Understanding “communication gaps” among personnel in high-risk workplaces from a dialogical perspective

Our primary aim in this paper is to argue for a discourse analytical take on questions of how risk and safety are managed by personnel in high-risk workplaces, with a special focus on constructions of “us” and “them”. Thus, we approach the same issue investigated in many other studies, i.e., diverging safety-related understandings between people representing various occupational groups. We choose to examine so-called communication gaps as they are “talked into being” in discourse, meaning that we treat them as primarily socially constructed. A case analysis based on interviews will be used to illustrate how we can understand this phenomenon from a communicative perspective inspired by Linell’s (1998a) dialogue theory. While previous discourse and safety culture research emphasizes broad patterns and differences between entire professions and departments, we argue that researchers should hesitate to reinforce the notion of homogeneous groups. Instead, there is great value in demonstrating collective social construction processes and commonalities so as to facilitate inter-group solidarity and possibly productive change.

► This article argues for the use of dialogic discourse analysis in safety research.
► We examine divergences in views on safety, a theme familiar from many other studies.
► Interviews from a pyrotechnical factory are analysed to illustrate the approach.
► Constructions of us and them draw on various contextual and discursive resources.
► To analyse rather than reproduce notions of divergent groups aids organizational change.