Skip to main content

Evaluating Topical Talk in Interactional Business Settings: When “Testing the Waters” with Customers May Not Be Much of a Gamble

  • Chapter
The Ins and Outs of Business and Professional Discourse Research

Part of the book series: Communicating in Professions and Organizations ((PSPOD))

Abstract

In the last few decades, increasing attention has been given to studies of naturally occurring business interaction, both by practitioners and academics, and interest has been raised towards approaches focused on the actual use of language “as it happens”, using real-time observational data. My study belongs to this tradition and looks at spontaneous talk by sellers and clients when they visit each other or in the context of exhibitions. In particular, I focus on a practice which, to the best of my knowledge, has not been described in the literature, and that has to do with sellers performing enquiry into the clients’ doings, in the course of informal chat. I have called this practice “testing the waters”. In brief, topics are raised in conversation with clients and assessed in ways as to create clients’ convergence on the sellers’ business policy. This is done through two main courses of action, the first is supporting clients’ actions which are found to be in line with the sellers’ policy, the second is re-orienting the clients’ actions towards the sellers’ goals and expectations. What is interesting is that both courses of actions occur in informal, friendly chat, but still seem to be strategically constructed with a clear business aim. “Testing the waters” seems thus to be achieved as an important institutional practice: looking at how it is constructed may suggest to sellers and clients ways to learn, improve or make the best out of it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Antaki, C., Hanneke, H.S. & Rapley, M. (2000). Brilliant. Next question…″: High-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units. Research on Language and Social Interaction 33 (3): 235–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. & Casey, N. (1984). Generating the topic: the use of topic initial elicitors. In Atkinson, J.M. & Heritage, J. (Eds), Structures in Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 167–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C., Drew, P. & Pinch, T. (2003). Managing prospect affiliation and rapport in real-life sales encounters. Discourse Studies 5 (1): 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M.H. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics 1, 1–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M.H. (1992). Assessments and the construction of context. In Duranti, A. & Goodwin, C. (Eds), Rethinking context: language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 147–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, G. (1978). Explanation of transcript notation. In Schenkein, J. (Ed), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press. xi-xvi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C.M. (1997). “That’s good sign”: Encouraging assessments as form of social support in medically related encounters. Health Communication 9(2): 119–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C.M. (2001). Missing assessments: Lay and professional orientations in medical interviews. Text 21 (1/2): 113–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In Ford, C., Fox, B. & Thompson, S. (Eds), The Language of Turn and Sequence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 196–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2012a). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2012b). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and Territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk in interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. & Raymond, G. (2012). Navigating Epistemic Landscapes: Acquiescence, Agency and Resistance in Responses to Polar Questions. In de Ruiter, J.P. (Ed), Questions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 179–192.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, E. (1993). The structure of death announcements: Looking on the bright side of death. Text 13 (2): 189–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, A. & Heinemann, T. (2009). Good enough: Low-grade assessments in caregiving situations. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (4): 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, A. & Mondada, L. (2009). Assessments in social interaction: Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (4): 299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondada, L. (2009). The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42 (4): 329–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piirainen-Mars, A. & Jauni, H. (2012). Assessments and the social construction of expertise in political TV interviews. Text & Talk 32 (5): 637–660.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J., Maxwell, J. & Heritage, J. (Eds), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 57–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Psathas, G. & Anderson, T. (1990). The practices of transcription in conversation analysis. Semiotica 78 (1/2): 75–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E.A. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction- A Primer in Conversation Analysis–Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Svennevig, J. (2004). Other-repetition as display of hearing, understanding and emotional stance. Discourse Studies. 6 (4): 489–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stivers, T. (2004). “No no no” and other types of multiple sayings in social interaction. Human Communication Research 30(2): 260–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2016 Chiara Ganapini

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ganapini, C. (2016). Evaluating Topical Talk in Interactional Business Settings: When “Testing the Waters” with Customers May Not Be Much of a Gamble. In: Alessi, G.M., Jacobs, G. (eds) The Ins and Outs of Business and Professional Discourse Research. Communicating in Professions and Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137507686_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137507686_9

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-50767-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-50768-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics