Me: a hard believer in linguistic analysis as a tool to discover why processes don't go the way we want them to go and presuming that there are a lot of taboos in talking business in OI (maybe to maintain 'face' (Goffman))
The work field: sees a lot of problems trying to get (potential) partners to speak up about their expectations and contributions in an OI collaboration, feels things can improve a lot in order to achieve a higher succes ratio for projects
The professor: things may not be that problematic and simple managerial skills and courses may solve, what is is essentially, a lack of assertiveness
You: good references, sources, ideas that will support either of the three views
Thank you a lot for thinking along!
I think there is a discrepancy between the concept of Open Innovation in economics and
in linguistic . Here, to my mind, is an interesting twisting of the very function of language. According to Jacobson's model the sentence " open innovation" has an informative function but Henry Chesbrough was able to transform its function into the aesthetic and consequently he literally objectified language and made it fulfill his aesthetic propaganda. Apart from concluding that Jacobson's model is flexible from the outside ( the user) ,this very instance proves that Heidegger was wrong. We are not prisoners of our own language-actually that are various instances where we can get out of the system and return very quickly. In other words we can leave the system for a short while but we are doomed to return to our prison.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers