Relating at Work:
What does it entail?
Helen Spencer-Oatey
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Overview
• Introduction: Motivation for the study
• Pragmatic perspectives on relations
• Pilot research project:
– Research procedure
– 1st Cycle Analysis: Holistic coding: Key facets
– 2nd Cycle Analysis: Conceptualisation for Axial
coding
– 2nd Cycle Analysis: Axial coding: Relational Tensions
• Dialectics, face and rapport
• Reflections
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
“Successful leaders know that
relationships are the engines of success.”
Murray 2012: 99
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
Research by agr, CIHE & CFE points to its importance
• 12 leading employers, representing 3500 graduate
recruits
• Ranked a list of global competencies by order of
importance
Global Graduate report, 2011 (agr, CIHE, CFE)
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
Global Graduate report, 2011 (agr, CIHE, CFE)
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
i.e. Collaboration – Teamwork
Relations
Communication
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
“There is no framework for
conceptualising work relationships.”
Murray, 2012, Personal Communication
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Introduction
The Importance of Relations at Work
 Is the ‘Relationships’ cluster in the
Global People framework adequate?
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives on
Relations
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Dominated by politeness and face
perspectives:
• Typically, strong emphasis on ‘smooth relations’:
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Early work: Avoidance of conflict
• Politeness, like formal diplomatic protocol …
presupposes that potential for aggression as it seeks
to disarm it, and makes possible communication
between potentially aggressive parties.
Brown & Levinson, 1987:1
• Politeness can be defined as a means of mimimizing
the risk of confrontation in discourse.
R. Lakoff, 1989:102
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Early work: Smooth relations
• I define linguistic politeness as the language usage
associated with smooth communication …
Ide, 1989:225
• [The role of the politeness principle is] to maintain the
social equilibrium and the friendly relations which enable
us to assume that our interlocutors are being cooperative
in the first place.
Leech, 1983:82
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Later work: Rapport (Management)
• We use the term ‘rapport’ to refer to people’s
subjective perceptions of (dis)harmony, smoothnessturbulence and warmth-antagonism in interpersonal
relations.
• We use the term ‘rapport management’ to refer to
the ways in which this (dis)harmony is
(mis)managed.
Spencer-Oatey & Franklin 2009: 102
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Studying relations:
• Early approaches – strong emphasis on the analysis
of speech acts.
• Later approaches – strong emphasis on the analysis
of discourse and the ways in which relations are coconstructed.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pragmatic Perspectives
Limitations:
• Not all relational issues are captured in discourse.
Lack of communication can be problematic (SpencerOatey 2011)
• Micro-analyses of discourse may
– Overlook/miss the bigger picture
– Appear too detailed and irrelevant for practitioners
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Challenge for Pragmatics
The Importance of Relations at Work
“There is no framework for
conceptualising work relationships.”
Murray, 2012, Personal Communication
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pilot Research Project:
Research Procedure
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pilot research
Project Focus:
Global Leaders and Employees:
Keys to Intercultural Effectiveness
Overarching aim:
• to understand what kinds of interactional
situations in a culturally different work context
new staff find demanding or challenging to deal
with.
(i.e. interactions at work involving people from a
different cultural/language background)
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Participants
Leaders
• 24 leaders in a major third sector organisation
with offices throughout the world.
Interns
• 10 home/EU UG students studying in the UK who
spent 6 months in Europe on a work placement;
• 14 international MSc students studying in the UK
who spent 1 month in UK on a work placement.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Data collection
Group Interviews with leaders and MSc interns:
Participants were asked to talk about the cultural
adjustment issues & challenges they had experienced
working in culturally unfamiliar environments/during
their internship. Discussion was wide-ranging, with no
particular focus on relationships or communication.
Arrangements:
• 4 or 6 per group
• Interviews lasted 45 - 70 minutes.
• Prior ethical approval had been obtained from the
University ethics committee
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Data collection
Interviews with UG interns: Participants were asked
to talk about the cultural adjustment issues &
challenges they had experienced during their
internship. Discussion was wide-ranging, with no
particular focus on relationships or
communication.
Arrangements:
• Interviews lasted 25 - 55 minutes (most c.45 mins.)
