Collaboration and underlying issues or the surprises of cooperative dialogues

  • Catherine Sauvagnac
  • Pierre Falzon


The observation of cooperative dialogues between production and maintenance workers of a dairy has revealed that socio-organisational factors had strong effects on cooperation. In order to better understand the nature of these factors, the sociological literature on autonomy, rule generation, negotiation and conflict is reviewed. A methodology based on inferential pragmatics is developed in order to analyze what takes place socially in operational exchanges and makes it possible to identify rules for cooperative functioning that are specific to this work situation, and that relate to the defence of the territory of each individual. The conclusion stresses that cooperative dialogues are also the place where social stakes are adjusted and discusses potential applications of the proposed framework to the design of cooperative systems.

Key words

Cooperation conflict negotiation dialogue pragmatics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Crozier, M. and E. Friedberg (1977): L'acteur et le système. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  2. Darses, F., P. Falzon, and J.M. Robert (1993): Cooperating Partners: Investigating Natural Assistance. In Human-Computer Interaction: Software and Hardware Interfaces, G. Salvendy and M.J. Smith (eds.). New York: Elsevier, pp. 997–1002.Google Scholar
  3. Easterbrook, S. (1993): CSCW: Cooperation or Conflict?. London: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Falzon, P. (1991): Cooperative Dialogues. In Distributed Decision-Making, J. Rasmussen, J. Leplat, and B. Brehmer (eds.). Chichester: Wiley, pp. 145–190.Google Scholar
  5. Friedberg, E. (1993): Le pouvoir et la règle. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  6. Ghiglione, R. and Trognon, A. (1993): Où va la pragmatique? Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.Google Scholar
  7. Koopman, P. and J. Pool (1991): Organizational Decision Making: Models, Contingencies and Strategies. In Distributed Decision Making, J. Rasmussen, B. Brehmer, and J. Leplat (eds.). Chichester: Wiley, pp. 19–46.Google Scholar
  8. Lacoste, M. (1991): Les communications de travail comme interactions. In Modèles en analyse du travail, R. Amalberti, M. de Montmollin, and J. Theureau, (eds.). Liege: Margada.Google Scholar
  9. Leplat, J. (1994): Collective Activity in Work: Some Ways of Research. Le Travail Humain, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 209–226.Google Scholar
  10. Liu, M. (1983): Approche socio-technique de l'organisation. Paris: Les Editions d'Organisation.Google Scholar
  11. Marc, E. and D. Picard (1989): L'interaction sociale. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  12. March, J.G. and H.A. Simon (1964): Les organisations. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  13. Navarro, C. (1993): L'étude des activités collectives du travail: aspects fondamentaux et méthodologiques. In Les aspects collectifs du travail, F. Six (ed.). Toulouse: Octarès, pp. 91–106.Google Scholar
  14. Reynaud, J.-D. (1979): Conflit et régulation sociale. Esquisse d'une théorie de la régulation conjointe. Revue Française de Sociologie, vol. XX, pp. 367–376.Google Scholar
  15. Reynaud, J.-D. (1993): Les règles du jeu. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  16. Sauvagnac, C. (1994): La coopération négociée: le cas de la collaboration maintenance fabrication. Mémoire de D.E.A. d'Ergonomie, C.N.A.M.Google Scholar
  17. Searle, J.R. (1972): Les actes de langage. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
  18. de Terssac, G. (1992): L'autonomie dans le travail. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  19. Varela, F., E. Thompson, and E. Rosch (1993): L'inscription corporelle de l'esprit. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catherine Sauvagnac
    • 1
  • Pierre Falzon
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d'ErgonomieC.NA.MParisFrance

Personalised recommendations