This paper introduces the concerns of the papers in the Special Issue and examines communication as a chameleon discipline that responds and adapts to sometimes very challenging contexts. It explores the strengths and weaknesses of the diversity of approaches that exist in communication studies and shows how this diversity offers both opportunities to be resourceful and hurdles to be managed. The paper reflects on the definitional ambiguity of communication and the ways that communication is perceived and approached in different institutions globally. Its aim is to forge a way through debates about the nature of the field by paying attention to the responsiveness and adaptability of those who teach communication in the face of educational and political change.

Using a narrative–semiotic approach, this article explores the decisions, plans, and actions involved in dealing with organizational risks and crises. It describes a model, or methodological framework, for crisis analysis as well as for organizational learning aimed at crisis management and prevention. The model is based on the interrelational positioning of the relevant agents (project managers, project team members, and stakeholders), the discourses produced by these agents, and their actions. This model is valuable for understanding the situations, goals, motivations, and anxieties that underlie the risk assessment and actions taken during crises. To illustrate the theoretical discussion, the article analyzes the Columbia Space Shuttle accident of 2003.