Editorial: Negotiating the Field of Business Communication

Abstract

This special issue came about as the result of a proposal I wrote to the editor, Lamar Reinsch, about two years ago. For me, the desire to know who I was as an academic professional had become sharp. Books about English as a discipline were proliferating (Elbow, 1990; Graff,1987;Scholes, 1985; one

The legitimacy of Business Communication

“…In this way, others in business disciplines will be able to identify the value of communication knowledge within their area of expertise. Rentz (1993) cautioned readers that &dquo;if we are to have an identity, if there is really is a 'we' in a disciplinary sense, then we have to fashion it ourselves -at our professional meetings and in our journals&dquo; (p. 233). This is our message for the future legitimacy of the profession of communication in business.…”

“…Although our profession is a very old one, its present state is not. Rentz (1993) brought this fact home when she stated that &dquo;we tend to be the minority area in our home departments, which means that there is a strong possibility that what we do is not generally understood&dquo; (p. 233). Because members of the profession are not housed together as marketing or mass communication professionals are, our power of legitimacy has perhaps been lessened by our own questions.…”

“…This concept continues today, although a study for The American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) by Munter (1987) The theory and methodology of the field involving communication in business are drawn from rhetoric, linguistics, and social science. As Rentz (1993) noted in her editorial in a special edition of JBC, &dquo;We in business communication come from different backgrounds, we work in various departments, ... we have adopted the vocabularies and methods of disciplines that seem to have little to say to each other&dquo; (p. 236). Beard and Williams (1993) determined these thoughts to be true.…”

Individual and Organizational Learning: A Developmental Perspective on Gilsdorf, Rymer and ABC

“…This time the discussions focused on how business communication was distinct from the burgeoning fields of organizational communication, technical communication, and managerial communication. (Couture, 1992;Fann and Smeltzer, 1989;Dulek, 1993;Reinsch, 1991Reinsch, , 1996Rentz, 1993;Rogers, 1996;Shaw, 1993;andShelby, 1993, 1996). Among the most recent external pressures on ABC is the globalization of business, which has led to an internationalization of our Association.…”

Interpretive Acts: New Vistas in Qualitative Research in Business Communication. A Guest Editorial

“…This perspective understands language not simply as an instrument or tool for accomplishing particular managerial objectives, but as the very means for producing identity (Cheney & Christensen, 2001) and organization itself (Putnam & Pacanowsky, 1983;Smircich & Stubbart, 1985). Consistent (Gadamer, 1989 As this brief overview has shown, the issues raised by the topic of the special issue necessarily concern not only qualitative methods and theories, but also our identity as researchers and scholars in a discipline that perennially ponders its hybrid, multidisciplinary roots (e.g., Graham & Thralls, 1998;Rentz, 1993). In this respect, by engaging the issue of qualitative research, we revisit three important questions raised by Rogers (1993), Yates (1993), and Locker (1994) Rogers (1993) describes researchers as those who respect rules, yet break new ground; draw on their capabilities as scientists and artists; and show that they are captivated by learning.…”