Journal of Business

Communication
http://job.sagepub.com/

English as a Business Lingua Franca in a German Multinational

Corporation : Meeting the Challenge
Susanne Ehrenreich
Journal of Business Communication 2010 47: 408
DOI: 10.1177/0021943610377303
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://job.sagepub.com/content/47/4/408

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Business Communication

Additional services and information for Journal of Business Communication can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://job.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://job.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://job.sagepub.com/content/47/4/408.refs.html

>>
Version of Record - Sep 9, 2010
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013
What is This?

ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS
LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN
MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION
Meeting the Challenge
Susanne Ehrenreich
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitt Mnchen, Germany

This article explores the role of English and other languages as perceived by members of upper management in a family-owned German multinational corporation in the technology sector. The findings
show that, in the 21st century, English has become an indispensable must in the company and that
there is a general understanding that staff at all levels develop their language skills as they see appropriate for their roles within the company. What needs to be learned, however, is not English as a
native language but communicative effectiveness in English as a business lingua franca, whichas
an international contact languagebrings together nonnative as well as native Englishes from various linguacultural backgrounds spoken with varying degrees of proficiency. Learning to cope with the
challenges of such diversity, in the context of business communication, seems to happen most effectively in business communities of practice rather than in traditional English training. The study
also shows that, despite the dominance of English, other languages are not disappearing from the
scene but are, indeed, used as a pragmatic or strategic resource. In particular, German, as the headquarters language, maintains an important role among individuals and within the organization.
Keywords:English as a business lingua franca; BELF; language diversity; multilingual communicative effectiveness

One decade into the 21st century, English has undoubtedly become the
dominant language in international business. This fact will be readily
acknowledged by those involved in global business operations today (see
Charles, 2007; Du-Babcock & Babcock, 2007; Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009;
Louhiala-Salminen & Charles, 2006; Nickerson, 2005; Piekkari, 2009;
The author would like to thank the editors and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions
and comments on an earlier draft of this article. All errors and shortcomings are exclusively her own.
Susanne Ehrenreich is a senior lecturer in Applied English Linguistics at LMU Munich, Germany.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Susanne Ehrenreich, Department
for British and American Studies, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitt Mnchen, 80799 Munich, Germany;
e-mail: ehrenreich@lmu.de.
Journal of Business Communication, Volume 47, Number 4, October 2010 408-431
DOI: 10.1177/0021943610377303
2010 by the Association for Business Communication

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 409

Rogerson-Revell, 2007, 2008; Welch, Welch, & Piekkari, 2005). However,

to fully grasp the meaning of this seemingly straightforward introductory
statement, a closer look at each of its individual components is necessary.
What kind of English is it that is used in international business interactions?
Also, what does the dominance of English imply? Does it imply exclusivity
at the expense of other languages or, rather, a relative position in the linguistic repertoires of individuals and organizations? Finally, what exactly do we
mean by international business? In concrete terms, what is the nature, structure, and global scope of individual business contexts and who are the people
in these contexts using English as a communicative tool?

What does the dominance of English

imply? Does it imply exclusivity at the
expense of other languages or, rather, a
relative position in the linguistic repertoires of individuals and organizations?

The aim of this article is to explore these and related issues on the basis
of a qualitative study that investigates the use of English and its role as a
business lingua franca alongside other languages as experienced by representatives of top and middle management of a German family-owned
multinational corporation (MNC). The article thus aims to complement
existing research into the use of English in other multinationals in Germany
(e.g., Fredriksson, Barner-Rasmussen, & Piekkari 2007) as well as in other
countries and regions (e.g., Louhiala-Salminen, Charles, & Kankaanranta,
2005; Marschan, Welch, & Welch, 1997).
The article is structured as follows: First, the above-mentioned themes
are explored against the backdrop of previous research. Then, the research
methodology of this study as well as its conceptual framework is described,
followed by a presentation of the findings and their discussion. The article
concludes with a critical examination of the limitations of the study and
some pointers to future research.
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS RESEARCH

The use of and the wider implications of English as a lingua franca

(ELF) are studied from various perspectives and with different foci in
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

410 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

several disciplines. The two most important strands of research that need
to be brought together for the purpose of the present article are linguistics,
with its newly emerging field of ELF research (e.g., Mauranen & Ranta,
2009), and international business communication, in which the study of
English as a business lingua franca (BELF) has also become a major focal
point in recent years (e.g., Gerritsen & Nickerson, 2009; Louhiala-Salminen
et al., 2005). In the following, the conceptual issues outlined in the introduction will be explored in more detail and linked to previous research.
The first set of questions concerns the English language. What kind of
English is used by and is useful for the interactants? There is general
agreement in both ELF and BELF research that English used for international communication purposes is not the same as the English used by its
native speakers locally in their home countries. Thus, a conceptual distinction has to be made between English as a native language (ENL) and
ELF (see Seidlhofer, 2001). Building on the concept of ELF, BELF has
been defined as a language that is nobodys own, but can be shared and
is used in the business discourse community, that is, it is ELF usage in
business situations (Louhiala-Salminen & Charles, 2006, pp. 31, 34). This
important distinction, however, between different concepts of English,
with the major implications it has on several levels, is not always made
explicit in the literature nor is it, despite the use of the terminology,
always maintained in the line of reasoning in some work.

There is general agreement in both

ELF and BELF research that English
used for international communication
purposes is not the same as the
English used by its native speakers
locally in their home countries.

