Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts: A BELF Approach and its Educational Implications 9781800416024

Table of contents :
Contents
Abbreviations
Introduction
1 The Role of English in the Global Community
2 BELF
3 The Use of English in the Bosnian Context
4 Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective
5 Conclusions and Implications
Appendix
References
Index

Citation preview

Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

LANGUAGE AT WORK Series Editors: Jo Angouri, University of Warwick, UK and Rebecca Piekkari, Aalto University Business School, Finland Language at Work is a new series designed to bring together scholars interested in workplace research. The modern workplace has changed significantly in recent years. The international nature of business activities and the increasing rate of mobility around the world create a new challenging environment for individuals and organisations alike. The advancements in technology have reshaped the ways employees collaborate at the interface of linguistic, national and professional borders. The complex linguistic landscape also results in new challenges for health care systems and legal settings. This and other phenomena around the world of work have attracted significant interest; it is still common however for relevant research to remain within clear disciplinary and methodological boundaries. The series aims to create space for exchange of ideas and dialogue and seeks to explore issues related to power, leadership, politics, teamwork, culture, ideology, identity, decision making and motivation across a diverse range of contexts, including corporate, health care and institutional settings. Language at Work welcomes mixed methods research and it will be of interest to researchers in linguistics, international management, organisation studies, sociology, medical sociology and decision sciences. All books in this series are externally peer-reviewed. Full details of all the books in this series and of all our other publications can be found on http://www​.multilingual​-matters​.com, or by writing to Multilingual Matters, St Nicholas House, 31-34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK.

LANGUAGE AT WORK: 7

Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts A BELF Approach and its Educational Implications

Elma Dedović-Atilla and Vildana Dubravac

MULTILINGUAL MATTERS Bristol • Jackson

DOI https://doi.org/10.21832/DEDOVI5997 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Dedović-Atilla, Elma, author. | Dubravac, Vildana, author. Title: Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts: A BELF Approach and its Educational Implications/Elma Dedović-Atilla and Vildana Dubravac. Description: Bristol; Jackson: Multilingual Matters, [2022] | Series: Language at Work: 7 | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This book presents a critique of current English as a Business Lingua Franca (BELF) practices using research conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The authors identify English communication behaviours that hinder or promote success in the workplace, and trace these back to curricula and teaching practices”—Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2022016329 (print) | LCCN 2022016330 (ebook) | ISBN 9781800415997 (hardback) | ISBN 9781800416017 (epub) | ISBN 9781800416024 (pdf) Subjects: LCSH: English language—Globalization. | English language—Business English—Study and teaching. | English language—Study and teaching—Bosnia and Herzegovina. | Business communication—Bosnia and Herzegovina. Classification: LCC PE1073.4 .D43 2022 (print) | LCC PE1073.4 (ebook) | DDC 306.442/21—dc23/eng/20220425 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022016329 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022016330 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN-13: 978-1-80041-599-7 (hbk) Multilingual Matters UK: St Nicholas House, 31-34 High Street, Bristol, BS1 2AW, UK. USA: Ingram, Jackson, TN, USA. Website: www​.multilingual​-matters​.com Twitter: Multi_Ling_Mat Facebook: https://www​.facebook​.com​/multilingualmatters Blog: www​.cha​nnel​view​publ​ications​.wordpress​.com Copyright © 2022 Elma Dedović-Atilla and Vildana Dubravac. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted to the printer concerned. Typeset by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India. Printed and bound in the UK by the CPI Books Group Ltd.

Contents

Abbreviationsvii Introduction 1 1  The Role of English in the Global Community Theoretical Perspectives on the Spread of English World Englishes English as a Lingua Franca

5 5 8 11

2  BELF 18 Conceptual Background 19 From the Research Perspective 19 Defining Features of BELF 22 Global Communicative Competence 48 Summary 51 3  The Use of English in the Bosnian Context 53 A Historical Overview 53 English in B&H Today 56 Bosnian Business Context and the Role of English 57 Research on Business and English in B&H and Neighboring Countries 61 Summary 64 4  Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective Rationale of the Study and Research Questions Addressed Research Design Sampling and Participants Research Instruments, Procedures and Administration Data Analysis Research Findings Interpretation of the Results

v

66 67 68 69 76 84 85 156

vi  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

5  Conclusions and Implications Conclusions and Implications for Business Practitioners Conclusions and Implications for Educators Suggestions for Researchers Final Remarks

182 182 185 188 189

Appendix

190

References

194

Index 208

Abbreviations

BE BELF B&H CA CAT CC CEFR CLIL CoP EBC EC EFA EFL ELF ELT ENL ESL ESP FTA GCC IC IELTS IICS KMO LEC L1 L2 MNC NS NNS OC PCA RS

Business English English as the business lingua franca Bosnia and Herzegovina Conversation analysis Communication accommodation theory Communicative competence Common European Framework of Reference Content and language integrated learning Community of practice English business communication The expanding circle Exploratory factor analysis English as a foreign language English as a lingua franca English language teaching English as a native language English as a second language English for specific purposes Face-threatening acts Global communicative competence The inner circle International English language testing system Intercultural and interactional communication skills Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy Linguistic and extralinguistic competence First language Second language Multinational company Native speaker Non-native speaker The outer circle Principal component analysis Reading skills vii

viii  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

QSI TEFL TOEFL SAT SLA SPSS SS TIGs UAE UK US WS

Quality School International Teaching English as a foreign language Test of English as a foreign language Speech accommodation theory Second language acquisition Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Speaking skills Transient international groups United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States of America Writing skills

Introduction

The Scope of the Book

For a long time, there has been heated discussion in academic linguistic circles concerning the current role and place of English in the global community. Some scholars perceive the omnipresence of English as cultural and linguistic supremacy (Canagarajah, 1999; Phillipson, 1992), while others take a more pragmatic view and highlight all the benefits of the world sharing a common language (Crystal, 2003; Davies, 1996; Seidlhofer & Hulmbauer, 2013; Widdowson, 1998). Regardless of all the theoretical bookish clashes and disputes, the reality unfolds its own story in which English has taken the leading language role on the global stage, acquiring the status of the global language used internationally across different walks of life and for different purposes (Crystal, 2003). It has been increasingly used in education, science, academia, media, sports, entertainment, politics, diplomacy, travel and business. The magnitude of the importance of English proficiency today is reflected in the fact that it has become one of the essential literacy skills that every individual striving to make progress in the global world in any sphere is bound to possess (Carmichael, 2000). A large body of research is exploring the nature and features of the English language and its usage in various fields worldwide, including the business field, presenting the domain this book has set out to explore. Globalization has definitely contributed to the deterritorialization of this field, the concept of multi replacing the earlier one of mono, workplaces no longer characterized by one nation, one culture, one language, but rather by more than one nation, more than one culture and more than one language. To describe this, scholars use the term transnational when referring to current workplace communication (e.g. Kingsley, 2013; Räisänen, 2018), pointing out the increasing ‘fluidity of work spaces and mobility of workers’ (Canagarajah, 2020: 5). To stay competitive in such a changing job market, one needs to rely on multilingual competence, i.e. a satisfactory level of proficiency in more than one language and developed communication skills required for meaning negotiation. The COVID-19 1

2  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

pandemic has created even greater diversity in the field of work (Canagarajah, 2020), with online communication more prevalent than ever before and borders less relevant. The aforementioned concept of multi now also includes competence in the use of different applications, different modes of communication and different registers. However, although the focus is on competence in more than one language, English still occupies the most prominent place in addition to the speaker’s first language. It remains a dominant lingua franca used for general business communication involving international participants (Canagarajah, 2020). A number of theoretical concepts and studies investigating various aspects and modes of business communication in English have been carried out, providing valuable insights and findings on the topic. This book has attempted to make its own contribution to the research on business English (BE) communication, by narrowing it down to the exploration of one particular business setting: Bosnia and Herzegovina’s (B&H) business context, the context belonging to the under-researched Global South (Pennycook & Makoni, 2020; Rudwick & Makoni, 2021). While the Global North has addressed this issue through studies mainly conducted in Nordic, Central European and Asian contexts, until now there has not been a comprehensive study that actually identifies English language needs in this part of Europe within a business context nor an attempt to specify particular genres of business communication that really exist and matter in the job market, drawing upon the business English as a lingua franca (BELF) perspective. Hence, raising awareness about this concept and conducting a study that would explore and pinpoint the exact nature, role, importance and features of English used in different contexts within this specific job environment seem critical. Therefore, this study aims to expand our knowledge of global business communication, providing us with novel findings from the Global South, which are to complement those from the Global North, making the overall picture more balanced and comprehensive. A number of issues regarding the topic need to be raised, shedding more light on many unanswered questions. First of all, an important question to be answered is what kind of English is needed within different business contexts, having also in mind the interaction with two different groups: native speakers (NSs) and nonnative speakers (NNSs). Furthermore, an exploration of the significance of different English skills and genres in different settings seems to be necessary. In addition, investigating what English communication behaviors hinder or bring about success in a workplace, i.e. what parts of the curriculum and teaching practices and modes seem to contribute to success in a workplace and which ones seem redundant in a specific business setting, should certainly be one of the many questions to be answered. Another important issue to be resolved is whether English courses concerned with general academic English skills and business vocabulary are sufficient to prepare individuals to adequately employ English communication skills

Introduction 3

in the workplace and communicate successfully in all international business settings. In addition, it is crucial to identify which literacy qualifications workplaces and employers really need and expect from novices and what business genres and content areas should be included or removed from these courses. Another important issue to be considered is the ways that classroom activities and teaching materials and methods should be revised and adapted to better suit the needs of a particular workplace. To be more specific, the question is what modifications should be executed in teaching English to all students in elementary schools and to those who choose business careers in their high schools or universities. Finally, an important query is whether the focus on achieving native-like proficiency with high grammatical standards and a strong emphasis on form is adequately preparing all students, some of them aspiring to use English in professional contexts simply as a means to ‘get their job done’. Even though the book is primarily concerned with the use of English in one specific aspect, before providing a more thorough account of the significance and role of English in business settings, in order to gain a broader insight into the topic it addresses the phenomenon of English and its use across the globe on a more general note. Thus, Chapter  1 provides a macro view on the place and spread of the English language, tackling theoretical and historical perspectives and offering an account of different standpoints and definitions of English as a world language. Chapter 2 narrows down the discussion to the field of BE and its application, inspecting both traditional and more novel definitions and attitudes. The primary focus is on the concept of BELF, its conceptual background and main features. The historical account of the role and rise of English in B&H is investigated in Chapter  3, followed by a portrayal of the status of English in the Bosnian setting today and by an examination of the interrelation of business and English in B&H, including a review of the studies tackling the issue in B&H and its immediate surroundings. Chapter 4 provides an overview of a detailed inquiry based on informed perspectives from business professionals in B&H, both employees and employers/supervisors. The book is expected to contribute to the current understanding of the BELF concept in various ways: ‘The Role of English in the Global Community’ (Chapter 1) and ‘BELF’ (Chapter 2) elaborate on and point out the global trends in comprehending today’s English role(s) worldwide; the conducted research study sheds light on the (non)presence and nature of those trends within Bosnian and other comparable societies; finally, the analysis and interpretation of the obtained research data provide general suggestions and guidelines, paving the way for the contextualized, authentic and adequate use of English within different aspects of B&H and similar contexts. This book might also be an important contribution to English education on multiple levels: individual, organizational and even national and international. Firstly, it might suggest

4  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

which basic business communication skills are critical in building careers in the international and intercultural world, within different contexts. Therefore, the book is of considerable importance to individuals in helping them recognize specific and varying workplace needs before entering the job market, because proficiency in a variety of skills is necessary to build a career and climb the professional ladder. As an illustration, to work efficiently and make progress in their jobs, individuals are expected to apply the knowledge acquired in schools/courses, and are expected to continue learning and improving while on the job. Moreover, this book can aid in designing English business communication (EBC) curriculums that prepare students to better adapt to both different types of workplaces and different types of positions and genres within one workplace by branching corporate English language teaching/learning into two general distinct fields: one focused solely on English as the official language, i.e. preparation for prominent job positions and discursive formats and genres requiring native-like proficiency, and another one focused on English as a working language, i.e. preparation for less prominent professional roles and discursive formats that could be utilized in a more flexible and hybrid manner, within a lingua franca business environment. Therefore, it can greatly contribute to reconceptualizing English for the international business context adopting a BELF approach and reshaping the current curriculums in order to create more adequate and effective business communication course content, teaching modes and methods, instructional materials and classroom activities, to better reflect and answer the needs of the specific business setting, and to equip students with business communication competencies that would enable them to be more efficient and productive, both as employers and employees. Thus, the findings of the previous studies presented together with the results of the research presented in the final chapters of the book can be utilized in both formal and informal education: (language) schools, colleges and universities offering general English courses, English for specific purposes (ESP), BE or EBC courses for business students not only in B&H but worldwide in similar language contexts. Finally, international individuals and institutions wishing to do business in those contexts can obtain valuable insight into the overall situation regarding English use.

1

1 The Role of English in the Global Community

Theoretical Perspectives on the Spread of English

The reality of English being a global language used in every corner of the world prompts us to ponder the reasons for this and to think of the factors that propelled English to prominence in the first place and of the underlying force that retains its preeminence in the world. Crystal (2003) argues that there are two reasons for this: geographical-historical and sociocultural. The former explains how English has risen to prominence, taking the leading role among other world languages, while the latter provides an account of the factors that enable English to preserve its privileged position. Both of these are presented in the following text. Geographical-historical perspectives

English has always been in motion. It came to England from Northern Europe in the 5th century and immediately started spreading throughout the British Isles: Wales, Cornwall, Cumbria and southern Scotland, and then throughout the Scottish lowlands in the 11th century following the Norman invasion. The 12th century witnessed the spread of English to Ireland, too (Nordquist, 2017). However, all of the movements occurred on a local scale and the real advent of English in global terms started in the late 16th century with British colonialism. It is estimated that at that time the number of native English speakers was between 5 and 7 million, all living in the British Isles. However, the number rose exponentially in the following 350 years, rising to approximately 250 million in the 1950s, with 80% of English speakers living outside of the British Isles (Mastin, 2011). The language thus became an instrument of imperial expansion and ended up holding a position of prestige and power in many conquered territories including Australia, New Zealand, the Caribbean, Canada, South Asia and South Pacific, as well as large parts of the African continent (Crystal, 2003). After the colonial spread of English in the 17th and 18th centuries, which was the first step, another reason for its rise and affirmation in the world was Britain’s leading role in the Industrial Revolution in the 5

6  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

18th and 19th centuries. However, by the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the US had emerged as a new economic and political superpower and strengthened the prestigious position of English and its dominance in the global context (Hagen, 2017). It is estimated that around 70% of native English speakers are American (Crystal, 2003). As a result of the political and historical expansion of English, there are now some 75 territories around the world where English holds a special place (Crystal, 2003). This special place is a broad term encompassing a number of varying meanings. In some countries where English has spread, English is an official or joint language of the state whose status is defined legally (e.g. India, Ireland and Canada). In other cases, it might be the only or the dominant language of the country due to historical reasons, despite the fact that it is not officially recognized as such (e.g. the UK and the US): the British Constitution makes no special mention of English being the official language of Britain while the question of whether a special place of English should be acknowledged legally has been one of the burning controversial issues in the US for a long time (Crystal, 2003). In some regions, English has lost its official status as the language of the state, but it has retained a significant role in everyday life. In other cases, the position of English is less certain and definable, coexisting with other local languages in an intricate linguistic web. However, in all of these cases, English has remained a part of the nation’s life and (or) even its identity. Some estimates indicate that the number of people throughout the globe who possess a command of English to a useful level has risen to one-fourth of the entire population (Crystal, 2003). The spread of English is a unique and peculiar phenomenon in linguistic history and what is even more interesting is the remarkable speed with which it has conquered the world throughout the last 60 years. The following section tackles social and cultural perspectives and the reasons that have further empowered English in the modern era and have made people dependent on it. Sociocultural perspectives

Nowadays, the significance of possessing a certain knowledge of English can be closely compared to the importance of being literate in reading and writing in the industrialization era in Europe (Carmichael, 2000). Over time, the mastery of English has become critical as part of general education (Huber, 1998) and most countries choose it as the primary foreign language taught in schools. It is increasingly used in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) from the secondary level onward (Commission of the European Communities, 2005). The vital position of English in education has been unequivocally cemented and is further strengthened by all other fields where English reigns.

The Role of English in the Global Community  7

Another field closely linked to the world of education where English plays a dominant role is the field of science and academia. It is estimated that around 98% of all scientific writing published today is in English (Engber, 2013). According to Ammon’s (1998) analysis of selected periodicals of international standing published by the mid-1990s, English was used in 90% of all publications in natural sciences and 82.5% in social sciences and humanities, with no other language reaching a representation higher than 10% in the examined publications (cited in Hamel, 2007: 57). Therefore, in order to gain international recognition and audience and to be acknowledged by the top scientific community, scientists are compelled to resort to writing in English. And the fact remains that ‘even the results of utmost significance and originality, i.e. in natural sciences or medicine, may get lost or pass unnoticed if they are published in any other language’ (Hamel, 2007: 61). English language supremacy is also finely portrayed in the political arena, as well as in divergent organizations and institutions of international character. Even if multilingualism is officially advocated on the international scene, in reality, in order to facilitate in-house communication in the institutions whose membership comprises different nationalities, English is used for practical purposes (van Els, 2000). Crystal (2003) points out that the language plays an official or working role in the proceedings of the majority of international political meetings in every corner of the world and that a prevailing impression seems to be that in every new organization founded, English becomes the common language. The reliance on English is not, however, restricted to education, politics and science. Besides these relatively closed elitist milieus, English has crept into the life of the ordinary person. This process has mostly occurred through the media: press, radio, advertising and especially television (Crystal, 2003). In more recent times, the internet and the mass use of social networks have contributed greatly to the rise of English, too. As Seidlhofer et al. (2006) note, the popularization of English has occurred not only in a top-down process through education, scientific publications and educational policies and practices, but also in a bottom-up process through popular dance, music, computers and sports. All of the stated facts indicate that English has become an international language, a contact language among people and nations around the globe. However, the elusive and altering character of its usage, the elusive nature of its functions, the various channels and modes through which it has established itself in different regions of the world have given birth to very complex theoretical considerations regarding English as an international language. Thus, a wide array of different concepts and terms related to its global status has stemmed from different viewpoints and given a path to the rise of divergent linguistic factions regarding the issue.

8  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Several terms are used to refer to English in its international usage role. Thus, in the literature tackling this issue, we might encounter expressions that have similar and sometimes almost identical meanings. Addressing English as it is variously used across the world, linguists write about World English (WE), World Englishes, New Englishes, Global English, International English, Globish, English as an international language and English as a lingua franca (ELF) (e.g. Brutt-Griffler, 2002; Crystal, 2003; Gnutzmann, 1999; Mair, 2003; McArthur, 1998). Out of these, this book emphasizes two highly prominent and popular terms and concepts to describe the spread and precedence of English, World Englishes and English as a lingua franca, as these are the two relevant constructs in close relation to the topic of this book (the former is utilized as a reference point in a number of English as the business lingua franca [BELF] writings, while the latter is BELF’s conceptual kin). Although there is some overlap in the usage of the terms, over time these expressions have come to denote two separate concepts in linguistics and are categorized into two distinct research fields. World Englishes

The concept of World English, later gradually altered to World Englishes/New Englishes/indigenized/nativized varieties, was coined by Braj Kachru who initially developed the Three Circle Model of World Englishes in 1985. Although this was not the only model that tried to account for the global spread of English (others include Strevens [1980]: World Map of English; McArthur [1987]: Circle of World English; Görlach [1988]: Circle Model of English; and Modiano [1999]: The Centripetal Circles of International English), it has remained one of the most dominant and most referenced models to group the varieties of English across the globe (Mollin, 2006), including the (B)ELF body of research. Kachru (1985) graphically explained the growth and expansion of English in terms of the three concentric circles: the Inner Circle (IC), the Outer Circle (OC) and the Expanding Circle (EC). They represent ‘the type of spread, the patterns of acquisition and the functional domains in which English is used across cultures and languages’ (Kachru, 1985: 12). The IC signifies the traditional bases of English, where it is used as a native language. The countries included in this circle are the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The varieties used in this area are said to be norm-providing. The OC comprises the colonized territories where the English language used is considered to be ‘norm-developing’ and both endo- and exo-normative. More than 50 territories (e.g. India, Malaysia and Singapore) fall into this category, standing for the regions with a conflict between the linguistic norm and linguistic behavior. Finally, the EC represents the countries where English is acknowledged as an international language. In this area, English neither plays an

The Role of English in the Global Community  9

important historical role nor does it have a notable intranational status or function. Here it is used as a foreign language, as a practical and highly efficient instrument in international communication. According to Kachru, the varieties used here are norm-dependent and exo-normative. The countries included in this domain are China, Japan, Greece, Poland and (as the name of this circle illustrates) an ever-increasing number of other countries (Crystal, 2003). Over the past several decades, the model has been utilized in scholarly debates regarding international and intercultural interaction (e.g. Graddol, 1997; Jenkins, 2006; Kachru, 1985; Seidlhofer, 2004). There are several reasons for its broad use as a reference, which Ngoc (2011) categorizes in four different sets. Firstly, the model underlines the pluralist nature of English and gives equal status to all of the varieties in their own contexts of application. The use of the model also recognizes the sensitivity of native and non-native opposition. Furthermore, the use of IC, OC and EC Englishes acknowledges the argument against the constructs of English as a native language (ENL), English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL), respectively. Finally, the circles mirror the role of English as an international language, as well as the historical account of the way in which it spread throughout the world. However, regardless of all the benefits it has provided for the academic discussion, the model has proved to be inadequate and somewhat oversimplified in some respects concerning the current function of English in global terms. Numerous authors, including Kachru himself, have revealed the limitations of the model in its inability to represent the myriad of functions and forms of English used in reality. Burt (2005) points out that while the concentric circles model recognizes diversity in English use and depicts English varieties as separate entities, it fails to point out the common features of Englishes. Bruthiaux (2003) criticizes the model for not being able to explain variation in different dialects of English, while Patil (2006) claims that due to the ever-increasing significance of English in the world, especially the seminal role it has taken in the EC, learning EFL can no longer be viewed in its traditional manner. Graddol (2006) goes even further and states that a knowledge of English is now one of the basic skills. Crystal (2003: 67) also argues that ‘there is much more use of English nowadays in some countries of the expanding circle, where it is “only” a foreign language…, than in some of the countries where it has traditionally held a special place’. Similarly, Canagarajah (2006) challenges the notion of the EC being norm dependent, since English is used as a lingua franca in the circle and would create its own norms. According to the nature of the model, there is no merging of the models, but in reality, as Crystal (1995: 363) puts it, it is difficult to always differentiate between English being someone’s first or second language since ‘there are several countries where population movement, language loss, divergent language attitudes, and massive shifts in

10  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

language use have made it difficult to answer the question: “What is your first language?”’. All the criticism has proved that the model falls short of portraying the practical realism of functions of English in its totality. In reality, the borders are fuzzy and fluid, there are many gray areas, the boundaries cannot be seen clearly and are unyielding, and ultimately the model cannot account for all the heterogeneity and dynamics of Englishspeaking/using communities. Therefore, Kachru himself revised the model and introduced the concept of functional nativeness, where the notion of a native speaker (NS) and the meaning it encompasses is broadened (Kachru & Nelson, 1996). In the traditional view, the concept of a native is strongly attached to a certain geographical area. However, a functional native can exist outside those mapped margins. In line with this modification, other linguists have advocated the redefining of the traditional terms and the introduction of new concepts that could illustrate more accurately the dynamic, altering and complex nature of the relationship across English-using communities. Consequently, building on de Swaan’s (2002) World Language system, Christian Mair (2013, 2016) attempted to complement some of the outdated aspects of the Kachruvian Circles and to account for the uses of English in the post-colonial nation state by proposing the ‘World System of Standard and Non-standard Englishes’. The hub variety, which is at the top of the hierarchy is a potential factor in the development of other varieties, while the users of peripheral varieties are usually familiar with and at least can actively use several other varieties, especially those higher up the hierarchy. Regarding the American/British English dichotomy, the model clearly portrays American super-dominance (the hub), having the highest demographic weight and the US being globally dominant in military, political and economic terms. British English, however, occupies the place of a standard super-central variety, institutionally supported in the media and foreign language teaching. The point where the model makes a groundbreaking shift is in the perception of non-standard varieties. While there is naturally no non-standard hub influencing all other varieties, there are some super-central non-standard varieties exerting a powerful influence on a number of others, such as African-American vernacular English. The nature of the concept suggests that it is not the sole standard English language that dominates the world, but the whole English language complex. The system makes the perception of the English language complex more inclusive by ‘integrating mediated and performed versions of vernaculars, and it alerts us to complex and sometimes unexpected hierarchies within it, both on the standard and non-standard levels’ (Mair, 2013: 26). Unlike Kachru’s (1988) model, Mair’s model provides for a number of different roles and places that English occupies nowadays. One of them included in the system is ELF. It represents a more novel term that has

The Role of English in the Global Community  11

been coined and introduced in the linguistic arena in order to account for the alterations and features of the use of English in the world today. The feature that differentiates ELF from the traditional notions of English use and procures it a substantial number of advocates and supporters is the fact that it can account for the heterogeneous, non-static and intertwined nature of the use of English in the world. The concept’s proponents do not perceive English users as fitting into a certain Kachruvian circle, but create new phraseology and perceptions shattering the models and transforming them into a completely novel mosaic. The following section provides an account of ELF, its theories and endeavors. English as a Lingua Franca Defining ELF

With globalization on the rise, and the omnipresence of English in the new global village, scholars have faced a great challenge in reconceptualizing English in its new vital role across the globe. Its all-pervasiveness in a myriad of varying communities and contexts has not facilitated the scholars’ task to create a uniform universal definition agreed on unanimously by academia. The term ELF has its roots in the works of Larry Smith (1983) in which he described the presence of English in various contexts worldwide using the phrase ‘English as an international language’. Following him, Knapp (1987) coined the phrase ‘English as an international lingua franca’, while the first research studies within the ELF framework were conducted in the late 1990s. Since then, ELF as a concept has been defined in slightly different ways by various key scholars in the field and has undergone slight modifications in meaning over time. Jenkins (2015) describes the development of ELF research as going through three distinct but related phases. The first phase focused on forms, scholars mainly investigating ELF pronunciation and lexicogrammar features (Jenkins, 2000; Mauranen, 2003; Seidlhofer, 2001), resulting in numerous lists of the characteristic ELF forms partially overlapping but still highly diverse. Due to such heterogeneity, the researchers in the second phase concentrated on the ELF variability depending on the multilinguals’ repertoire and not being limited to any geographical boundaries as was common to the World Englishes research. Finally, Jenkins (2015: 58) expressed the need for the further development of the field to take into account ‘the increasingly diverse multilingual nature of ELF communication’. In this vein, Jenkins (2015: 77) proposes the concept of English as a multilingual franca with the focus moving ‘this time from the ELF as a framework to ELF within the framework of multilingualism’. The author points out that English should be deemed as only one among many resources that multilinguals have at their disposal when communicating with each other. Although this marks a turning point, the dichotomy not existing between non-native English speakers and native

12  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

English speakers but between monolinguals and multilinguals, the author does not attempt to present it as unrelated to the previous ELF theorization and sees it ‘as evolutionary rather than revolutionary’ (Jenkins, 2015: 51). A similar notion has been put forward by Canagarajah (2018) whose lingua franca English (LFE) refers to various concepts representing communication established within a multilingual framework. However, unifying principles form the backbone of the ELF research advocated by the majority of ELF scholars. These principles and notions are elaborated on in the text and are contrasted with similar traditional notions, thus explaining the critical points where ELF theorists differ from traditional perspectives on various linguistic constructs. Speakers/learners/users

If we define ELF in its simplest form, we could say that ‘it is a “contact language” between persons who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and for whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication’ (Firth, 1996: 240). This is one of the earlier definitions, with subsequent definitions highlighting the same key concepts as well. Thus, when talking about ELF, Jenkins (2009: 200) refers to ‘a specific communication context: English being used as a lingua franca, the common language of choice, among speakers who come from different linguacultural backgrounds’. Seidlhofer (2005: 339) also refers to it as ‘communication in English between speakers with different first languages’. Although in some earlier definitions, such as House’s (1999), the communication channel excluded native English speakers, ELF interaction is mostly understood as including interaction between NSs and non-native speakers (NNSs) of English as well (Jenkins, 2006a, 2015). However, a more frequent scenario taking place in reality is ELF being primarily used among NNSs of English, who have to resort to a common language in order to engage in a successful comprehensible interaction (Crystal, 2003). A titanic shift that has occurred in the novel way of perceiving learners in ELF conceptualization is that a non-native person speaking ELF is not a learner, as seen traditionally, putting in strenuous efforts to achieve native-like competency, but rather a language user who is not inferior to a native English speaker (Firth, 1996). From the ELF standpoint, the goal is not to conform to NSs’ standards, but rather to utilize their linguistic knowledge efficiently, to communicate successfully, regardless of the NS model. With this view, a tremendous break from the traditional viewpoint has been made, making a distinction between a learner in an EFL setting, where the objective is to develop native-like proficiency in order to communicate in English with the NS model in mind, on the one hand, and an English user, on the other hand, whose goal is to use English internationally without strictly adhering to NS standards. Furthermore, the

The Role of English in the Global Community  13

learner/user polar division might be out of place. If we have in mind that learning and using a language are not consecutive, but rather processes that can be employed simultaneously (Seidlhofer, 2011), then it means that any learned knowledge can be used any time for the purposes of communication in an international context and that any English learner is automatically a user if their goal is not to identify and interact with natives exclusively, but rather to use the language as a means of communication in all contexts. Regarding user/learner and native/non-native-like proficiency dichotomies, ELF proponents have raised another issue: who is the perfect native model? If, as MacKenzie (2014: 8) puts it, ‘the standard model for EFL is not any NS, but rather an “educated native speaker”’, then the question posed is who that educated model is. Kramsch (1997: 363) argues that ‘the native speaker is in fact an imaginary construct – a canonically literate monolingual middle-class member of a largely fictional national community whose citizens share a belief in a common history and a common destiny’. Thus, the majority of ELF scholars criticize the traditional impossible-to-reach educational target of compelling one to become native-like, which leads to inevitable failure (MacKenzie, 2014). Therefore, the principal implication for education is ensuring that the norm against which second language (L2) users are assessed should be L2 user norms, not first language (L1) NS norms. Thus, the success in communication should be measured by the capacity to use an L2 productively (Cook, 2002). Lately, scholars have attempted to move the focus away from individual codes, languages, to multilingual repertoires, multilingual competence which makes communication in international contexts possible. However, multilingualism does not imply perfect command of the target languages. Thus, Blommaert (2010: 9) considers ‘fragmented multilingualism’ satisfactory for international communication and Nguyen (2012) names the idea that multilingualism entails native-like proficiency as one of the common misconceptions about multilingualism. Various communication strategies used by multilinguals while negotiating meaning (Canagarajah, 2013) complemented by other resources such as body gestures, physical objects and positioning contribute significantly to successful communication on such occasions (Canagarajah, 2018). Community/group

A concept closely related to the notion of language use is the notion of community. Seidlhofer (2009) points out that at a time of omnipresent and prevalent global communication, the old concept of community based solely on repeated face-to-face contact among people living in close physical proximity to each other obviously no longer applies. With the ever-changing nature of human interactions today, with globalization on the rise and the elimination of borders and distance among people

14  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

through technological advances, the notion of community has gained a different shape and requires redefining. In linguistic terms, a new concept that would reflect more accurately the contexts and manner in which the language is used today was first proposed by Wenger (1998)1 and later adopted by Seidlhofer (2009): community of practice (CoP). As one the main advocates of ELF, Seidlhofer calls for the requestioning and redefining of the old concept of community in the Kachruvian sense, claiming that it simply cannot hold up to the present-day rapid ever-changing world of incessant global communication. Therefore, people with specific ELF registers comprising shared repertoires for international and intercultural interaction should be seen as a community, regardless of the fact that they do not coexist at the same geographical location (Seidlhofer, 2009). CoP as a replacement for the traditional social construct of community is thus defined by its membership and the practices they employ together. Prior to Seidlhofer, House (2003) also talked about three dimensions of CoP within the ELF context: The activity-based concept of community of practice with its diffuse alliances and communities of imagination and alignment fits ELF interactions well because ELF participants have heterogeneous backgrounds and diverse social and linguistic expectations. Rather than being characterized by fixed social categories and stable identities, ELF users are agentively involved in the construction of event-specific, interactional styles and frameworks. (House, 2003: 573)

Although the notion of CoP successfully replaced the notion of speech community in the mid-2000s, ELF scholars (Baker, 2015; Jenkins, 2015; Mauranen, 2018; Pitzl, 2016, 2018) have emphasized the need for a new concept to be developed due to its limitations to cover all the diversity in the contexts of ELF groupings. The community appeared too fluid (Baker, 2015) comprising smaller groups within it (Smit, 2010), which are in fact most frequently the subjects of ELF research analyses. Rarely does it happen that these smaller groups, or ‘social clusters’ as Pitzl (2018: 29) calls them or ‘ELF groups’ as Cogo (2016: 365) names them, become a part of a more stable community which might be regarded as a CoP (Pitzl, 2018). Thus, Pitzl (2018) introduced the term transient international groups (TIGs) as appropriate for addressing temporary groups comprising multilingual individuals whose encounters are limited in duration and frequency of occurrence, whereas the notion of CoP still seems suitable for more permanent entities. Ownership of English

Another concept that has been challenged by ELF proponents concerns the idea of the ownership of a language. Merriam Webster

The Role of English in the Global Community  15

dictionary defines the term ownership in a twofold manner, the first signifying ‘the state, relation, or the fact of being an owner’ and the second one referring to ‘a group or organization of owners’. However, besides being defined by physical possession over material things, the concept encompasses a broader meaning as well, extending to intangible abstract categories. It is an especially interesting phenomenon in the context of heated language debates. It is a traditional belief that a nation is defined, among other things, by a language, and together with the concept of identity they form an interconnected, intricate web. However, with English being used as an international language nowadays, a complex question of its rightful ownership has gained prominence. Widdowson (1994), one of the noted scholars giving his thoughts on the issue, re-questions the traditional conceptions, pointing out that a whole range of various communities, such as the scientific or business one, use English for their own purposes, adapting it to meet their own circumstances and needs. Thus, its function transcends cultural and communal margins. The author makes an interesting point, claiming that being proficient in a language means being able to express your mind exactly and freely, being uninhibited by the linguistic and sociocultural norms of the NSs’ talk. Otherwise, one feels as a supporting role in someone else’s show. Therefore, paradoxically, the backbone of reaching proficiency in a foreign language is users’ staying non-conformist to the standards and conventions of the language and utilizing it as they wish for their own specific surroundings and objectives. Thus, in time, with tailoring and modifying the language to meet their design and purposes, its non-native users make a custom-made product with their own norms and conventions of use. Widdowson (1994: 385) highlights the double nature of these purposes: communicative, meeting the needs of interaction, and communal, defining the identity of the group, concluding: The very fact that English is an international language means that no nation can have custody over it. To grant such custody of the language is necessarily to arrest its development and so undermine its international status. It is a matter of considerable pride and satisfaction for native speakers of English that their language is an international means of communication. But the point is that it is only international to the extent that it is not their language. It is not a possession which they lease out to others, while still retaining the freehold. Other people actually own it.

Hulmbauer et  al. (2008: 27) hold a similar view, arguing that ‘ELF is emphatically not the English as a property of its native speakers, but is democratized and universalized in the “exolingual” process of being appropriated for international use’. Therefore, these novel notions which are in line with the contemporary dichotomy in linguistics calling for a distinction between the

16  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

language for communication and the language for identification call for a comparative analysis of EFL and ELF, which is discussed in the following section. ELF vs. EFL

ELF scholars (Jenkins, 2006b; Seidlhofer, 2004) deem second language acquisition (SLA) researchers’ unwillingness to make a distinction between a lingua franca and a foreign language, which is in line with prior confusion in differentiating between a nativized variety and a foreign language variety, to be one of the crucial problematic points that SLA researchers have with accepting the notion of ELF. Therefore, Jenkins (2006b) provides a contrastive analysis of the two paradigms drawing upon the dissimilarities in some of the key features of each concept. The first major difference lies in the objectives and goals of ELF and EFL users. As stated earlier, the ultimate goal of an EFL learner is to reach native-like proficiency, since their target interlocutors are mostly NSs. On the other hand, the LFEs (Jenkins, 2006b: 139) of the territories that overlap with the expanding circle in the Kachruvian sense are used in communication settings where NSs are not the target communicators, and thus are not entitled to perceive themselves as the yardstick against which correctness is measured (Jenkins, 2006b). The objective of an ELF user is to use English in communication with both NSs and NNSs, with the latter occurring much more frequently (Crystal, 2003; Jenkins, 2015), thus making it nonsensical to measure the success in linguistic competence against the minority of users involved in communication. As discussed before, terms such as a native speaker and a static standard variety are idealistic constructs, considering the fact that a language is an ever-changing, dynamic, fluid entity and thus, unlike traditional EFL approaches aiming at teaching one standard variety, a more practical solution, as Widdowson (2003) notes, would be to equip users with the tools needed for later continuation of independent learning in different contexts. In line with what was explained previously, the EFL concept perceives any deviation from a standard native norm as an error that should be corrected, while ELF scholars see it as a variation. What EFL deems as ‘deficit’, ELF calls it ‘a difference’ (Jenkins, 2006b: 139). However, as Jenkins (2006b: 141) notes, this does not mean that ‘anything goes’ in ELF, since there are levels of proficiency in ELF as well. The success and progress of an ELF learner should not be compared and measured against EFL standards, but rather against ELF categories, aims and objectives. Furthermore, Jenkins (2006b) points out that the two concepts fall into two diverse categories and therefore their very starting positions make it impossible to compare them on the same grounds. Namely, EFL is a part of modern foreign languages, and as such, should not be seen on

The Role of English in the Global Community  17

different terms to any other foreign language in respect to teaching, i.e. like any modern foreign language, EFL is still seen by the body of SLA researchers and educators as bound to NS standards, and thus from a deficit perspective in terms of any L2 deviations from those standards. Such deviations, including code-switching and code-mixing, are portrayed in terms of both ‘a transfer/interference metaphor and a fossilization metaphor’ (when acquisition does not reach a native-like level, which is a typical occurrence) (Jenkins, 2006b: 139). In contrast to EFL, ELF is under the World Englishes umbrella, where code-mixing and code-switching by people with different sociocultural and linguistic backgrounds come as a natural and spontaneous phenomenon, reflecting empathy, solidarity and creativity among users of different L1s. Note (1) With the aim of comprehending how learning takes place in informal settings, Lave and Wenger (1991) studied the ways that newcomers to a certain informal group grew to become established members of the group. This situated learning, occurring through practice and participation was described using the term ‘communities of practice’. The structure of the community was formed over the course of time with the process of legitimate peripheral participation, i.e. a kind of socialization process where novices watch and learn and take small steps, in order to understand how a group works and how they can join in. Thus, ‘community of practice’ is the group of people who share common interests and a desire to learn from and contribute to the community with the myriad of their own experiences (Lave & Wenger, 1991). In his later work, Wenger (1998) divorced from the concept of legitimate peripheral participation and utilized the idea of an inherent tension in a duality instead. He elaborated on the structure of a CoP as comprising three interconnected terms: ‘mutual engagement’, ‘joint enterprise’ and ‘shared repertoire’.

2

2 BELF

Although various attempts have been made to create an artificial language that would function as a global lingua franca (e.g. Esperanto), the fact remains that not one has been successful (Levin, 1993). As discussed in Chapter 1, English has taken the dominant role in international communication in all walks of life, upon which a large body of text has been written (e.g. Ammon, 2006; Bargiela-Chiappini et al., 2007; Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2004, 2009; Knapp & Meierkord, 2002; Mair, 2003; Seidlhofer et al., 2006). The supremacy of English in the professional business context has been undisputed for several decades; however, the perceptions of it along with some practical implementations have changed dramatically with the turn of the new millennium (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013). According to Kankaanrata (2008), the English taught for business purposes in the 1980s was exactly the kind of English learned in schools, i.e. English as a foreign language (EFL) that placed native speakers’ (NSs) norms on a pedestal. The only consideration that teachers had to pay attention to was to keep up to date and informed about new technological advances and the linguistic concepts related to them. The only point of dispute was the opposition between the Queen’s English on the one hand, and General American, on the other. However, with the 1990s and especially on entering the new millennium, globalization processes turned the old school EFL teaching system upside down. As Kankaanranta (2008) notes, English became a necessity and the first choice of communication in internationally operating businesses. However, its style and features remained aloof from traditional EFL as taught, learned and used before. The considerations and investigation of these features by a few scholars gave birth to the novel concept English as the business lingua franca (BELF), stemming from the notion of ELF. The notion of BELF was first introduced by Louhiala-Salminen et al. (2005), who conducted large-scale research on communication and language use within two Swedish–Finnish international merger companies. Drawing on the concept of ELF, as well as on the results of the study, they coined a new term to stand for business English as a lingua franca, later modified as BELF to better fit the conceptual framework (Kankaanranta 18

BELF 

19

& Louhiala-Salminen, 2013). Throughout the last decade, there have been a substantial number of studies on BELF, accumulating in a pool of knowledge on its defining features, which are presented in the following text. However, before that, a brief conceptual background and an overview of the critical research in the field are provided. Conceptual Background

Long before the term BELF was coined, English had been used as a convenient and critical instrument in international business transactions; therefore, considerable research has been carried out, exploring the use of English within the business context on the global scene.1 The studies conducted fall within the categories of English for specific purposes (i.e. English for specific business purposes), international communication and business communication. Therefore, English used internationally among non-native speakers (NNSs) for business purposes is not a novel phenomenon. Its features have been explored and the BELF concept itself naturally draws from the fruits of previous research and problematization of the issue. However, what differentiates BELF from other approaches is the very theoretical reconceptualization of English as the global business lingua franca. Since BELF was first introduced in 2005, a number of studies on its style, strategies and success and failure predispositions have been conducted. At this point, an overview of the critical research carried out in the field of BELF to the present day, which actually gave birth to the very definition, the conceptualization and identification of BELF features in the first place, is presented. Unlike many other constructs which were born as theoretical concepts and only subsequently (dis)proved, the case with BELF was the reverse: its principal features stem from the research projects investigating the nature of international business communication. Therefore, this chapter follows the same structural succession and first presents the studies on BELF, followed by a presentation of the BELF features stemming from these studies. From the Research Perspective

The first project that played a crucial role in the subsequent birth of the concept of BELF was the study of language use at Kone Elevators, conducted by Charles and Marschan-Piekkari (2002). The study investigated the middle management in a multinational company (MNC) by interviewing 110  staff members from 25  corporate units across 10 different countries from Europe, Mexico and the Far East, as well as by subsequent detailed interviewing of the key figures in the company. The aim was to design appropriate communication training for employees working in middle management. The study represented an extensive needs analysis attempting to pinpoint current and future language needs and specific situations in which different kinds of communication forms

20  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

were required. It also explored the relationship between the company’s official corporate language policy and its actual implications and applications in reality, shedding light on some of the major language-related impediments and problems that business people experience. The study found, among other things, that employees should be trained to be familiar with ‘global Englishes’, produced by different nations, in order to respond adequately when encountering different communication styles, strategies, types of discourses and accents. The second large-scale research titled ‘Finnish, Swedish or English? Internal Communications in Recently Merged Finnish–Swedish Companies’ that was ‘vital for the construction of the BELF concept’ (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013: 23) was carried out at the Aalto School of Business in Finland. The project, conducted between 2000 and 2002 by Kankaanranta and her colleagues, focused on examining language use and practices in two Swedish–Finnish merger companies: a paper company and a banking group (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013) and, as the name of the project suggests, on exploring what languages were used in the merger of the two Nordic countries. Besides investigating communicative practices in the companies, the goal was to probe the perceptions of Finnish and Swedish workers of each other’s communication cultures, exploring both similarities and differences (Louhiala-Salminen, 2002). For this purpose, both questionnaire surveys and follow-up interviews were used to gather data. In addition, analyses of authentic English language discourse were executed, including meetings (see Louhiala-Salminen & Charles, 2006; Nikko, 2009) and emails (Kankaanranta, 2005, 2006). The questionnaire survey comprised around 400 respondents, while 31 employees were interviewed; the meeting data comprised four video recorded meetings with nine hours of talk; and the email corpus contained 282 emails. As a result of the project, a journal article drawing on the findings of the project was written introducing the concept of BELF (Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005). The third project, led by the same team from the Academy of Finland, explored communication know-how as an integral part of business know-how in the period between 2006 and 2009. Communication conventions, the characteristics of BELF interactions, as well as the success factors in international business encounters were investigated within five international Finland-based companies. The goal was to explore how communication was influenced by titanic alteration processes in business such as globalization, advancement of information technology (IT) systems, specialization, modularization and networks. The data were gathered by questionnaires administered online and related semistructured interviews. There were 987 questionnaire respondents speaking 31 different mother tongues, with Finnish prevailing (40%), while the interviews were conducted with 27 internationally operating professionals. The results indicated some interesting points about BELF usage and

BELF 

21

strengthened the notion of English as the (necessary and naturally taken for granted) business lingua franca. Thus, the results of the pioneering studies shed light on the use and characteristics of BELF, describing some of the key features of global business and corporate communication and identifying factors contributing to successful BELF encounters. However, besides these initial largescale projects, a number of other studies ensued, investigating further the nature of a BELF environment, and these are presented further in the text. A significant piece of research in the field was undertaken by Susanne Ehrenreich (2010), who investigated the use of BELF in a German MNC throughout 2006 and 2007. By employing an ethnographic, multi-method approach including qualitative interviews, meeting observations, shadowing and recordings, the researcher explored upper management (board members, high-level executives, project managers, engineers and a few assistants) views on, use of and attitudes toward the role of English in the international business context. The overall database collected consisted of 24 qualitative interviews with an average length of 90  minutes, the observation of various types of internal and external meetings as well as dinners (16 events), two days of shadowing, and nine recordings of phone conferences and meetings. In total, more than 30 days were spent on-site at the company. The majority of interviewees were German, while the nationalities of the observees included Italian, French, British, American, Chinese and Spanish. The findings confirmed once again that English has become an indispensable imperative in an international company and that there is overall understanding that personnel at all levels of hierarchy expand their language skills in line with their respective roles and positions within the company (Ehrenreich, 2010). Besides the research projects mentioned, other studies have been conducted in various contexts with the purpose of further exploring the nature and role of English in international business contexts. Planken (2005) investigated rapport in sales negotiations; Poncini (2004) explored discursive strategies in multicultural interactions; RogersonRevell (2007a) studied international business events in Europe focusing on the role of humor; Nickerson and Camiciottoli (2013) explored BELF in the world of print advertisements; Pullin (2010) focused on the role of small talk in building rapport in BELF interactions; Petterson (2015) tackled (in)formality in BELF emails; Kassis Henderson and LouhialaSalminen (2011) explored the interplay between trust and language in business settings; and Forsbom (2014) further contributed to exploring the features of MNC corporate language, etc. It is conspicuous, however, that the research on BELF has largely taken place in Scandinavian countries and in Central Europe, with the exception of research executed in Italy (Poncini, 2004). It is still rather neglected and limited in other parts of the world, i.e. in the Global South

22  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

(Pennycook & Makoni, 2020; Rudwick & Makoni, 2021). However, East Asia has recently become another location for research on (B)ELF. The studies conducted are still limited in number, but range from investigating communication at video-conferences (Du-Babcock & Varner, 2008), analyzing the narratives of BELF users (Takino, 2015, 2019), investigating small talk (Otsu, 2015), turn-taking in airline alliance business meetings (Du-Babcock & Tanaka, 2010), to perspectives on the use of English (Evans, 2013). Besides these two regions, BELF has recently been investigated in the Middle East (in Saudi Arabia), focusing on communicative strategies in a Saudi workplace (Alharbi, 2016). In the process of a contrastive analysis of BELF and ELF research, a striking difference cannot be overlooked. While the number of ELF researchers is growing rapidly, the same cannot be said of BELF. As illustrated above, studies on the latter are still largely executed by its pioneers, the research is mostly restricted to a few regions and the circle of researchers joining the BELF bandwagon has been expanding quite slowly. Ehrenreich (2016) provides a twofold rationalization of the phenomenon. Firstly, the very setting of the exploration – the business company – is characterized by confidentiality. Therefore, accessing it for the purposes of exploration can present quite an obstacle. Secondly, in the field of international business and management, where BELF interactions occur, language has not been recognized as an important factor in globalization and even studies that actually explored the role of language paid no attention to its conceptualization. However, although the research range in the field is expanding slowly, it is important to note here that it has been carried out by two research groups operating from different perspectives, i.e. one exploring business English from a linguistic point of view, and the other perceiving it from an international business point of view. The former have been discussing the concept of English for a long time, while the latter mostly do not place the conceptualization of the business language in focus, but are more concerned with some practical considerations (Komori-Glatz, 2018). Reconciling these two perspectives, however, is possible and efforts have been invested to bridge the gap, which will be elaborated on in the following sections for pragmatic considerations. Having provided some introductory thoughts, a research overview and some critical considerations, the following section provides an overview of the very nature and features of BELF, as implied by the pool of research literature and studies that have been executed on the topic. Defining Features of BELF

BELF is defined as a ‘neutral and shared communication code’ (­ Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005: 404) used within the international business community with the main purpose of getting the job done (Kankaanranta

BELF 

23

& Louhiala-Salminen, 2010). ‘Neutral’ refers to the fact that no BELF user can claim it as their mother tongue, while ‘shared’ means that it is used to conduct business within the international business community. Although initially there was an ongoing debate on whether NSs are a part of this (B)ELF community (e.g. Rogerson-Revell, 2007b, 2008), most researchers came to include NSs in the ELF community (e.g. Jenkins, 2007), and this is reflected in BELF studies too (e.g. Ehrenreich, 2010; Forsbom, 2014; Kankaanranta, 2008; Kankaanranta et al., 2010; Nielsen, 2019; Planken, 2005). BELF has been shown to be inherently characterized and defined by a set of principal characteristics including: the notion of a ‘shared code’, neutrality, specific ‘success’ factors and skills, pragmatism, the importance of rapport-building, (im)balance of power relations, accommodation practices, the notion of being ‘linguistic and cultural masala’ and a unique role within global communicative competence (GCC). All of these are discussed thoroughly in the following sections. ‘Shared communication code’

As Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) point out, the status of English has experienced a major change in business settings, because it can no longer be perceived as other foreign languages. English, as stated previously, being studied for the purpose of interacting with both NSs and, even more frequently, with NNSs, has become a ‘shared’ resource (Louhiala-Salminen et  al., 2005) among internationally operating business professionals. This implies that it is neither ‘owned’ by anyone nor culturally tied to one specific community. As Kankaaranta and LouhialaSalminen (2010) note, the global business community using BELF first and foremost shares ‘B’, the context of business, despite the fact that their individual professions can be completely different. However, they also share ‘E’, i.e. the English language. Since the language is shared by the BELF community composed of business people from all kinds of backgrounds and highly varying degrees of language competency, an inevitable question that follows concerns the nature and the minimum extent of English knowledge that this community should share. Jenkins (2000: 123) answers this question by suggesting a ‘common core’ of the English language that could be used as a conceptual outline in English language training. However, as Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaaranta (2011) suggest, this ‘core’ should not be focused on achieving pristine linguistic competence, but rather on essential sociolinguistic and strategic skills needed to use language effectively in various business contexts. Although the use of language strategies and skills in business contexts is still being investigated in more detail, it is conspicuous that most studies (e.g. Cogo, 2016; Hujala, 2009; Kaur, 2009; Pitzl, 2005; Poncini, 2004) found no major communication breakdowns or misunderstandings

24  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

in BELF encounters that could not be repaired quickly. Charles (2007) notes that this ability of BELF interactants to understand each other can certainly be attributed to their shared business background, in spite of its great variety, and shared purpose, which both aid in interpreting discourses. Therefore, besides sharing a language, the BELF business community shares the same context of the language use and the purpose/ values behind it. In this sense, we can talk about distinctive business communities of practice (CoPs). CoP was defined earlier in Chapter 1: ‘Community/Group’, but when applied to the business context, it is characterized by three prominent features: mutual engagement, joint business enterprise and shared repertoire. BELF users compose a separate CoP by developing their own distinctive way of talking (Graddol, 2006). The idea of a CoP serves well in explaining the difference in perception of English in BELF between business communicators and communication scholars and linguists. Ehrenreich (2010) notes: In international business communities, accomplishing and communicating about a business task forms part of the members’ ‘joint enterprise,’ whereas English (as well as other languages) is no more than a resource in the interactants’ ‘shared repertoires,’—albeit a highly functional one. Countless instances of international business representatives referring to English as a ‘tool’ support this conceptualization. By contrast, in the academic communities of business communication or (B)ELF scholars, English, or language in general, is a key element of the ‘joint (research) enterprise’ and is, legitimately, assigned paramount significance (see Livesey, 2002, p. 7). Bringing the two perspectives together—the practitioner’s lived communicative realities and the scholar’s analyses thereof—in a productive way is probably one of the most challenging tasks of the field(s). (Ehrenreich, 2010: 427–428)

Taking a look at the studies on BELF from these two opposing perspectives, it becomes obvious that English certainly is ‘a shared code’ among business professionals. However, its definition, role and place in business interactions, as suggested above, is seen from two strikingly different positions: one is the external, linguistic perspective, while the other is internal and practical (i.e. international business perspective). Naturally, attempts have been made to reconcile these approaches and find a unifying force that would benefit the research and its practical implications in the field. Thus, Komori-Glatz (2018: 8) expands on the definition of BELF and proposes a working definition as ‘the use of English as the medium of communication among speakers of different first languages in an emergent, variable and hybrid manner that is appropriate to the demands and (multilingual) resources of the specific business context’, with the previously mentioned concept of CoPs and its threefold dimensions perceived

BELF 

25

as a link that encapsulates both perspectives and their focal points and thus offers a reconciled view and common ground for future research and understanding. The definition also evidently incorporates more novel approaches to (B)ELF, which place multilingualism at the front of these interactions (Canagarajah, 2018; Jenkins, 2015). Nevertheless, regardless of the differences in conceptualizations which are yet to be fully reconciled, the studies from both factions have come to overlapping conclusions regarding essential BELF features, neutrality being one of them. Neutral communication code

Louhiala-Salminen et  al. (2005) attribute neutrality to the concept of BELF. This means that BELF speakers are neither NSs nor NNSs of the language. All the parties in a BELF encounter are regarded as equal participants who do not perceive English as their mother tongue. According to Louhiala-Salminen et al. (2005), the interlocutors are not English speakers or learners, but simply language users with the aim of getting the job done. Takino (2019) also discusses the transformation of learners of the English language in the classroom context into BELF users in the workplace, emphasizing the importance of learning from experience, i.e. using the language though a trial-and-error method, as opposed to learning from studying. However, other studies challenge this notion. As an illustration, the interviewed managers in a German MNC stated that besides being BELF users, they considered themselves to be lifelong learners (Ehrenreich, 2010). Ehrenreich suggests that this problematic user/ learner dichotomy can be overcome by adopting the already mentioned CoP approach. Nevertheless, regardless of the divergent views on naming the phenomenon, various studies confirm the stance: English is taken for granted as a highly functional ‘global’ tool to do business and is not perceived as an exclusive right of the people living in the US or the UK (e.g. Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2010; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). In a business setting, being on an equal footing with other business professionals is obviously highly significant; and this inclination is strengthened by no one using their own mother tongue, but rather the language that is ‘owned’ by ‘no one and everyone’, as Charles (2007: 263) states. Kankaanranta and LouhialaSalminen (2013) report on the large-scale case of a Swedish–Finnish merger, where the interviewed employees stated that they felt on equal ground with colleagues from other countries when using English, but the Finnish employees felt that their professional expertise typically declined when they used their (frequently limited) Swedish for business interaction with their native Swedish-speaking colleagues. However, exemptions from this overall feeling of equality when using English confirmed

26  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

in various studies (e.g. Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013) were business situations which included English NSs, a peculiar sociolinguistic phenomenon that will be explored more thoroughly in a later section of the chapter. The fact that BELF is considered neutral also implies not only an imperative to acknowledge and value different types of English, especially different accents and pronunciations, but also an imperative to appreciate different discourse practices (Kankaanranta, 2008). In addition, it also follows that in BELF interactions, the emphasis is not on nativeness, but on communication strategies (Hulmbauer et  al., 2008; Seidlhofer, 2004). However, it should be noted here that neutralism does not translate into a total absence of any cultural, mother tongue or personal influences brought by interlocutors into a communicative act. Quite the opposite; Louhiala-Salminen et  al. (2005) herself acknowledges that BELF users blend their own cultural perceptions and discourse practices into interactions and, as explained later in the text, power play is often felt in these interactions. Rather, neutrality in the BELF sense simply reflects the notion that all participants engage in communicating in a language that is seen as belonging to nobody and everybody, and therefore, each user is fully entitled to construct and utilize it in a manner that suits them best (Charles, 2007). It seems that the overall general agreement among participants of various studies on BELF implies that a business interaction is, in light of this perspective, neutral and equal when English is employed. However, the question that needs to be addressed refers to the kind of English used, taking into consideration the fact that BELF encounters most frequently comprise NNSs (Kankaanranta, 2008), coming from a myriad of backgrounds with their own respective first language conceptual patterns. The following sections explain the kinds of linguistic skills that characterize BELF in practical terms. BELF skills and success factors

When examining the factors that contribute to successful international business communication, they seem to vary somewhat depending on whether the pragmatic managerial or sociolinguistic approach is adopted. The practical implications of the two perspectives were neatly proposed by Kankaanranta et al. (2018) who came to the conclusion that the two representations of parallel English usage in MNCs naturally also entail two different approaches to what is considered a productive communicative act in an international setting. Thus, in conceptualizing ‘English as a corporate language’, they adopt the Goffmanian perspective and underscore the necessity of taking into account the two stages of multilingual corporate settings: frontstage and backstage. In the

BELF 

27

former setting, English is perceived as the official language representing the company, as native language representation with standard, uniform competence across the board. A top-down approach is employed with the language usage and norms being prescribed by native standards and top management. In this domain, English is also perceived as critical in advancing the image and prestige of the company, i.e. it is such an important resource that is ‘always potentially in the mix’ (Jenkins, 2015) in a multilingual environment. On the other hand, English as the working language employed in internal communication within a company requires a whole new outlook: English is now seen as representing not a corporate, but an individual voice, corresponding to the BELF conceptualization and being situation specific. A bottom-up approach followed, implying interconnectedness with professional expertise and multilingual practice. The research projects that have been conducted so far, investigating in more depth the nature of BELF communication or the working corporate language and exploring strategies and practices leading to success or breakdown in communication, mostly overlap in their major findings. Thus, some of the characteristics have been confirmed in so many instances that they are now recognized as an unyielding part of the BELF conceptualization. First of all, grammatical accuracy in BELF encounters is not perceived as important as the genre knowledge of one’s own field of expertise (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011), which implies a common understanding of, for instance, a suitable choice of audience, media and timing as well as the focal point and prevailing style(s) of a delivered (spoken or written) linguistic message (Kankaaranta & LouhialaSalminen, 2013). Rather, ‘adequately’ good grammar would suffice, a kind that enables communication flow without investing too much effort into it (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). On the other hand, business-related vocabulary and the shared genre knowledge implied by such vocabulary are being recognized as fundamental in performing the work (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011; Kankaanranta et al., 2018). In other words, if business professionals are well equipped with knowledge of the topic of the business, it is likely that communication will succeed, regardless of the participants’ grammar competence. Participants in some studies (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011) clearly demonstrated this reality, since the majority rated their present grammar competence lower than their knowledge of business-specific vocabulary. Kankaanranta (2007: 56) notes that ‘a grammatically and lexically “correct” message doesn’t necessarily do the job, but a message with many “mistakes” may do so’. This especially applies to oral communication, whereas the importance of observing the rules of standard English might be seen as significant only in the frontstage performance of English as a corporate language, e.g. in official written texts, such as

28  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

contracts, annual reports or websites or official meetings (Ehrenreich, 2010; Kankaanranta et al., 2018). It seems that the correct usage of English in these situations is predominantly not only a matter of image and prestige (Cogo, 2012; Ehrenreich, 2010; Seidlhofer et al., 2006), but also a sign of international recognition and quality (e.g. Lønsmann, 2015). Therefore, the general conclusion seems to be that the accuracy of content and not the accuracy of form is what really matters in a BELF interaction. Business-related vocabulary has been perceived as more vital and significant than not only grammatical knowledge but also general vocabulary (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). Even though the importance of a wide general vocabulary was rated high in the study conducted by Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011), it was still ranked lower than specific vocabulary knowledge. Thus, it follows that out of the three parameters (grammatical accuracy, field-specific vocabulary and wide general vocabulary), the primary importance is given to business-related vocabulary, with wide general vocabulary following and grammar accuracy the least prioritized. Regarding linguistic accuracy discussed above, the research has shown that a ‘let it pass’ strategy (Firth, 1996: 243) is frequently employed by business professionals. This means that any linguistic anomaly in interaction is ignored, not seen as essential, since the emphasis is on constructing meaningful and accurate content (Pitzl, 2005; Poncini, 2002; Rogerson-Revell, 2008). On occasions, other parties can even join in with the unusual linguistic usage in order to create a feeling of solidarity and to create rapport (Firth, 1996). Thus, a BELF talk generally prioritizes the message itself, and not the form through which it is being conveyed. However, it is worth noting that although it is prevalent, there might be some exceptions to this practice as Tsuchiya and Handford’s (2014) study illustrated. They concluded that in certain contexts the not ‘letting it pass’ strategy is being used through linguistic devices such as repair or reformulation. The authors suggest that the explanation for this strikingly different finding might be found in the field of business that studied the gender of the participants and the location. They argue that the not ‘letting it pass’ strategies might have something to do with the fact that the interactions examined were taking place in a construction setting, where safety is crucial and any misunderstanding might be lethal. In addition, males are mostly represented in this business field, and thus, in terms of genderlect, particularly masculine communication is expected. Finally, the research was performed in an Asian setting, which might contribute to the differences in results as opposed to other studies usually taking place in European contexts. The findings of the study are certainly interesting, and additional research in this direction could bring more solid evidence to the reasons behind such conflicting findings in this setting.

BELF 

29

Another feature whose importance is emphasized in a BELF context is the role of clarity and directness (Cogo, 2016; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011; Pullin, 2013; Tsuchiya & Handford, 2014). Directness had different meanings for the participants in the aforementioned studies. For some, it meant clarity, while for others it implied a lack of politeness. However, regardless of the nuances the word was understood to have for different people, it was unanimously agreed that the information and facts must be presented explicitly, clearly and directly (Kankaanranta, 2008). This becomes of critical importance in BELF contexts where participants have different sociocultural backgrounds, their speech is influenced by their native languages, the level of their competence in English may vary greatly and encounters are usually under time constraints. All these different factors underscore the necessity of ensuring that the discourse is clear and explicit, so that ‘the message gets across’. BELF communication is also described as ‘void of complicated structures’ (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012: 266), i.e. it usually does not contain idiomatic expressions, complex sentence structures or complicated phrases. Thus, BELF is often called ‘simplified’ English (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012: 266). Considering the fact that there are considerable differences in business professionals’ proficiency levels, it is only natural that the discourse is kept undemanding, straightforward and focused on clear messages and simple structures. This seems to be practiced well by non-native English speakers who easily accommodate different contexts and linguistic situations (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Pitzl, 2005). However, the issues with accommodation strategies mostly seem to occur with native English speakers (see more in the section titled ‘Accommodation Practices’). In addition, a number of studies on business communication in English testify to the importance of backchanneling (e.g. Bjorge, 2010; Cogo, 2016; Du-Babcock, 2013; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011), which is seen as a turn-continuer (Meierkord, 2000), a strategic competence where the listening party offers confirmation, comprehension signals and support using different verbal or non-verbal utterances or asks for a clarification in the case of misunderstanding or non-understanding (White, 1989). Asking for clarifications and repetitions has proved to be one of the critical communicative competences in BELF interactions and both a listener and a speaker are equally responsible for keeping the communication channel open and working together toward the mutual understanding of an issue (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). Thus, clarifications and repetitions, the ability to paraphrase, to check for understanding are frequent key strategies in avoiding costly communication breakdowns (Ehrenreich, 2010). The importance of employing this pre-emptive strategy especially at the start of a business relationship is highlighted, when the parties are still unacquainted with each other’s

30  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

speech and business styles, accents or practices. As Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) note, the strategy can be embodied in a single communicative act (asking questions on the spot during a meeting) or in a chain of communicative acts (checking on comprehension and confirming issues by subsequent written correspondence or phone calls). Some studies focused specifically on probing the non-linguistic traits of BELF interactions. For instance, Birlik and Kaur (2020) underscored the salience of non-verbal communication strategies in BELF face-to-face interactions, including head nods, serving as continuers and enabling interlocutors to confirm shared understanding; hand-pointing gestures, further emphasizing and clarifying the accompanying verbal message; and eye contact and gaze, a powerful widely applicable non-verbal resource that regulates, monitors and directs communication and feedback. Similarly, Räisänen (2020) examined the use of multimodal resources in BELF contexts and the ways they contribute to constructing shared meanings. The study showcased that in the selection of multimodal resources, gestures, objects and gaze have to work together with the spoken language to create understanding. The study especially highlighted the necessity of putting into use multimodal resources besides language when checking for information and providing more information. Thus, the interconnectedness and interplay of various available communicative strategies in construing meaning were confirmed in this research as well. Besides the explored linguistic skills (vocabulary knowledge), discourse skills (simple nature of English structures), strategic skills (backchanneling strategies, clarity and directness) and various non-verbal communication strategies (e.g. head nods, hand-pointing gestures, eye contact, gaze and different multimodal resources), another important aspect of communicative competences in BELF encounters should not be underestimated: sociocultural competence. In the BELF context, it implies several skills. As an instance, the ability to understand different accents has been recognized as important. Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) report that in their study, half of the respondents made no comments about it, but the other half said they needed practice in understanding the Chinese or Indian accent, while they had no problems with other Western European accents. They note that this may be explained by the length of a business relationship between these countries, meaning that more time, listening and practice are needed to get used to different accents. Therefore, listening and being attentive is another skill that seems to be of utmost importance in the BELF contexts, especially until parties are acquainted with each other’s idiosyncrasies. An overall conclusion drawn might be that in order to achieve shared mutual understanding in international business situations and to be successful in ‘closing the deal’, one has to employ a variety of different communicative strategies, assessing when and how to use them to produce the best possible results in a specific communicative event. This

BELF 

31

inevitably leads to recognizing one of the central cornerstones of successful BELF communication: pragmatism. Pragmatism

It is an established finding (Louhiala-Salminen & Kaankanranta, 2011) that a lingua franca is created in each specific communication context. As BELF is highly context bound and situation specific, it comes as no surprise that its pragmatic and flexible nature is one of its conspicuous aspects. Even though it is characterized by some core features (discussed above) and some solid unifying foundations, variation, hybridity and modification are at its heart, meaning that communicators in a specific situation comprehend each other and advance with the communication process utilizing their own ‘situated’ variants (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). Since BELF is a hybrid bringing together both English and experiences and the linguistic influences of interactants’ mother tongues (e.g. Jung & Louhiala-Salminen, 2012; Kankaanranta, 2006), it is only natural that communicators adapt to each other’s speech and negotiate the meaning together in situ. As an illustration, the proportion of topic versus r­apport-building talk, directness versus indirectness (or explicit vs. implicit talk) and politeness-related issues are examples shown to be negotiated and readily agreed upon among interviewed professionals from different backgrounds and thus require a flexible attitude (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). Since BELF is inherently multicultural and multilingual, flexibility is imperative. Therefore, if one wonders what the required language competence level should be in BELF contexts to make it work, Ehrenreich (2010: 417) answers with the broad term of a ‘pragmatic attitude’, claiming that NS proficiency in English (ENL) is neither expected (see Charles, 2007) nor necessarily beneficial. The concept is dismissed as ‘unrealistic’ and also described as ‘unnecessary’ from a cost–benefit perspective (Ehrenreich, 2010). Choi (2014) also notes that the focus should be on flexibility regarding sociocultural norms and effective communication strategies. Choi (2014) points out that perceiving linguistic ability on a continuum from basic, but functional, to expert users might be a suitable attitude for BELF – a concept finely reflecting its flexible, dynamic nature. Kankaanranta (2007) notes that this BELF feature should be taken into consideration while training future business professionals as well. This is why the aim at Aalto School of Business is to tutor students to be flexibly competent and to be aware of the fact that no stiff norms should/can exist in lingua franca communication (Kankaanranta, 2007). Pragmatism has also proved beneficial in situations where the majority of communicators shared the same mother tongue, i.e. in-house communication in some international companies, where English was either

32  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

the official corporate language or just a practical choice, chosen as a working language due to its expansive lingua franca status (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013). In these kinds of international workplaces, a number of linguistic issues can arise and interactants frequently have to decide what language to use, with whom and whether and how to adapt it. Therefore, the choice between English and the mother tongue is often purely pragmatic: it depends on the target audience and personal preferences. In the study conducted by Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2012), all of the participants seemed happy with using English as one corporate language in the MNC, seeing it as a pragmatic choice, since everybody knew it sufficiently to be able to use it for their work on a daily basis. The choice of their using English in the multilingual setting was reported to have other benefits as well: English, or rather BELF seemed to be a language mastered, to a sufficient extent, by the communicators and this enabled knowledge sharing throughout the organization. As most of the internal communicators were non-native-speakers of English, nobody gained the upper hand, and equality and trust prevailed in the sense that each speaker had an equal right to the language used. Although there were no explicit guidelines about language usage here either, it did not seem to arouse any problems since the language conventions and communication practices had emerged from practice and were negotiated in situ. (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012: 267)

From this pragmatic approach to language, focusing on the economic, relevant and efficient use of language (Seidlhofer, 2001) in order to complete the work efficiently, it follows that English is just an instrument, a tool among many others used in the most suitable way to achieve a business goal (Canagarajah, 2018; Jenkins, 2015). As discussed earlier, what really matters is not the accuracy of form, but the accuracy of content and ‘function’, i.e. communicative efficiency. Finally, using divergent pragmatic strategies has highly beneficial long-term results, since opting for strategies like simplification, codeswitching and/or repetition, which can traditionally be deemed as ‘errors’ in language learning settings, in BELF contexts communicators make a communication effort to improve accommodation and cooperation, which eventually lead to ‘productivity’ and ‘respectability’ between BELF users (Choi, 2014: 17). As pointed out earlier, one of the functions of being pragmatic while using ELF is a relational one. Namely, highlighting the importance of building rapport with other colleagues permeates the studies on BELF. Therefore, as it is a critical aspect of international business professionals’ interactions, it is thoroughly explicated below.

BELF 

33

Building rapport

Changes in workplaces in the last decades have led to increasing awareness about the importance of informal communication and building trust among work colleagues (Charles, 2007; Holden, 2002). However, as Pullin (2010) notes, a number of studies (e.g. Crossling & Ward, 2002; Guirdham, 1999; Palermo, 2002) exploring the workplace needs and skills expected of future employees report that, in reality, educational training mostly underscores and prepares trainees for professional formal communication such as official presentations, while they are deprived of the skills of how to employ informal talk to build and develop professional relationships. Even linguists themselves frequently tend to investigate goal-oriented aspects of language, while its interactional functions are neglected – a peculiar and unjustified practice considering the fact that goal-oriented talk is intricately and closely interconnected with relational talk, since reaching the goal usually greatly depends on building a good relationship (e.g. Holmes, 2000; Pullin, 2010; Spencer-Oatey, 2000a). When we talk about building relationships in business contexts, operative terms and concepts encountered in research are ‘relational practice’ (Pullin, 2010: 459), ‘relational work’ (Pullin, 2015: 36), ‘relational management’ (Planken, 2005: 383) and ‘rapport management’ (Spencer-Oatey, 2000a: 429). Pullin (2010) cites Spencer-Oatey (2000b: 459) who defines rapport as ‘the relative harmony and smoothness of relations between people’, and its management being related with the (un)successful managing of human relations, while relational practice mostly concerns team work. She further cites Campbell and Davis (2006: 43), outlining two significant aspects of rapport, namely enjoyable interactions and personal connections. Pullin (2015: 36) herself defines rapport as ‘any behaviour that has an impact on interpersonal relations, whether positive, negative, or neutral’. Planken (2005) cites Spencer-Oatey (2000a, 2000b), who defined relational management through five interconnected domains. The illocutionary domain, in which the politeness theory is placed, is concerned with accommodating or damaging facework, i.e. with expressions of facethreatening acts (FTA). Next is the discourse content domain, related to the arrangement and sequencing of interactional content, topic content, switch, transition and the inclusion or exclusion of topics (Planken, 2005). There is also the participation domain concerned with procedures in the interaction, i.e. turn-taking, the (non)use of back-channeling, etc. The stylistic domain concerns the choice of register, the choice of tone and the level of deference (Planken, 2005). Finally, the non-verbal domain involves gestures, proxemics, etc. In order to develop and maintain a good-quality relationship and a warm, harmonious atmosphere, all of these aspects should be properly observed (Spencer-Oatey, 2000b, as cited in Planken, 2005).

34  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

The notion of facework, mentioned above as part of the illocutionary domain, is one of the salient concepts in business interactions. Face-giving and face-saving behavior, i.e. the recognition of the other’s self-positive image and the speaker’s own need to feel respected, are highly important in business situations, which by their nature are potentially conflictive (Goffman, 1972, as cited in Planken, 2005). Therefore, in such situations, facework will be directed at nurturing the participants’ bond, on the one hand, and at preventing or halting conflicts which result from disagreements concerning particular negotiation goals, on the other hand (Planken, 2005). The concept of taking care of other parties’, as well as one’s own, face in business situations, shows the delicate nature of those interactions whose importance has been recognized in BELF research as well (e.g. Frederiksen, 2014; Planken, 2005). In the study of rapport management, a concept which cannot be neglected is the politeness theory, which Leech (1983: 82) defines as ‘a means to maintain the social equilibrium and friendly relations which enable us to assume that our interlocutors are being cooperative in the first place’. Planken (2005: 383) notes that it is ‘the way language is used to minimize the risk of confrontation, to maintain smooth relationships, and ultimately, to prevent communication breakdown’. Therefore, it is recognized as one of the prerequisites in business talks. LouhialaSalminen and Kaankanranta’s (2011: 256) findings confirm this. They suggest that having a positive attitude, being friendly and constructive, building personal contacts and focusing on communication partners’ needs were underscored by the participants in their research, thus testifying to the importance of politeness, ‘the lubricant of social relations’. Nielsen’s (2019) research also underscored the importance of politeness in overcoming linguacultural differences and promoting positive social relationships. Similarly, the importance of small talk or chit-chat must not be underestimated in business interactions. Even though it is traditionally regarded as peripheral and non-informative, in reality it is ‘an intrinsic part of the talk at work complex’ (Coupland, 2000: 13, cited in Pullin, 2010: 458). The importance of informal conversations in the workplace was confirmed by the studies conducted by Cogo and Dewey (2006), Crossling and Ward (2002) and Palermo (2002). It is considered pivotal both in and out of the workplace contexts in communication with business partners and colleagues, because it fosters solidarity, repairs relationships in times of friction and allows the acceptance of different views and the mitigation of power (Pullin, 2010). Interactional talk in business settings is said to have ambivalent purposes. One is a discourse strategy to manage social interactions, for instance, to ease the shift into and out of business topics, such as at the end of meetings or filling in between different activities (Pullin, 2010), while the other has a social role of establishing, showing, maintaining and

BELF 

35

reinforcing interpersonal relations (Pullin, 2010). Planken (2005) names some of the topics that are considered interactional or safe topics used in business contexts to foster good relationships, such as the weather, family, personal interests and, particularly interesting, interculturalism. It seems that by acknowledging cultural differences, participants try to form a temporary in-group of (fellow) non-natives, who all share the same thing: they differ culturally (Planken, 2005). She noted that the majority of professional negotiations included some sequences about the intercultural context of the negotiation. Their principal goal was to build rapport. Thus, the negotiators emphasized solidarity by highlighting how much alike they were in their non-nativeness, or promoted and supported the other party’s positive social face by relating positive experiences with the other’s culture. Sometimes they detached themselves from certain aspects of their own cultural identities by lighthearted criticism of some concepts from their respective cultures. Thus, Planken (2005: 397) noted that ‘they were taking on the temporary role of “outlaws” whose common ground is created by the fact that they “occupy a no-man’s-land” (…) and whose successful creation is the focus of mutual appreciation and laughter’. Another way that was reported to be often used by professionals in building rapport is the inclusion of expressions from the other party’s mother tongue. English seems to be highly welcome as a tool for business professionals to complete a job. However, this seems to be the case with formal business talk. When it comes to non-business purposes, using expressions from the other party’s mother tongue, such as in greetings or email complimentary closings or in prior and post-meeting chit-chat, is very appreciated and shown to be a useful asset in building a harmonious business relationship and a sense of togetherness (e.g. Goodall & Roberts, 2003; Kassis Henderson, 2005; Louhiala-Salminen, 2002; Poncini, 2004). The listed studies show that individuals who are not monolingual and show effort to learn the other team’s (at least some basic) language or expressions are perceived to be more open to cooperation. This extra knowledge helps in establishing trust when used in small talk. LouhialaSalminen and Kankaanranta (2012) point out that their findings suggest that although the actual use of other languages besides the mother tongue or English in the day-to-day communications within the workplace was not expansive, the value of knowing a third language was underscored since it opened windows to new cultures and other (different) ways of perceiving things, and built rapport with the communication partner. Sometimes knowing just a few words in another language can help in creating rapport (e.g. Ehrenreich, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011; Pullin, 2010, 2013; Virkkula-Räisänen, 2010), while a more solid knowledge of a third language is a great asset as it allows a person ‘to read between the lines’ (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011: 253). In addition, a third language can sometimes be used for practical

36  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

reasons, as in parallel talking, when both parties speak two languages, but they are more competent in one of those languages, so both parties speak different languages (e.g. one party speaks English and the other speaks German), which seems to work fine when they share knowledge of the topic (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). Similarly, Cogo (2016) notes that various studies confirm reliance on local languages to stress belonging and that many individuals insert some expressions from their own language, which is part of their professional identity. She further claims that this habit does not mean that identity and culture are constructs that can only be connected with the use of local languages (rather than English, for instance), but that practices of language mixing are utilized efficiently for career work and the establishment of a professional identity. Therefore, it is not a matter of English coming into conflict with other languages, but of English and multilingualism as one unit, i.e. BELF (Cogo, 2016). Thus, multilingualism is a highly desirable phenomenon in international business contexts, since it can frequently be an advantage and act as a facilitator in building longterm solid business relationships or a healthy corporate culture. However, although small talk and informal discussions are of paramount importance in building rapport, some studies have explored other aspects of building rapport which are often neglected in research. For instance, Virkkula-Räisänen (2010) investigated semiotic aspects (gaze, gesture, body orientation) in business interactions and found that successful business communication is typically accompanied and supported by appropriate non-linguistic modalities. The issue of (saving, endangering) facework is often accompanied by non-linguistic cues such as pointing, gestures or body language. Next to body language and gestures, other non-linguistic aspects proved important in rapport building, such as humor and laughter (Holmes, 2000, 2006; Kangasharju & Nikko, 2009; Rogerson-Revell, 2007a; Vuorela, 2005). Vuorela (2005) found that comic relief in multicultural and multilingual business negotiations has multifold functions: humor is often initiated after a problematic part of negotiation, possibly in order to humor the other party; difficult issues are also sometimes handled with the help of humor; it can also be used strategically to mitigate a possible offense; it is a factor closely related to power, which decides on who can initiate or end instances of joking and whose joking is laughed at; finally, it has a role in the achievement of business-oriented goals. Kangasharju and Nikko (2009) explored laughing in meetings and found that laughter can be strategically used to form collegiality and a warm working atmosphere; it is linked to closing a topic or a stage in a meeting in a way that projects mutual understanding; it can also act as relief, decreasing tension in demanding and challenging situations during the treatment of delicate topics or difficult tasks; finally, joint laughter can act as a remedy in problematic and conflicting situations.

BELF 

37

Finally, the studies have shown that although future business professionals are not taught how to create successful rapport and how to manage relational talk, it is possible to learn them over the course of time through business itself (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). The respondents in Kankaanranta and Planken’s study (2010: 395) showed that they even had their own name for the kind of business talk blended with relational talk: ‘the international style’. The previous section already made brief mention of the notion of power in business contexts. This is one of the recurring terms throughout studies exploring interpersonal business relations in (international) business contexts. Therefore, it is a topic in need of more thorough elaboration, which is provided in the following section. Power in BELF interactions

The concept of power is inevitably closely linked to business interactions, and it is a factor that decides on subtle practices and procedures during business communication (Bargiela-Chiappini & Harris, 1997; Holmes & Stubbe, 2003; Pullin, 2013; Yli-Jokipii, 1994). The factor of power is thus highly interconnected with language use in professional settings. When communicating parties do not share the same language, the issue of language and its role in the power game is made even more conspicuous. In the case of international corporations, the choice of the corporate language has been shown to directly empower or disempower certain groups, i.e. individuals proficient in the corporate language automatically gain the upper hand in their workplace because of the expansive access to information, the ability to share it, the ability to express their professional expertise effortlessly and the capacity to form social networks in the company (Vaara et al., 2005). Sometimes, individuals in the minority group, who know the corporate language, wield significant power in their organization because all information, orders and instructions are filtered through them, and the others become dependent on them (Charles & Marschan-Piekkari, 2002). In addition, it seems that individuals with better language skills and knowledge of more languages are both physically and psychologically more mobile career-wise in comparison to their colleagues with more limited knowledge of other languages, which directly influences the power balance in the workplace (Itani et al., 2014; Latukha, 2016). Thus, necessary language skills frequently enable groups or individuals who possess them to occupy a central role in meetings, to dominate and direct discussions, to become stars and the center of attention, to exercise power and control and occupy the gate-keeping position (Virkkula-Räisänen, 2010). Therefore, it seems that English is directly related to power and prestige in comparison to other languages in corporate culture (Lønsmann, 2015).

38  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Simultaneously, individuals less proficient in the same corporate language are stripped of their status and rank (Vaara et al., 2005). As an illustration, a merged Finnish–Swedish company was studied by Charles (2007) as part of a larger Finnish Academy project. Swedish became the official language after merging, which was the native language of some of the employees. A significant number of Finnish-speaking employees felt their Swedish was inadequate and insufficient. Thus, the Finns felt their power was abruptly taken away and due to their linguistic (in) competence they could not properly exercise or influence the power and control that was given to them by their professional status. Only when the official corporate language changed to English did they feel on equal footing with their Swedish colleagues, since they all came together on neutral ground. Therefore, the very introduction of a common language in an MNC is perceived as a control mechanism and a power source used to support the corporate strategy (Logeman & Piekkari, 2015), where an explicit or implicit language policy contains broad guidelines and practical measures for the purpose of harmonizing, governing and controlling the internal and external language used (Logeman & Piekkari, 2015). An interesting aspect of language-based power relations in international business settings relates to the NS/NNS dichotomy. Some studies found that, in general, communication with NNSs was perceived more equal and stress-free (e.g. Ehrenreich, 2010; Kankaanranta & LouhialaSalminen, 2010; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012). This means that NNSs of English sometimes might feel intimidated by native English speakers’ use of language that is often used in such an adept way that NNSs feel manipulated by ambiguous and complex structures, producing a feeling of mistrust (LouhialaSalminen & Kankaanranta, 2012). NSs are often seen as powerful players in the business context (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010) and NNSs can typically experience manifold challenges in interacting with them, such as a limited range of phraseology, stylistic features and idiomatic expressions, a fast tempo of speech and incomprehensibility of some regional native accents (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). On some occasions, NSs explicitly stress the linguistic competence difference by asking, for example, at the start of a meeting, if they should speak more slowly, thus degrading NNSs (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). On the other hand, communication with other NNSs is seen as equal. Although there are also a variety of accents and different levels of proficiency, English used as a neutral language for all parties provides a feeling of mutual understanding and solidarity due to the awareness of the challenges they all face in a multilingual situation (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). However, an interesting perspective on the changing status of NSs and NNSs in international business settings has been introduced by Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011). They suggest that particularly due to the feeling of solidarity among NNSs who understand each

BELF 

39

other’s linguistic challenges, and because the focus in multilingual contexts is not on grammar and accuracy, but on building rapport and trust and completing the work, the traditional taken-for-granted NSs’ power might be decreased or lost. In this respect, NNSs can equalize their position in the global business flux. The topic of NS/NNS distinction in BELF settings introduces another issue closely related to this dichotomy, i.e. the adaptation and accommodation of language in multilingual settings in order to reach full understanding, which is explored in the following section. Accommodation practices

Many studies on BELF (e.g. Ehrenreich, 2010; Nielsen, 2019; ­ ogerson-Revell, 2008; Sweeney & Hua, 2010) suggest and/or someR times thoroughly discuss the importance of accommodation in international business communication. The original speech accommodation theory (SAT) was introduced in the 1970s by social psychologist Howard Coupland and it aimed to provide reasons for divergent kinds of motivations behind the attempts to modify a speech style either toward a speaker (convergence) or away from a speaker’s speech (divergence) (Rogerson-Revell, 2008). The theory was later adjusted and renamed the communication accommodation theory (CAT) (Giles et al., 1991, cited in Rogerson-Revell, 2010: 434) to take into consideration a broader assortment of linguistic and prosodic characteristics (i.e. speech rate, pauses, pronunciation, utterance length, smiling and gaze). The CAT introduced three major accommodation processes: ‘convergence’, ‘divergence’ and ‘maintenance’. Convergence is defined as a strategy by which interlocutors bend toward each other’s interactional conduct, for example, by adjusting their accent or terminology to the other parties in a communicative act or mirroring non-vocal signs (Rogerson-Revell, 2010). On the other hand, divergence concerns the ways in which speakers underscore dissimilarities in both verbal and non-verbal communication. Finally, maintenance is a kind of divergence, where speakers uphold their own communication behavior to retain their identity or to suggest detachment from other speakers (Rogerson-Revell, 2010). According to CAT, there are three major goals behind accommodation practice: ‘(a) evoking the addressee’s social approval, (b) promoting communicative efficiency between interlocutors, and (c) maintaining a positive social identity’ (Beebe & Giles, 1984, cited in Rogerson-Revell, 2010: 434). The first two aims are mostly related to convergence, while the last aim concerns divergence. Accommodation needs to be undertaken by both (all) sides in a communication channel in order to attain successful communication, i.e. speakers need to adjust their speech to maximize listeners’ understanding and listeners need to be aware and tolerant of different linguistic variations and to alter their expectations along this

40  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

understanding. This seems to be particularly important with parties coming from completely different linguistic and sociocultural backgrounds. Bhatia (1997) and Nelson (1992) also underline the importance of accommodation in order to retain a high degree of comprehension across all varieties. In the course of time, the focus in accommodation theories has been placed on linguistic strategies and communicative efficiency as the primary motivation. A number of studies on BELF have investigated the nature of the accommodation in BELF interactions and explored different discourse strategies and moves executed for accommodative purposes (e.g. ­Rogerson-Revell, 2010; Sweeney & Hua, 2010). The underlying findings behind the research seem to point toward a difference in the approach and accommodative practices between NSs and NNSs. Although BELF is considered not to have NSs, the traditional NS/NNS dichotomy seems important in this context, since the research has suggested considerable accommodative differences within the two groups. A growing body of research (e.g. Charles & Marschan-Piekkari, 2002; Kankaanranta, 2008; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011) has shown that NNSs mostly employ a wider array of strategies in order to grapple with communicational hiccups and to maintain a successful communication flow. On the other hand, the same effort has not been widely reported among English NSs. Referring to American NSs’ accommodative practices, Gilsdorf (2002) notes: Invited to use English abroad, they tend to feel complacent and therefore may be blind to linguistic and cultural interference that may underlie a foreigner’s ostensible facility in English. We ought to be reminded of the pitfalls just by the common misunderstandings between two fluent American English speakers. But we forget; and, internationally, the more fluent the foreign English speaker sounds, the more the American feels free to forget about the potential interlanguage interference. (Gilsdorf, 2002: 368)

The author continues by elaborating on why a mindset change is needed regarding this issue, which is finely summarized in the quoted words of Willy Brandt (a former German councilor): ‘If I’m selling to you, I speak your language. If I’m buying, dann mussen Sie Deutsch sprechen’ (Saskin, 2001, cited in Gilsdorf, 2002: 376). The sentence reflects the reality: global business interactions are often power games, where weaker parties have to adapt in a number of ways, including language adaptation, which very often implies not only knowledge of other languages, but also knowledge of different cultural contexts. Hilton (1992) makes a similar point, claiming that people who want to do business in Japan should not forget that in international business, a shared language does not directly imply shared motivation and goals. The author further asserts that Japanese

BELF 

41

learning English in a world where English NSs stubbornly opt for staying monolingual is a two-edged sword, because Japanese proficiency in English may act as an aid in opening the door of cooperation and mutual success, or it might become an efficient weapon and competition. In line with these observations, native English speakers should be aware of the need to (learn to) adapt and accommodate their English in business interaction with others. However, the research portrays a different reality, in which NSs are frequently described as having little accommodation skills (Ehrenreich, 2010; Rogerson-Revell, 2008). Some research has suggested that BELF speakers face more difficulties with comprehending NSs than comprehending other BELF speakers, naming British English to be one of the most challenging varieties for them (Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009). Rogerson-Revell’s (2010) study also revealed that some of the reasons why NSs’ English is perceived as more difficult are the speed with which it is spoken and its broad array of complex, sophisticated vocabulary items. Sweeney and Hua’s (2010) research also indicated that NSs are less efficient in accommodating interaction than NNSs. They note that the data in their study showed that, to an extent, NSs accommodated NNSs. However, this accommodation seemed partial and not consistent throughout the entire interviewed group. To be more precise, the results showed that only two-thirds of the participants tried to accommodate NNSs (although the sample was rather small2). Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2012) also report that NNSs can feel extremely irritated by NSs’ use of their language competence as an instrument of power. Ehrenreich (2010) reports that, especially in the processes of negotiation or conflict, NNSs tend to feel disadvantaged in comparison to NSs, while interaction is less problematic when there is no competitive threat. This is another point where more accommodation strategies on the part of NSs might be needed. Kankaanranta and Planken (2010) also point out that even though NSs are sometimes reported to simplify their language and reduce their speech speed, they quickly return to their previous way of talking. On the other hand, some studies and pieces of writing have shown an effort on the part of NSs to accommodate their speech (Cogo, 2016; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Rogerson-Revell, 2008; Sweeney & Hua, 2010). A manifestation of this can be seen, for example, in the term ‘offshore English’ (Rogerson-Revell, 2007b: 109), coined by the Cunning Training Company and standing for a kind of English that NSs should use in their communication with NNSs. A similar attempt was made by Ericsson Company, which tried to form its own variety of internationally used English (‘Ericsson English’), with the goal of limiting the vocabulary range to particular structures, preserving accuracy (Rogerson-Revell, 2007b: 109). There is also the concept of ‘foreigner talk’, referring to NSs’ simplification of language in order to make communication with

42  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

NNSs easier and smoother (Haegeman, 2002). Foreigner talk is characterized, for example, by high-frequency vocabulary, lower syntactic complexity, fewer pronouns, clearly articulated pronunciation and a slower speech rate. However, it seems that despite their willingness, NSs often lack knowledge of the application, i.e. specific practical strategies to implement it in communication (Sweeney & Hua, 2010). That is why many researchers highly recommend and accentuate the need of BELF training for NSs regarding communication with others in international contexts (Charles & Marschan-Piekkari, 2002; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012). They suggest that the training could include, for example, techniques to simplify idiomatic expressions, understanding different accents and ways of speaking (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012), focusing on intercultural training and raising awareness of their own communication style (Sweeney & Hua, 2010). In contrast to the case of NSs, most studies have reported on NNSs’ tendency to adapt their speech in BELF interaction in order to prevent conversational hiccups and ensure communication flow (Charles & Marschan-Piekkari, 2002; Kankaanranta, 2008; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011; Nielson, 2019). The underlying reason for this practice seems to be their mutual shared understanding of their specific situation, since ‘they all take the same risk’ (Cogo, 2016: 365). Gilsdorf (2002) notes that most second language (L2) business people have a much lower level of L2 knowledge than knowledge of their own native language, which often prevents them from expressing themselves as eloquently as in their own mother tongue. He graphically paints the situation, adding that, ‘They say, Please excuse my “Bad English” and they soldier on, regularly risking loss of face, making mistakes, and continuing toward their business goal. They are far outside their comfort zone’ (Gilsdorf, 2002: 373). In a nutshell, solidarity is what makes BELF speakers empathize with the other party and try to accommodate to keep communication smooth. They are reported to use a wide array of accommodative strategies to achieve this goal and to make an effort to communicate intelligibly. As an illustration, if a communication partner speaks English fluently, they also fully employ their language capacity, but with less-proficient speakers, they lower their level (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2010). They also avoid using idiomatic expressions, complicated phraseology or complex sentence structures and opt for simple clear English (Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010). Some of the key accommodative strategies used are repetition, code-switching and translanguaging3 (Cogo, 2009, 2012). Some of the other strategies used are pre-realization and post-trouble source strategies that may be utilized to avert and resolve non-understood issues (Cogo & Dewey, 2012). One of the pre-emptive strategies used is commenting on one’s own (poor) language abilities,

BELF 

43

thus indirectly asking for understanding and flexibility from other parties. This practice seems to be common in international business settings, where interlocutors, even when lacking linguistic skills, are actually familiar with international and intercultural settings, which acts as a great aid in their communication channel. In addition to investing their efforts in linguistic accommodation, effective BELF speakers have the ability to exploit their cultural resources in the process of adapting and negotiating meaning. Pullin (2015: 34) names a couple of these: the awareness that politeness may be enacted differently in different cultural settings, or that genres do not always follow the same patterns in all cultures. Similarly, Cogo (2016) relates the case of an Italian business professional who distinguishes himself in a multilingual context by inserting some Italian expressions in conversation. In the business world, this kind of practice is a way of standing out, not as an Italian, but as a business professional. A myriad of other studies have also stressed the reliance on local languages to emphasize belonging, to illustrate strong rapport management and solidarity with other employees (Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005). Cogo (2016) points out that identity and culture are not concepts linked just to the native local language, but language mixing can also be suitably and efficiently used in professional work and in creating a professional identity. Although NNSs frequently emphasize NSs’ unwillingness or lack of awareness of accommodation needs, they themselves admit that quite often the problem lies within their own lack of proficiency, which sometimes causes them to enter a conversation already feeling frustrated because they cannot fully and precisely express themselves (Sweeney & Hua, 2010). However, they still tend to employ a range of strategies that prove productive in maintaining a successful communication channel. For instance, ‘let it pass’ is a frequently used strategy, i.e. ignoring any linguistic anomaly and focusing on the meaning rather than on the form, negotiating the meaning throughout communication (Firth, 1996: 243). Related to this is the ‘lack of other repair’, where the other party does not correct a speaker’s abnormal linguistic usage. In addition, there is accommodation via convergence toward a procedurally and linguistically formal and cautious speech mode involving topic and turn-taking strategies, firm observance of the agenda, focus on information giving and reporting (procedural formality) or recurrence of nominalization, passivization and Latinate lexis (linguistic formality) (Rogerson-Revell, 2010: 446–448). Careful speech is reflected through several points. For example, paying attention to delivery and accent seems to be very important, i.e. having a measured, steady pace while talking and trying to accommodate one’s accent to an international audience. Next, low-context communication is usually used for accommodative purposes, characterized by the avoidance of using jargon, unusual words, metaphors or vague phrasings (Rogerson-Revell, 2010: 450).

44  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

All the accumulated data from various studies (e.g. Charles & Marschan-Piekkari, 2002; Kankaanranta & Planken, 2010; LouhialaSalminen & Kankaanranta, 2012) suggest that both NSs and NNSs could benefit from training in accommodation strategies, since it is a critical component of successful international business communication. Linguistic and cultural masala

Closely related to accommodation strategies are speakers’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Even early research on BELF showed that its usage reflected interactants’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Thus, BELF is evidently not a ‘cultureless’ code, but rather a ‘linguistic masala’, i.e. a variety with a dynamic set of features depending on the interlocutor and their mother tongue and its accompanying linguistic conventions (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013: 25). They also point out that BELF speakers share the culture of the international business community, which, however, coexists with their individual cultural backgrounds. Thus, multiculturalism is seen as an inherent feature in BELF interactions, and is further strengthened by multilingualism (Baker, 2011). This multicultural competence refers to the knowledge and a set of skills in successfully tackling communicative situations comprising individuals of different national, organizational and professional cultures (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013), where knowing languages other than English and one’s own mother tongue broadens horizons, opens new perspectives and provides tacit knowledge which is hard to gain otherwise (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013). Therefore, although some linguists claim that a lingua franca is a culture-neutral code in the sense that it does not outrightly reflect cultural ties or identities (Pölzl, 2003), the research has shown that international communication is certainly not culture-free, but is a blend permeated by speakers’ local and individual cultures, since it bears the marks of different languages, even if it is just in the sense of the word order or sentence structures used (Akkermans et al., 2010; Meierkord, 2002; Pölzl & Seidlhofer, 2006; Pullin, 2010). A range of scholars have recognized the importance of culture in international contexts. Thus, Victor (1992) portrays cross-cultural business communication as an applied form of ethnography, where an interactant thoroughly scrutinizes and analyzes elements of another culture. In this sense, he talks about seven variables that influence business communication: language, environment, technology, social organization, contexting, authority, non-verbal behavior and conceptions of time. By taking the variables into consideration, it is possible to learn about new cultures and business practices stemming from them. Thus, by applying the newly gained knowledge, business people can adapt and accommodate in a way that will serve them best in their business communication with a specific audience (Jameson, 2007). Varner and Palmer (2005) also

BELF 

45

created a procedure by which cultural self-knowledge could be systematically integrated as part of preparations for company employees when they are assigned to work abroad. The process starts with exhaustive self-discovery education in terms of personal and cultural preferences. This newly gained knowledge is then balanced with a concentrated study of the cultural backgrounds of the people with whom the employee will interact abroad. The following important step is to connect these two types of knowledge – knowledge of self and knowledge of others – which is executed through identifying specific cultural adaptation strategies that will allow the employee to succeed. Thus, placing more focus on understanding one’s own culture does not exclude or reduce the need to understand others’ cultures. Hence, the process suggests that both types of knowledge are necessary and their amalgamation is at the heart of the efficient practice of intercultural business, technical and expert communication (Jameson, 2007). Therefore, admitting the fact that culture plays an important role in business interactions, various attempts (as illustrated above) have been undertaken to pinpoint or at least describe cultural points in business communication. However, because the study of human interactions is far from an exact science, many dilemmas occur. Even within one country there are numerous subcultures and there are numerous debates on the notion of national culture. Due to the elusive nature of this concept, Bargiela-Chiappini and Nickerson (2003) have called for the redefining and requestioning of the concepts of self, identity and nation within intercultural business communication by using a multidisciplinary approach. Poncini (2002) also notes that research on discourse within a multicultural business context should not perceive interactants as standing for a homogeneous national culture, but other factors such as organizational positions, business contexts and individual dissimilarities might be significant (Jameson, 2007). Jameson (2007) points out that language can create both division and unity in ways that influence business strategies, expenditures and resolutions. Furthermore, she points out that language can be an important and difficult issue in some sectors, such as the healthcare industry, where hospitals and pharmacies need to ensure that highly specialized language is fully and correctly translated to patients. With family or friends serving as translators, many issues can arise. Thus, hospitals have devised different alternative solutions to the problem. However, at the same time, ‘language unites disparate people’ (Jameson, 2007: 215), as in the example of Indians and Filipinos whose widespread knowledge of English has enabled a multitude of telecommunications outsourcing firms (Jameson, 2007). Regardless of their idiosyncratic differences, general proficiency in English and their thought patterns have put them in the same cultural group of English speakers, together with other members. Räisänen (2012) similarly notes that business today is a field of globalized trade, people, commodities, services and distributed

46  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

work teams as a number of companies move their business overseas and cooperate with firms beyond national borders. Simultaneously, business is an arena of linguistic mobility and mixing as people’s linguistic assets join in and blend in various ways, forming novel practices and ways of communication. However, when talking about international business interactions, one element must not be neglected: the context. Even if there are at least three possible scenarios when focusing on cultural and behavioral norms in (B) ELF interactions, the only thing that can be concluded with certainty is the importance of the specific situation. Although, as noted earlier, some have observed that ELF is a ‘culture-free’ pidgin language (Pölzl, 2003), and others have seen it as involving cultural norms linked with the use of English as a native language or as a linguistic mix, it seems that in reality all these options play second fiddle to the context where BELF is used. The very fact that the international business community is often cited to be a linguistic masala testifies to this community’s hybridity, which implies that interactants frequently have to employ not only a cocktail of their own cultural and linguistic backgrounds, but also situation-specific requirements in a way that will suit the particular case and situation (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011: 259) also note that some respondents in their studies were aware of the factor of culture in their international communication. They appreciated ‘different ways of doing things’ and recognized the distinction between different cultures: talkative vs. silent, more linear versus circular4 or more abrupt vs. ‘polite’. They conclude that ‘multicultural competence stems from the acknowledgement of factors related to national, corporate, and/or professional cultures as fundamentals of any communicative event, and enables the flexibility and tolerance needed for GCC to succeed’ (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011: 259). Even the pioneer studies in BELF showed that communicators in international contexts soon become aware of the cultural peculiarities of different nationals. As an illustration, Charles (2007) explored Swedish– Finnish communication, showing that Swedish participants paid explicit attention to other participants, addressed them directly, asked for their opinions, they ‘thought out loud’ and used metalanguage for speech chunks uttered by previous speakers. This means that they talked a lot, but did not say too much about the topic, and thus were perceived to be ‘wordy.’ On the other hand, the Finnish focused on information, without too many inquiries, talked in a well-argued, but monologist style, did not use metalanguage and did not pay too much attention to the interactive needs of other parties. This example accurately portrays cultural differences between issue-oriented and interpersonally oriented interaction, as well as in the amount of metadiscourse and timing of speech. These cultural features have had a great impact on the image of the two nationalities in the international merger where they work together. The Finns

BELF 

47

were frequently seen as less powerful and less dominant, which they themselves confirmed in interviews by saying that it had been difficult for them to feel assertive and dominant in BELF interactions (LouhialaSalminen, 2002). However, their communication was still more or less effective and both groups together created a situation-specific, discursive culture made out of at least two distinct cultures. Charles (2007) also stresses the importance of the context, pointing out that building on the shared lexico-semantic core of the English language, BELF speakers with different mother tongues and with different cultural origins use the language based on divergent sociopragmatic rules and norms. In this way, they bring together into the BELF communication their own cultural features, blending them into a novel operational culture that is founded on their own common understanding of the specific situation. The question that arises naturally concerns the threshold level of the English language command required to become a member of the BELF community. As discussed earlier, the reality has shown that although some core language knowledge is necessary, even interactants with quite rudimentary knowledge can engage in successful communication (e.g. Blommaert, 2010; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). One of the reasons accounting for this success is multilingualism, i.e. interactants’ general language awareness, habits and practices used in different contexts with their own local/native languages, which means that multilingualism is virtually at the heart of BELF heterogeneous community identity and speaker proficiency (Canagarajah, 2007). BELF interactants are always minimally bilingual and very often multilingual and their interaction is characterized by ‘multi-faceted multilingual repertoires’ (Seidlhofer, 2009: 242). Although different cultural backgrounds in international contexts are taken as one of the inherent features of BELF interaction, these differences can be a cause of a breakdown in communication, especially with inexperienced professionals who have still not fully grasped the subtleties and communication conventions in these kinds of contexts. Gerritsen and Nickerson (2009) note that speakers tend to communicate from their own cultural perspective, which translates to their using communication strategies belonging to their culture and applying it to another language. They summarize the issue as follows: While people may need to ‘speak the same language’ in such multilingual contexts, they may not necessarily ‘speak the same way’ (RogersonRevell 2007, p.188) and similarly, they ‘tend to interact in accordance with the socio-cultural norms which govern the use of their own first language’ (Vandermeeren 1999, p. 275). (Gerritsen & Nickerson: 2009: 182)

In line with these observations, Gerritsen and Nickerson (2009) report on Shaw et al.’s (2004) findings illustrating that Belgian, Danish, Swedish

48  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

and British professionals differ greatly from Italians in their understanding of what an efficient, acceptable and problem-solving discourse should look like. The former appreciate direct but relational talk, while the latter seems to prefer longer dialogues with the inclusion of supplementary politeness strategies. Consequently, from an Italian’s perspective, northern Europeans’ problem-solving may be seen as excessively straightforward, which might hinder communication. Similarly, it seems that in BELF email correspondence, people who come from cultures with a high power distance tend to employ more formal salutations and closing phrases (e.g. ‘Dear Madam’, ‘Yours respectfully’) than correspondents from low power distance cultures (e.g. ‘Hi’, ‘Cheers’) (Bjorge, 2007, cited in Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009: 183). As a result, smooth communication might be jeopardized simply because of cultural differences: high power distance cultures may deem the informal use of language rude or uncomfortably personal, while low power distance cultures may see the formal use of language aloof and too impersonal (Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009). However, all these difficulties, as pointed out earlier, can act as a unifying factor that builds solidarity among interactants, as soon as they become aware that they all share the same obstacles in trying to communicate successfully. This means that, eventually, they all work together in negotiating meaning and building a successful communication channel, implying that there are no solid, written-in-stone norms about BELF usage, i.e. BELF cannot be owned by anyone nor can it be exclusively tied to one particular culture (Kankaanranta & Lu, 2013). Still, as Pullin (2015) claims, it is important to insert intercultural competences in curricula and to recognize its interactive nature, which by default exerts a profound impact on the ways language is being taught and learned. Language and culture are closely interconnected and linguistic and cultural forms expressed through (B)ELF are likely to be hybrid, dynamic and incessantly modified to local needs, global impacts and the requirements of cross-culture communication (Baker, 2009; Räisänen, 2016). Therefore, a need for more studies exploring communication in underresearched contexts arises. Enquiries exploring in detail various milieus belonging to the Global South are expected to broaden horizons, expanding the knowledge of different cultural backgrounds and linguistic features stemming from them. Global Communicative Competence

After taking a look at the features of BELF as discussed by researchers in the field, one final concept should be explained in order to form a complete mosaic and to grasp the place of BELF in broader terms. For this, the concept of GCC was investigated by Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011), along with the role and place of BELF within this broad concept.

BELF 

49

Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) provide an insight into the notion of communicative competence, which we will draw on here. The origin of the concept is linked to Hymes, who developed it as a counterpart to Chomsky’s (1968) famous linguistic theory claiming that linguistic competence stems from an abstract system of rules founded on an inherent language mechanism. Hymes (1972), on the contrary, made a distinction between linguistic competence and performance. Hymes (1972) claimed that it is not just the language itself as a system that shapes someone’s competence, but also the manner in which the language is used, i.e. a combination of knowledge and the ability to utilize this knowledge. This means that competence concerns not only cognitive aspects, but also affective and volatile factors such as values, motivation and attitudes. Hymes (1972) stressed the interconnected social nature of this competence and emphasized the importance of the knowledge which is found in four domains: Whether and to what degree (the spoken or written text to be communicated) is formally possible; Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of implementation available; Whether (and to what degree) something is appropriate in relation to a context in which it is used and evaluated; Whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done, actually performed, and what its doing entails. (Hymes, 1972: 284–286)

All of the above components seem to be highly relevant in everyday business global communication. Canale and Swain (1980) built on Hymes’ theory and applied it to foreign language teaching. They introduced the following four areas of communicative competence: (1) grammatical competence (the mastery of the linguistic system, including vocabulary, as well as morphological, syntactic, semantic, phonetic and orthographic rules) (2) sociolinguistic competence (the mastery of rules and conventions serving as the basis of the proper comprehension and language use in diverse sociolinguistic and sociocultural contexts) (3) discourse competence (the knowledge of rules that decide on the ways in which forms and meanings are joint to attain a meaningful accord of spoken or written texts) (4) strategic competence (the knowledge of communication strategies utilized as a compensation for breakdowns in communication due to insufficient competence in the three areas above, e.g. paraphrase, repetition, reluctance, evasion of words, structures or themes, guessing, adjustment of messages etc.) (Canale & Swain, 1980). The ability to use language is not incorporated in Canale and Swain’s communicative competence, but is seen as an element of performance,

50  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

i.e. the implementation of the four domains in a particular communicative act and the way they interrelate mutually. Widdowson (1996), however, notes that performance and competence might not be separate entities at all and Peterwagner (2005) points out that competence is more than knowledge, since, as an instance, ability for use can be a part of discourse or strategic competence, implying that competence and ability for use are closely linked and even a prerequisite to each other (LouhialaSalminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). When we talk about a lingua franca, as has been elaborated on in previous sections, it is mostly agreed that it is constructed in each specific context, which makes its exploration elusive. As stated previously, Canagarajah (2007) notes that variation is at the heart of the lingua franca system: interlocutors in a specific situation understand each other and employ their own ‘situated’ variants to contribute to a successful communicative act. Jenkins (2000) also talked about ‘lingua franca core’, which was elaborated on in previous sections. However, although lingua franca competence itself is defined in varied forms in an international context and it might be difficult to pinpoint its complete nature because it is specific/distinctive on every micro level, BELF competence can be situated at least in broader terms on a macro level as a piece of a larger mosaic. In this sense, Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011: 258) proposed an interesting model of GCC. In the bull’s eye model, as they explain, the innermost layer represents the overall GCC of a business professional. The prerequisites for its existence are the outer layers of multicultural competence, BELF competence and business know-how. First of all, in order to reach successful communication in the global context, an individual is bound to possess proper sociolinguistic and discourse competence for the multicultural environment, which is the setting where communication takes place. As explained earlier, this layer refers to a number of skills, such as listening and accommodation skills, the ability to understand different accents and variants, and sensitivity to different ways of doing things. It is a complex segment involving the acknowledgement of factors linked to national, corporate and/or professional cultures as rudiments of any communicative event, and ensures the flexibility and tolerance needed for GCC to succeed (Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011). It also seems true that competence in more languages increases multicultural competence. The second layer represents BELF competence, which is just one, but a highly important, element in the overall successful global business communication. It has already been broadly discussed what BELF competence implies, depending on the context. Sometimes it can be embodied in basic English with a multitude of ‘linguistic errors’, while on other occasions it can be understood as ‘standard English’. The third outermost layer of business know-how seems to be essential for GCC, which cannot be separated from communicative competence and is an integral

BELF 

51

part of the entity. As Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) note, this model’s contribution to existing theories is twofold, namely on the one hand, it stresses the need for a multidisciplinary approach to fully grasp the demands of working in global contexts and communicating successfully within them and thus, it is desirable to rely on communication theory and the concepts of appropriateness and effectiveness and investigate linguistic studies that have as their focus the actual language used in a communicative act. On the other hand, it is clear that communicative competence cannot be divorced from the knowledge of a specific field, i.e. business know-how. In this way, international communicative competence is designed from three elements, which are all interconnected and heavily dependent on each and every specific business situation. Although Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanranta (2011) talk about GCC primarily on an individual plain, in their later work (LouhialaSalminen & Kankaanranta, 2012) they note that the same notion should be further extended to the level of organizations and point to the research finding that the language should be handled as a corporate asset, since the cost of the language barrier is measured not only through the cost of translations and interpretations, but also through damaged relationships (Feely & Harzing, 2003, cited in Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2012). Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaanrant, (2012) note, however, that this is a rather complex and delicate issue in practice, because levels of English proficiency vary and because English might be used in geographical areas where it is not fully mastered, thus causing inequality and obstacles to knowledge sharing, as well as power imbalance.5 Having said all this, a critically important point needs to be made. As some scholars suggest (e.g. Kankaanranta et al., 2015), a dividing line between the macro and micro level of the use of English in international contexts has to be drawn. The former is often related to more official, standardized English used at the company level for instance on the website, official reports, public presentations, while the latter concerns individual English use in emails, team meetings and is related to BELF. The use of the first one is advocated by corporate management and is mainly guided by the native norms while the second is guided by pragmatic reasons so the knowledge of a specific business and openness to multiculturalism play a more significant role than native-like standards. Summary

With this, the chapter on BELF features and its underlying principles ends. It is quite evident that the research on the characteristics and the way BELF operates has come to some overall general conclusions that form a larger mental image regarding what BELF represents and its key success and failure points. However, most of the research has been conducted in a limited set of geographical areas and therefore, this book’s

52  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

aim is to draw on the findings of the studies that have been conducted so far, and to investigate its nature in the specific Bosnian context, which has not been done until today. Taking into consideration the specific status of B&H and its economic, political, cultural and lingual differences in respect of the countries where BELF has been explored so far, the results might yield some characteristics specific to this region. Therefore, Chapter 3 explores in more detail Bosnian English (business) practice, as well as the education associated with it. Notes (1) For a comprehensive overview of research in business, see Dudley-Evans and St. John (1996). (2) The study’s participants included 14 native and 13 non-native English speakers. (3) Translanguaging (García, 2009; Vogel & García, 2017) presents one of the key features of multilingualism (Jenkins, 2015). It includes ‘multiple discursive practices in which bilinguals engage in order to make sense of their bilingual worlds’ (García, 2009: 45, emphasis in original) and as such goes beyond code-switching and should not be identified with it. (4) Kaplan (1966) was first to propose the idea that the discourse pattern heavily depends on the culture and the native language of the speaker, i.e. logic is not universal and the logical arrangement of ideas is culture bound. Thus, many Western languages are believed to be linear, while Asian languages such as Korean, Chinese and Japanese are considered to be circular. Linear discourse is direct, quick to the point, ideas follow one another and lead to a conclusion. On the other hand, in circular/Oriental discourse, the development of ideas turns into an ever-decreasing circle. The circles turn around the subject and show it from a variety of angles, but the subject itself is never looked at directly. Things are developed in regard to what they are not, and not what they are. (5) For further reading on the topic see Marschan-Piekkari et al. (1999) and Vaara et al. (2005).

3

3 The Use of English in the Bosnian Context

Today, English is an everyday part of Bosnian life in the media, sport, marketing, education and work. It is an essential international communication tool that is taught as the first foreign language in Bosnian schools (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). A person who wants a successful career and an opportunity to climb the professional ladder is, in most cases, required to use at least basic, if not proficient, English for work purposes. However, this has not always been the case. Just a few decades ago, English was a marginal language in Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) of no importance in most walks of life. Then, a number of factors combined to mold the present-day linguistic panorama of Bosnian society, where English plays one of the dominant roles. This is especially true of the Bosnian business setting, which is the topic of exploration in this book and therefore, a subject that is elaborated on in more detail in this chapter. However, before that, the historical account of the role and rise of English in B&H is investigated, followed by a portrayal of the status of English in the Bosnian setting today and, finally, the interrelation of business and English in B&H is examined, including a review of the studies tackling the issue in B&H and its immediate surroundings. A Historical Overview

After World War II, the first predominant foreign language formally taught in Yugoslavia, of which B&H was a part at the time, was Russian, due to political reasons, while English was of secondary importance (Ignjačević, 2004). From the mid-1950s, when Yugoslavia opened up to the world and people could travel to and work in Western countries visa-free, the language needs changed, together with the language power balance, resulting in the authorities’ decision to distribute the number of students among four languages: Russian, German, French and English (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). In the 1950s and 1960s, English became popular among urban young people who listened to jazz, swing and rock ‘n’ roll and watched Hollywood films. This era of consumerism

53

54  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

and pop culture prompted young people to learn English in order to understand the music (Tomc, 2010). In the 1970s and 1980s, English spread even more. Due to increasing living standards, more people could afford to travel, which raised the value of knowing English. It was the language needed in different domains of life, particularly in business, science and technology. Recognizing its importance, well-off parents sent their children to study in the UK and student exchange programs were a possibility in many universities. Still, even during this period, the major driving force behind young people’s eagerness to learn English was pop culture, the age of hard rock, disco music, hippies and sitcoms, originating from the US (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). However, although English was preferred by a significant number of pupils and officially, they could choose which out of four languages to learn, in reality, due to a lack of English teachers and the availability of Russian staff, most students ended up learning Russian. Only in the late 1980s did English gradually start to replace Russian, with Russian teachers retiring, and English teachers hired. Only one book for teaching English could be used, produced by a selected publisher, with the content prescribed by the Institute of Education, leaving no autonomy to the publisher (Kovac & Sebart, 2002). English was taught three times per week in 45-minute sessions starting in Grade 5, i.e. when students were 10 years old. Emphasis was placed on drilling exercises, expressive reading, pronunciation, grammatical correctness, intonation, dictations, rewriting and translating short texts and producing short compositions. In addition to regular classes in school, the Pioneers Center in Sarajevo started English courses for children in the 1970s. The textbooks used an audio-visual global and structural method, which was highly popular in English language teaching (ELT) at the time (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). In the 1980s, the focus was more on communicative methods. Primary school teachers were required to complete two or three years of post-secondary education, while secondary school teachers went through four years of university training at the only English language and literature department in the country at the time in the Faculty of Philosophy in Sarajevo. For almost 50  years it served as the only higher education institution where both English teachers and interpreters were trained (all attending the same classes). However, some English courses were organized by Radnički Univerzitet, and only in the late 1980s did the first private schools open, which also needed to use government-approved textbooks and qualified staff. In 1992, the three-year-long war broke out in B&H following the disintegration of former Yugoslavia, after B&H passed a referendum for independence. Consequently, schools worked irregularly in extremely perilous and difficult conditions (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). However, at the time, English proved an extremely expedient way to earn some money, because after the first United Nations Protection

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  55

Forces arrived, a number of other military and non-governmental organizations followed, all using English as a means of communication. Thus, English became a lingua franca in wartime Bosnia and anyone who knew any English was hired to work for the organizations, with positions and salaries largely dependent on a person’s English-speaking skills (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). Thus, with international organizations offering much higher salaries than local employers, working for an international organization became highly desirable. However, this meant that English teachers were among the first to leave school positions. The result was that anyone with some knowledge of English was hired to work as an instructor in these improvised schools. At this point, Russian was completely removed and replaced by English. In these perilous times, English was taught without textbooks (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). Old pre-war time textbooks were used together with any materials that could be found. The first textbooks arrived in 1994 as part of the humanitarian aid, but students who had worked for two years with improvised instruction found it hard to keep up with their content. Toward the end of the war, two new English departments were opened: in West Mostar (inhabited by Croats) and in Banja Luka, in Republika Srpska. Due to the shortage of academic staff, visiting lecturers from Croatia and Serbia, respectively, were hired. After the war ended, a number of international organizations in the service of helping to restore peace and rebuild the country arrived, again ensuring well-paid workplaces for English-speaking locals (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). The situation with English teachers was again chaotic – unqualified staff taught in schools due to staff shortages. Even though children were formally taught English from Grade 4, most were unable to speak it, and those who could usually learned it from their parents or cable TV. However, in 1996, the first international school chains opened, initially in Sarajevo and then in other cities: Bosna Sema and Quality School International (QSI), followed by many more. They were primarily intended for the children of foreigners working in B&H, but soon children from Bosnian elitist circles started to attend. The language of instruction was English and the curriculum varied: Bosnian to American to British to mixed (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). At this time, a number of private English language schools had opened up to meet the increasing needs of Bosnians to learn English. Due to the shortage of English teachers, native English speakers were often hired. They were required to have a tertiary degree and a teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) certificate. Most of the schools organized international exams: the test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL) or the international English language testing system (IELTS). A number of nongovernmental organizations also organized free English courses. New English language and literature departments started to open throughout B&H to compensate for the chronic shortage of English teachers.

56  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Although it was generally thought that these were doomed to failure due to the lack of academic staff, some thought it was better to have staff with any qualifications instead of those who had none and yet regularly worked in schools. Thus, they persisted with local teaching assistants organizing classes and visiting lecturers coming mostly from Croatia and Serbia. The US Embassy and the Open Institute of Sarajevo also helped by bringing in English language fellows and specialists. The system of teaching was based on the ex-Yugoslavian concept and it mostly comprised of ‘practical language skills to improve the students’ level of English, linguistic disciplines (phonology, morphology, morphosyntax, syntax, semantics), general linguistics, British and American literature and cultural studies, as well as applied linguistic disciplines, such as ELT methodology and translation studies’ (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016: 25). Graduates could find jobs in schools immediately and were qualified to work as both interpreters and teachers. Having seen that English diplomas provided a secure future and state-employed positions, young people rushed to English departments in pursuit of mastering English (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). English in B&H Today

Today, all children in B&H learn the English language starting in Grades  1 or 3 of a nine-year elementary school curriculum. They continue learning English in high school for a further three or four years. In addition to English now being widespread and available everywhere, the methods of teaching English have also changed. They are based on eclecticism and involve the use of computer and information technology (IT) in a growing number of instances, although still not sufficiently represented in classrooms. All unqualified teachers have been replaced by qualified teachers, who are mostly committed to improving themselves professionally by enrolling in master and doctoral studies and attending various workshops, seminars and conferences, organized by language institutes and English language departments in cooperation with embassies and other international organizations. Today, there are a few professional English linguists’ associations throughout B&H, including the national association: the Society for the Study of English in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Students also have many opportunities to prosper and participate in different competitions testing their knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary, or their spelling and writing skills. Some universities provide scholarships and student exchange programs. The English departments that started in the immediate postwar period have gradually grown and developed over time. Thus, at present, there are eight state university departments in Sarajevo, East Sarajevo, Tuzla, Banja Luka, West Mostar, East Mostar, Bihać and Zenica. Unlike in the early postwar years, departments now offer

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  57

specialized studies in different fields in masters studies: English linguistics, British and American literature, ELT methodology and translation, as well as doctoral programs. A substantial number of universities also have English courses for specialized fields and English is highly recognized as an essential asset for a future career, since most attractive job positions require knowledge of English. Thus, English is no longer an option, but a must. Finally, English departments have been opening in private universities as well, many of which use English as a medium of instruction throughout all of the departments. The trend of teaching and learning English is likely to continue in the future, considering that many universities have been trying to attract foreign students and that B&H is a part of the European continent and is striving to become a member of the European Union, in which case English will gain even more prominence, especially in administration. Bosnian Business Context and the Role of English

The Bosnian business context is heavily influenced by the country’s complex and unique political and economic structure. As a result of the number of administrative units and different political and ethnic factions and their interests, B&H fosters a decentralized political and legal framework. This has created negative impacts on many spheres of life, but mostly on the economy. This political and administrative complexity, combined with the historical burden and legacies of the 1990s war, has contributed to the bleak business environment in B&H. The entire business environment in B&H is a kind of vicious circle, where (mostly) employees are unhappy with their work conditions and employers are displeased with the government. Dissatisfaction on the part of employees is a result of a number of factors, such as low wages, employers’ poor treatment of their subordinates, (non)regulation of extra work hours payments, unhealthy working atmosphere and environment and nontransparency in procedures. On the other hand, employers’ unhappiness with the governmental apparatus has been caused by many factors as well. Double standards for small businesses on the one hand and ‘wheeler-dealers’ in the business arena backed by prominent political figures or parties on the other hand; non-transparency in public tenders and job allocations; loose and varying interpretations of a myriad of legal documents and regulations within different governmental bodies, enabling them to abuse their authority and power, are just a few of many. This permanent structural crisis has resulted in the domestic business sector being the least organized and the least competitive in the South East Europe (SEE) region. In comparison to neighboring countries, B&H is lagging behind in terms of the size of its structural indicators: business start-ups, registration and contract enforcements. The decentralized political and legal framework has caused the existence

58  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

of overlapping competences in decision-making, which negatively affects all sectors, mainly the economy. Hence, ‘it is due to this political establishment and the fact that in the past two decades, Bosnia and Herzegovina has endured severe economic instability while undergoing economic transition from a closed-command economy to an openmarket economy, that structural economic limitations have imposed great barriers for B&H at this time’ (Mirascic, 2011: 33). This unstable system is further aggravated by a number of other factors as well. Firstly, B&H has a disproportionately enormous public sector, dating back to the 1980s (Yugoslav times) and it has only been partly reformed. It is estimated that ‘public expenditures amount to nearly half of GDP and, if state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and costs from corruption are added in, the public sector may be as large as 70 percent of GDP’ ­(Goldstein et al., 2015: para. 3). SOEs generate bills, paid by high taxes and an enormous tax wedge eats up more than 30% of the lowest salaries, which all results in extremely unfavorable conditions for employers to create formal jobs (Goldstein et  al., 2015). Secondly, the country’s economy is built on consumption rather than production. Thirdly and sadly, exports are worth only 30% of the gross domestic product (GDP) of B&H, which is estimated to be one of the lowest in Europe and a clear sign of the country’s poor economic competitiveness (Goldstein et al., 2015). Bosnian society also suffers from a chronically high unemployment rate. The official reported rate for 2016, for example, was 41.7 (Employment Institute), while 40% of the employed population works in some form of a government sector and as such is not producing new value. All these entangled political-economic reasons have contributed to creating the murkiest business environment in the entire region (for more information, see Mirascic, 2011). The murky condition of the Bosnian entrepreneurship and job market has had negative consequences in terms of an overall climate of mistrust, skepticism and pessimism on the part of employees and heightened stress, mistrust, irritation with the governmental system and with employees’ alleged incompetence in meeting job requirements, on the part of employers. In this kind of situation, a resourceful way for many aspiring individuals to enhance their careers has been to equip themselves with superior foreign language skills, with two languages being the most represented: German and English. The reason behind learning German is that a significant number of Bosnian citizens feel pessimistic about building (or continuing with) their professional life in the Bosnian gloomy business context. Thus, feeling that they are not rewarded for their hard work and learning, many individuals and families (mostly members of the medical and pharmaceutical sectors) emigrate to German-speaking countries, which have certain deficit professions, where they hope to build a more optimistic future for

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  59

themselves and their families. However, for those who decide to stay for various reasons, English is an inevitable tool in pursuing well-paid jobs. The significance of English in the Bosnian context reflects the global scene, which is mirrored both on a micro and a macro level. The former is reflected through several occurrences. Firstly, a growing awareness among an increasing number of students of the importance of mastering English, resulting in better career opportunities and the potential to obtain prestigious jobs with higher than average salaries. Secondly, there has been a rapid increase in the number of individuals enrolling in both general and business-specific English courses to improve their career status and obtain an English language certificate, which, next to a driving license and basic IT skills, is one of the basic competencies that any serious candidate’s CV in the process of job seeking contains (Alumna, 2015). On a macro plane, the significance of English is reflected at the national and organizational level. Firstly, English is taught as the first foreign language in state elementary schools, while it is the primary medium of instruction across disciplines in a number of private schools. This practice continues throughout high school education in all schools, regardless of professional orientation. Moreover, a number of privately held higher education institutions offer courses where English is the medium of instruction, and conferences and seminars on English language theory and application have been organized and supported by various education institutions (Imamović & Delibegović-Džanić, 2016). Business English has become a highly needed asset in many fields, testified by a substantial number of private language schools and business centers offering business courses. Most of them offer general business courses with several levels focused on general communication skills in relation to meetings, conferences, presentations, negotiations, written and oral email and phone correspondence. A significantly smaller number of schools offer English for specific professional fields, the most frequently represented being: administrative work, pharmacy, medicine and nursing, tourism, IT, law, business English for job hunters, engineering, economy and management. The areas taught in these courses reflect the economic and social trends of the Bosnian business community. As an instance, administrative positions, most often represented by secretaries or logistics assistants, in most cases require knowledge of English, because they are usually the buffer zone and the line of contact between a company and customers who might not speak Bosnian. Thus, a number of locals who either hold or are in pursuit of these positions, usually take these courses to perfect their English communication skills. Pharmaceutical companies are among the most attractive job positions due to their often well-paid jobs. Thus, individuals who want to make progress in their career often need to attend seminars and conferences that are frequently in English. Therefore, even those who can speak English fluently, but are ambitious in their careers, enroll in courses

60  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

specializing in pharmacy. Law classes are usually attended not only by professionals who are interested in an international legal career or have prospects of working as legal associates in international organizations based in Bosnia, but also by legal staff who work in Bosnian companies that do business with foreign clients and are often required to have all legal documentation and correspondence in English. The connection between tourism and English has also become an interesting phenomenon, especially in the last few years. Namely, a huge wave of middle-class Middle Eastern tourists, usually from the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Oman have been pouring into B&H seeing it as a perfect vacation spot. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, when compared to world megalopolises, the cost of living is much lower and the same quality and range of services obtained in other European cities can be provided in B&H at a much lower cost. Secondly, even though a significant number of upper-class tourists from the Middle East spend their vacations in huge Western cities, frequently those from the same class, who pay special regard to their religion and tradition, decide to spend their vacations in B&H because of the availability of halal food, Islamic religious objects and the feeling of belonging to the same religious affiliation as many locals. Thirdly, coming from vast areas of desert, the lush green abundance of Bosnian nature is one of the major factors attracting these tourists. All these reasons combined have prompted many of them to buy properties in B&H to secure permanent accommodation on their frequent visits. Thus, a large number of locals are engaged in real estate and tourist business services to meet the demands of an ever-growing number of tourists from the Middle East. In these ventures, next to Arabic, knowledge of English (for tourism) has become indispensable. At this point, it is important to note that most of the textbooks used in the courses mentioned previously are new editions of renowned British or American publishers, with courses of varying degrees of quality offered in different schools. Teachers include both locals, a more frequent scenario, and native speakers (NSs), which are often a great advertisement for a school. However, many well-off, especially old-school locals who want to perfect their language skills at a faster rate still tend to go abroad to an English-speaking country for a period of time. Here, it is important to recognize the difference between younger and senior generations regarding their knowledge and interest in English. For many urban young people, English is the language they have grown up with, as noted before, by watching TV or listening to music, and very often they can understand if not speak basic conversation. Unlike in many vocational schools, where the performance and profile of students are much lower and with less remarkable grades, which reflects on their poorer English language skills, students of grammar high schools are often proficient in English on graduation, i.e. they are expected to be at B2 level once they

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  61

graduate (CEFR, 2011). For the older generations of people in business who grew up learning Russian, the effort invested in learning English is much greater and usually involves taking either courses or, more often, private one-on-one tutoring to exploit the maximum potential of their time. Research on Business and English in B&H and Neighboring Countries

The phenomenon of the impact of English and its importance on this geographical area as well as its relationship with and influence on the Bosnian/Serbian/Croatian language has been explored in a number of scientific studies. Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian are the official languages in B&H, even though Croatian and Serbian are also the official languages of the neighboring countries, Croatia and Serbia, respectively. Although the Bosnian language dates back to the 10th century, the official language used in B&H as a member of ex-Yugoslavia was SerboCroatian/Croato-Serbian. This term went out of use after the country gained its independence, and since there are three constituent peoples in the country, namely Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats (see Figure  3.1), there are three official languages, Bosnian, Serbian and Croatian, which bear a high degree of mutual intelligibility (Greenberg, 2004) but whose choice is based on ethnicity (Footitt & Kelly, 2012). Thus, this overview presents research on all three languages. For instance, Benci (2013) explored the role and use of anglicisms in the Croatian language, focusing on the registers of IT, economics and the media (sports, politics, pop culture, show business and fashion). The findings suggested that the use of English has been increasing in all of the investigated spheres and that English words and expressions have even threatened to completely replace certain Croatian words. RunjićStoilova and Pandža (2010) investigated the use of English loanwords on several state and private TV channels, concluding that, out of the examined channels, state TV has shown the greatest consistency in trying to preserve the Croatian language by adapting English loanwords to the norms of the local language. Skelin-Horvat (2005) studied, among other things, the change in the use of anglicisms in the Croatian print press, finding that the number of anglicisms had more than doubled in the period between 1975 and 2004. Brdar (2010) looked into the use of English words in online articles written in Croatian, finding that the use of English words has become a sort of fashion fad. Milić (2013) examined the influence of English on Serbian sports terminology, concluding that English borrowings have had a great impact on the Serbian sports register. Šljivić (2006) analyzed the impact English has had on Bosnian language structures in magazines and concluded that English has brought completely new grammatical language structures into Bosnian language

62  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Figure 3.1  Bosnia and Herzegovina ethnic map. The figure is based on the one published at https://commons​.wikimedia​.org​/wiki​/File​:Bosnia​_and​_Herzegovina​_Ethnic​ _map​.png. The data are taken from the 2013 population census

usage. Kajtazović (2012) looked into the influence of the English language and culture on the Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian language in the field of music, with results suggesting that English borrowings in this field have been growing. Šehović (2009) also examined the important role of anglicisms in the Bosnian language, concluding that they should be neither avoided nor unconditionally accepted without a proper linguistic analysis. Other more recent enquiries (Ajšić, 2014; Dubravac, 2016; Dubravac & Skopljak, 2020; Habul-Šabanović, 2009) have also studied the effects that English has had on the Bosnian language, finding numerous anglicisms sometimes used in their original form and sometimes in a partially or fully adapted form. Although Bosnian people generally share a positive attitude toward the use of anglicisms (Dubravac & Latić, 2019), this trend seems to be especially noticeable among the younger population, who would rather opt for a foreign word, whereas older people are more favorable toward native words (Skopljak & Dubravac, 2019). Interestingly, younger people do not tend to use English words with the aim to

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  63

appear native-like but rather to play with language(s) creating a multilingual self who might as such impress the target audience (Dubravac & Skopljak, 2020). Finally, some studies have been conducted regarding English and specifically business world relationships in the B&H region. Thus, Dobrić (2008) investigated a large number of new job names of English origin used in Serbian. The author draws attention to their inadequate translation offering possible solutions. Vasić et al. (2011) coped with a similar issue, producing a dictionary of contemporary anglicisms in the Serbian language. Čedić (2008) also published a dictionary of anglicisms in the Bosnian language. Sumeunović (2008) examined the role of English in the Serbian business register, claiming that the influence of English on profession-related terminologies is immense. Silaski (2012) looked into the presence of anglicisms in the Serbian economic terminology, concluding that there is a need for the standardization of English-based terminology existing in this field. Vidaković (2016) explored the profiles of teachers of business English in Serbia and tried to offer new models in teaching business English that would be in line with contemporary research and educational trends. The author acknowledged an increasing need for business English teaching, on the one hand, and a lack of support for English teachers through corresponding professional development programs, on the other hand. Therefore, Vidaković (2016) proposed a model according to which prospective teachers should gain mastery of the following skills: teaching skills, business communication skills and skills needed to support other professionals in the field. Moreover, the author emphasized the great importance of a real needs analysis for preparing individuals for a specific working environment. Obviously, general English knowledge should be upgraded to meet the needs of working professionals, which has been confirmed by Dragaš (2016) who explored different aspects of contemporary English business communication in the neighboring country of Croatia, finding that there is a great interdependence between verbal, non-verbal and intercultural communication. Moreover, native-like proficiency does not seem to be a decisive factor for successful communication here, as Imamović and MulahmetovićIbrišimović (2018) demonstrated when investigating business communication in B&H. The authors showed that international English in B&H, as they call it, is characterized by the non-standard1 use of articles, tenses, passives, prepositions and word order. Similarly, exploring the presence of English as a lingua franca (ELF) features in business communication in B&H, Isaković (2019) identified the non-standard use of prepositions, articles, tenses, adverbs, pronouns, passive voice and sentence structure. This short overview of the studies indicates that the issue of the significance, role and effect of English within this environment has been approached from multiple aspects. The entire body of research in this

64  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

field has contributed to identifying, rationalizing and resolving a number of dubious and difficult points that have been raised over the years with the growing presence of English in different walks of life, including business. Over time, it has become embedded in the regional business culture. However, while the related studies have mainly identified ELF features in this context and have indicated that general English skills should be upgraded by other necessary skills, they have not really explored the specific business context to describe those other skills and provide clear guidelines for professionals. Hopefully, the research presented in the following chapters will add further insight into the topic from its own unique conceptual point of view. Summary

As can be seen, English has taken supremacy among other foreign languages in this geographical region not only in the educational arena, but also in other fields, thus reflecting global English trends. Hence, the phenomenon of English influence and its importance in this geographical area, as well as the relationship and impact it has had on the Bosnian/ Serbian/Croatian language, have been the subject of various linguistic studies. However, although the studies do tackle some of the relevant issues concerning English and its roles in the business world, there seem to be some unresolved and unexplored issues regarding English and its use in the Bosnian business context. Firstly, a number of studies on business communication needs have been conducted in English-speaking countries (Crossling & Ward, 2002), and while there is a substantial body of research on English business proficiency needs within mainly Global North ELF contexts, such studies in the South Europe business contexts, the Bosnian context being one of them, are in the minority. Moreover, since each country (or region) possesses its own particular contextual educational needs, the specific environment should be explored to provide guidelines and suitable materials for professionals instead of utilizing generic, non-contextual foreign publishers’ materials, as is the case in B&H. Secondly, as some recent research has shown (e.g. Ehrenreich, 2016; Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009; Kankaanranta, 2007; Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005), teaching/learning English as a foreign language exclusively in non-English-speaking countries might simply not hold anymore in our globalized world, where the roles of English have greatly changed. Thus, with the English language being an international lingua franca, a reconceptualization in teaching English has become an acute need today. This fact is of particular importance to the Bosnian settings as well, considering the fact that very often English here is used with non-native speakers (NNSs). These issues present the major reasons why the topic of English as the business lingua franca (BELF) was chosen to be explored

The Use of English in the Bosnian Context  65

in practice in this specific context. It will possibly shed some light on the peculiarities, practices and perceptions of English among Bosnian business professionals. Note (1) The two dominant standard varieties in B&H are British and American English, the former strongly represented in the educational milieu, and the latter in the media (Dubravac et al., 2018).

4

4 Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective

As stated in the previous chapters, a number of studies have explored the relationship between English and business in Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) and its surroundings; however, to the best of our knowledge, none has explored business communication from an English as the business lingua franca (BELF) perspective. Thus, the underlying reason behind this research is to critically explore the phenomenon of BELF through users’ views and experiences, in an attempt to obtain accurate information about the status and nature of the English language used in business in Bosnian settings. To achieve this goal, a number of practical steps based on theoretical concepts have been employed. This study sought to investigate the perceptions of employees and employers/supervisors about the English for business communication (EBC) skills and literacies needed in the Bosnian workplace, with the BELF constructs in mind. These perceptions, in turn, can contribute to designing or modifying English teaching in B&H in order to meet the English communication requirements of the Bosnian business environment. The study will show if teaching and learning English in line with the English as a foreign language (EFL) conceptualization is still required, or should business English be taught on the basis of BELF concepts, or maybe a mixed approach might be required, used simultaneously or alternatively, depending on the specific context, the students and their future professional targets. The major objective of any general English and business English instruction is to fulfill students’ pragmatic needs to achieve successful communication in English within a dynamic workplace environment. This is especially important nowadays with the world undergoing tremendous changes in the nature of business, communications and perceptions of the language. Therefore, in order to achieve a broader goal, this study aims to assess the English literacy needs in the Bosnian business context, pinpointing the language skills that are or are not important in Bosnian business situations; to explore the type of English needed in a Bosnian business workplace (native-like proficiency vs. any English that gets the message across); and to investigate how Bosnian companies cope 66

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  67

with the need for English proficiency. Hence, if we want to prepare future Bosnian professionals for their their future and be deserving of the challenges awaiting them, it is highly important that the knowledge obtained from these kinds of studies are implemented in English language teaching (ELT), enabling students to be effective communicators in EFL and/or BELF contexts, depending on the specific situation. Rationale of the Study and Research Questions Addressed

The rationale for this study arose from a desire to help improve English language education in B&H and similar contexts, adjusting it to reflect the reality of the job market awaiting young individuals; to contribute to the overall business market and aspiring future professionals by suggesting the needs, competencies and skills required to become successful in the workplace, where English is needed. Moreover, because of growing international business interactions and the increasing use of English as a shared language, the need arises to understand all communication skills in their entirety that would enable an individual to understand and fit in well with an intercultural and interlinguistic business environment, in which English is used as the lingua franca. Therefore, the main reason for conducting this study was the feeling that the English language education taught in B&H schools and both general and English for specific purposes (ESP) courses were inadequate and outdated, as well as acknowledging the disappointment and ignorance that novices to the job market are doomed to face upon realizing that successful English communication in the workplace means using a complete toolbox of different instruments, instead of robotic knowledge of when to place the right suffix or verb shift, in order to make their speech perfectly grammatically correct. Hence, due to an under-developed awareness of the changes that English has been experiencing, and thus not reacting to these changes in our society, it is imperative to raise awareness about the issue, which will hopefully prove useful on multiple levels. In order to gain accurate and comprehensive insights and answers to the dilemmas and concerns elaborated in previous chapters, the study addressed the following research questions (RQs): (1) What are Bosnian business professionals’ perceptions of the importance of English within the Bosnian business context? (2) What are Bosnian business professionals’ perceptions of the sources that can be used effectively in improving English for a better job performance? (3) Is there a significant difference in Bosnian business professionals’ perceptions of the importance of English and learning sources in the Bosnian business context based on the age of the participants?

68  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

(4) Is there a significant difference in Bosnian business professionals’ perceptions of the importance of English in the Bosnian business context based on the types of businesses in which they are employed? (5) Which language skills are or are not important in the Bosnian business context? (6) What is the importance of business genres and acts/behaviors related to the four core English language skills (listening, reading, writing, speaking) in the Bosnian business context? (7) What is the importance of business genres and acts/behaviors related to the intercultural and interactional communication skills (IICS) in the Bosnian business context? (8) Is there a significant difference in Bosnian business professionals’ perceptions of the importance of different skills based on gender, job position and nature of business? (9) Out of the factors: age, total years of experience and self-assessed level of English, which correlates most with the participants’ perceptions of the importance of different skills? (10) What are the features of BELF, as observed through written and spoken BELF interaction (emails, meetings, WhatsApp messages, phone calls) and based on the participants’ insights? Research Design

To achieve the purpose of the study and to provide responses to the RQs, a mixed-method design was utilized. A mixed-method approach enables a researcher to use both quantitative and qualitative approaches that can complement each other and prevent weaknesses occurring when a sole instrument is employed (Cresswell & Clark, 2007). Thus, the study consisted of three main methods. Firstly, a quantitative research method was utilized through a questionnaire survey to gather business professionals’ views on the English communication realities, practices and needs within a Bosnian workplace. Secondly, a qualitative research method, i.e. a semi-structured, detailed interview with a selected group of participants (both higher and lower ranks), was employed in order to collect more extensive and inclusive responses. In addition, meetings were observed and correspondence was listened to or read (emails, WhatsApp written and voice messages, phone conversations) with the aim of gathering first-hand information and impressions that could further expand the knowledge on the data provided in the questionnaires and interviews. Finally, a field journal was utilized for recording ideas, dilemmas and thoughts to help in the subsequent analysis and discussion. A concurrent approach (Cresswell & Clark, 2007) was used in the study, i.e. both qualitative and quantitative methods were used around the same time.

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  69

Sampling and Participants

The study involved several kinds of sampling. Firstly, simple random sampling was utilized by sending out surveys to Bosnian companies. However, upon contacting companies that were found in different online records and asking for their participation in the study, the response rate proved low and insufficient for the study. As it was expected that random sampling might not provide a sufficient number of participants, another method was selected to be employed simultaneously, which was haphazard (convenience) sampling, i.e. choosing a sample as a matter of availability and convenience. Because the participants could only be employed persons who use (at least partially) English in their workplace, the pool of potential surveyees shrank significantly. Additionally, taking into consideration that B&H is a small and developing country where businesses are not thriving internationally, this further reduced the number of potential surveyees, in comparison to studies executed in more economically developed and more populous countries. Finally, due to their own internal policies and sensitive issues, different business communities might not be open to participation in explorative studies. Therefore, although there was no evidence that this kind of sampling is representative of the entire Bosnian business population, convenience sampling still remained the best option available for this particular study, taking into consideration the aforementioned circumstances. Thus, surveying any person who met the (previously mentioned) criteria of using English at work seemed a natural option, in order to obtain as many responses as possible. Researchers’ friends, acquaintances and family members who fit the criteria of using English in the workplace were asked to participate. The third method employed in the survey was snowball sampling. The professionals contacted were asked if they could identify and connect the researchers with other professionals and companies willing to take part in the study, apart from those that the researchers had already contacted or visited. This technique proved effective, as it showed that personal recommendations to third parties greatly extended the network of the study participants, thereby increasing the total number of participants to 152. All the data collected were treated anonymously. The study participants were composed of individuals working in local and international small to medium business companies in several cities in B&H: Sarajevo, Mostar, Konjic, Goražde, Tuzla, Gračanica, Sanski Most, Bugojno, Visoko, Kakanj, Kupres, Vitez and Velika Kladuša. The total pool of participants comprised 152 individuals who gave their answers to the questionnaire, while 15 individuals (out of 152) were interviewed. Finally, participants whose emails, WhatsApp conversations, phone conversations and meetings were analyzed as part of the research included high-ranked individuals (chief executive officer [CEO]) and medium-ranked individuals (thus excluding lower-ranked

70  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

employees), as these two groups had the most frequent BELF encounters during their working day. As shown in Figure 4.1, the sample population in the study included 152 participants, of whom 140 (92.11%) were from B&H, 5 (3.29%) were from Turkey, 4 were from Serbia (2.63%) and 1 participant each (0.66% each) from Croatia, Syria and Montenegro. Thus, due to the very small sample of non-Bosnian citizens, the variable of citizenship was not deemed relevant and was not brought into the comparison with other variables in the analysis of the study data. As Figure 4.2 illustrates, out of 152 participants, 27 (17.76%) were in a supervisory position (either a higher-ranked employee or an employer of a private company), while the majority of the respondees were employees, i.e. 125 (82.24%). With regard to the gender ratio in the study, the data proved to be balanced, i.e. the number of female participants was only slightly higher than the number of male participants, as shown in Figure 4.3. There were 80 female participants (52.63%) and 72 male participants (47.37%). In relation to age, the respondents were grouped into four categories (see Figure 4.4). The first category consisted of 58 persons aged between 18 and 29  years, which was 38.41% of the total participating population. The second category consisted of 65 individuals or 43.05%, aged between 30 and 39 years. The third category consisted of 18 participants or 11.92% aged between 40 and 49  years. The oldest group of participants were over 50 years and was the smallest group with 10 individuals or 6.62%. Thus, it can be concluded that the majority of the participants

Figure 4.1  Descriptive statistics of participants by nationality

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  71

Figure 4.2  Descriptive statistics of participants by job position

were less than 40 years old (123 out of 151 answers), which suggests that the majority of individuals working with English as a tool are younger citizens. Regarding the level of education, the majority of the participants had a bachelor’s degree (83 participants or 54.97%), followed by participants with a master’s degree (35 or 23.18%) and participants holding a secondary education degree (32 or 21.19%), while only 1 participant had a doctoral degree (0.66%). The data are shown in Figure 4.5.

Figure 4.3  Descriptive statistics of participants by gender

72  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Figure 4.4  Descriptive statistics of participants by age

As Figure  4.6 illustrates, the professions of the participants were diverse and included administration and finances (12.08%), marketing and consulting (16.78%), transportation and telecommunications (6.71%), web design and information technology (IT) (12.08%), construction and architecture (12.75%), manufacturing and trading (16.78%) and services (22.82%). Regarding the participants’ work experience, 42 participants (27.63%) had between 0 and 3 years of experience, 56 participants (36.84%) had between 4 and 7  years of experience, 20 participants (13.16%) had

Figure 4.5  Descriptive statistics of participants by level of education

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  73

Figure 4.6  Descriptive statistics of participants by nature of business

between 8 and 11  years of experience, 11 participants (7.24%) had between 12 and 15  years of experience, while 23 participants (15.13%) had more than 16 years of experience, as shown in Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7  Descriptive statistics of participants by years of experience

74  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

In terms of the participants’ self-assessed English language proficiency, out of 150 participants who provided an answer, 5 assessed their knowledge of English as poor (3.33%), 14 assessed it as fair (9.33%), 29 assessed it as good (19.33%), 62 assessed it as very good (41.33%) and 40 (26.67%) assessed it as excellent (Figure 4.8). However, since self-assessment is a very subjective category and may not reflect objective reality and standardized criteria, a question about a formal English language certificate was included in order to check for harmony/discrepancy between subjectively perceived self-assessed knowledge and the knowledge assessed by a formal English language institution. The results, however, illustrated that out of the 149 participants who provided an answer, only 44 participants (29.5%) had some type of English certificate/diploma, while 105 participants (70.5 %) did not. Out of 44 who did have an English certificate/diploma, 3 had an A1  level diploma, 8 had an A2  level diploma, 4 had a B1 certificate, 7 had a B2 certificate, 9 had a C1 certificate and 10 had a C2 certificate (Figure 4.9). On asking the participants about the way(s) they had studied and learned English – selecting among different options: school, English course, the media, self-study, combination of some of these or other – the majority of the participants answered that it had been either a combination of all of the factors (16.56%) or a combination of school, the media and self-study (16.56%) (Figure  4.10). These high numbers were followed by a significant number of participants who had learned

Figure 4.8  Descriptive statistics of participants by their self-assessed knowledge of English

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  75

Figure 4.9  Descriptive statistics of participants by English language level proficiency

Figure 4.10  Descriptive statistics of participants by place/mode of studying English

76  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

English only in school, i.e. 21 participants (13.91%), followed by a significant number of participants who had studied English in school and independently, i.e. 17 participants (11.26%). It is interesting that in the rubric called other there were 14 answers, where some participants simply ticked the rubric without elaborating on it, while those who identified the other, wrote that they had learned English by living abroad (either in the US or the UK). Finally, Table 4.1 presents a more detailed description of the participants who provided answers to the interview questions, as a part of the qualitative analysis. All of the presented figures illustrate that the participants in the survey ranged in terms of their age, profession, level of education and knowledge of English – the differences that might prove indicative of certain English language experiences and perceptions, which will be analyzed in the section titled ‘Data Analysis’. Research Instruments, Procedures and Administration

The quantitative approach in terms of a survey and the qualitative approach in terms of an in-depth interview, as well as the examination and observation of meetings, phone calls and correspondence were used to investigate business professionals’ experiences and perceptions of English language use in the Bosnian context from a conceptual BELF perspective. Survey

A survey was used as the quantitative part of the research because it allows participants to provide relevant and meaningful responses within the assigned parameters of a purposeful study (Ellis, 2003). The design of the survey instrument was founded upon general guidelines for developing surveys in second language (L2) research (Brown, 2001; Dörnyei & Taguchi, 2009). The length, format and anonymity issues were especially significant points when designing the survey (Dörnyei & Taguchi, 2009). Previous studies and books of a similar nature and purpose were consulted as helpful examples (e.g. Almuhim, 2001; Cavalheiro, 2015; Donna, 2000; Jensen, 1990). Finally, pivotal studies on BELF and their focal points of examination were taken as indicators in posing similar questions in this survey in order to check whether the results obtained in previous studies could be replicated in the Bosnian business context (Du-Babcock & Varner, 2008; Ehrenreich, 2010, 2016; Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2004, 2009; Kankaanranta, 2005, 2006, 2007; Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2010, 2013; Kangasharju & Nikko, 2009; LouhialaSalminen et al., 2005; Louhiala-Salminen & Kankaanranta, 2011, 2012; Pitzl, 2005; Planken, 2005; Poncini, 2002, 2004; Pullin, 2010, 2013, 2015; Rogerson-Revell, 2007a, 2007b, 2008).

Communication specialist

Marketing and sales representative

Legal associate and consultant

CEO

IT coordinator

Network administrator

Operations manager

Environmental consultant

Customer service manager

Advertising sales representative

Public relations officer

Dispatch coordinator

Pharmaceutical administrative assistant

Cosmetics marketing manager

Drug control officer

Participant 2

Participant 3

Participant 4

Participant 5

Participant 6

Participant 7

Participant 8

Participant 9

Participant 10

Participant 11

Participant 12

Participant 13

Participant 14

Participant 15

Position

Participant 1

Interview participants

Field of business

Pharmaceutical sector

Beauty and cosmetics sales and marketing

Pharmaceutical sector

Transportation

Public relations/administration

Sales

Services

Environment and conservation

Web design service

IT service

IT service

Construction and architecture

Construction and architecture

Real estate

Telecommunications

Table 4.1 Participants in the semi-structured interview sessions

700

50

9

20

7

7

10

30

28

200

200

30

30

10

110

Number of company employees

Sarajevo

Sarajevo

Konjic

Velika Kladuša

Goražde

Sarajevo

Mostar

Sarajevo

Sarajevo

Tuzla

Tuzla

Sarajevo

Sarajevo

Sarajevo

Sarajevo

Place

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Turkish

Bosnian

Bosnian

Bosnian

Nationality

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  77

78  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

The internal consistency of the psychometric test, i.e. assessing how closely related a set of items are as a group, was measured by employing Cronbach’s alpha. The item subscale intercorrelations ranged from 0.727 to 0.908. This implies that the test items were well designed to measure the subscale, since all of the coefficients in each category exceeded 0.7 (Nunnaly, 1978). The Cronbach coefficients across all the subscales were acceptable and highly reliable (see Table 4.2), amounting to 0.885 for all skills categories together. Furthermore, with the aim of assessing content validity, the instrument was given to a panel of four experts in the English language field whose task was to evaluate the materials in line with the prior information provided, including the underlying theoretical conceptualization of the research, the participants and the aims of the study. Following their examination, several suggestions and remarks were made for the purpose of enhancing the content quality of the materials. Firstly, it was suggested that in order to obtain as accurate information as possible, besides the survey, the participants should be given an additional English proficiency exam. Thus, the potential (dis)agreement between the participants’ perceptions regarding their English proficiency and their actual proficiency could be detected and analyzed. However, bearing in mind practical and time considerations, this suggestion was implemented through adding a couple of questions in the survey where the participants were asked if they possessed an official English certificate/diploma and to name their officially allocated level of English proficiency. Secondly, it was suggested that questions should be added to the survey to provide more detailed information on the participants’ habitual behavior when faced with problems using English. Finally, it was recommended that the structure of some of the questions be modified and adapted to ensure clarity and better organization of the content. All of the comments were implemented and thus the instrument was ready for distribution. In order to check the construct validity of the survey, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed with the aim of identifying a set of potential latent constructs underlying a group of measured variables Table 4.2 Internal consistency reliability for a total 63 items and 5 categories of English language skills English language skill category

Number of items

Cronbach’s alpha

Writing skills

8

0.888

Listening skills

4

0.727

Reading skills

5

0.854

Speaking skills

8

0.843

Intercultural and interactional skills

11

0.908

Total

36

0.885

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  79

(skill sets) for each set of skills examined in the survey: writing skills (WS), reading skills (RS), listening skills (LS), speaking skills (SS) and IICS. Prior to performing an EFA, tests checking for the adequacy of the data in each skill set (a necessary prerequisite for running an EFA) was performed: the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity. The former indicated that the strength of the relationship among the variables in each skill set was high (WS: KMO = 0.88; LS: KMO = 0.66; RS: KMO = 0.75; SS: KMO = 0.79; IICS: KMO = 0.89), thus showing that it was appropriate to proceed to the factor analysis. The latter (testing the overall significance of all the correlations within the correlation matrix) showed that it was significant for all skill sets, thus indicating that it was acceptable to perform an EFA on these sets of data: WS (X2(28) = 602.60, p = 0.000); LS (X2(6)=136.21, p = 0.000); RS (X2(10)=357.74, p = 0.000), SS (X2(28)=447.41, p = 0.000), IICS (X2(55)=878.66, p = 0.000). For WS, a principal component analysis (PCA) was run and only one factor was extruded, with an eigenvalue of 4.56, accounting for 56.98% of the variance in the data. A PCA for LS was also performed and once again a sole factor was extruded with an eigenvalue of 2.24, accounting for 55.97% of the variance in the data. The same procedure was performed with RS: one factor was extruded with an eigenvalue of 3.17, accounting for 63.43% of the variance. When the same procedure was run with SS, however, two factors were extruded. The first one had an eigenvalue of 3.88, accounting for 48.53% of the variance, while the second one had an eigenvalue of 1.15, accounting for 14.40% of the variance in the data. A rotated component matrix (Varimax with Kaiser normalization) revealed that the first factor contained four items, which were labeled linguistic and extralinguistic competence (LEC). The second factor also consisted of four items that were labeled communicative competence (CC). Finally, upon performing a PCA for IICS, two factors were extruded. A rotated component matrix revealed that the first factor consisted of eight items, while the second one consisted of three. Therefore, with the three items not fully belonging to IICS, it was decided that they would be used only in the descriptive analysis, while inferential statistics including IICS will not take them into account. Additionally, in order to ensure face validity (e.g. to pinpoint potential difficulties and impediments that the participants might experience when providing responses, the possible vagueness of the content or structures, as well as to measure the time necessary for completing the surveys), the survey was distributed to a group of 19 business professionals who completed them in person in the researchers’ presence and were asked to comment on any vague, ambiguous, confusing or other potential issue that might have occurred in the process. After some useful suggestions and comments, the survey was slightly adjusted and was ready for distribution to the remaining participants.

80  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

At this juncture, it is important to note that the survey was written in both English and Bosnian and that the participants could opt for either of these versions. Thus, it was ensured that in the case of poor or insufficient English language skills, the answers would still be reliable, i.e. completing the survey in the Bosnian language prevented misunderstanding and inaccurate answers due to linguistic obstacles. The general instructions informed the participants in broad terms that the survey deals with the use of English in the Bosnian business context without providing specific details, so as not to influence their responses in any way. Furthermore, as the intention of the survey was to obtain insights into the reality of English language use in business from a BELF perspective and to learn about the experiences, perceptions and attitudes of business professionals on the issue, no definition of the BELF concept was provided, in order not to manipulate the responses. Instead, the perceptions were analyzed indirectly regarding their answers to given questions related to the BELF concepts. Consequently, the final version of the survey consisted of three fragments of 24 questions in total (see Appendix for the complete questionnaire). The first fragment of the survey, i.e. 10 initial inquiries, comprised background and ethnographic information about the participants, as well as their English language knowledge including: job position, age, gender, citizenship, level of education, nature of business, years of business experience, self-assessed general knowledge of the English language, formal level of English proficiency and place/mode of learning English. The second fragment of the survey consisted of nine questions related to general practices in terms of use of English in the workplace, as well as the participants’ own attitudes about some aspects of their English language learning/use. Thus, the second fragment investigated issues such as the frequency of interacting in English with native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers (NNSs); the importance of English in general in their workplace and the importance of English for job promotion; the frequency of English use in their workplace; different kinds of help in the case of linguistic difficulties (in English); perceptions of the best/worst ways of mastering English and of the best textbooks to use for entering the business market; perceptions of the kind(s) of English that should be used at work; and perceptions of the varying importance of basic English language skills in their jobs. Finally, the ultimate fragment consisted of five broad questions, each containing sub-questions. Thus, a question on WS contained eight sub-questions investigating the importance of different aspects of writing in the workplace including: using correct grammar in writing; using business-specific vocabulary; having a wide vocabulary; writing effective formal reports; writing effective formal business letters; writing effective proposals; writing effective emails; and translating from Bosnian to English and vice versa. The next broad question on LS had four subcategories exploring the importance of following

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  81

instructions, listening to clients and colleagues, taking notes at meetings and understanding presentations and reports. The RS general question had five subcategories assessing the importance of several of its aspects in the workplace: reading correspondence, reading reports, contracts and agreements, reading job-related technical materials, reading manuals and instructions and reading websites. SS, as explained earlier, was divided into two subcategories: LEC (using the correct grammar in interactions, using business-specific vocabulary, having a wide vocabulary and having native-like pronunciation) and CC (including questions on giving oral presentations/speaking at seminars, giving orders and instructions, using good phone skills and talking to clients and colleagues fluently). Finally, the last question explored different aspects of significance to IICS, having 11 subcategories: knowledge of the business etiquette of different cultures; being clear; being polite; using/recognizing non-verbal communication skills; socializing and building relationships with clients (dinners, parties, etc.); using appropriate greetings; using appropriate humor in communication; using small talk to create rapport; using some expressions or greetings from other parties’ native language; trying to understand an issue from the other person’s perspective; and trying to make the other person feel good. In order to obtain all the data regarding the participants’ experiences and views, the survey was structured in a variety of question types, all of them closed-set questions, with the aim of facilitating the subsequent data analysis. The questions took on the following forms: fill in the blanks, multiple choice, five-point Likert-type scale of importance and ranking schemes (e.g. from 1 to 5, from the least important to the most important). The surveys were distributed either in person or via an online format, depending on practical and time management reasons and the distribution and return process was executed within two months (November and December 2017). Where possible, the researchers preferred giving questionnaires in person, because it ensured a higher response rate, since the participants were more likely to fill in the survey when it was in print form on their desk. On the other hand, however, online surveys enabled the researcher to send out surveys to a significant number of professionals across the country, thereby saving time and resources. Thus, both online and print formats were used in the research, depending on expediency. Interviews

In general, qualitative interviews are used to gain participants’ thorough knowledge about a certain phenomenon or experiences (deMarrais, 2004). Thus, the interview was an important complement to the questionnaire in this study, because it provided extended information to the data obtained from the survey, thus allowing the researchers to clarify and build on the basic survey information and to explore associated

82  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

topics that did not lend themselves to a survey (Verma & Mallick, 1999). It helped the researchers to comprehend some points in more depth and length, which could not be fully achieved with closed-ended questions in the survey. The interviews conducted were semi-structured, i.e. the interviews had a general structured outline, but there was room for flexibility: the order of the questions could be altered and answers could be further developed through follow-up or clarification questions. Thus, placed between rigid structured interviews and free unstructured interviews, researchers deemed semi-structured interviews ‘the best of both worlds’, because although providing a fluid and elastic structure, they were economical in their execution, preventing surveyees from digressing from focal concepts. A total of 15 persons were interviewed, including employers, supervisors and employees. These were the people who first completed the surveys and subsequently responded to the interview questions. All of the survey participants were asked to participate in an interview lasting approximately half an hour. A total of 15 participants agreed to schedule an appointment for an interview. The interviews were conducted over a month, mostly in person (December, 2017). A few interviews were conducted over the phone for practical reasons (geographical distance or erratic timetables). The interview consisted of 30 questions which drew on the survey questions in an attempt to obtain broader and more detailed answers. Thus, depending on the interviewee’s loquaciousness, each interview lasted between 20 and 45  minutes. The interviews were conducted in Bosnian with all of the Bosnian interviewees, as Bosnian is also the mother tongue of the researchers who conducted the interview. Only one interview was conducted in English, as the interviewee’s first language is Turkish. Those conducted in Bosnian were initially translated by the researchers. Then, the translations were checked by two experts in the field of Bosnian–English translation, and in some cases interviewees were contacted to clarify some issues and check some parts. All of the interviews were audio-recorded. During the interview, the researchers talked as little as possible to give the participants a chance to express themselves freely and fully, without interruptions. All the participants were asked to provide final extra comments or suggestions if they wished, so that nothing of importance to the topic was left unsaid. While preparing for and conducting the interviews, as well as during the survey distribution, field notes were employed to document reflections, reminders and ideas. The notes were both descriptive and reflective. The descriptive part included a description of the setting, participants, conversations and things that the participants said in private. The reflective part refers to the researchers’ observations, impressions, concerns and personal reflections about the interviews. Writing the notes helped to nullify preconceived assumptions and to be aware of biases.

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  83

Observation and investigation of meetings, phone calls and correspondence

In order to strengthen the validity and credibility of the study, a triangulation technique was employed, i.e. validating the data by crossverifying the same information. Thus, in addition to the survey and interviews accompanied by field notes, another component was added to the study: the researchers’ direct examination of interactions in English that took place within one company in B&H operating internationally in the field of architecture and construction. The international interactions of four persons working within the company were probed, including two high-positioned professionals (CEO and executive director, both male Turks) and two medium-ranked professionals (a legal associate and marketing manager, both female Bosnians) as these four posts were the most exposed to interactions in English and the researchers were allowed access to their communication. Their interaction via different modes with a total of 14 other business professionals was examined, including: two Qataris, two Emiratis, two Saudis, one Kuwaiti, one Mauritanian, three Bosnians, one Italian and two Croatians. Thus, 9 international meetings were observed and 30 WhatsApp conversations (both written and voice messages), 15 phone conversations and 90 emails were examined from the BELF conceptual perspective. The duration of the meetings ranged between 20 minutes (the shortest) and 2 hours (the longest) and they spanned over a four-month period (November 2017–February 2018). Seven of the meetings were held in the company’s offices, while two took place elsewhere over lunch and the researchers were allowed to be present for all of them. Four of the meetings in the office were held between the CEO of the company (Turkish) and three of his employees (Bosnians); three meetings in the office included the CEO (Turkish), the long-time working legal associate (Bosnian) and international guests, all from the Gulf countries (Qatar, UAE and Kuwait). In the two lunch meetings, the CEO, the legal associate and a Bosnian and a Croatian partner from other cities/countries (Konjic and Nin) took part. The WhatsApp phone conversations examined were also a part of the CEO’s and the legal associate’s international interactions. The former provided the researchers with access to 20 conversations (15 written and 5 voice conversations) with the following nationalities: Italian (2), Qatari (4), Kuwaiti (3), Mauritanian (2), Saudi Arabian (2), Emirati (2), Bosnian (4) and Croatian (1). The latter provided access to 10 WhatsApp conversations with the following nationalities: Turkish (5), Qatari (2), Kuwaiti (2) and Saudi Arabian (1). Phone conversations to which the researchers were granted access were also provided by the same professionals: 10 phone conversations between the CEO and business partners (3 different conversations with a Qatari, 2 conversations with a Kuwaiti, 5 conversations with a Bosnian) and 5 phone conversations between the

84  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

legal associate and international business professionals (4 conversations with a Turk and 1 with a Qatari). Finally, 40 of the CEO’s emails and 50 of the legal associate’s emails were examined; the former including 20 emails with a Bosnian, 13 emails with a Qatari and 7 emails with an Emirati, and the latter including 32 emails with 2 Turks (19 and 13 with each), 13 emails with a Qatari and 5 emails with a Kuwaiti. All of the WhatsApp messages, phone conversations and emails took place over six months before being examined by the researchers (January and February 2018). As the listed national representation of the interactants shows, communication mostly took place between individuals whose native languages were either Bosnian, Turkish or Arabic, with a few samples including Italian and Croatian. All the data was anonymized. In order to gain a truthful understanding of all of the conversations, the researchers asked for short background information on possible previous relationships with interlocutors and the nature of their relations, the purpose and goal of the meetings/ conversations, the country of origin and a short business profile on the corresponding parties. Data Analysis

The quantitative data including data derived from a five-point Likerttype scale were analyzed through descriptive statistics using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). All of the 152 response papers were manually entered into the SPSS software. The analytical procedures included descriptive statistics for divergent items on the questionnaire to calculate the frequencies, percentages and, in many cases, the mean scores of the responses. In addition, inferential statistics was employed to draw conclusions about the business population and their needs, with a sample analysis and observation serving as the basis. In order to achieve this, the following tests were executed: an analysis of variance (ANOVA: testing the mean differences between specific groups), Chi-square (testing the intensity of the association between categorical variables), Spearman’s correlation (testing the intensity of the association between ordinal variables) and Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test (used in conjunction with an ANOVA to detect the means statistically significant from each other). The interviews were audio-recorded and used for the qualitative analysis and exploration of the perceptions of business professionals. To manage the process of qualitative data collection and analysis, a summary of the data gathered was written and the interviews were subsequently transcribed. While listening to and transcribing the audio recordings, notes and memos were made in the margins to record initial thoughts and impressions for later use in the analysis and coding of the data. While reading, the researchers identified patterns, concepts and phrases

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  85

and developed coding categories to organize the key notions and themes (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2008). The categories were labeled and defined using the researchers’ descriptive phrases, and examples and quotes were given from the texts to illustrate the meaning of the categories. The core methodology conducted for the analysis of the meetings, phone calls and correspondence was a discourse analysis and a content analysis. The former method offers the opportunity to thoroughly analyze and comprehend the text of the communicative event itself, the discourse practice and the wider social practice of which the communicative event forms part (Nielson & Nørreklit, 2009), while the latter enables an analysis of the meanings and relationships between certain themes and concepts (Krippendorff, 1980). In addition, in terms of the content, the analysis of the data relied heavily on the core features of BELF interaction, with the thematic units encompassing the concept of politeness and directness; coping strategies and mechanisms to grapple with misunderstandings; success and failure factors; grammatical features; sentence structure and style; English proficiency needs and shortcomings in education and business; multilingualism; accommodation; intercultural awareness; and building rapport. Thus, it was believed that the qualitative analysis performed in this way would act as an aid in the contrastive analysis of the European BELF findings and the discoveries made in the Bosnian business contexts. Research Findings

The findings of the conducted study are elaborated on in this chapter, observing the chronological order of the RQs. Thus, the 10 RQs probing divergent aspects of English proficiency within the Bosnian business setting are presented in sections, yielding some interesting results regarding the nature, conventions and features of business communication in English in B&H from a BELF perspective. Discussion of these findings, interpretations and references to the relevant studies will be elaborated on in Chapter 5. In order to provide a cohesive and coherent presentation of the data collected via the mixed-method approach, as described in the methodology section, it was deemed practical to blend in the responses of both the qualitative and quantitative methods in the same thematic sections, answering the same RQs posed. Therefore, the qualitative stage of the data presentation, i.e. the answers to the interview questions are incorporated into the quantitative data, rather than being dealt with in isolation. More precisely, the first part of each section (each RQ, apart from RQ10) starts with findings retrieved from the questionnaire responses, pinpointing the statistically verifiable peculiarities, discrepancies and both expected and surprising data results, followed by a qualitative representation of the data. The only exception to this structural organization of

86  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

the chapter is the final RQ, which presents only the qualitative data of the third part of this research: findings gathered from observations, reading written correspondence and listening to meetings and phone calls, as well as some interviewees’ insights and responses. It should be noted and reiterated here that, in regard to quantitative findings, in order to check if the data meet the assumptions of the parametric tests (i.e. to determine whether a data set is modeled for normal distribution), a normality test was run. More precisely, two numerical measures of shape (in statistical terms) were used to test normality: skewness and kurtosis, with the skewness value providing an indication of the symmetry of the distribution, and the kurtosis value, on the other hand, giving information about the ‘peakedness’ of the distribution (Pallant, 2005: 51). According to George and Mallery (2010), skewedness and kurtosis values ranging from –2 to +2 are considered acceptable in proving a normal or near-normal univariate distribution. All the results of the normality test for different segments of the questionnaire used in this research were shown to be within the prescribed range, with the lowest skewness value of –0.995 and the highest –0.064, while the lowest kurtosis value was –0.739 and the highest amounted to 1.684 (Table 4.3). Therefore, the results indicated that parametric statistical inferential procedures could be used in the data analyses. The importance of English within the Bosnian business context

Regarding the two opposing groups in terms of communication interlocutors, as expected the results showed that only a small proportion of business professionals, i.e. 10.53%, communicated exclusively with NSs. Interestingly, a significant proportion of the surveyees reported communicating only with NNSs, i.e. 40.13%, while the majority (approximately half) of the participants (49.34%) said that they communicated with both NSs and NNSs in their jobs (Figure 4.11). A noteworthy question that the quantitative survey did not answer concerned the amount of communication that occurs with NSs and Table 4.3 Descriptive statistics: Distribution of scores on continuous variables n

Min

Max

M

SD

Skewness

Kurtosis

Stat.

