As opposed to the ‘hypodermic’ model, or the ‘information deficit’ model. You can’t expect your ‘message’ to be accepted/interpreted by someone without some changes, even if they share the same cosmology as you.
The most hilarious version of this I know is in “Black Mischief”,the extremely politically incorrect novel by Evelyn Waugh…
In contrast to the diffusion metaphor, which has dominated much of institutional theory and “connotes a transmission of a given entity,” translation “connotes an interaction that involves negotiation between various parties, and the reshaping of what is finally being transmitted” (Zilber, 2006: 283). It focuses on the negotiation of shared meanings that make particular practices possible or, in the case of deinstitutionalization, make them illegitimate (Oliver, 1992).
(Maguire and Hardy, 2009: 149)
Meaning is, however, neither unequivocal nor inherent to a text, nor is it simply passed intact from one text to another; instead, it is negotiated between the text’s author and its readers (Czarniawska, 1997) as the text is consumed (i.e., read and interpreted). This has been referred to as “translation,” a concept derived from the French philosopher Michel Serres (Brown, 2002; Czarniawska & Sevo´n, 1996) that has been widely used in actor-network theory (Callon, 1986; Latour, 1986) and adopted in organization studies by Czarniawska and Sevo´n (1996) and Zilber (2006) to explore institutionalization. The notion of translation is used to break away from the diffusion model and to draw attention to the way that meanings, rather than being passed on intact, inevitably change as they travel in space and time (Zilber, 2006). “To translate is to transform, and in the act of transforming a breaking of fidelity towards the original source is necessarily involved” (Brown, 2002: 7).
(Maguire and Hardy, 2009: 151)
Maguire, S. and Hardy, C. 2009. Discourse and Deinstitutionalization: The Decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal, Vo. 52, (1), pp.148-178.