on the individual's interpretation of symbols in shaping their understanding of the world.

In summary, while both Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) and Symbolic Interactionism study communication and meaning-making, they differ in their specific focuses, levels of analysis, and systemic approaches. CMM focuses on social contexts, coordination of meaning, and patterns of interaction, operating at interpersonal and societal levels. Symbolic Interactionism focuses on individual interactions, attachment of meaning to symbols, and the process of constructing social reality, operating at the micro level.