• Prior ethical approval had been obtained from the
University ethics committee
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Data collection
Pilot dataset:
• All interviews were conducted in English;
• Interviews audio recorded and transcribed in
full;
• Over 15 hours 46 minutes of interview
recordings in total.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Data analysis
• Leader & intern data initially analysed
separately;
• First cycle coding: Holistic coding (Dey 1993;
Saldaña 2009) of themes using NVivo:
– Initial coding by broad categories (e.g. relating);
– Then broad categories coded in sub-categories (and
sub-sub- (etc.) categories
• Second cycle coding: Axial coding
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pilot Results of
First Cycle Analysis:
Key Facets
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Key Facets
• Complex web of highly interconnected facets;
• Different participants emphasised different aspects:
– All talked about 6 aspects of relational work;
– Leaders talked a lot about contextual factors;
– Interns talked a lot about relational atmosphere.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Key Facets
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Second Cycle Analysis:
Conceptualising the Data
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Conceptualisation
Questions:
• How can such data be conceptualised
theoretically?
• Can they be explained in terms of the concepts
of face, (im)politeness and rapport?
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Conceptualisation
Suggestion:
• Might a relational dialectic approach be
conceptually useful?
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational dialectics
Dialectic research
• Baxter and Montgomery (1996), Communication
Studies theorists, studied romantic relationships
and identified three core dialectic tensions:
– Connectedness
– Openness
– Certainty
Separateness
Closedness
Uncertainty
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectic approach
Traditional view:
• Relations perceived in bi-polar (either/or)
terms;
Dialectic view:
• Relations perceived in dialectic (both/and)
terms.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational dialectics
Relational tensions
“Social life is a dynamic knot of contradictions, a
ceaseless interplay between contrary or
opposing tendencies.”
“Contradiction refers to the dynamic interplay
between unified opposites.”
Baxter and Montgomery 1996: 3,4
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational dialectics
“The conflicting forces can’t be resolved by
simple ‘either/or’ decisions. The ‘both/and’
nature of dialectical pressures guarantees that
our relationships will be complex, messy and
always somewhat on edge.”
Griffin 2012: 155-6
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational dialectics
Relational Tensions: Multivocal in nature
“… it is much too simple and mechanistic to reduce the
dialectics of relationships to a series of polar oppositions
…… Rather, contradictions are better conceived as
complex, overlapping domains of centripetal or dominant
forces juxtaposed with centrifugal or countervailing
forces. Thus … connection as a centripetal force in
personal relationships is in dynamic and opposing
associations with a host of centrifugal forces like
autonomy, privacy, self-assertion and independence.”
Baxter and Montgomery 1998: 157
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Pilot Results of
Second Cycle Analysis:
Relational Tensions
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational Tensions
Connectedness
Separateness
Association – Dissociation (physical & social)
Engagement – Detachment
Inclusion – Exclusion
(Inter)dependence– Independence
Openness
Closedness
Disclosure – Concealment
Explicitness – Implicitness
Emotional display – Emotional restraint
Certainty
Uncertainty
Certainty – Uncertainty
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 1: Association–dissociation
You know if somebody new arrives in a team,
perhaps not every day, but if they’re not
prepared to come down occasionally and sit
down and have lunch, there’s a real distancing
put in place. [ML-#6]
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 1: Association–dissociation
You know if somebody new arrives in a team, perhaps
not every day, but if they’re not prepared to come down
occasionally and sit down and have lunch, there’s a real
distancing put in place. [ML-#6]
• The importance of connection, but also of
separation (= not every day!)
 Impact on distance/closeness
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 2: (Inter)Dependence–Independence
You have to keep on going to see them to check your
understanding. In terms of the feedback I received at the
end of the year it was that sometimes I was a bit too...,
you know I needed to take more responsibility or to act on
my own initiative. Which I think that was to a large extent
was an unfair piece of feedback. Well yeah unfair might
be the wrong word, but I think that to a large extent that
could be attributed to the language... In that obviously
the language in understanding instructions, and the fact I
mean working in a foreign language it is less easier to go
off and to do something your own way in case you hit
some language barrier or... [MUI-#3]
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 2: (Inter)Dependence–Independence
You have to keep on going to see them to check your understanding. In
terms of the feedback I received at the end of the year it was that
sometimes I was a bit too..., you know I needed to take more
responsibility or to act on my own initiative. Which I think that was to a
large extent was an unfair piece of feedback. Well yeah unfair might be
the wrong word, but I think that to a large extent that could be
attributed to the language... In that obviously the language in
understanding instructions, and the fact I mean working in a foreign
language it is less easier to go off and to do something your own way in
case you hit some language barrier or... [MUI-#3]
• The importance of connection, but also of separation (= not too
frequent!)
 Impact on impression formation
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 3: Inclusion–exclusion
FMI-#15: Our boss also provide tea for us but no
biscuits [laughter] They just provide the biscuits
like this lady and this lady and just ignored me!
[laughter]
FMI-#16: For us we feel like face threatening.
FMI-#15: Yes, they excluded you. At the beginning
it was like that, but in the end we can eat
biscuits.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Connectedness–Separateness
Example 3: Inclusion–exclusion
FMI-#15: Our boss also provide tea for us but no biscuits
[laughter] They just provide the biscuits like this lady and
this lady and just ignored me! [laughter]
FMI-#16: For us we feel like face threatening.
FMI-#15: Yes, they excluded you. At the beginning it was
like that, but in the end we can eat biscuits.
• The balance between inclusion (for relational
reasons) and exclusion (for financial/regulatory
reasons)
 Impact on rapport
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Relational dialectics
Rapport issues:
• If two people have different preferences for
dealing with connection/separation, either
generally or on a specific occasion, this can lead
to rapport issues.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectics,
Face & Rapport
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectics, face & rapport
 What is the inter-connection between
Relational Dialectic Theory and Face/Rapport
Management Theory?
 Are they alternatives or do they complement each
other?
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectics, face & rapport
Complementary:
RDT – Provides a framework for describing
relations.
“… relational dialectics … identify not personal
needs or wants …, but rather properties,
conditions, or states evinced in the
interpersonal relationship that persons create
and recreate as they communicate …”
Arundale 2010: 2086
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectics, face & rapport
Complementary:
RDT cannot provide insights into :
• People’s relational needs, wants and
motivations;
• Face/rapport management theory is needed
for that.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Dialectics, face & rapport
In other words …
• A relational dialectic approach complements a
face, (im)politeness or rapport approach;
• It can provide a broader perspective, since
rapport is not the only relational goal in a
workplace.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
1. The Scope of ‘Relational’ Research
Much broader than existing work within
the broad umbrella of ‘politeness theory’
(face, politeness, rapport)
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
Relational management important for:
• Relational rapport PLUS
• Integration and (collegial) friendship formation;
• Impression management – convey good
impression of self to others, including line
manager(s);
• Personal and professional development;
• Conducive workplace atmosphere;
• …?
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
 Research into ‘relating at work’ needs to
expand to cover all of these aspects.
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
2. Frameworks for studying ‘Relational’
Research
Relational dialectic theory is potentially a
useful complement to face/rapport
management theory
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Reflections
3. Developing an applied model of value
to practitioners
“There is no framework for
conceptualising work relationships.”
Murray, 2012, Personal Communication
 More work is needed!
Centre for Applied Linguistics
Thank you!
Centre for Applied Linguistics
References
agr, CIHE, CFE (2011) Global Graduates. Global Graduates into Global Leaders. Unpublished report.
Available at http://www.cihe.co.uk/global-graduates-into-global-leaders/
Arundale, R. (2010) Constituting face in conversation. Face, facework, and interactional achievement.
Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2078–2105.
Baxter, L.A. & Montgomery, B.M. (1996) Relating. Dialogues & Dialectics. New York & London: Guildford
Press.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP.
Originally published as ‘Universals in language usage: politeness phenomenon’. In: Esther Goody
(ed) (1978) Questions and Politeness: strategies in Social Interaction. New York: CUP.
Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative Data Analysis: A User-Friendly Guide for Social Scientists. London: Routledge.
Griffin, E. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory. Eighth edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic
politeness. Multilingua, 8(2/3), 223-248.
Lakoff, R. (1989). The limits of politeness: therapeutic and courtroom discourse. Multilingua, 8(2/3),
101-129.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Murray, K. (2012). The Language of Leaders. How Top CEOs Communicate to Inspire, Influence and
Achieve Results. London: KoganPage.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage.
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2011). Conceptualising ‘the relational’ in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic
emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3565–3578.
Spencer-Oatey, H. & Franklin, P. (2009) Intercultural Interaction. A Multidisciplinary Approach to
Intercultural Communication. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Centre for Applied Linguistics