For example, as the primary purpose of language is to enable communication, the issue needs to be addressed as to what specific characteristics of BELF (or, more precisely, what specific skills exhibited by its
speakers) actually make this communication work. Thus, the concept of
language competence, which has traditionally been gauged against the
yardstick of a native speakers skills, has to be reevaluated in the light of
recent (B)ELF research. Several approaches can be identified. Somewhat
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 411

inconsistently, a couple of linguistic (B)ELF studies still use native speaker

standards to evaluate the language performance of nonnative speaker business professionals (Firth, 1996; Rogerson-Revell, 2008). In contrast, the
bulk of research into both ELF and BELF is pursuing an avenue more in
line with its own conceptual underpinnings. In BELF research, Poncinis
(2002, 2007) and Louhiala-Salminens (2002) context-sensitive analyses
of business professionals discourse activities reveal the interactants ess
entially pragmatic approach to language issues as well as their skilful and
strategic use of BELF together with other languages. These findings are
very much in line with work done in general ELF research. With regard to
the specific domain of language use, Poncinis (2002, 2007) and LouhialaSalminens (2002) studies remind us of the fact that business discourse is
governed by a range of business-related, extralinguistic contextual factors
such as the participants professional roles, the extent of shared knowledge
and differing expectations, as well as time constraints. Unfortunately,
though probably because of the disciplines orientations, in international
business and management studies, the conceptual question of what actually
constitutes English language competence in international business today is
generally not problematized (e.g., Blazejewski, 2006; Fredriksson et al.,
2007; Piekkari, 2009; Tietze, 2004).

Although English is clearly the dominant language in international business,

other languages do not disappear from
the business scene but interact with
English in many ways.

Another set of questions concerns the position of English in relation to

other languages. Although English is clearly the dominant language in
international business, other languages do not disappear from the business
scene but interact with English in many ways. This interaction is played
out on the individual, the social, as well as the organizational level.
Although the multilingual nature of international (business) contact settings is generally acknowledged (e.g., Poncini, 2003), the way it is evaluated across the disciplines varies considerably. Contact linguistics, on the
one hand, and international management studies, on the other, probably
represent the two endpoints of an interdisciplinary continuum. In contact
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

412 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

linguistics, and more specifically in the study of Postcolonial Englishes,

the interaction between English and other languages in multilingual settings as well as the resulting (socio)linguistic effects constitute the major
focus of the fields (Schneider, 2007; Seidlhofer, 2009). In the area of
international management studies with its focus on the notion of a common corporate language, the parallel coexistence of one or several languages alongside such a shared language (e.g., English) is considered to
be potentially problematic from the perspective of corporate cohesion
and integration (Fredriksson et al., 2007, p. 419).
Finally, the domain of international business is a vast one, encompassing different industries, organized in companies of varying sizes
and with widely differing organizational structures, located in highly
diverse linguacultural regions across the globe, and involving representatives on different hierarchical levels. These are just some of the contextual business-related factors that recent research has shown to shape
the individual speakers communicative realities (e.g., Fredriksson et al.,
2007). Similarly, these factors are likely to influence the speakers attitudes toward BELF and their ability and willingness to deal with the
communicative challenges associated with it. For example, recent
research suggests that top management in large MNCs is not sufficiently aware of the existence of language-related problems on the
lower hierarchical levels (e.g., Piekkari 2009). Also, the role that is
assigned to the headquarters language seems to be a function of the
relative size of the language in question. Thus, in contrast to Nordic
businesses (Louhiala-Salminen, 2002; Marschan et al., 1997), in
Germany-based multinationals, German tends to maintain a major role
in the organization (Fredriksson et al., 2007). Empirical research focusing on the individual and his or her perceptions of the use of English in
the globalized work environment is still limited to only a couple of
landmark studies (e.g., Blazejewski, 2006; Fredriksson et al., 2007;
Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005; Marschan et al., 1997).
Based on qualitative interviews conducted with representatives of the
upper management in a German MNC, the following research questions
will be examined in this article to give additional empirical substance to
the issues addressed above:
1. What is the role of English in a German global MNC? How do German
business managers evaluate the communicative facets of (B)ELF and what
are their perceptions of native speaker interlocutors?
2. What are the roles of languages other than English? In a Germany-based
MNC, is the headquarters language privileged and if so in what way?
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 413

DATA AND CONCEPTS

Data and Analysis

The data for this study form part of an ongoing larger scale research
project investigating (B)ELF discourse as well as (B)ELF users perceptions of language and communication in MNCs and was gathered in 2006
and 2007 in two companies that are both global players in their fields. The
company investigated in the present study is a supplier for transport systems with an international workforce of 14,000 employees at 60 locations
in 25 countries on all continents. Throughout the study, the acronym
TechComp is used for this case company.
To capture the multidimensional realities of language and communication as experienced by mid- to top-level business managers as comprehensively as possibleultimately aiming to gain access to their conceptual
worlds (Geertz, 1973, as cited in Smart, 1998)an ethnographic, multimethod approach was adopted (see Charles, 2007; Kvale, 1996; LouhialaSalminen, 2002; Smart 1998). Data collection and analysis were governed
by general principles of qualitative research in the social sciences (Flick,
von Kardorff, & Steinke, 2000/2004; Glaser & Strauss, 1967) including
the relevant quality criteria of intersubject comprehensibility and indication of the research process as suggested by Steinke (2000/2004). The
overall database collected in TechComp consists of 24 qualitative interviews of an average length of 90 minutes, observation of various types of
internal and external meetings as well as dinners (16 events), 2 days of
shadowing, and nine recordings of phone conferences and meetings. All
in all, more than 30 days were spent on-site at the company. Among the
interviewees and observees in TechComp were board members, highlevel executives, and project managers, as well as engineers and a few
assistants. The majority of interview partners were German, and the
nationalities of the observees included Italian, French, British, American,
Chinese, and Spanish. However, at events such as the annual international
executive meeting (which the author also observed), people from more
than 20 nationalities gathered.
As research into the use of and attitudes toward BELF at the level of
top management is particularly scarce, four interviews with members
representing the four top levels of TechComps organizational hierarchy
have been singled out for an in-depth analysis in the present study: B is a
member of the companys executive board and functions as head of one
of the companys two divisions, C is chair of the management board of this
division, D is vice president of a development centre in the same division,
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

