Journal of Business Communication

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 30, No. 3, 297-313 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/002194369303000304

The Shape of Our Field: Business Communication as a Hybrid Discipline

Gary Shaw

The College of William and Mary

The field of business communication suffers from a lack of cogency as a discipline. The renewed search for definitions of the field, the wrangling for primacy in its intellectual traditions, and the paucity of robust research reflect continuing confusion over the na ture of our field. The author argues that business communication is a hybrid discipline. Like most hybrids, business communication represents a melding of interests and char acteristics in a new form. The hybrid conception of the field allows us to make the most of our ranging intellectual traditions and to derive research and teaching purposes that extend beyond the limits of a narrow academic legitimacy. A careful look at these intel lectual traditions reveals how we may reconceptualize our sense of a discipline without arguing about whether, for instance, skills or knowledge represents the more respectable focus of our efforts or whether disciplinary categories such as organizational com munication or management communication provide the better umbrella for our work.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Business CommunicationHome page
M. B. Graham
Disciplinary Practice(s) in Business Communication, 1985 to 2004
Journal of Business Communication, July 1, 2006; 43(3): 268 - 277.
[PDF]


Home page
Journal of Business CommunicationHome page
J. Forman and M. L. Markus
Research on Collaboration, Business Communication, and Technology: Reflections on an Interdisciplinary Academic Collaboration
Journal of Business Communication, January 1, 2005; 42(1): 78 - 102.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
E. S. O'Connor
Discourse at Our Disposal: Stories in and Around the Garbage Can
Management Communication Quarterly, May 1, 1997; 10(4): 395 - 432.
[Abstract]


Home page
Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
L. R. Smeltzer
Communication within the Manager's Context
Management Communication Quarterly, August 1, 1996; 10(1): 5 - 26.
[Abstract]


Home page
Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
P. A. Argenti
Corporate Communication as a Discipline: Toward a Definition
Management Communication Quarterly, August 1, 1996; 10(1): 73 - 97.
[Abstract]


Home page
Business Communication QuarterlyHome page
P. S. Rogers
IN THIS ISSUE: What Sources Have Inspired Our Research?
Business Communication Quarterly, January 1, 1995; 58(1): 57 - 60.
[PDF]