Using video-recordings of faculty meetings in a U.S. school district as data, this conversation analysis (CA) study examined problem presentations in multi-party workplace interactions. In particular, the focus was on how the participants demonstrated self-efficacy and justified their requests for help in problem solving. Taking control over the trajectory of their talk through a narrative format, the participants provided a granular description of the background information, illustrated the problem with reported speech, and made troubles-resistant claims (e.g. prior attempts to solve the problem on their own). The study’s findings contribute to the understanding of accounts that accompany initiating actions in institutional talk. Furthermore, they reveal how the participants actively engage in problem solving processes and display self-efficacy in the workplace.
AllenJABeckTScottCW, et al. (2014) Understanding workplace meetings: A qualitative taxonomy of meeting purposes. Management Research Review37(9): 791–814.
2.
AsmußB (2015) Multimodal perspectives on meeting interaction: Recent trends in conversation analysis. In AllenJALehmann-VIllenbrockNRogelbergSG (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.277–304.
3.
AtkinsonMHeritageJ (eds.) (1984) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
4.
BanduraA (1997) Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.
5.
BanduraAWoodR (1989) Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology56(5): 805–814.
6.
BaranovaJDingemanseM (2016) Reasons for requests. Discourse Studies18(6): 641–675.
7.
BergerEDoehlerP (2015) Direct reported speech in storytellings: Enacting and negotiating epistemic entitlements. Text & Talk35(6): 789–813.
8.
BindlUParkerS (2010) Proactive work behavior: Forward-thinking and change-oriented action in organizations. In ZedeckS (ed.) APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New York, NY: American Psychological Association, pp.567–598.
9.
BodenD (1994) The Business of Talk: Organizations in Action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
10.
BoonyaritI (2023) Linking self-leadership to proactive work behavior: A network analysis. Cogent Business & Management10(1): 1–20.
11.
BrownHReedAYarrowT (2017) Introduction: Towards an ethnography of meeting. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute23(S1): 10–26.
12.
CaroniaL (2019) Reported speech in problem telling: Doing epistemic and moral work in parent–teacher conferences. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice16(2): 135–159.
13.
ClarkHHRichardGR (1990) Quotations as demonstrations. Language66: 764–805.
14.
CliftR (2006) Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics10(5): 569–595.
15.
CliftR (2016) Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Couper-KuhlenE (1999) Coherent voicing: On prosody in conversational reported speech. In BublitzWLenkUVentolaE (eds.) Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How to Create It and How to Describe It. Amsterdam: Benjamin, pp.11–32.
17.
Couper-KuhlenE (2007) Assessing and accounting. In HoltECliftR (eds.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.81–119.
18.
DavidsonJ (1984) Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests, and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (eds.) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.102–128.
19.
DrewP (1998) Complaints about transgressions and misconduct. Research on Language and Social Interaction31(3–4): 295–325.
20.
EbstrupJFEplovLFPisingerC, et al. (2011) Association between the Five Factor personality traits and perceived stress: Is the effect mediated by general self-efficacy?Anxiety, Stress, & Coping24(4): 407–419.
21.
FoxBARoblesJ (2010) It’s like mmm: Enactments with it’s like. Discourse Studies12(6): 715–738.
22.
FreseMFayD (2001) Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. Research in Organizational Behavior23: 133–187.
23.
FreseMKringWSooseA, et al. (1996) Personal initiative at work: Differences between East and West Germany. Academy of Management Journal39: 37–63.
24.
FullerJBMarlerLE (2009) Change driven by nature: A meta-analytic review of the proactive personality literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior75: 329–345.
25.
FurhamAChengH (2023) The Big-Five personality factors, cognitive ability, health, and social-demographic indicators as independent predictors of self-efficacy: A longitudinal study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology65(1): 53–60.
26.
GistMEMitchellTR (1992) Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review17(2): 183–211.
27.