414 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

and, finally, E is a member of middle management and director in another

development centre (see the appendix for additional information on the
interviewees and a graph representing TechComps organization).
The format of the episodic interview (Flick, 2000/2004, p. 179) was
chosen, which combines a semistructured and a narrative approach and
involves the use of different types of questions that help gain access to
different types of knowledge and perspectives. The interview conversations thus provided rich personal accounts full of thick descriptions.
Strategies of communicative validation employed in the course of the interviews (e.g., brief summaries, clarifying requests) fulfilled the function of
within-method triangulation; the supplementary observational data contributed to between-method triangulation (Flick, 2000/2004, p. 179).
In light of the research questions of the present study, relevant text passages of the four interviews, which had previously been coded thematically
using the software package MAXQDA (Kelle, 2000/2004; VERBI Software,
2007), were retrieved and compared, followed by within-case and crosscase analyses. The main target was a detailed analysis of as many facets
as possible of the themes under investigation, as viewed by a group of
interviewees to whom access is notoriously difficult to gain (at least for a
linguist). Contributing to theory building in the field of ELF, rather than
generalization, is therefore the primary aim. However, through the processes of triangulation and the provision of the necessary contextual
information, a certain degree of transferability is guaranteed, enabling
a comparison with other dis/similar contexts (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, as
cited in Flick, 1995).
Analytical Concepts

As outlined above, English is conceptualized here as English as a

lingua franca (ELF), which is used as an international contact language
between speakers from various linguistic and cultural backgrounds to communicate across languages. As such, it is characterized by a high degree of
diversity in terms of regional linguacultural variation and levels of proficiency. The term BELF specifies the domain in which ELF is used and
emphasizes the many ways in which language and business strategies
interact in business discourse (Louhiala-Salminen & Charles, 2006) The
often debated issue of (non)inclusion of native speakers of English in res
earch into English-medium (business) communication (Louhiala-Salminen
& Charles, 2007; Rogerson-Revell, 2007, 2008) is solved here on an
empirical basis. As native speakers are an integral part of many business
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 415

interactions in TechComp, they are, naturally, included in the analysis.

International interactions conducted via English as a contact language
thus comprise a vast range of native speaker as well as nonnative speaker
Englishes. Another theoretical controversy concerns the issue of how international (business) communicators can be conceptualized adequately. Are they
primarily learners, or rather speakers in their own right? The answer hinges
both on how learning is framed theoretically and on empirical evidence
gained through self-reports and observation of language behavior in situ.
In previous research into BELF, the notion of discourse community has
been fruitfully applied for analyses of BELF discourse focusing on the business interactants shared knowledge of the forms and purposes of their discourse activities (Louhiala-Salminen, 2002). However, for an exploration of
the perceptions and attitudes of (B)ELF speakers, the concept of community
of practice (CofP) with its focus on the notion of practice (Holmes &
Meyerhoff, 1999, p. 174) may open up a perspective more in line with the
members own frames of reference (Ehrenreich, 2009; Lave & Wenger, 1991;
Poncini, 2007; Wenger, 1998). Members of a CofP are brought together by a
common task (joint enterprise), which they pursue and negotiate
through regular interaction (mutual engagement) developing their own
communicative resources (shared repertoire; see Wenger, 1998). In this
process, [w]ays of doing things, ways of talking, beliefs, values, power
relationsin short, practicesemerge (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet, 1992,
p. 464), which are passed on to and have to be learnt by new members joining
a particular community.
At TechComp, members of individual international CofPs interact with
each other face-to-face in various settings (in their offices, in corridors,
during meetings, over lunch, dinner, or coffee) or via different channels of
telecommunication (phone, email, Internet). Their joint enterprises are
defined by the companys objective of profit making, which again translates into each members individual contribution toward this goal. Finally,
the shared repertoires that have been developed by TechComps top and
middle managers include German, English, and many more languages, as
well as documents such as drawings, charts, or PowerPoint presentations,
as well as models of different parts of their products (see Smart, 1998).
FINDINGS

Over the past 20 years, TechComp has gradually but steadily developed
from a national medium-sized enterprise into a highly globalized corporation
whose multiple internal and external links around the world shape the
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

416 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

business activities of almost all employees at its headquarters in Germany.

Judging from the overall ethnographic data gathered on-site, the companys global makeup is not only seen as a major economic asset giving it
its competitive edge but is also something that isdespite all the challenges and potential frustrations such diversity brings with itvalued
highly by most of its staff. The fact that TechComp has thus evolved in a
continuous process of global expansion through acquisitions and new
foundations as well as the fact that it is still family-owned may set it somewhat apart from other larger public MNCs, which are often the result of
cross-border mergers of two or more large companies. This general backdrop of a largely pro-international spirit and the relative solid grounding
of the interviewees in the actual profit-loss business units provides the
necessary context for the following analyses of the four interviews with
members of TechComps upper management. First, the role of English in
TechComp is discussed, exploring aspects such as its status as an indispensable must, the nature of the required language and communication
skills, as well as other facets pertaining to English-based international
communication. Then, the other languages, including German as the
headquarters language, and their places in the organization are examined.

There is unanimous agreement between

all interviewees about the fact that
English is a must for managers and
employees in all locations and at practically all levels, all the way from top
management down to regular office
workers and, most importantly, secretaries in top and middle management.

The Role of English

Although English is not officially the corporate language at TechComp,

its status as the de facto lingua franca of international business is undisputed. There is unanimous agreement between all interviewees about the
fact that English is a must for managers and employees in all locations
and at practically all levels, all the way from top management down to
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 417

regular office workers and, most importantly, secretaries in top and middle management. Quite clearly, in 2006, English is no longer an asset on
CVs (contra Piekkari, 2009) but has turned into a sine qua non, which
means that job candidates without English will basically not be hired. The
same requirements apply to career-minded employees. The comparisons
and metaphors used by the interviewees to express the vital importance of
English as a tool for TechComps international business operations speak
for themselves: For E, there is no difference between English skills and
basic literacy skills such as reading and writing, or general computer skills.
D uses the following illustration:
Its like . . . well, were all swimming in water, and you either sink or swim.
No English is not an option.
Das ist so, wie wenn er . . . also wir schwimmen dann einfach im
Wasser und entweder schwimmst du und bleibst oder gehst unter. Ohne
Englisch geht nicht. (D 14)

The metaphors underscore the fact that English has become virtually
indispensible in the company. However, despite its undisputed importance, a
managers or an employees professional managerial or technical expertise
still comes first. In their business CofPs, English is a tool enabling international
communication and is as such part of the communities shared repertoires.
In contrast, the necessary professional skills are directly related to the
communities core activities, their joint enterprises, and this is what really
counts to be successful in the business:
English . . . is a means to an end. For me, English is not an end in itself.
Englisch . . . ist das Mittel zum Zweck. Englisch ist fr mich nicht
Selbstzweck. (D 11)

The fact that language skills without the necessary professional profile
are not sufficient is something they said they had to learn the hard way. E
relates how such an approach, that is, hiring employees on the basis of
their English language proficiency rather than based on their technical
expertise had initially been taken in China but had ended with TechComp
getting a bloody nose.
With regard to what is perceived to be the required level of language
competence, the operative quote is pragmatic attitude (C 11), and, indeed,
this down-to-earth view is shared by all interviewees. Their answers concerning the importance they attribute to correct English further substantiate
this perspective. Apart from what they call important written texts, which

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

418 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

include contracts or official texts geared toward a wider public (such as

annual reports and websites), conformity with Standard English is seen as
a fairly irrelevant concept. Interestingly, even with regard to these important written texts, it turns out that correctness is actually only a matter
of prestige (Seidlhofer, Breiteneder, & Pitzl, 2006, p. 8). By presenting to
the world English texts that conform to Standard English, the company
demonstrates its professionalism and its global leadership.
After all, were not amateur players, which means we dont have to reveal
to the world that this company manages to express itself on, well, lets say,
only an amateur level.
Und wir sind ja hier kein Kreisligaverein, da muss man ja nicht der
ganzen Welt dokumentieren, dass dieses Unternehmen, ich sage mal,
amateurhaft versucht, sich auszudrcken. (C 10)

Other than that, what counts in the jungle of different varieties and
proficiency levels of English is the languages function of transmitting
information effectively and efficiently across language boundaries
(Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005, p. 418).
I must say Im confronted with so many levels of correctness that I dont
actually care whether something is correct or incorrect. As long as the
meaning is not distorted.
Ich bin mit so vielen Levels von Korrektheit konfrontiert, dass ich mir
da eigentlich nichts daraus mache, ob das jetzt richtig oder falsch ist,
muss ich sagen. Wenn es nicht sinnentstellend ist. (B 11)

The language of international business is BELF. Native speaker proficiency

in English (ENL) is neither expected (see Charles, 2007) nor necessarily
beneficial. The concept is dismissed as unrealistic (C 10) and also described
as unnecessary from a cost-benefit point of view. E puts it as follows:
A manager must speak English, its not a matter of how well or badly, he
must simply speak.
Ein Manager muss sprechen, nicht gut oder schlecht, er muss sprechen.
(E 20)

However, there is no reason to underestimate the concept of proficiency

in BELF. Although native speaker competence is not expected, general, or
rather, well-developed communicative skills (in any language) and the ability to make oneself understood are regarded as essential. E points out that,

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 419

above all, managers and employees at TechComp need to be able to communicate, which for him includes both communicating facts as well as communicating with people and this, if need be, in English.
Developing the necessary BELF skills happens in two ways, either
through exposure and interaction in the course of mutual engagement in
their CofPs with international colleagues and business partners (see Charles
& Marschan-Piekkari, 2002, p. 25, on encouraging staff to understand
and negotiate global Englishes) or through language training, which is
offered through TechComps HR department. It needs to be added, though,
that all four interviewees expressed a certain dissatisfaction with conventional formats of English training. Essentially, they felt that the CofPbased approach through learning by doing was a much more efficient
way of acquiring the language and communication skills they actually
needed in their daily routines. In any way, the interviewees leave no doubt
about the fact that a willingness to develop ones English skills further,
one way or the other, is, in fact, expected of all managers and employees
at TechComp.
Instructive differences in perspective between the interviewer, a linguist, and the interviewees, the business managers, became apparent in
the course of the interviews. The interviewees pointed out the fact that a
number of interview questions concerning the use and their perceptions of
English were too narrowly language-focused and could, in fact, only be
answered in more global terms of business communication in general.
Along the same lines, the overall importance of business-related contextual parameters and the ways in which these tend to govern communication processes at TechComp were also revealed, more indirectly, through
an analysis of the narrative passages of the interviews. Such parameters
include, for example, general or specific business goals or topics, the position of interlocutors in an organizations hierarchy and their personalities, organizational and time constraints in general, and so on (see also
Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2010).
It is these and a whole range of other business-related parameters that
determine to a large extent how English is perceived. In the literature,
English has variously been described not only as a facilitator alleviating
communication problems but also as a challenge, and even barrier, impeding communication for those who do not or only insufficiently speak it
(Charles & Marschan-Piekkari 2002; Marschan et al., 1997). According to
the interviewees in the present study, English can be many things ranging
from facilitator through to barrier. Above all, however, they mentioned
repeatedly that it is not something they give much thought to outside an

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

420 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

interview with a linguist. Nevertheless, their characterizations of English

are varied and full of perceptive insights. Its role as facilitator is appreciated in situations in which it is only through English that conducting business is made possible in the first place. This is illustrated by B as follows:

Its role as facilitator is appreciated in

situations in which it is only through
English that conducting business is
made possible in the first place.

