skip to main content
10.1145/3472714.3473641acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Organizing For Power in/as Technical Rhetoric: Organizing Power in Technical Rhetoric

Published:12 October 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

This article explores how to marry technical communication sensibilities with structure-based action of organizing. This article draws an initial framework from the work of McAlevey [16] and analyzes its overlap with technical communication and how organizing praxis can shape technical communication sensibilities. Structure-based work, prioritizing a strong organization before a message or document, as a product-focus of technical communication emerges as a fruitful avenue of further study.

References

  1. Agboka, G. Y. (2013) Participatory Localization: A Social Justice Approach to Navigating Unenfranchised/Disenfranchised Cultural Sites, Technical Communication Quarterly, 22:1, 28-49, DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2013.730966Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Barad, K. (2009). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckland, M. (1991). Information as Thing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 42(5): p351-360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2020. “Union Members—2019.” https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press..Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Faber, B. D. (2002). Community action and organizational change: Image, narrative, identity. SIU Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Frymer, P. and Grumbach, J. M. (2021). Labor Unions and White Racial Politics. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 65, No. 1, January 2021, Pp. 225–240Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Gitelman, L. Paper Knowledge: Toward a Media History of Documents. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Herndl, C. G. and Nahrwold, C. A. (2000). Research as Social Practice: A Case Study of Research on Technical and Professional Communication. Written Communication, Vol. 17 No. 2, April, pp258-296Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Johnson, R. R., Salvo, M. J., Zoetewey, M. W. (2007). User-Centered Technology in Participatory Culture: Two Decades “Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol. 50, no. 4, December 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Jones, N. N., Moore, K. R., and Walton, R. (2016). Disrupting the Past to Disrupt the Future: An Antenarrative of Technical Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 2016, vol. 25, no. 4, 211–229, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2016.1224655Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Kahn, S. (2011). Putting Ethnographic Writing in Context. Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Volume 2. eds. Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. Anderson, SC: Parlor Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Katz, S. B. (1992). The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust. College English Vol 54, No 3: 255-275Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Kendi, I. X. (2019) How to Be an Antiracist. New York, NY: One World. ePubGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Love, P. (2018). Rhetorically Defining ‘Information’ For Designers and Technical Communicators: Transport, Institutional Shift, and Usability. SIGDOC '18, August 3-5, Milwaukee, WI, USAGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. McAlevey, Jane F. (2016). No Shortcuts: Organizing for Power in the New Gilded Age. New York: Oxford University Press. Apple Books.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Simmons, W. M. (2008). Participation and Power: Civic Discourse in Environmental Policy Decisions. Albany: SUNY Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Spinuzzi, C. (2008). Network: Theorizing Knowledge Work in Telecommunications. New York, NY: Cambridge University PressGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Star, S. L. and Strauss, A. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 8: 9–30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Sullivan, P. (1989). Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, vol 32 no 4, December. p256-264.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGDOC '21: Proceedings of the 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication
    October 2021
    402 pages
    ISBN:9781450386289
    DOI:10.1145/3472714

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 12 October 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format