Diplomatic negotiation in an international organisation: an exploration of expert status and power
This paper will explore the status and characteristics of ‘expert’ membership within an international organisation and its influence on the development of ‘exosomatic resources’. Invoking the framework of the ‘Community of Practice’ (Wenger, 1998), it is argued that status and power are realised in the development and interpretation of policy and conventions within the organisation, through the ‘negotiation of meaning’ and through the ‘politics of participation and reification’. Negotiations and decisions may take place over a period of time but are also situated within plenary debates. As such it is argued that power and hierarchy are not fixed structures but are emergent and fluid discursively over time and space. The paper defines the characteristics of ‘expert’ membership encompassing a consideration of the command of participatory and interactional norms, as well as knowledge of the status and content of reified products. To illustrate these characteristics a critical analysis of the discourse of one delegate is provided. This exemplifies how expert knowledge is applied within a debate to influence and inform the development and interpretation of texts and subsequently to contribute to the (re)production of shared meaning and agreement on issues under debate. It is argued that in considering both the forms of asymmetry in organisations and the practice of decision-making, research should focus on: the type of knowledge that is required and valued in any context; how this knowledge is accessed, enacted and exploited; and which members are instrumental in its construction, representation and reproduction.
'You tell all the stories' : Using narrative to explore hierarchy within a Community of practice
Recent discussion of the Community of Practice (CofP) (Davies 2005) has suggested that there are certain limitations to the approach with regard to how it accounts for internal hierarchy and community membership. Eckert and Wenger (2005: 588) have suggested that the only way to evaluate such criticism (and avoid building an inappropriately rigid conception of power into CofP theory) is to explore how hierarchies operate within CofPs. This paper offers such an exploration. Using data from a long-term ethnographic study of a high school in the north-west of England, this paper will use narrative analysis (drawing upon the work of Labov and Waletsky [1967] 1997 amongst others) to explore the interactional space in which speakers actively negotiate their personal and community behaviour. The analysis focuses upon the role individuals play as narrators of community practice and illustrates that status inequalities between individual CofP members do not necessarily result in inequitable allocation of control within the CofP.
Immaculate Consumption: A Critique of the “Shop till you drop” School of Human Behavior
Consumer behavior and choice models have assumed a major role in historical archaeology. Recent interest in consumption is an honest attempt to move beyond an emphasis on production. Consumer models have clear material referents, making them useful in historical archaeology. These models, however, separate production from consumption, and privilege the autonomous individual as the preferred unit of analysis. They also reinforce and validate ideologies that obscure inequalities and power relations in modern society. For us the important issue is how people reproduce themselves as social beings. Focusing on social reproduction integrates both production and consumption.