This morning I talked to a Japanese partner on the phone. It was awful

English, but we sort of understood each other.
Ich habe heute Morgen ein Telefonat mit einem Japaner gehabt in einem
furchtbaren Englisch, aber wir haben uns einigermaen verstanden. (B 3)

And later on in the interview, he adds:

There is simply no better solution, I dont speak Chinese, I dont speak
Indian, I dont speak Japanese.
Es gibt ja keine bessere Lsung, ich kann kein Chinesisch, ich kann
kein Indisch, ich kann kein Japanisch. (B 15)

As a result of the increasingly global reach of TechComp, English has,

over the years, become a fact of life for these managers. And though this
may have been a real challenge initially, the interviews reveal how they
have learned to master this challenge through extended experience. Of
course, situations, in which old problems resurface or new ones emerge,
still occur and once in a while this causes frustration and annoyance. In
general, however, being part of a highly diverse English-speaking global
network is seen by all four interviewees as a rich and rewarding experience. B takes real pride in his truly global task of managing the companys
business in 35 to 40 countries. D even uses the words gift (Geschenk)
or enrichment of his life (Bereicherung fr mein Leben) to express his
appreciation of his international tasks.
This positive attitude, however, by no means implies that communication always flows smoothly. The managers perceptions of what it means
to be involved in international business are therefore multifaceted. Many

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 421

of the challenges and problems mentioned in the interviews are similar to

the problem areas that have been uncovered in previous research across
industries and regions (see Blazejewski, 2006; Charles, 2007; Charles &
Marschan-Piekkari, 2002; Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005; RogersonRevell, 2007, 2008; Welch et al., 2005). For example, problems are
caused by business partners who have only very rudimentary or no knowledge of English at all and with whom communication is therefore only
possible via interpreters (who, in turn, in some cases may not be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter). In terms of regions, this is mainly
the case in countries such as China and Russia, and, in terms of age, it is
reported to happen with more senior business partners as well as internally
at the lower levels of TechComp. Also, coping with different levels of
proficiency as well as with native speakers is reported as challenging.
Partly because of these challenges, English-medium interactions are
described as being more tiring and also taking longer than those in ones
mother tongue, German. Interactions in English are also reported to be
more prone to what occasionally proves to be a substantial loss of detail,
potentially causing delays in a process or extra costs. Whereas communicating about technical matters is reported to be mastered with relative ease
(also because in the communities shared repertoires additional communicative aids are available such as documents, drawings, parts, etc.), talking
about personal or more emotional issues and dealing with conflict are areas
where the linguistic handicap is felt most (see Fredriksson et al., 2007, p. 418).
Perhaps not surprisingly, in their answers to the question as to which
English they understand best, intelligibility is portrayed as an individual
and experience-based category, as indicated by B:
I dont want to generalize, I can only talk about my own experience, or how
I feel about it.
Ich mchte nicht pauschalisieren, ich kann immer nur von meiner
Erfahrung sprechen oder von meinem Empfinden. (B 5)

It seems that in the course of the mutual engagement with their international business partners, they gradually got used to those varieties they have
been most exposed to. Hence, there is no clear overlap between the Englishes
each manager identifies as easy or difficult to understand. Nevertheless, two
general trends become visible. Native speaker English is generally said to be
among the difficult candidates mostly because of the speed with which it is
spoken and because of its sophisticated vocabulary (see Rogerson-Revell,
2008) and Indian English also seems to pose a major challenge. In general,

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

422 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

however, intelligibility is not seen as an inherent quality of a certain variety

of English (see Nelson, 2008) but is rather something that is coconstructed
by interlocutors who make an effort (B, C, E). This is a quality they see in
most nonnative speakers of English. Although all interviewees have, in the
course of their international careers, acquired a large repertoire of coping
strategies such as comprehension checks, asking for clarification and repetition, attention to facial expression, and so on, when and where to apply these
depends on more than just linguistic considerations. Situation-specific and
task-specific factors as well as issues of face may sometimes rule out making
use of these strategies as is exemplified below.
Finally, if native English is reported as difficult to understand, what are
the interviewees perceptions of native speaker interlocutors? Of the four
interviewees, only B said he did not experience any particular problems
in interactions with native speakers, a diplomatic answer that is arguably
closely related to his position as head of the division. The other three
agree that native speakers frequently use their native competence as an
instrument of power, a fact they find extremely irritating. In addition,
native speakers are described (and have, in fact, been observed by the
author) as fairly inconsiderate interlocutors with apparently little accommodation skills (see Du-Babcock & Babcock, 2007; Rogerson-Revell,
2008). Asked how he tries to deal with native speakers, C replied,
Of course, you can ask them to talk less, and to slow down. And all they do,
is raise their voices. . . It [accommodating] seems to be difficult for them.
Sie knnen halt sagen: Erzhl weniger, erzhl es langsamer. Und er
wird lauter. . . . Das fllt denen offensichtlich sehr schwer. (C 8.4)

Again, face is an issue, and, as asking for clarification is seen as a display of weakness by all three interviewees (Charles, 2007), clarification
requests are not always an option. C explains why interactions with native
speakers are considered particularly challenging, especially in a situation
of conflict:
And you cant really attack him [the native speaker] because there is always
this residual risk, did I just get him wrong, or is he actually talking rubbish?
Und Sie knnen ihn nicht so massiv angreifen, weil Sie immer ein
Restrisiko haben, haben Sie das jetzt nur falsch verstanden, oder redet der
einfach Unsinn? (C 8)

On the other hand, in noncompetitive situations, native speaker interlocutors are generally seen as much less of a problem.

