Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T18:41:08.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - On the reflexivity between setting and practice: the ‘recruitment interview’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2010

Nick Llewellyn
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
Jon Hindmarsh
Affiliation:
King's College London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In recent years there has been a much discussed ‘turn to practice’ within organisation studies (see Jarzabkowski 2004; Boczkowski and Orlikowski 2004; Alby and Zucchermaglio 2006; Nicolini 2007). This has raised questions about how to theorise and empirically access practice, in ways that reveal the interplay between knowledge and ordinary work activity (Gherardi 2001: 132–5; Gherardi and Nicolini 2002b). Such questions and interests have simultaneously, though largely independently, been pursued in a body of ethnomethodologically informed research, which is also committed to a ‘practice-based theory of knowledge and action’ (C. Goodwin 1994: 606). Such themes are apparent in studies of ‘situated actions’ (see Suchman 1987) and the ‘choreography’ of ordinary work practice (J. Whalen, Whalen and Henderson 2002). A key concern of ‘workplace studies’ (see Luff, Hindmarsh and Heath 2000; Heath, Luff and Sanchez Svensson 2002) has also been the interplay between knowledge, learning and ordinary work practice (see Hindmarsh and Pilnick 2007). Despite common interests, the points of connection between these literatures have been minimal.

The present chapter explores one way in which ethnomethodologically informed research might inform the ‘practice turn’ within organisation studies, via an illustrative study of interaction during graduate recruitment interviews. The chapter explores how the practice of recruitment is a product of, and simultaneously a resource for, ordinary interaction during job interviews. What Graham Button calls ‘interview orthodoxy’ (Button 1992) is reproduced through interaction, but it simultaneously allows actors to resolve practical problems such as ‘what next’ and ‘why this now’ (Garfinkel 1967).

Type
Chapter
Information
Organisation, Interaction and Practice
Studies of Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis
, pp. 74 - 95
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×