Stakeholders in transdisciplinary collaboration understandably expect that interventions will generate added value. The evaluation of such added value cannot lead to a simple number at the bottom of a calculation, but the success of interventions can be measured at key points. For practice—here the financial analysts, and the organisation—added value is achieved when practitioners have continued to work independently within a defined period of time after a transdisciplinary collaboration project and the objectives of the intervention have been achieved sustainably. For the researcher, added value is achieved when firstly, the research-based interventions have led to a successful and sustainable impact for practitioners; secondly, the measures could be further developed through insights from the interventions, and thirdly, the transdisciplinary collaboration results in scaling effects of knowledge generation.

In the following, the added value of the research-based interventions with regard to the overall research question (Chapter 1) is discussed: what are the reasons for the actual state of texts, and how can financial analysts reach a different target state if necessary? (Sect. 10.1). Then, the significance of this added value for the theoretical, practical, and, above all, for the transdisciplinary context is discussed with regard to organisations, the financial community, and society at large (Sect. 10.2).

1 Added Value for Financial Analysts

Financial analysts are experts—and experts need good reasons to change their habits and routines. The transdisciplinary collaboration described in this study offered the framework for change and development for individual writers (Bank 1 case and Bank 2 case). Given the investment of their precious time (Chapters 6 and 9), the financial analysts expected sustainable added value by the interventions that lead to improvements regarding their writing context, their writing process, and, ultimately, their text products. The researcher aimed at bringing the financial analysts to a state in which they firstly perceived the issues discussed in Chapters 4–6, and secondly, co-developed and implemented the measures of their own accord beyond the intervention phase of the collaboration—and beyond the transdisciplinary collaboration at all.

The added value for financial analysts and for the researcher is discussed in the following with reference to key points regarding context (Sect. 10.1.1), product (Sect. 10.1.2), and process (Sect. 10.1.3). From a context perspective, financial analysts are part of an economic and professional environment (Chapter 4) which has, so far, largely neglected the needs of the target readers, due to, e.g., the double-bind situation (Sect. 6.4.1.2); added value, therefore, would manifest itself, e.g., in higher context awareness (Sect. 2.3). From a product perspective, the traditional features of financial analysts’ text products constitute hurdles for the target audience (Chapter 5); added value, hence, would be, e.g., a higher language awareness (Sect. 2.4), entailing, e.g., a significant reduction in unexplained technical terms, abbreviations, and hedging phrases. From a process perspective, there are constraining factors, e.g., lacking definition of target groups, which neglect or undermine the communicative potential of financial analysts’ texts (Chapter 6); added value, therefore, would be evident, e.g., in a classification of target group readers according to their financial literacy (Sect. 2.5).

1.1 Added Value Regarding Context

The financial analysts’ environment is a complex interplay of agents with manifold interests, expectations, and interdependencies. In this environment of domain-specific opportunities and constraints, financial analysts are embedded in a layered system (Sect. 4.4). Within this system, financial analysts are experts in analysing and interpreting economic data and business data of which they derive investment recommendations. The words buy, hold, and sell uttered by a financial analyst have the power to cause big shifts in the financial markets which can lead to huge losses or profits for the stakeholders and, ultimately, entire societies. For this very reason, it is indispensable that the financial community, and especially investors with low financial literacy, understand the reasoning behind the financial analysts’ recommendations.

Experiencing what it is like not to fully understand a text from one’s own colleagues was the pivotal added value for the financial analysts who participated in the training intervention (Bank 2 case: Sect. 9.2.1). Numerous participants were not able to correctly summarise their colleagues’ main arguments in the texts with the Re-Explaining Test (Sect. 8.3.4). This experience was of fourfold value for the financial analysts: firstly, it showed that hedging phrases due to the double-bind situation (Sect. 6.4.1.2) leave too much room for interpretation, even for their colleagues who are experts in the same domain; secondly, it helped them understand that there is no gain for the audience who does not understand the reasoning of a financial analyst’s recommendation (Sect. 6.4.2); thirdly, it made clear that, as a consequence, the audience, e.g., financial journalists, would not correctly cite the financial analysts (Sect. 4.4.4); and fourthly, it indicated how vital it is to include the audience’s financial literacy to exploit the communication potential of the financial analysis text product (Sect. 6.4.1.3).