GoffmanE (1981) Footing. In GoffmanE (ed.) Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp.124–158.
28.
GolatoA (2000) An innovative German quotative for reporting on embodied actions: und ich so/und er so ‘and I’m like/and he’s like’. Journal of Pragmatics32(1): 29–54.
29.
GoodwinC (2007) Interactive footing. In HoltECliftR (eds.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.2–46.
30.
GoodwinMH (1990) He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization Among Black Children. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
31.
GrantAMAshfordSJ (2008) The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behavior28: 3–34.
32.
HaakanaM (2001) Laughter as a patient’s resource: Dealing with delicate aspects of medical interaction. Text21(1/2): 187–220.
33.
HaakanaM (2007) Reported thought in complaint stories. In HoltECliftR (eds.) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.150–178.
34.
HalkowskiT (2006) Realizing the illness: Patients’ narratives of symptom discovery. In HeritageJMaynardDW (eds.) Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.86–114.
35.
HeritageJ (1984) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (eds.) Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.299–345.
36.
HeritageJ (2009) Negotiating the legitimacy of medical problems: A multi-phase concern for patients and physician. In BrashersDGoldsmithD (eds.) Communicating to Manage Health and Illness. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.47–164.
37.
HeritageJ (2012) Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction45(1): 1–29.
38.
HeritageJRobinsonJD (2006) Accounting for the visit: Giving reasons for seeking medical care. In HeritageJMaynardDW (eds.) Communication in Medical Care: Interaction Between Primary Care Physicians and Patients. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.48–85.
39.
HodgeGCormierK (2019) Reported speech as enactment. Linguistic Typology23(1): 185–196.
40.
HoltE (1996) Reporting on talk: The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction29(3): 219–245.
41.
HoltE (2000) Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on Language and Social Interaction33: 425–454.
42.
HoltE (2016) Indirect reported speech in interaction. In CaponeAKieferFLo PiparoF (eds.) Indirect Reports and Pragmatics: Interdisciplinary Studies. Cham: Springer, pp.167–187.
43.
JeffersonG (1978) Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In SchenkeinJ (ed.) Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York, NY: Academic Press, pp.219–248.
44.
JeffersonG (1984) Transcription notation. In AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (eds.) Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.ix–xi.
45.
JeffersonG (1988) On the sequential organization of troubles-talk in ordinary conversation. Social Problems35(4): 418–441.
46.
JeffersonG (1990) List-construction as a task and a resource. In PsathasG (ed.) Interaction Competence. Washington, DC: University Press of America, pp.63–92.
47.
KendrickKHDrewP (2014) The putative preference for offers over requests. In DrewPCouper-KuhlenE (eds.) Requesting in Social Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.87–114.
48.
KendrickKHDrewP (2016) Recruitment: Offers, requests, and the organization of assistance in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction49: 1–19.
49.
KimMS (2014) Reported thought as a stance-taking device in Korean conversation. Discourse Processes51: 230–263.
50.
KoyamaK (2014) The limited effects of internal career concerns on self-initiative work style. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research3(4): 66–75.
51.
KushidaSKawashimaMTetsuyaA (2020) Why this clinic now? A context-sensitive aspect of accounting for visits. Social Science & Medicine265: 1–12.
52.
LarsonLMBorgenFH (2006) Do personality traits contribute to vocational self-efficacy?Journal of Career Assessment14(3): 295–311.
53.
LernerGH (1996) On the “semi-permeable” character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics13: 238–276.
54.
LiX (2016) Some discourse-interactional uses of yinwei ‘because’ and its multimodal production in Mandarin conversation. Language Sciences58: 51–78.
55.
LuthMT (2012) The bright and dark sides of empowerment: Linking psychological empowerment and job stressors to proactive and counterproductive work behaviors. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Kansas.
56.
MayesP (1990) Quotation in spoken English. Studies in Language14: 325–363.