Stat.

Stat.

Stat.

Stat.

Stat.

Std Error

Stat.

Std Error

WS

152

1.00

5.00

3.87

0.77

–0.995

0.197

1.555

0.391

LS

152

2.00

5.00

4.22

0.68

–0.966

0.197

0.681

0.391

RS

152

1.00

5.00

4.02

0.77

–0.964

0.197

1.684

0.391

LEC

152

2.00

5.00

3.67

0.74

–0.064

0.197

–0.739

0.391

CC

152

2.00

5.00

3.87

0.77

–0.410

0.197

–0.535

0.391

IICS

152

1.50

5.00

3.93

0.76

–0.857

0.197

0.610

0.391

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  87

Figure 4.11  The groups with whom most of communication takes place

NNSs, respectively, out of the group of professionals and companies that communicate with both NSs and NNSs. This information was supplemented by the qualitative analysis. The answers varied and were determined by the type and focus of the business and, most importantly, by its target markets internationally. On the basis of all the interviewees’ answers, there seemed to be a few patterns in the usage of English with different groups. In the case of local companies, with local owners, the major factor influencing who the interlocutors are, is apparently the target business group. Thus, for companies that specialize in a certain field, are Europe oriented and tend to apply for European Union (EU) funds and partners for their projects (as is the case with the workplaces of Participant  8: environmental consultant and Participant  13: pharmaceutical administrative assistant), communication with NSs seems to be of the utmost importance since the representatives of funding organizations and partner companies are most often NSs. In these cases, both written and oral communication tend to observe NS standards, because the largest proportion of English communication in these companies seems to occur with NSs (Americans and British), and only a smaller proportion with NNSs (Northern, Western, Southern and Central European countries) – usually lower-ranked correspondents and colleagues. In the case of local companies, with local owners, which are, however, not Europe oriented, but rather globally oriented, the largest proportion of interactions seems to take place with NNSs. In this scenario, communication with NNSs overwhelmingly surpasses communication with NSs, with reported percentages (of interaction with NNSs) ranging

88  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

from 60% to 99%. The national and ethnic affiliations of these NNS groups differ substantially, depending on the nature of the business. Thus, it seems that in real estate, construction and architecture businesses, interaction often occurs with NNSs originating from the Gulf countries and Turkey. In trading business, very often interlocutors come from Turkey and China. In services, interlocutors come from all over the world, mostly Europe, America and Asia. In the case of branches of international companies with headquarters mostly in the UK or the US, communication in English is frequently ambivalent and is roughly equally distributed between both NS and NNS groups. This seems to be a frequent case with IT, telecommunications, transportation, dispatching and other types of businesses that can be managed and operated smoothly from a distance, since the labor cost is significantly less in B&H than in their own countries (as reported, for example, by Participant  1: communication specialist; Participant  5: IT coordinator; Participant 6: network administrator; Participant 7: operations manager; Participant 9: customer service manager; Participant 12: dispatch coordinator, who work in these fields). In these cases, quite often both the director and the managing body of the mother company, as well as the customers requesting a service are NSs (the UK, Australia and the US). However, colleagues from other branches and subcontractors often come from the Indian subcontinent, some Far East countries and some Latin American countries. In the case of international companies with headquarters mostly in non-English-speaking EU countries, communication usually occurs with NNSs, both with company managers and with other branches. The interviews (with Participant  2: marketing and sales representative; Participant 3: legal associate and consultant; Participant 4: CEO; Participant 10: advertising sales representative; Participant 14: cosmetic marketing manager) suggest that this is particularly the case with trading, marketing and distribution companies. Within this operating framework, the interlocutors were reported to originate from the Scandinavian countries, Western and Central European countries and the Balkans. As reported previously, the study included only companies where English was partially or fully utilized as a communication tool in conducting business. However, exactly how much proficiency in English was important in that type of Bosnian workplace was a topic explored in one of the survey questions. Naturally, none of the participants answered that it was not important, since it is used (at least partially) in their job. However, 6.58% answered that it was a little important; 16.45% positioned themselves on a more neutral side opting for a ‘somewhat important’ value; 29.61% deemed it important; while almost half of the participants (47.37%) gave it the highest ‘very important’ score on the scale (Figure 4.12).

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  89

Figure 4.12  Importance of English proficiency in a Bosnian workplace

These findings were substantiated by the interview answers, where a number of respondents were adamant in their view that a knowledge of English is one of the essential skills in building a successful career. They supported their view by reporting that proficiency in English had been used as a filtering tool in obtaining their job positions. The job interviews had been conducted in English or written paragraphs had been given to be translated into English in order to eliminate candidates with insufficient knowledge of English. Thus, they revealed a striking reality, as Participant  5 (IT coordinator) noted: ‘The individuals who might be experienced experts and fit for the job were not hired because they did not meet the primary prerequisite of being proficient English speakers’. Similar observations were reported by professionals employed in both locally owned businesses and branch offices of foreign companies. Participant  13 (pharmaceutical administrative assistant) pointed out that, bearing in mind that the Bosnian economy is not self-sufficient and sustainable and is mostly import oriented, it is only natural that a significant number of businesses rely heavily on English in their communication with foreign partners. She exemplified this observation by the current status in her own (pharmaceutical) industry: ‘There are only four domestic pharmaceutical companies, out of which only two produce wide-range medicines, while the rest of them are being imported. Thus, external communication and all procedures and regulations are inextricably linked to English’. The question inquiring how important English is in order to be promoted in the respondents’ workplace provided some interesting results. Only 4% of the participants said it was ‘not important’; 7.89% said it had ‘little importance’; 19.74% deemed it ‘somewhat important’; and

90  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

31.58% and 36.84% perceived it ‘important’ or ‘very important’, respectively (Figure 4.13). Thus, the results illustrate that the greatest percentage of respondees saw English proficiency as an important condition for promotion. This finding was further validated by the interviewees’ responses. Participant 6 (network administrator in IT field) noted: Only after you have been just recently hired can you afford to be bad in English, but later on, if you don´t show good English skills, you are being put aside, you don´t get a chance to show your qualities fully and you don´t get a chance to be promoted to a higher post.

Participant  7 (operations manager in web design service) reported that her own personal success in her job was made possible by her advanced English proficiency. She said that one of the first steps that she had taken and which enabled her to be promoted (now she works as a sector manager) was that she had volunteered to manage correspondence in English with their clients, which other employees were reluctant to take on due to being self-conscious about their English proficiency. In a short time period, she had become the person to handle all official written correspondence in their sector. Participant 3 (legal associate in the construction and architecture field) made a similar observation: ‘The personnel with the best English communication skills is usually selected for initial meetings with new potential clients and in this way their significance in professional presentation of the company is being recognized and valued’. However, at this juncture, it is important to note that this was not

Figure 4.13  Importance of English proficiency for promotion in a Bosnian workplace

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  91

the case for all the job positions. For instance, Participant 12 (dispatch coordinator in a transportation company) reported that English proficiency is a prerequisite to perform her job, but higher levels of proficiency are not required because her job mostly involves formulaic expressions related to the dispatching register, which most people with basic English can pick up quickly. Therefore, in her particular case, a great knowledge of English (she holds a master’s degree in English language and literature) did not procure her a better job position. Consequently, the findings show that more often than not, in (at least partially) English-speaking workplaces, English is important for promotion. However, in some job posts it has no significance. The dilemma of how important English really is in their daily work was further probed by enquiring how often English is employed as a communication tool in their job. The findings showed that the most prevalent practice is where English is used often (49.67%). In a significant number of companies, English is used always (24.50%), while in 15.23% of cases it is used sometimes and in 10.60% of cases it is used rarely (Figure 4.14). Thus, the data show that, most commonly, job environments require a frequent, but not constant use of English. The responses obtained through interviews are in agreement with the data, i.e. the answers varied, but a majority of the respondees reported using English more often than not within their overall work communication. Finally, after examining the levels of significance of English, it seemed natural to explore what type of English is important to use. Thus, the overwhelming majority of the participants (81.3%) responded that any English variety is acceptable. Small percentages of 5.33% and 11.33% opted for British and American English, respectively, while 2% chose

Figure 4.14  The frequency of English use in a Bosnian workplace

92  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Figure 4.15  The kind of English to be used in a Bosnian workplace

other option, without specifying what that other option was, in their view. Figure  4.15 shows the stark contrast between the view that any English is fine and all other possible options. Some respondees, however, did note that they had lived in the US for a period of time and therefore preferred using American English, placing it on a higher level than other varieties. However, the majority of the respondees in the interviews also noted that the type of English used in work is irrelevant, as long as it serves its business purpose (e.g. Participants 1–6, 9, 10, 12, 14). The survey question analyzed earlier asked the participants about the importance of English in their own workplace. However, based on their overall work experience and contacts with other business professionals, the interviewees were also asked what their general impression was regarding the importance of English in the entire Bosnian work environment, with the answers providing similar results. Only a few claimed that in the majority of companies it is not a prerequisite and thus, it is not an imperative. Others were unwavering in their view that English is a basic skill for anyone who wants to make headway in their career. Some, however, were less unremitting in their judgments stating that English is important, but lamented over the fact that this importance still ‘stays unrecognized in our society in many business and economic aspects, predicting that by 2025 the importance of English in governmental sectors will have increased tremendously’ (Participant 5: IT coordinator). Participant 15 (drug control officer, pharmaceutical sector) summarized the issue as follows: English is important in many sectors, but we live in a rather closed society that does not utilize all the sectors. Thus, it is acceptable in our

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  93

country that a clerk holding a position in a public office, a tourist clerk or a country delegate representing us outside are not proficient in English. This places us in a very bad starting position in business. I do think, however, that the larger segment of business transactions in B&H does require a satisfactory knowledge of English: less in some, and more in some other contexts. In any case, I would say that English is a significant segment of business activities. Effective sources to improve English for better job performance

The participants were asked to rate the effectiveness of five different ways of learning English for subsequent professional purposes. The options offered included private tutoring, self-study, the media, English course and formal education. The respondees had the choice to give all high or low scores, without having to rank them on the continuum of importance. Thus, it was possible to gain an insight into how important all of the different modes were in relation to each other and in an overall assessment of modes and ways of studying. As Figure  4.16 shows, all five options received around 30% or more responses, labeling them the best ways to learn English for business purposes. Roughly equal proportions of the options were rated as the second or third best ways to learn English.

Figure 4.16 The best way to master English in order to successfully fit into the Bosnian business market

94  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

The overall picture shows that none of the offered options stands out as the best option, i.e. it seems that all of the ways to learn English can be exploited if one is willing to invest the time and effort, as one of the interviewees noted. At the same time, all of the options received lower scores from a number of participants, suggesting that each option has both advantages and disadvantages. What is shown, therefore, is that no one mode of studying English is superior to the other, and that all modes can be uniformly employed to enhance one’s knowledge. However, the highest number of negative scores was given to formal education: 11.28%; n = 15 (but it had more than 30% of highly positive rankings as the best option, too). A more thorough insight into the shortcomings of Bosnian education in regard to English teaching was gained through the interviews. Interestingly, only 2 out of a total of 15 interviewees were content with the way they had been taught English from institutional elementary to higher education. The remainder had a number of objections. An overpowering impression seems to be that the formal educational system, as it is designed, does not fully provide for the needs of future professionals. The recurring comments criticized the overemphasis on grammar rules and theory: ‘Schools need more of interaction and conversation, and less fill-in-the gap drills’ (Participant 11: PR officer). I was one of the best students and managed to learn English in general, but I was definitely not prepared to use business English nor was I taught business-specific vocabulary at my faculty, which I later needed in my job. (Participant 13: pharmaceutical administrative assistant) I think we needed more fun and games in English in primary schools, while in high schools and at the faculty we definitely needed more English interaction, more workshops, more native speakers’ guest lectures and more simulated mock dialogues that we would need in the future. (Participant 12: dispatch coordinator) Definitely less grammar and more speech and oral summaries of our days, books or articles we read, films we watched etc. (Participant  9: customer service manager) Whether you will really learn English in primary and high school depends heavily on your self-initiative, not on the educational system, because our educational system does not produce fluent speakers ready to enter the workforce. It all depends on a person, how much they will study and learn on their own. The spotlight in teaching English should be on the two things: conversation and building self-confidence. I learned English on my own initiative and through hard work. (Participant  8: environmental consultant) We had too much focus put on pronunciation, spelling and grammar, but from the very beginning teachers should insist on a lot of reading

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  95

and summarizing of the read excerpts, to increase the vocabulary. And what is the point of learning some things in English by heart? In my high school we had to learn Shakespeare’s sonnets in old English by heart. I still don’t get why? (Participant 7: web design operations manager) I think that one of the failures of English education at most of our faculties is that we are still being taught basic English instead of being taught specialized English related to our profession, that could prepare us for the market. I had to learn business-specific vocabulary on my own after I got a job and had to consult technical texts in English. (Participant 2: Marketing and sales representative) What I learned in school was not enough to prepare me for my future work. It would be really good if 50% of all school subjects in state schools could be taught in English. Today you are very professionally limited if you cannot speak English. (Participant  3: legal associate and consultant) It is paradoxical that we learn English for a dozen years and we still cannot speak the language after finishing high school. It is true that most good students can understand when they read or listen to it, but very often they cannot express themselves in English. (Participant 1: communication specialist)

It is, however, important to note that a few interviewees who had some experience with the private educational system pointed out that the distinction between state and private schools regarding the English language is quite evident. In most private schools, at least half of the subjects are taught in English, and with teaching materials in English and exams and lectures held in English, students quickly learn English through this crosscurricular approach. When asked about what private English courses should include, interviewees made several remarks: courses have to keep up with global trends; first of all, they should work on freeing students from the fear of making a mistake (‘When speaking, I should not be thinking all the time if I should say does or do, that puts a huge pressure’, as Participant 11: PR officer, noted), which seems to be rooted in the educational system; they should insist on plenty of interaction and conversation. When it comes to business English courses specifically, the overriding answers pointed to an idealistic concept: a perfect English teacher who knows how to transmit knowledge, but at the same time is involved in business in the specific context and can navigate the course toward fulfilling real market needs. However, being aware that this might be too naïve an expectation, a few interviewees suggested that every business English course teacher and administrator should spend some time observing authentic business activities, communicating with business people and closely inspecting

96  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

written business texts and materials, and only then design and teach the course curricula. Participant  4, the CEO of a construction company, drawing on his own long experience as a company director frequently required to use English, brought up a novel concept, which might be considered when planning English courses: ‘designing the course bearing in mind the age of the attendees, as well as their immediate needs’. He stated: What should be taught in class depends on the people: for young people who have enough time and are still working on their careers, you can give them grammar as a foundation and go with the old-school approach. But after some age, it simply cannot work. Businessmen need face to face communication, so you need to make them practice conversation starting with basic level, basic way to communicate (key concept) and then if they need more, or have potential, you can build on this. But most business professionals don’t have time for this, or even linguistic potential and it’s hard. Courses have to be practical and teachers need to let go of their rigid standardized chronological way of teaching the same way for everyone. They should just give the students what they want the way they want, without trying to persuade them that their teaching method is great for everyone. They have to put themselves into a businessman´s shoes and understand our mindset, our overcrowded schedules and everyday stress and provide us with the real thing we need, without wasting our time and energy on trying to explain things of secondary importance, such as the difference between present perfect and past simple. The same way that we have coffee to go and grab & go foods, we need to have intensive, quick and to the point learn & go courses (laugh). This is an illustrative exaggeration, but you get my point.

Finally, the interviewees were asked which of these is more important: ‘knowledge of English learned before starting their job’ or ‘the practical English knowledge one acquires while performing their work’. A few of the respondees opted for practical knowledge, saying that ‘you cannot really anneal until you are thrown in the fire’ (Participant 2: marketing and sales representative) and Participant  8 (environmental consultant) said that everything they learned before work was proven fundamental and more important than the extra knowledge gained through their work experience; however, the remaining respondees said that both segments are equally important. Participant 4 (construction company CEO) summarized it graphically: It’s best to first learn English in school and courses and then have practice at work. You need to have a foundation. It’s like infrastructure, you need to have all the elements there, and then you can create your own style, which should be easy, practical and successful.

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  97

The following questionnaire asked the participants what was the best help when encountering problems with English in their workplace. The participants were offered five possible answers (once again being able to assign high or low marks as many times as they wished): ‘searching the internet’, ‘asking a colleague’, ‘asking a friend’, ‘seeking advice from an expert’ and ‘consulting a technical text’. The predominant response was anticipated, and it came as no surprise that 61.38% of the participants answered that the first ‘friend’ to whom they turn when experiencing a difficulty with English is Google (Figure 4.17). The second option with a high score was seeking advice from an expert (34.40%), followed by consulting technical texts (25.60%), asking a colleague (23.85%) and asking a friend (11.11%). The interview responses provided more understanding of their rationale. As most of the interviewees noted as well, resorting to the internet when they need to find or confirm information (of any kind, including linguistic issues) is the fastest, cheapest and frequently the most effective way, considering that we live in a digital era of androids and omnipresent internet connections on hand. When a piece of information is too specific or contextualized and cannot be obtained from the wide web, an expert is consulted. Surprisingly, as Figure 4.17 shows, asking a colleague received slightly more than 20% as the best option (among others). The reason might be suggested from some of the interview responses. Although some answered that they have no problem with asking their colleague for help,

Figure 4.17  The best help when encountering a problem at work related to English

98  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

a significant number of interviewees answered that they prefer not to, providing varying reasons: sometimes they simply know that their colleagues’ proficiency is not advanced enough to be able to help them, other times they do not have a close enough relationship with other colleagues to ask for this kind of help, sometimes they simply do not want to depend on others or unnecessarily show any vulnerability and possibly jeopardize their image, but it seems that most often they do not feel a need to turn to colleagues when they have access to the internet. It is an interesting finding that out of all the options, consulting technical texts (19.20%) was considered the least effective way to help, and expectedly the internet received the fewest negative ratings with just 3.45%. As Participant  5 (IT coordinator) noted, going to a library and looking for a specialized book to retrieve some data seems like a remnant of another time and in today’s fast-paced world, people have simply got used to having all kinds of information just a click away. He pointed out that when specialized texts are consulted, most of the time they are accessed through internet databases and not in hard copy formats. Finally, when asked about the type of textbooks to use when learning English before entering their workplace, the surveyees had four options to choose from: ‘textbooks for business purposes’, ‘general English textbooks’, ‘both’ or ‘other’. Exactly 100 participants (66.67%) opted for ‘both’, followed by 27 participants who opted for ‘English business course books’ (18.00%) and 16 participants who opted for ‘general English course books’ (10.67%) and, finally, 7 participants (4.67%) chose the option ‘other’, with a few specifying that ‘other’ meant living abroad, thus placing authentic real-context learning over book learning (Figure 4.18).

Figure 4.18  The kind of textbooks to be used for learning English before entering a Bosnian workplace

Business Communication in B&H from the BELF Perspective  99

Age-based differences in perceptions

The overall assessment of the importance of English and its different aspects and learning resources that were explored in the two initial RQs was narrowed down in RQ3, by cross-tabulating the same questions by age (group) distribution and then conducting an ANOVA or Chi-square tests of independence to check for statistical significance. The former was used whenever interval variables were involved, while the latter was used when both dependent and independent variables were categorical, thus disabling the use of parametric tests. The first question asking ‘with whom the participants mostly communicate at work place (native speakers, not-native speakers or both)’ was subjected to cross-tabulation and a Chi-square test. The cross-tabulation results showed that out of all the age groups, the group that communicates most with both NSs and NNSs is the 30–39 age group, with percentages of 53.3% and 50.8%, respectively. On the other hand, the group with the highest proportion of communication with both groups is the youngest 18–29 age group amounting to 46.7% in overall ‘both groups’ communication. The oldest 50–59 age group was predictably represented with the smallest percentages of all of the groups, considering that this group consisted of the smallest sample of all other age groups (Table 4.4). However, a Chi-square test showed that the differences between the groups regarding this question were not statistically significant: X²  (6, n = 151) = 7.29, p = 0.29, V = 0.16. The following question asked ‘how important English is at their workplace’, with the possible answers ranging from 1 to 5, i.e. from ‘not important’ to ‘very important’. A descriptive analysis at the 95% confidence level for the question showed that the means ranged from 3.6, which was the lowest (M = 3.6, SD = 0.8), to 4.4, the highest mean value (M = 4.4, SD = 0.8). The former was produced by the oldest age group (50 and more), while the latter was produced by the youngest age group (18–29), which means that the senior professionals considered English least important, and the youngest professionals considered it most important, out of all the age groups (Table 4.5). The other two groups in between also considered it rather important with a mean of 4 or more. Table  4.4 The groups with whom most communication in English takes place: Cross tabulation by age Age group NSs

18–29 n

%

30–39

40–49

50+

Chi-square

n

%

n

%

n

%

4

26.7

8

53.3

3

20.0

0

0.0

NNSs

19

31.1

31

50.8

7

11.5

4

6.6

Both

35

46.7

26

37.4

8

10.7

6

8.0

X²

df

p

V

7.29

6

0.29

0.16

100  Reconceptualizing English for International Business Contexts

Table  4.5 The importance of English in a Bosnian workplace: Descriptive statistics by age Age group

n

M

SD

Min

Max

18–29

58

4.37

0.81

2.00

5.00

30–39

65

4.12

1.00

2.00

5.00

40–49

18

4.00

0.97

2.00

5.00

50+

10

3.60

0.84

2.00

5.00

In order to check if these differences were statistically significant, an ANOVA was performed. The results indicated that the groups did not differ significantly across the age groups, F(3, 147) = 2.52, p = 0.060, f  = 0.21. The means for a similar question ‘How important is English at your workplace in order to be promoted?’ were distributed as follows: the highest score was produced by the youngest group (M = 4.05, SD = 1.09), while the lowest score was produced by the oldest group (M = 3.00, SD = 0.94). The 30–39 and 40–49 age groups had the following scores, respectively: M = 3.92, SD = 1.11 and M = 3.72, SD = 1.07 (Table  4.6). The obvious difference between (some of) the groups was confirmed as statistically significant at the p