Regarding explanation in negative messages, this article makes two innovative
suggestions for presentation in the classroom and in textbooks of business
communication: (1) Providing a reasonable explanation is the sender's moral
obligation; receiving such explanation is a natural right of the target.
(2) Explanation should be consciously generated and presented on two levels:
general (macro) and specific (micro). Such presentation has at least two
advantages: explanation on the general level ties the message to its wider con
text or even with the human condition itself; explanation on the specific level
connects it with the target's unique situation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alred, G. (1993). "We regret to inform you": Toward a new theory of negative messages. In B. Sims (Ed.), Studies in technical communication: Selected papers from the 1992 CCCC and NCTE meetings. Denton, TX: University of Texas and NCTE.
2.
Boone, L., Kurtz, D., & Block, J. (1994). Contemporary business communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
Bovée, C.L., & Thill, J.V. (1995). Business communication today (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
4.
Brent, D. (1985). Indirect structure and reader response. The Journal of Business Communication, 22 (2), 5-8.
5.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Campbell, K.S. (1990). Explanations in negative messages: More insights from speech act theory. The Journal of Business Communication , 27, 357-375.
7.
Cherry, R.D. (1988). Politeness in written communication. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 63-81.
8.
David, C., & Baker, M.A. (1994). Rereading bad news: Compliance-gaining features in mariagerrient memos. The Journal of Business Communication , 31, 267-290.
9.
Dulek, R., & Fielden, J. (1990). Principles of business communication. New York: Macmillan.
10.
Galle, W., Nelson, B., Luse, D., & Villere, M. (1996). Business communication: A technology-based approach . Chicago: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
11.
Guffey, M.E. (1995). Essentials of business communication. Cincinnati: South-Western.
12.
Hagge, J., & Kostelnick, C. (1989). Linguistic politeness in professional prose: A discourse analysis of auditors' suggestion letters, with implications for business communication pedagogy. Written Communication, 6, 312-339.
13.
Harcourt, J., Krizan, A.C., & Merrier, P. (1996). Business communication. Cincinnati : South-Western.
14.
Jablin, F.M., & Krone, K. (1984). Characteristics of rejection letters and their effects on job applicants. Written communication, 1, 387-406.
15.
Lee, F. ( 1993). Being polite and keeping MUM.: How bad news is communicated in organizational hierarchies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology , 23, 1124-1149.
16.
Limaye, M.R. (1988). Buffers in bad news messages and recipient perceptions . Management Communication Quarterly, 2, 90-101.
17.
Locker, K. (1995). Business and administrative communication (3rd ed.). Chicago: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
18.
Salerno, D. (1988). An interpersonal approach to writing negative messages. The Journal of Business Communication, 25(1), 41-51.
19.
Suchan, J., & Dulek, R. (1988). Toward a better understanding of reader analysis . The Journal of Business Communication, 25 (2), 29-45.
20.
Vik, G., & Gilsdorf, J. (1994). Business communication. Burr Ridge, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
21.
Wayne, F.S., & Dauwalder, D.P. (1994). Communicating in business: An action-oriented approach. Burr Ridge, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
