christopher candlin & alan jones: developing a research agenda in collaborative & partnered...

Christopher Candlin & Alan Jones: Developing a Research Agenda in Collaborative & Partnered Professional Communication.

Developing a Research Agenda in Collaborative and Partnered Professional Communication:

Accounting for AccountsChristopher N Candlin & Alan A Jones

Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney.

April 9th, 2006.


1. What do we mean by ‘partnered’?

2. What do we mean by ‘collaborative’?

1 – A focus on product (outcomes)

2 – A focus on process (means)


Accountability andAccounts

Product v process

• What do such accounts imply?

• How are such accounts defined?

• Who is responsible for such accounts?


Different accounts, and different goals

• The professional partner frames the project as the development and exercise of professional skills and, ultimately, professional expertise

• The research partner frames the project as an experiment in applied DA

• The professional partner’s goal: exercise skills, i.e. engage in skilled results-oriented practices.

• The research partner’s goal: demonstrate that applied DA can enhance professional practice


Account #1 (from the discourse of professional partners)

• Communication is viewed as a means to an end.• Communicative interactions and relationships are

viewed as necessary but perhaps peripheral. • Professional goals are thought to be achieved

through the production of accurate diagnoses, briefs, reports (= official, or ‘espoused’ discourse).

• The ‘Professional Partner’ sees (and talks about) professional practices as being product oriented.

• Universities produce ‘fit-for-purpose’ graduates who then themselves produce accurate ‘accounts’ or ‘accountings’ for organisations/institutions.


Account #2 (from the discourse of discourse practitioners)

• Communication is viewed as the realisation of professional purposes, as practices – i.e. the Research Partner sees professional practice as a process.

• The acquisition of professional skills, i.e. expertise, is accounted for as discursive practice, and as interactional process. • Integration of content and language

(Maastricht conference, 2006; ICLHE).


Two worlds: four ‘discourses’

• The espoused discourse of professional practice

centres on constructs like clarity, accuracy, honesty, etc., in diagnoses, briefs, reports (i.e. ‘accounts’).

• The tacit discourse of professionals centres on risk, advice and advocacy for lay decision-makers.

• The primary discourse of discourse practitioners centres on analysis. (Discourse Analysis = DA).

• The secondary discourse of discourse practitioners centres on supporting the real-world practices of the professionals and/or partners.


Case Study: Financial Accounting

PARTICIPANTS:

Samantha Sin – accounting lecturer

the professional partner

Alan Jones – discourse practitioner

the research/discourse partner


“What’s in a name?”

Most general definition of ‘accounting’:

a convincing explanation that reveals basic causes.

Example: "he was unable to give a clear accounting for his actions"

From: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


The specialised definition (accounting = accountancy)

• accountancy: the occupation and the

profession responsible for maintaining and

auditing financial records and preparing

financial reports for a business

Closely based on wordnet definition: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


Meanings ‘in practice’

Two distinct but parallel ‘accountings’

Accounting as a professional ‘practice’ – producing financial accountings for business organisations (‘practices’)

Discourse analysis as praxis – reveals that accounting practice is largely accomplished through talk and writing (people talk the practice into existence)


When worlds ‘collude’

• Six months of talk to agree that we can ‘collude’ i.e., collaborate …

• Six months to forge the ground-rules – the ‘contract’ – the partnership …

• Two different ‘discourses’

• Two different sets of goals

• Two different sets of incentives


What have we learned?

• Don’t begin with a method, begin with a problem and/or a question.

• Uncover ‘mutuality’ through lots of talk.

• Goals and accountings can be aligned: practice-research nexus.

• Different accountings can be fruitfully combined; qualitative and quantitative.

• Productive synergies >> new knowledge in the form of joint accountings.


Now what?

Where does all this leave us in terms of a research agenda?

• What types of professional would respond to invitations from researchers?

• What is in it for the professional partner?• What steps need to be taken – in what order?• What kind of accountings could emerge?• Each group to produce 8 – 10 Bullet Points.• Points to be discussed in open session.

christopher candlin & alan jones: developing a research agenda in collaborative & partnered...

Documents