Understanding the difference between professionally trained and inexperienced financial analysts was the core added value in the coaching intervention (Bank 1 case: Sect. 9.1.1). The participants who had been trained in professional writing understood writing as a project and process in a challenging context, not just as a product. They thus planned their main message and the stage goals in their head, including the context of the text, such as the audience. From the progression graph of the colleagues, the inexperienced writers understood how much shorter the writing time can be when contextual factors are included right from the beginning: the text can be written without having to push back and forth the individual pieces of information on the screen until they fit together at the level of the individual words and sentences that suit the audience. Moreover, the text product is more coherent as the main message and the stages follow a master plan that has been set up in the beginning. This insight instigated the inexperienced writers to want to actively improve the own writing skills with further coaching.

These insights of the financial analysts in both cases also facilitated cooperation with the editorial team: suggestions for changes in the text by the editorial team were accepted with greater understanding than had previously been the case. The financial analysts had now understood better that the proof readers were not eager to generate additional work, but to create added value.

From the perspective of action research, the added value from interventions regarding the context (Sects. 9.1.1 and 9.2.1) was twofold. Firstly, the inclusion of the ethnographic context proved valuable for a theoretically sound understanding of the problem and for developing research-based measures of coaching and training, e.g., the researcher’s knowledge about the double-bind situation made financial analysts more open to the interventions because they felt understood in their problems. Secondly, the interventions regarding context encouraged the discussion about the target readers and, consequently, led to a better understanding of the interplay between context, product, and process by the financial analysts and their organisations, which enlarged the common ground (Whitehouse et al., 2021) in the transdisciplinary collaboration.

1.2 Added Value Regarding Product

Financial analysts’ text products shape their environment by framing the financial world’s message, appearance, image, as well as potential conclusions and consequences; at the same time, these text products are shaped by their complex environment (Sect. 5.4). Given the constant time pressure under which financial analysts write their texts, there is not much room for amendments regarding calculations, assessments, or language matters. While financial analysts provide investors with comprehensive and relevant information, their investment recommendations are interspersed with abbreviations and technical terms and due to their double-bind situation, their reasoning is dysfunctionally ambiguous as it leaves too much room for surmise and error in places where conciseness and clarity is pivotal.

Perceiving the structure of their own text product by seeing it emerge with progression analysis was the main added value for the financial analysts in the coaching intervention (Bank 1 case: Sect. 9.1.2). The coachees understood the importance of text dramaturgy as basis for the reasoning, such that the recommendations for investors are coherent. Moreover, they recognised that fragmented writing leads to omitting or obscuring key information, which makes writers lose the overview, and investors who have not seen previous versions of the text lack crucial information for their investment decision. This insight encouraged the coaches to regularly apply the writing techniques (Sect. 8.3) presented by the researcher in the coaching units.

By approaching their texts from several perspectives, e.g., by analysing and rethinking each other’s texts with the Finger Technique (Sect. 8.3.2), financial analysts became aware of the gap between the actual and the targeted text quality that was required by the organisation (Bank 2 case: Sect. 9.2.2). This pivotal added value was of threefold benefit for the financial analysts: firstly, the reformulation of text parts led to a raised language awareness (Sect. 2.4); secondly, the trainees were sensitised for the addressees’ financial literacy (Sect. 2.5), e.g., when texts from other domains had to be summarised it became clear how hard it is having to read a text with many unknown abbreviations and technical terms; and thirdly, rephrasing lines of argumentation in each other’s texts and thereby recognising the signs of their double-bind situation made financial analysts realise which mechanisms had become routines regarding this issue.

From the perspective of action research, the added value from interventions regarding the product (Sects. 9.1.2 and 9.2.2) was twofold. Firstly, the interventions made the coachees and trainees realise that the current text quality does not correspond to the requirements of the organisation, they were thus eager to improve the quality of their writing products. This strengthened the transdisciplinary collaboration as financial analysts understood the necessity for change. Secondly, the interventions allowed for further developing text-based exercises for the participants and evaluating them after the coaching and training units. These insights and improvements benefit next phases of research-based intervention development in this current and future transdisciplinary collaborations.

