Conversation Analysis in Dialogue With Stocks of Interactional Knowledge: Facework and Appraisal Interviews

Abstract

The literature tells that performance appraisal interviews (AIs) are approached with trepidation by appraisees and appraisers alike. However, despite this observation, few fine-grained analyses have been carried out into the in situ communicative strategies deployed by practitioners to deal with the face-threatening nature of AIs. Using conversation analysis as a research methodology and transcripts of naturally occurring talk from an AI, this article explicates the seen but unnoticed machinery of talk by which facework during AIs is accomplished. Furthermore, it is argued that such fine-grained analysis of what actually goes on in AIs can add to our stocks of interactional knowledge concerning AIs which, as they stand, are more often based on second-order accounts rather than on direct observation of AIs as communicative events.

Making objectives common in performance appraisal interviews

“…Clifton (2012) reproduces strips of interaction that show that documents and reading the documents is important in terms of what happens in interaction. Similarly, Adams's (1981) analysis points toward the fact that texts such as goal sheets and the practice of reading play a highly important role in the interaction.…”

“…Similarly, studies related to communicational aspects of PAIs (Laird and Clampitt, 1985;Van der Molen and Kluytmans, 1997) have been preoccupied with what is good and efficient communication. In all, we can conclude that prescriptive research has been managerially-centered: this research has established guidelines on how to conduct PAIs, but neglected the interactive character of the interview (Fletcher, 2001;Asmub, 2008;Clifton, 2012;Gordon and Steward, 2009). …”

“…Her study demonstrates that giving critical feedback is socially problematic, and that this specifically affects the way the employees deal with negative assessments. Clifton (2012) elaborates on this theme and shows that facework characterizes the conduct of interviews.…”

“…Put more generally, there has been an overall emphasis on reported experiences of PAs (e.g. interviews or questionnaires) in past research (Gordon and Steward, 2009), but only a few (for exceptions, see Adams, 1981;Asmub, 2008;Sandlund et al, 2011;Clifton, 2012) have dealt with PAs as situated action, as a lived experience and in real time. In simple terms, e.g.…”

Negotiating meaning and co-constructing institutionalisable answers: Leadership through gate-keeping in performance appraisal interviews

“…She approaches this topic from a conversation analytic perspective by applying the notion of preference and by discussing the interactional consequences of using either preferred or dispreferred turn shapes in these negative assessments. Using the same methodological perspective, Clifton (2012a) looks into the way in which face-threatening activities are often very carefully dealt with in performance appraisal interviews in order to prevent any attacks on the identities constructed by the appraiser and appraisee and to maintain a good working relationship. In line with Asmuß's findings, Clifton emphasizes the collaborative nature of facework in performance appraisal interviews, describing it as a "joint accomplishment" (Clifton, 2012a: 302).…”