Getting service at the constituency office: Analyzing citizens’ encounters with their Member of Parliament

Abstract

In this paper, we present an analysis of how constituents procure services at the constituency office of a Member of Parliament (MP) in the United Kingdom. This paper will investigate how several previously documented interactional practices (e.g. entitlement) combine at the constituency office in a way that secures service. From a corpus of 12.5 hours of interaction, and using conversation analysis, we examine constituents’ telephone calls and meetings with constituency office staff and the MP, identifying practices constituents use. First, constituents opened encounters with bids to tell narratives. Second, constituents presented lengthy and detailed descriptions of their difficulties. These descriptions gave space to manage issues of legitimacy and entitlement, while simultaneously recruiting assistance. Third, we examine ways in which constituents display uncertainty about how the institution of the constituency office functions, and what services are available. The paper offers original insights into how constituency services are provided, and how constituency offices give access and support to ordinary citizens, while expanding the conversation analytic literature on institutional service provision.

Somewhere to turn to: Signposting in service provision

“…Following a potentially problematic gap of silence (line 15) C confirms his knowledge about service remit and reissues the earlier request in line 1 of ‘needing advice’ (line 16). As with other institutions contacted in our dataset, it is clear that establishing grounds for the provision of service is negotiated between caller and call-taker (C does eventually receive information on his housing options later in the call) when pursuing the case for aid (Alexander, 2018; Alexander and Stokoe, 2019; Hofstetter and Stokoe, 2018).…”

“…In the course of presenting a case, callers or visitors to a service present evidence for their need of assistance, incrementally designing their problem description, where possible, in a way that increases the relevance of an assisting response (Hofstetter and Stokoe, 2018). Responsive actions by professionals (e.g.…”

“…However, there may be other social practices contributing to the occurrence of signposting (as opposed to offering service, or indeed solely rejecting it) that we have not covered here; we have focused on describing the occurrence of signposting and its features. Future work could examine other practices that alter the trajectory of signposting, including the accomplishment of relevant social identity (see both Erickson and Schultz, 1982; Kitzinger and Mandelbaum, 2013), the relation of openings and other sequential elements to the eventual signposting action (see Robinson and Heritage, 2006), and of course the design of case making (see Alexander, 2018; Hofstetter and Stokoe, 2018).…”

“…The charity provides legal and housing advice, as well as contact details of other organisations. The constituency office data was collected as part of a dissertation investigating talk between politicians, their staff, and everyday citizens (25 meetings, 58 phone calls) (Hofstetter, 2016). Although follow-up discussions concerning cases previously signposted to TPAs were common, the data for this study focused on cases of new signposting actions.…”

Problems in the neighbourhood: Formulating noise complaints across dispute resolution services

“…They are more like calls to the constituency offices of members of parliament (e.g., “I was ↑told to ring you by a friend”—see Hofstetter, ). And so, it might be that mediation and environmental health services are somewhat “unknown institutions” (Stokoe, ; or at least, institutions that callers display a “lack of familiarity” with; Hofstetter & Stokoe, , p. 566) on a continuum of services that people show they know and use regularly or do not know and use occasionally or just once.…”