1.3 Added Value Regarding Process

Financial analysts’ most frequent problems in their writing process consist in mutually conflicting and dependent conditions: too little time, double-bind situation, and blurred target groups (Sect. 6.4). This leads to issues in numerous activity fields in text production (Sect. 2.11), such as skipping of planning techniques due to time pressure; not being able to set up a stringent storyline due to the double-bind situation; and missing out on establishing relevance for the audience due to the lack of the target readers’ needs. Added value in context and product presupposes also change and added value in the writing process: only if the competences for writing texts are adequate and the writing processes of the financial analysts are sufficient to plan the text according to the needs of the addressees, interventions can be successful in the long run.

Acknowledging their problems in the writing process and being prepared to solve them with the proposed measures was the main added value for the financial analysts in the coaching intervention (Bank 1 case: Sect. 9.1.3). The coaches recognised, e.g., how vital the initial phase Comprehending the Task (Sect. 2.11) is for the whole writing process and for the text product: if they do not understand what exactly the task is, the solution cannot be to start writing and hope for insight during the process; the base line, the task itself, needs to be clarified in the very beginning. The financial analysts also realised that constantly changing the idea of text message and structure during writing, and therefore, having to fundamentally rebuild the resulting text several times is time-consuming and leads to incoherence.

Becoming aware of one’s own writing and the processes that take place during writing was the core added value in the training intervention (Bank 2 case: Sect. 9.2.3). The accompanied, conscious working through the different writing phases enabled valuable individual insights. Thus, the added value for financial analysts was fourfold: firstly, they realised why difficulties in their writing process occurred, e.g., why they repeatedly lost track during writing. Secondly, they learnt which writing techniques (Sect. 8.3) can help them overcome these difficulties. Thirdly, financial analysts experienced that the consequent application of the writing techniques enables them to meet the text quality requirements defined by the organisation in less time and with less strain on their professional setting (Sect. 2.2). And fourthly, they understood how their writing difficulties are connected to their writing context, e.g., that their double-bind situation with its difficult reasoning strategies has an impact on their writing process, e.g., for Staging the Story.

From the perspective of action research, the added value from interventions regarding the process (Sects. 9.1.3 and 9.2.3) was threefold. Firstly, the progression analysis in coaching confirmed to be an adequate measure to show sceptical experts the issues in their writing process. Secondly, the combination of theoretical and practical aspects in the training units proved to be beneficial as the trainees understood the writing process as a process with several stages that effect the text product in different ways. Thirdly, the questions from the participants during the writing coaching and training enable the researcher to enlarge the repertoire of measures, e.g., the repeated question from participants regarding the shortening of texts led to the development of the Bonsai Technique (Sect. 8.3.4).

2 Added Value for Organisations, Financial Community, and Society at Large

The generation of added value on the level of individual financial analysts and analyst teams (Sect. 10.1) scales up to added value on higher levels: the organisation, the financial community, and ultimately, society at large. With every level, the evaluation of such added value becomes more complex (e.g., Gazzola & Grin, 2013). Regarding text producing business units, this difficulty can lead to decisions, e.g., outsourcing editorial work (Editorial Team case, 9.3), that are omitting crucial factors and thereby ultimately shift the problems and the costs to other entities. To generate added value for a text producing business unit in an organisation, diligently scrutinised scenarios can reveal cost-efficient and socially responsible solutions, such as in the Editorial Team case (Sect. 9.3). Taking this further, added value of improved financial text products can be evaluated at exemplary measuring points in the complex dynamic system of the financial community and society at large.

The significance of this added value for the theoretical, practical, and, above all, for the transdisciplinary context is discussed in the following with regard to the organisation (Sect. 10.2.1), the financial community (Sect. 10.2.2), and society at large (Sect. 10.2.3). From a financial organisation’s perspective, text producing business units are not part of the core business, rarely profitable, and bind resources (Sect. 9.3); added value, hence, would be, e.g., a text producing business unit that is cost-efficient and constitutes a convincing USP for the organisation (Part I, problem identification). From a financial community’s perspective, the stakeholders’ financial literacy (Sect. 2.5) varies greatly and information circulating in the financial community is not understandable to all stakeholders; value added, therefore, would consist, e.g., in comprehensive (Sect. 2.7) financial analysts’ text products that take the target readers’ financial literacy into account. From the perspective of society at large, financial text products often are difficult to understand and lack clarity (Part I, Problem Identification); added value, hence, would manifest itself in financial text products that offer comprehensible (Sect. 2.6) and unambiguous arguments (Sect. 2.9), and that are reliable and trustworthy sources of information in the financial markets.

2.1 Added Value for the Organisation

Banks as financial organisations rely on text producing business units even though these units are not part of the core business. One of these rather complementary units is financial analysis. Given the cost-cutting throughout the financial sector, many banks have decimated their financial analysis units or abolished them; in the latter case, the banks buy their financial analysis text products from other banks or brokers and rebrand them (Sect. 4.4.3.7). For banks that have their own financial analysis, it is vital, firstly, that these business units are cost-efficient (if not profitable); secondly, that the text products increase the reputation of the bank; and thirdly, that the financial analysts’ recommendations constitute a convincing USP for the bank. In the Editorial Team case (Sect. 9.3), the transdisciplinary collaboration enabled the stakeholders to find a sustainable, cost-efficient, and effective solution for a business unit that is part of the text production cycle.

Discussing issues regarding document cycling and text quality directly with colleagues in the same financial institution was regarded as main added values in the Editorial Team case (Sect. 9.3) by the practitioners. Moreover, the new tasks of the editorial team members, such as developing a process to enhance the writing skills of analysts across the financial analysis business unit, proved to be beneficial for the whole business unit as it improved its performance considerably. This increased performance in text production by individual, but institutionally involved financial analysts could be measured along the activity fields in text production and writing (Sect. 2.11) and showed added value regarding the context, the product, and the process perspective.

From the context perspective, financial analysts were more aware that writing begins with Comprehending the Task; even the unexperienced writers did not “just start writing and then had to rearrange the text repeatedly” (e.g., Appendix B, statement 016). This led to an increased number of timely delivered texts and, hence, to timely Implementing the Product. As organisation development had clarified the processes, the writers knew by when exactly for whom which type of text has to be written. By applying the writing techniques (Sect. 8.3) that were presented and exercised in the interventions, the financial analysts could improve the activity Handling Tools. Against the background of constant time pressure, Handling Tasks remained a challenge; however, the shorter text production times through more efficient writing eased matters to a certain extent. Triggered by the discussions about the influence of professional setting, financial analysts’ awareness for Handling the Social Environment had risen which, in turn, led to a more agreeable situation at the workplace.

Regarding the product perspective, the activity fields (Sect. 6.4.1) Finding the Sources and Limiting the Topic remained unproblematic, whereas the problematic activity fields benefitted greatly from the interventions. By discussing the double-bind situation, there was a distinct difference in the activity field Taking Own Positions, e.g., the use of hedging phrases to fit any scenario and ambiguous statements was reduced, firstly, by the financial analysts themselves, and secondly, by the editorial team who was more aware of these practices and asked for changing such phrases in the course of the document cycling. Sensitising the writers for the audience payed off in two ways: in Staging the Story, financial analysts took the target readers into account, e.g., when they set their line of argumentation and deciding on the dramaturgy of the text product. With raised context awareness (Sect. 2.3), financial analysts started to include the prior knowledge of the audience and then decided which semiotic means were most appropriate for Establishing Relevance for the Audience.

Regarding the process perspective, where activities interlock incrementally and recursively (Fig. 2.2), the regular application of writing techniques (Sect. 8.3) created further added value. Since financial analyst teams had become more agile in Planning their texts, it was easier for them to handle Reading Source Text, e.g., they could detach themselves better from the source. Given the heightened context awareness (Sect. 2.3) and with it the envisaging of the target audience, Goal setting was done in a shorter time, especially for unexperienced writers (e.g., Appendix B, statement 016). With the rough direction of the text product being clear, the writing process smoothly led to the finer, more local planning of text parts and formulations and fluent writing in the reading direction (Controlling). The increased language awareness (Sect. 2.4) helped better assess what had been achieved (Monitoring), and thereby shifting towards thoroughly reading the own resulting text (Reading Own Text).

From the perspective of action research, the added value from interventions regarding the organisation (Sect. 9.3) was twofold. Firstly, the measures regarding the organisational development proved adequate and successful insofar as the organisation realised that interventions can save costs in the long run, e.g., the improvement of financial analysts’ writing competence reduces the resources for lavish rewriting and editing of the text products. Secondly, the transdisciplinary collaboration led to a future-oriented solution consisting in new tasks of the editorial team members, such as developing a process to enhance the writing skills of analysts across the financial analysis business unit. This facilitates and ensures sustainable text quality management and development on site, but also in further collaboration with the researcher.

2.2 Added Value for the Financial Community

The financial community consists of financial analysts, companies, financial journalists, investors, and rating agencies (Sect. 4.4.4). These stakeholders influence each other and depend on each other in various ways. Within the financial community, information is circulated, processed, and prepared in different sorts of text products such as investment recommendations, broker reports, or newspaper articles. Thus, financial analysts’ text products are used by, e.g., retail investors who take them as base for their investment decision, institutional investors, pension fund managers, companies’ investor relations, or journalists who use them as source of information and quotation. The stakeholders’ financial literacy (Sect. 2.5) varies greatly and, therefore, the individual stakeholders in the financial community do not understand the circulating information to the same extent.

The interventions described in this study offer added value for the financial community in three ways. Firstly, the transdisciplinary collaboration began to raise context awareness (Sect. 2.3) of financial analysts (Sects. 9.1 and 9.2) and of their organisations (Sects. 9.1 and 9.3). This resulted in a better understanding of the other stakeholders’ needs in the financial community, e.g., that the various levels of financial literacy (Sect. 2.5) require target-reader-oriented text products. Secondly, the interventions with financial analysts led to a heightened language awareness (Sect. 2.4) which was reflected in text products, e.g., with less abbreviations and technical terms. Thirdly, and most importantly, the interventions in the Bank 1 case (Sect. 9.1), the Bank 2 case (Sect. 9.2), and the Editorial Team case (Sect. 9.3) resulted in a remarkable adaptation of the performance evaluation for financial analysts: after the interventions, the writing competence became part of the individual performance evaluation at the end of each year. In other words, the financial analysts’ writing skills began to be monitored as part of the text quality management; this is a promising indication that the text quality in financial community will increase with regard to financial analysts.

From the perspective of action research, the added value in the financial community is of importance in three ways. Firstly, it becomes evident that interventions, e.g., with the financial analysts, can scale up and impact higher levels, e.g., the financial community. Secondly, it was surprising that text producing business units in finance that were not inclined to change much in the beginning adopted a new performance evaluation system in which writing competences are an integral part. Thirdly, the interventions confirmed that transdisciplinary collaboration is a fruitful endeavour which facilitates mutual learning—in financial analysis, the financial community, and beyond.

2.3 Added Value for Society at Large

Worldwide, financial literacy in society at large is low: “The results of the latest OECD/INFE survey confirm that financial literacy levels are low across participating economies. Individuals across the entire sample on average scored only 12.7 or just under 61% of the maximum financial literacy score.” Moreover: “The key highlights from this OECD/INFE survey among adults globally […] illustrate the high levels of financial stress experienced by individuals in their daily dealings with money and the low financial resilience across certain groups” (OECD, 2020, p. 63). And the same holds true for Switzerland: “[…] the level and structure of financial literacy in Switzerland are comparable to those of other OECD countries. However, financial literacy strongly varies between different population groups” (Ackermann & Eberle, 2016, p. 352).

The lack of financial literacy impedes the understanding of information and recommendations regarding financial matters, and it is one of the reasons why people cannot or do not set up investment plans for their future wealth. Careless or naïve investing can entail losses on investments: losses on retail investors’ funds can lead to insolvency and drive people into huge debts, as we witnessed for example in the financial crisis 2007/2008—and this also impacts society at large. Especially in bearish markets with falling prices do investors realise that they were not aware of the potential consequences of their investment decisions even though they had access to, e.g., financial analysis text products. However, of what use is this access when the recommendations in the text products are ambiguous and not comprehensible for the target groups because the writers did not take the audience’s financial literacy into account?

“Communication […] must never confuse stakeholders,” said Francis Petersen, rector and vice-chancellor of the University of the Free State, Cape Town, in his opening speech at the Conference of the Association for Business Communication 2016 (Petersen, 2016). In this vein, the interventions described in this study offer added value for society at large in two ways. Firstly, by raising the financial analysts’ context awareness (Sect. 2.3) and language awareness (Sect. 2.4) and by offering techniques that enable them to write audience-oriented, comprehensible texts with stringent reasoning. Given that financial analysts’ texts are often recycled and cited in the financial community, this could lead to more comprehensible texts for laypersons with low financial literacy. Secondly, the research-based interventions within transdisciplinary collaborations triggered changes in financial institutions, such as the distribution of financial analysts’ text products. A few months after the interventions, a bank decided that “the clients and recipients of our publications are to be divided into two categories: natural persons and legal entities. The lead publication for natural persons is the ‘AB’ or the ‘AA’, depending on the business unit and/or client segment” (Translation Marlies Whitehouse). In other words: the bank started to classify customers and they are divided into groups with weaker and stronger financial experience when investment interest is established. For this purpose, the customers are interviewed about their financial circumstances, their investment experience, their investment objectives, and their investment horizon. This information is stored in the personal customer profile and as a result, the bank sends only the publications that correspond with the customer’s financial literacy.