ObschonkaMGoethnerMSilbereisenR, et al. (2012) Social identity and the transition to entrepreneurship: The role of group identification with workplace peers. Journal of Vocational Behavior80: 137–147.
59.
ParkI (2012) Seeking advice: Epistemic asymmetry and learner autonomy in writing conferences. Journal of Pragmatics44: 2004–2021.
60.
ParkI (2018) Reported thought as (hypothetical) assessment. Journal of Pragmatics129: 1–12.
61.
ParkerSKCollinsCG (2010) Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiplemproactive behaviors. Journal of Management36(3): 633–662.
62.
ParkerSKLiaoJ (2016) Wise proactivity: How to be proactive and wise in building your career. Organizational Dynamics45(3): 217–227.
63.
ParkerSKWilliamsHMTurnerN (2006) Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology91(3): 636–652.
64.
ParryR (2009) Practitioners’ accounts for treatment actions and recommendations in physiotherapy: When do they occur, how are they structured, what do they do?Sociology of Health & Illness31: 835–853.
65.
PomerantzAM (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (eds.) Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.57–101.
66.
PomerantzAM (1986) Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies9(2–3): 219–229.
67.
RobinsonJDBoldenGB (2010) Preference organization of sequence-initiating actions: The case of explicit account solicitations. Discourse Studies12: 501–533.
68.
SacksH (1974) An analysis of the course of a Joke’s telling in conversation. In BaumanRSherzerJ (eds.) Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.337–353.
69.
SacksH (1995) Lectures on Conversation, Volume II (JeffersonG., Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
70.
SchegloffEA (2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
71.
SchegloffEASacksH (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica8: 289–327.
72.
SeltingM (2010) Affectivity in conversational storytelling: An analysis of displays of anger or indignation in complaint stories. Pragmatics20: 229–277.
73.
StecKHuiskesMRedekerG (2016) Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics104: 1–17.
74.
StiversT (2008) Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research in Language and Social Interaction41(1): 31–57.
75.
Taleghani-NikazmC (2006) Request Sequences: The Intersection of Grammar, Interaction and Social Context. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
76.
TraversoV (2009) The dilemmas of third-party complaints in conversation between friends. Journal of Pragmatics41(12): 2385–2399.
77.
VásquezCUrzúaA (2009) Reported speech and reported mental states in mentoring meetings: Exploring novice teacher identities. Research in Language and Social Interaction42(1): 1–19.
78.
VehviläinenS (2009) Student-initiated advice in academic supervision. Research on Language and Social Interaction42(2): 163–190.
79.
WardTB (2012) Problem solving. In MumfordMD (ed.) Handbook of Organizational Creativity. London: Elsevier, pp.277–304.
80.
WaringHZ (2007) The multi-functionality of accounts in advice giving. Journal of Sociolinguistics11: 367–391.
81.
WhalenMRZimmermanDH (1990) Describing trouble: Practical epistemology in citizen calls to the police. Language in Society19: 465–492.
82.
WooffittR (1992) Telling Tales of the Unexpected: The Organization of Factual Discourse. Savage, MD: Barnes & Noble Books/Harvester Wheatsheaf.
83.
WoottonA (1981) The management of grantings and rejections by parents in request sequences. Semiotica37: 59–90.
84.
WuCWangYLMobleyWH (2012) Understanding leaders’ proactivity from a goal-process view and with multisource ratings. In MobleyWHWangYLiM (eds.) Advances in Global Leadership. Bingley: Emerald Group, pp.57–75.
85.
WuCHParkerSK (2013) Thinking and acting in anticipation: A review of research on proactive behavior. Advances in Psychological Science21(4): 679–700.
86.
YangFChauR (2016) Proactive personality and career success. Journal of Managerial Psychology31(2): 467–482.
87.
ZimmermanDH (1992) The interactional organization of calls for emergency service. In DrewPHeritageJ (eds.) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.418–469.
