<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com">
<title>Journal of Business Communication current issue</title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com</link>
<description>Journal of Business Communication RSS feed -- current issue</description>
<prism:coverDisplayDate>July 2008</prism:coverDisplayDate>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Business Communication</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0021-9436</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/231?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/232?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/265?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/286?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/308?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/331?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/333?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/349?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://job.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Journal of Business Communication</title>
<url>http://job.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/231?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Introduction To the Business Communication of Corporate Reporting: Part 2]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/231?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Penrose, J. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317522</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Introduction To the Business Communication of Corporate Reporting: Part 2]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>231</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>231</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/232?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Toward a Taxonomy of Corporate Reporting Strategies]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/232?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Studies of corporate reporting that focus on information disclosure do so primarily from a mandatory, financial perspective owing the decision to the rationality of corporate actors. Yet, social and environmental disclosures&mdash;often reported voluntarily&mdash;are increasing in importance because of their impact on a firm's performance and perceived value. Likewise, disclosure decisions are made based on managerial choice, often being communicated for a specific strategic purpose. The aim of this article is to illuminate the importance of voluntary disclosures as an aspect of corporate reporting and to integrate the deterministic and behavioral elements of disclosure decisions. A taxonomy of the disclosure process, activities, tasks, forms, types, and strategies is provided to add to our understanding of the additive and corrective nature of proactively disclosing information either to provide context to existing disclosures or to use information in a preventive manner.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Clark Williams, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317520</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Toward a Taxonomy of Corporate Reporting Strategies]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>264</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>232</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/265?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Considering Bias in Government Audit Reports: Factors That Influence the Judgments of Internal Government Auditors]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/265?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Government auditors collect data and assess, via written reports, the operations of a government; however, little is known about what can affect and govern their representations of those operations. This analysis examines research studies about author bias and government audit manuals in order to understand how government auditors' neutrality is threatened. While bias may be an overt function of preferential or prejudicial thoughts, most sources of bias that influence auditors derive from less explicit sources including prior expectations, media coverage, nondiagnostic information, and other significantly less direct channels. To determine how government guidelines address this issue for their auditors, the principle audit manuals for Canada and the United States were reviewed for their references to bias, impartiality, and objectivity. Neither manual provides a significant amount of guidance to assist auditors in addressing the problems of bias in data collection, interpretation, and representation. If bias is to be reduced in audit reports, more must be done.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Palmer, L. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317521</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Considering Bias in Government Audit Reports: Factors That Influence the Judgments of Internal Government Auditors]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>285</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>265</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/286?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in South Africa: A Descriptive and Comparative Analysis]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/286?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>In this article, the authors compare the corporate social responsibility reporting (CSRR) of companies&mdash; environment, human relations, community, human rights, and diversity dimensions&mdash;in the emerging market economy of South Africa with that of companies in the leading economies represented by the</I> Fortune <I>Global 100. The descriptive analysis extends earlier empirical work on the CSRR of emerging market economies, and the impact of culture on CSRR, by examining annual report data from the top 100 companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Index and the</I> Fortune <I> Global 100. Generally, the frequency and level of CSRR in South African companies was significantly higher than that of the</I> Fortune <I>Global 100, which indicates a greater willingness to convey social responsibility in their disclosure practices. This lends credence to the notion that emerging market economies may be more receptive to stakeholder concerns and social responsibility than peer institutions in leading economies.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dawkins, C., Ngunjiri, F. W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317111</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in South Africa: A Descriptive and Comparative Analysis]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>307</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>286</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/308?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Changing Uses of Technology: Crisis Communication Responses in a Faculty Strike]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/45/3/308?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This case study of a faculty strike examines the crisis response strategies of a university and its faculty union and the changing uses of technology to communicate to key stakeholders. An analysis of the types of crisis response strategies reveals that both the university and the faculty union used defensive and ingratiation strategies to build their cases and protect their reputations. The university also used denial to argue that the strike was not disrupting operations. The university and the union both relied on e-mails, Web sites, and press releases to update their constituencies. The difference was that for the union in particular, technology both expanded the options for sending information and accelerated the flow of information when conditions changed. The case study illustrates that technology has diminished an organization's control of crisis communication by opening numerous communication channels for others to use to explain their positions and build support.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vielhaber, M. E., Waltman, J. L.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317112</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Changing Uses of Technology: Crisis Communication Responses in a Faculty Strike]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>330</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>308</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/331?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Papers By the 2006 Kitty O. Locker Outstanding Researcher Award Recipient and Respondent]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/331?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317760</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Papers By the 2006 Kitty O. Locker Outstanding Researcher Award Recipient and Respondent]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>332</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>331</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/333?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Academic Research: Two Things That Get My Goat--and Three That Offer Meaning]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/333?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dulek, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317761</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Academic Research: Two Things That Get My Goat--and Three That Offer Meaning]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>348</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>333</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/349?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[How Academic Organizational Systems and Culture Undermine Scholarship and Quality Research: A Response to Ron Dulek]]></title>
<link>http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/45/3/349?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Suchan, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-06-02</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0021943608317762</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[How Academic Organizational Systems and Culture Undermine Scholarship and Quality Research: A Response to Ron Dulek]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Association for Business Communication</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>45</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>356</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-07-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>349</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>