From the perspective of action research, the added value for society at large is of twofold importance. Firstly, research-based interventions in transdisciplinary collaboration can scale up and impact higher levels, e.g., society at large. Secondly, the interventions with the financial analysts as one of the stakeholders in the financial community and the added value thereof suggest that interventions with other stakeholders in financial community, e.g., with companies’ regarding their financial communication, could improve financial text products even more, such that they offer comprehensible and clear arguments, and are reliable and trustworthy sources of information for society at large.

The results so far show that it is possible to improve the communicative potential of financial analysts’ recommendations. I thereof conclude that further transdisciplinary collaborations with stakeholders from the financial community could bring added value for society at large, manifesting itself in the following five complementary points:

First, a broader share of stakeholders, e.g., the financial analysts, would become aware of their context, including their double-bind situation. This means that, instead of neglecting this conflict that impacts their writing, financial analysts would, e.g., realise what is their solid knowledge and what is gut feeling and extrapolation into the future.

Second, the financial analysts’ awareness as reflective practitioners would enable them to honestly abandon writing strategies that obscure their message, e.g., the use of hedging phrases. Together with an increased context and language awareness, this would lead to more comprehensible texts for the audience.

Third, forecasts of the market developments in scenarios with higher or lower probability would result in two consequences: it would enable the investors to decide how much risk they are prepared to take, and it would relieve the analysts of the constant nerve-racking double-bind situation.

Fourth, readers of financial analysis texts could hence better assess the value of financial texts, i.e., whether they actually offer guidance for investment decisions. At the same time, seekers of investment recommendations could distinguish between dubious and serious financial institutions.

This could, finally, lead to a deeper understanding of (non-)ethical behaviour in finance: if investors understand what they are actually doing based on an investment recommendation and what the implications are, it is easier for them to act responsibly—and this benefits the financial sector as a whole and especially society at large.

3 Added Value for Research and Theory

Developing a suitable and all-encompassing approach to analyse the key drivers of the financial analysts’ writing activities is a challenge. There are approaches that shed light on selected issues, such as text products’ readability (Loughran & McDonald, 2014), narrative strategies (Laskin, 2018), or earnings forecast accuracy (Stotz, 2017)—but they do not offer a multidimensional approach that analyses the key issues of writers in finance and the impact of these key issues on the text products in an integrative way.

When interviewing financial journalists for a study on the interplay of financial literacy, audience awareness, and storytelling (Sect. 4.3.2; Whitehouse, 2019), I realised that their core writing problems are identical with the main writing issues that financial analysts experience. This led to the assumption that the multidimensional model of activity fields of text production and writing (Sect. 2.11), a mid-range theory that was designed to analyse text production in the domain of journalism, is transferable to the domain of finance. The actual application of the model throughout this study confirmed this assumption. There are two main reasons for this transferability: firstly, the model’s generic definition of the activity fields of text production allows for analysis of writing issues on scaling levels from individual to organisational and societal practices and relations; and secondly, the multidimensional set-up differentiates between context, product, and process, which supports ethnographically-based analyses in, across, and beyond specific domains such as journalism or financial analysis. To illustrate this rationale, the next three sections give an overview of the crucial activity fields in writing from a theoretical perspective beyond practical domains. The architecture of the fields allows researchers to conceptualise and analyse writing activities in context and to identify and explain potential problems, which is a conditio sine qua non for the development of solutions.

From a context perspective, the five writing activities Comprehending the Task, Handling Tools Environment, Handling Task Environment, Handling Social Environment, and Implementing the Product of the model systematically cover all the potential context-based drivers so far discussed in real-life writing research (Jakobs & Perrin, 2014, p. 21).

Comprehending the Task is the thorough understanding of the task at hand with all its facets and implications in context; writers need to have clarified questions such as: Who is the audience? Which information does the audience need?

Handling Tools Environment describes the knowledge and application of writing tools that are necessary to accomplish the writing project in its organisational environment; writers have to know, e.g.: Which writing techniques facilitate a smooth writing process? How can be ensured that the reasoning is understandable?

Handling Task Environment is the successful planning and matching of tasks at writers’ workplaces, such that all these tasks can be managed in the end in due time; the writers need to have answers for questions such as: Which tasks have to be prioritised? How many resources need to be allocated to which task?

Handling Social Environment is the social interaction of people and larger social entities who are connected to the writing project in some way, entailing questions like: How is the collaboration with colleagues organised? Is the interaction with stakeholders defined?

Implementing the Product describes the phases along the production chain in today’s work divided chains of organisational value production, beginning with the writer’s final version and ending with the reader’s receipt of the text product; this necessitates defined steps to clarify: At which point in time is the text edited? Are there waiting periods for the publication?

From a product perspective, the five writing activities Finding the Sources, Limiting the Topic, Taking Own Positions, Staging the Story, and Establishing Relevance for the Audience of the model systematically cover all the potential product-based drivers so far discussed in real-life writing research (Jakobs & Perrin, 2014, p. 22).

Finding the Sources is the search for suitable sources of information as well as its studying and classifying. This leads to questions such as: Is the source reliable? Is the information reasonable and comprehensible?

Limiting the Topic is the focus on the core message and the omission of information that dilutes the value of the information; writers hence have to know, e.g.: What exactly are the key points? Does all of the information given contribute to clarifying and sharpening the topic for the target reader?

Taking Own Positions describes that the writers show their stance regarding a topic, entailing questions such as: Is the text clear or ambiguous? Does the text have to fulfil contradictory tasks which prevent a clear stance?

Staging the Story is the set-up of the text dramaturgy; the writers need to have answers for questions such as: How can the text appeal to the audience? Which line of argumentation supports the core message?

Establishing Relevance for the Audience is the inclusion of the prior knowledge of the audience and the choice of the target-reader-oriented semiotic means. This leads to questions such as: Is the audience’s financial literacy high? Do the target readers benefit from detailed explanations or rather from concise information?

From a process perspective, the four writing activities Goal Setting, Planning, Controlling, and Monitoring of the model systematically cover all the potential process-based drivers so far discussed in real-life writing research (Jakobs & Perrin, 2014, p. 22).

Goal Setting is the phase in which the writers determine which goal the text should to achieve; writers need to have clarified questions such as: What purpose does the text serve? Is there enough reliable source text to discuss the key message?

Planning describes the structuring of the writing task in its various dimensions, entailing questions such as: Which time slots can be allocated to this writing task? How should the text be structured?

Controlling is the constant comparison between the target state and the actual state regarding several key points in the writing process; the writers need to have answers for questions such as: Can the deadline be met? How can hampering distractions be eliminated in order to stay in the writing flow?

Monitoring traces the results of the production process throughout all levels. This necessitates questions such as: Does the text quality correspond to the audience’s needs? Does the text fulfil the requirements of the task?

If there are conflicting requirements in a writing task—which is usually the case in real-world text production (Ruhmann & Perrin, 2002), problems occur in one or several writing activities. Given that the activity fields of the model complement each other, and, thereby, cover the whole range of writing activities in a text production system, misfits, and system-inherent writing problems can be detected and described. Analysing the writing problems of the seemingly different domains of journalism and finance shows that there are common core problems, such as the double-bind situation or time pressure. The acknowledgement of such writing problems is the first step for solving them. However, it is up to the practitioners and their organisations to decide whether they are prepared to identify, address, and sustainably solve their writing issues, e.g., with research-based interventions.

In transdisciplinary collaboration, combining the mid-range theory of situated writing and text production (Sect. 2.11) with the double-bind notion (Sect. 6.4.1.2) hence offers theoretical insights into real-life writing issues beyond the domain of journalism—issues that practice, in general, can sense but neither explain nor solve sustainably without the insights from research. The transferability of this model from the domain of journalism to the domain of finance offers added value for research and theory in two ways: firstly, it broadens the range of applicable models for the analysis of communication situations in the domain of finance; and secondly, it suggests that the mid-range theory might be applicable to other domains of professional writing as well.