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 423

The Role of Other Languages

and the Status of German

As sites of language contact (Harris & Bargiela-Chiappini, 2003),

BELF interactions are rarely ever monolingual events. Languages other
than English are involved in different roles and, indeed, put to use as a
valuable resource in a range of contexts. In some instances, the parallel
use of several languages is situationally motivated. For example, B exp
lained how for an audience in Russia a presentation held in English was
supported by slides that contained an abridged Russian version of the
presentations content to assist comprehension. If, in meetings or phone
conferences, a quick exchange between compatriots is necessary, this is done
in their mother tongues, though as the interviewees pointed out, never
without first apologizing for this code switch into another language.
From a corporate perspective, the importance of other languages as
valuable strategic resources is clearly recognized by all interviewees.
English may be the necessary tool facilitating international communication, but to accomplish a range of specific business tasks successfully,
other languages are indispensable, a fact that is also reflected in
TechComps global organization. In particular, this concerns issues
involved in establishing and maintaining relations with customers. For
example, native competence in a countrys national language as well as
cultural expertise is considered necessary to be successful in the bidding
for and winning of contracts in a region. This is one of the reasons why,
as a rule, local subsidiaries are run by local managing directors.
Well, its our explicit strategy to have a national representative in each
country in the world, whose job it is to look after our customers there. And,
indeed, we have been very successful in the past because of the combined
strengths of these different nationalities.
Es ist ja unsere gewollte Aufstellung, dass wir in jedem Land auf
dieser Welt einen nationalen Menschen haben, der halt auch wirklich da
diese Kunden bearbeiten kann. Und wir machen schon haufenweise Joker
ber die verschiedenen Fhigkeiten dieser Nationalitten. (C 15)

Similarly, at the headquarters in Germany, the positions of key account

managers are generally filled with national representatives of the customers home countries.
In general, being able to communicate with a business partner in his or
her national language is considered a definite advantage, particularly with
respect to customer relations in countries in which English cannot be expected
to be spoken by the customers upper management levels (e.g., China,
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

424 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

Japan, Russia). Thus, additional foreign languages are, indeed, an asset.

Yet as much as B and D would like to extend their foreign language repertoires (see the appendix), there is, of course, a downside to the companys global makeup: Which of the many relevant languages to single out
for learning?
But the fact that I travel to so many countries makes it a bit difficult [to
decide which language to learn].
Aber ich bin halt auch in sehr vielen Lndern unterwegs und das macht
es [die Entscheidung fr eine Sprache] dann schon ein bisschen schwer.
(B 17)

Last but not least, among the many languages, is German as the language
of the parent company in any way privileged? Although a large European
language with more than 100 million native speakers, German is, as the
interviewees say, simply not an option for international interactions.
German is out of the question.
Deutsch steht nicht zur Debatte. (C 9)

Thats just the way it is, whether they like it or not, and indeed sometimes
they do not, mainly because, as indicated above, the interviewees are fully
aware of the extra power that comes with being a native speaker of the
language used for conducting business.
With respect to the issue of language choice, in their linguistically
mixed work environment, the tacit rule applies that whenever non-Germanspeaking interactants are involved in spoken interactions or in an e-mail
exchange, the language choice is English. Now and again this can lead to
fairly ironic constellations. D related how, in several top level meetings,
German managers had to speak English because there was one single nonGerman-speaking British participant involved (who would, according to
D, if necessary, not stop short of using his native competence in English
as a competitive edge).

The tacit rule applies that whenever

non-German-speaking interactants are
involved in spoken interactions or in an
e-mail exchange, the language choice is
English.
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 425

Unlike what has been reported to be occasionally the case in Finnish,

Dutchor even Germanbusiness contexts (Fredriksson et al., 2007;
Louhiala-Salminen, 2002), at TechComp, English is practically never
used within Germans-only groups. This means that as soon as everybody
realizes that there is no need to speak English, they switch back to
German. Yet at times, realizing at a dinner or during a coffee break that
the last non-German-speaking person had actually left the scene or, in a
meeting, that all participants were in fact speakers of German may take a
little while. B describes a typical reaction in such situations:
Ooops, it would actually be much easier, if in this circle, in which everyone speaks German, we continued the conversation in German.
Hoppla, es ist ja eigentlich viel leichter, wenn wir uns jetzt in dem
Kreis, wo wir alle Deutsch sprechen, in Deutsch weiter unterhalten. (B 10)

Continuing to communicate in English in such contexts, that is, without a

reason is therefore labeled by D quite frankly as dumb (dmlich, D 13).
In one respect, German does enjoy a certain corporate privilege. Because
all board members are German, the language of board meetings is German.
Occasionally, a deliberate choice of German is also made in other top-level
meetings, which would otherwise, because of their international makeup,
be held in English. This is done, for example, if an extremely delicate strategic issue needs to be sorted out. The rationale behind this unusual language choicewhich may come at the price of excluding international
executives who do not speak Germanis, of course, to ensure maximum
communicative effectiveness and avoid any BELF-induced loss of information. Thus, in these rare cases, not knowing the headquarters language
actually constitutes a concrete language barrier. As a general rule, however,
English is the language used internationally and German skills are not a
requirement for international managers and employees in the subsidiaries.
Another area influenced by German is the international company jargon, which, as typical contact phenomena, includes several German loan
words as well as loan translations. Other contact features which were identified at TechComp and which are regularly observed in English-based
contact varieties include culturally hybrid discourse rules and terms of
address (Schneider, 2007; see also Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

If members of management have been described elsewhere as often

see[ing] language differences in simplistic terms, so that language is not
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

426 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

viewed as an important managerial issue (Welch et al., 2005, p. 11) the

interviews studied here convincingly demonstrate that in top management
at TechComp, a family-owned Germany-based MNC, this is not the case.
The four managers have a clear awareness of the complex linguistic environment in which they need to get their jobs done, and they have, at the same
time, developed sophisticated strategies for dealing with this complexity
as is appropriate in their global business contexts in each particular situation. Though forming an integral part of their communication practices,
this kind of experience-based expertise is not necessarily part of their
declarative knowledge, and hence it is sometimes difficult for them to
articulate (see Wenger, 1998). With the methodical help of the interview,
though, this tacit knowledge was elicited or rather prompted by questions
the interviewees had never really asked themselves before and transformed
into explicit knowledge together with the interviewer (Kvale, 1996).
Notwithstanding some minor context-specific differences, key empirical findings of BELF research are supported by the present study. Similarly
to what has been reported for Scandinavian multinational companies by
Louhiala-Salminen et al. (2005), at TechComp, a pragmatic and flexible
approach to language use is adopted by the interactants. This means that
pragmatic reality decide[s] language choice on a day to day basis, and
effectiveness and efficiency in communication govern [. . .] language use
rather than linguistic correctness as such (Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005,
p. 418). The managers linguistic and communicative performance as
observed by the author at an international executive meeting supports
another important observation as put forward by Nickerson (2007): experienced business people are strategically competent despite the fact that
they may not have high levels of proficiency (p. 353). In the case of the
four managers discussed in this study, this meant excellent communication
skills despite a range of linguistic innovations in their English. Also,
with regard to BELF as a contact language, the ubiquity of other languages
that have to be dealt with competently is confirmed: the realities of the
business context are often considerably more complex than the simple
label of English as a lingua franca would imply (Nickerson, 2007, p. 354).
With regard to a number of conceptual issues, however, the findings of
this study suggest a slight reorientation. Although, indeed, BELF has no
native speakers, in some contexts, native speakers of English are, in fact,
part of international business operations, occasionally causing considerable communicative trouble (Charles, 2007). As much as transcending the
native speaker-nonnative speaker dichotomy may be a desirable theoretical aim, it is ultimately the empirical reality of a specific international
business setting that decides whether or not native speakers of English are
Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 427

included in a particular research activity (Rogerson-Revell, 2007, 2008). In

a similar vein, how to conceptualize BELF speakers adequately has been
referred to as an open question. In the interviews analyzed in this study, the
managers characterized themselves as being, quite evidently, users of
English but also in some ways lifelong learners. Interestingly, adopting the
CofP approach helps to go beyond the controversial learner-user distinction (see Charles, 2007; Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005). More specifically,
the concept of CofP as an integral part of a social theory of learning criticizes traditional models of learning in which learners are abstracted from
their normal interactional contexts. Instead, it defines learning as a fundamentally social process through which we learn to perform appropriately
in a CofP as befits our membership status (Holmes & Meyerhoff, 1999,
p. 174). Researchers are therefore invited to rethink their own notions of
learner and ask novice as well as expert members of different (B)ELFspeaking business CofPs what it is they had to learn about languages, and
English in particular, in order to become fully functional members in their
communities (see also Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005, p. 419). Finally,
with regard to BELF as a research paradigm, it is deemed important not to
see the two approaches of ELF and BELF as mutually exclusive or in
opposition (see Charles, 2007) but, rather, as complementing each other.
Combining the research efforts into ELF by charting the general linguistic
developments on the one hand (Seidlhofer, 2009) and uncovering the
domain-specific operational rules governing its use in international business, on the other hand, will eventually contribute to a better understanding
of the overall lingua franca phenomenon.
A final point concerns the tacit nature of the business interactants
knowledge of the operational rules of BELF communication. Again, the
CofP approach with its three dimensions of joint enterprise, mutual
engagement, and shared repertoire helps explain a widely observable
gap between business communicators on the one hand and business communication scholars as well as linguists on the other hand, with regard to
the specific significance attributed to language. 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,

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

428 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

assigned paramount significance (see Livesey, 2002, p. 7). Bringing the

two perspectives togetherthe practitioners lived communicative realities and the scholars analyses thereofin a productive way is probably
one of the most challenging tasks of the field(s).
Limitations and Implications for Future Research

This study has uncovered and analyzed in some detail the individual
and shared ways in which four German top managers perceive and deal
with BELF in their particular international corporate environment.
Although embedded in rich observational data, this interview study suffers from the well-known limitations of a qualitative case study approach,
and generalizations extending beyond its context are therefore not possible (nor are they intended). Naturally, a more detailed discussion of the
many facets addressed in the interviews is not possible within the limited
space of an article. Nevertheless, several pointers to future research have
become visible. First, to gain a better understanding of the differences and
similarities between different groups of business professionals concerning
their perceptions of and communicative practices in BELF, future research
activities need to be extended to include not only other countries and business areas but also different types of MNCs, that is, MNCs that are globalized to different extents. Second, the role and perceptions of native
speakers of English and, most importantly, their actual communicative
behavior in BELF settings deserve further scholarly attention. Why is it
that, in the present study, accommodation on the part of the native speakers (Du-Babcock & Babcock, 2007) seems to be the exception and not the
rule? Third, how does age or time as a factor influence the perceptions of
BELF? More specifically, how are the challenges that BELF brings with
it met by a younger generation who grew up in the knowledge that in a
globalized world, English is a must?

APPENDIX
Additional Information on Interviewees
(Correct at the Time of Data Collection)

B: German; age: 52 years; languages: German (first language), English,

Latin, French
C: German; age: 45 years; languages: German (first language), English
(continued)

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 429

APPENDIX (continued)

D: German; age: 45 years; languages: German (first language), English,

French
E: Romanian-German; age: 61 years; languages: German (second language,
nativelike), English, French, Spanish, Hungarian, Romanian (first language)

TechComps Organizational Structure

References

Blazejewski, S. (2006). Transferring value-infused organisational practices in multinational companies: A conflict perspective. In M. Geppert & M. Mayer (Eds.), Global,
national and local practices in multinational corporations (pp. 63-104). Basingstoke,
England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Charles, M. L. (2007). Language matters in global communication: Article based on ORA
lecture, October 2006. Journal of Business Communication, 44, 260-282.
Charles, M. L., & Marschan-Piekkari, R. (2002). Language training for enhanced horizontal
communication: A challenge for MNCs. Business Communication Quarterly, 65(2), 9-29.
Du-Babcock, B., & Babcock, R. D. (2007). Genre patterns in language-based communication zones. Journal of Business Communication, 44, 340-373.
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992). Think practically and look locally: Language and
gender as community-based practice. Annual Review of Anthropology, 21, 461-490.

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

430 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

Ehrenreich, S. (2009) English as a lingua franca in multinational corporations. Exploring

business communities of practice. In A. Mauranen & E. Ranta (Eds.), English as a lingua
franca. Studies and findings (pp. 126-151). Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge
Scholars.
Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality: On lingua franca English
and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 237-259.
Flick, U. (1995). Qualitative Forschung. Reinbek, Germany: Rowohlt.
Flick, U. (2004). Triangulation in qualitative research. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, &
I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (B. Jenner, Trans., pp. 178-183).
London, England: Sage. (Original work published 2000.)
Flick, U., von Kardorff, E., & Steinke, I. (Eds.). (2004). A companion to qualitative
research (B. Jenner, Trans.). London, England: Sage. (Original work published 2000.)
Fredriksson, R., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Piekkari, R. (2007). The multinational corporation as a multilingual organisation: The notion of a common corporate language.
Corporate Communications, 11, 406-423.
Gerritsen, M., & Nickerson, C. (2009). BELF: Business English as a lingua franca. In
F. Bargiela-Chiappini (Ed.), The handbook of business discourse (pp. 180-192).
Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for
qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Harris, S., & Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2003). Business as a site of language contact. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 23, 155-169.
Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M. (1999). The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in Society, 28, 173-183.
Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2010). English?Oh, its just work! A
study of ELF users perceptions. English for Specific Purposes, 29, 204-209.
Kelle, U. (2004). Computer-assisted analysis of qualitative data. In U. Flick, E. von
Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (B. Jenner, Trans.,
pp. 276-283). London, England: Sage. (Original work published 2000.)
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews. An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Livesey, S. M. (2002). Interpretive acts: New vistas in qualitative research in business
communication [Guest Editorial]. Journal of Business Communication, 39, 6-12.
Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2002). The flys perspective: Discourse in the daily routine of a
business manager. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 211-231.
Louhiala-Salminen, L., & Charles, M. L. (2006). English as the lingua franca of international business communication: Whose English? What English? In J. C. Palmer-Silveira,
M. F., Ruiz-Garrido, & I. Fortanet-Gomez (Eds.), Intercultural and international business communication (pp. 27-54). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
Louhiala-Salminen, L., Charles, M. L., & Kankaanranta, A. (2005). English as a lingua
franca in Nordic corporate mergers: Two case companies. English for Specific Purposes,
24, 401-421.
Marschan, R., Welch, D., & Welch, L. (1997). Language: The forgotten factor in multinational management. European Management Journal, 15, 591-598.

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013

Ehrenreich / ENGLISH AS A BUSINESS LINGUA FRANCA IN A GERMAN MNC 431

Mauranen, A., &. Ranta, E. (Eds.). (2009). English as a lingua franca. Studies and findings. Newcastle, England: Cambridge Scholars.
Nelson, C. L. (2008). Intelligibility since 1969. World Englishes, 27, 297-308.
Nickerson, C. (2005). English as a lingua franca in international business contexts. English
for Specific Purposes, 24, 367-380.
Nickerson, C. (2007). English as a lingua franca in business contexts: Strategy or hegemony? In G. Garzone & C. Ilie (Eds.), The use of English in institutional and business
settings. An intercultural perspective (pp. 351-363). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Piekkari, R. (2009). International management. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini (Ed.), The handbook of business discourse (pp. 269-278). Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University
Press.
Poncini, G. (2002). Investigating discourse at business meetings with multicultural participation. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 345-373.
Poncini, G. (2003). Multicultural business meetings and the role of languages other than
English. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 24(1), 17-32.
Poncini, G. (2007). Communicating within and across professional worlds in an intercultural
setting. In G. Garzone & C. Ilie (Eds.), The use of English in institutional and business
settings. An intercultural perspective (pp. 283-312). Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Rogerson-Revell, P. (2007). Using English for international business: A European case
study. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 103-120.
Rogerson-Revell, P. (2008). Participation and performance in international business meetings. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 338-360.
Schneider, E. (2007). Postcolonial English. Varieties around the world. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as
a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11, 133-158.
Seidlhofer, B. (2009). Common ground and different realities: World Englishes and
English as a lingua franca. World Englishes, 28, 236-245.
Seidlhofer, B., Breiteneder, A. & Pitzl, M. L. (2006). English as a lingua franca in Europe.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 1-34.
Smart, G. (1998). Mapping conceptual worlds: Using interpretive ethnography to explore
knowledge-making in a professional community. Journal of Business Communication,
35, 111-127.
Steinke, I. (2004). Quality criteria in qualitative research. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, &
I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (B. Jenner, Trans., pp. 184-190).
London, England: Sage. (Original work published 2000.)
Tietze, S. (2004). Spreading the management gospelin English. Language and Intercul
tural Communication, 4, 175-189.
VERBI Software. (2007). Maxqda. The art of text analysis. Retrieved from http://www
.maxqda.com/download/mx2007intro_eng.pdf
Welch, D., Welch, L., & Piekkari, R. (2005). Speaking in tongues: The importance of
language in international management processes. International Studies of Management
& Organization, 35, 10-27.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Queens University on May 2, 2013