Re-Viewing Business Communication: A Response to Carmichael, White-Mills and Rogers, and Krapels and Arnold

Abstract

This paper responds to the observations regarding the identity of business communication, management communication, and organizational communica tion set forth in the Carmichael, White-Mills and Rogers, and Krapels and Arnold articles which appeared in the July 1996 issue of The Journal of Busi ness Communication, 33(3). It argues that the identity of the field of business communication and all variations thereof ought to be determined by the concep tual problematic underlying its intellectual inquiry rather than by its vocabu lary or instructional practices. On this basis, the paper advocates the view that business communication, management communication, and organizational communication are not, as suggested by the three articles, separate disciplines but interdependent areas of study nested within the domain of the mother discipline of communication. The paper concludes by making the plea for a more inclusive editorial policy that adopts an eclectic methodological stance and encourages substantive deba...