While English has risen to its unquestionable position as the working language of international business and the global economy, there have been interesting devel-opments in the way it has been seen and taught. This section will demonstrate these developments by first discussing the position of English as a lingua franca and the issues of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) and Business English. It will then discuss the reasons for the shift of focus from Business English to English Business Communication. In conclusion, the current state of English Business Communica-tion will be reviewed.
4.3.1 English as a lingua franca
Among the foreign languages studied in Finnish universities, the importance of English seems to be in a class of its own (cf. e.g., Takala 1998). The situation thus mirrors the special position of English worldwide as a world language, a lingua mundi, and a lingua franca, a common language of global commerce, media and politics, as categorized by Cope and Kalantzis (2000, 6). Indeed, English is cur-rently more frequently used in communication between non-native speakers of English than between native speakers of the language (Crystal 1997). Furthermore, according to a survey conducted in Europe in 2001 (Eurobarometer 54, 2001), 71%
of the Europeans thought that everyone in the European Union should be able to speak one European language in addition to their mother tongue, and almost the same number of people agreed that the language should be English.
While also recognizing the indisputable position of English among languages, Cope and Kalantzis (2000, 6) consider it paradoxical that English seems to be breaking into multiple and increasingly differentiated Englishes. They write as follows:
“Increasingly, the name of the game in English is crossing linguistic boundaries. Gone are the days when learning a single, standard version of the language was sufficient.
Migration, multiculturalism and global economic integration daily intensify this process of change. The globalization of communications and labour markets makes language diversity an ever more critical local issue. Dealing with linguistic differences and cultural differences has now become central to the pragmatics of our working, civic, and private lives. Effective citizenship and productive work now require that we interact effectively using multiple languages, multiple Englishes, and communication patterns that more frequently cross cultural, community, and national boundaries.
Subcultural diversity also extends to the ever broadening range of specialist registers and situational variations. When the proximity of cultural and linguistic diversity is one of the facts of our time, the very nature of language learning has changed.”
(Cope & Kalantzis 2000, 6)
The arguments presented in the citation above by Cope and Kalantzis in support of their conclusion regarding the changing nature of language learning could also be used to explain why the focus on teaching business English has shifted to teaching English business communication, which issue will be addressed in sections. 4.3.2 and 4.3.3.
4.3.2 Business English
There are several ways of defining Business English. From their perspective of ESP (English for Specific Purposes), Dudley-Evans & St John (1998, 9) see teaching Business English as a branch of English Language teaching. According to them, the English language teaching (ELT) could be presented on a continuum that runs from clearly definable General English courses through to very specific ESP courses. Ellis and Johnson (1994, 3), in turn, regard Business English as a variety of ESP, which differs from the other varieties in that it is often a mix of specific content and general content. The specific content might relate to a particular job area or industry and the general content would relate to general ability to commu-nicate more effectively, albeit in business situations.
Business English has undergone several developments. Ellis and Johnson (1994, 3–4) explain that in its early stages in the late 1960s and the early 1970s Business English was specialist vocabulary focused (e.g. banking). In its next stage in the 1970s, there was a greater emphasis on training the skills of speaking, writ-ing, listenwrit-ing, and reading in a business context. Ellis and Johnson (1994, 4) indi-cate that in its third stage, which continued into the 1980s, Business English teaching started to focus more on functional aspects such as formulaic language for e.g. giving opinions and showing agreement. They also point out that since the late 1980s Business English teaching has drawn on various aspects of the previous ap-proaches, but it has added more emphasis on the need to develop the skills needed in actually using the language learned.
Ellis and Johnson (1994, 5) further suggest that there are many varieties of Business English. They make an important distinction between pre-experience or low-experience learners and job-experienced learners. In regard to university stu-dents, their business knowledge typically is still more theoretical than practical al-though some students may already have wide work experience.
The role of Business English has been challenged by the impact of societal changes on today’s workplaces. For example, Bhatia (1999, 129) argues that as a response to the dynamic complexity of present-day workplace practices, a number of universities have been radically changing the nature of their academic programs by making them increasingly interdisciplinary. He therefore stresses that many of the conventional Business English courses are becoming increasingly inadequate to meet the complexity of the communication demands inherent in the cross-disciplinary academic tasks learners face. As Bhatia (1999, 129) indicates, learners need the competence to handle several types of literacy, which may not be a simple extension of previously acquired communicative competence. Consequently, he calls for developing expertise in diverse and multiple literacy practices within and across disciplinary boundaries. Therefore, it can be argued that the current devel-opments in the sphere of Business English largely focus on English Business Communication, which will be discussed next.
4.3.3 From Business English to English Business Communication
The development of English into its current global status has also reformulated the teaching of English as a language into teaching English for communication. Con-sequently, the emphasis on Business English has undergone a major shift in recent years towards an emphasis on business communication. This changing emphasis is
reflected in what is being taught in business language studies.7 Louhiala-Salminen (1999a, 100–101) aptly describes this shift as being due to the drastic changes in the economic scene. Among these changes the internationalization of companies has been the most visible one. Furthermore, the growing rate of mergers and acqui-sitions has required the employees to adapt themselves to a new business culture, and increasingly, a new language (cf. also Salminen 2002). Louhiala-Salminen (1999a, 100–101) also mentions the expansion and consolidation of the European Union as a factor placing more demands on communication skills. Fi-nally, she sees the emphasis on communication resulting from the developments in the use of technology.
The increasing demands on linking language studies with the needs of the workplace have traditionally been most extensively met in the business education sector. Finnish Schools of Economics, other universities offering business pro-grams and polytechnics specializing in business studies have for long included practical, business and working life oriented language and professional communi-cation studies in their curricula as they have been considered essential for business students.8 In fact, according to the current views (Nikko & Kankaanranta 2000, 247–249), language and communication proficiency is seen as part of the profes-sional competence of Finnish business graduates.
The shift from Business English to English Business Communication has also made it necessary to take a new look at teaching methodology and course design in the teaching of English Business Communication. For example, Louhiala-Salminen (1996, 50) emphasizes that in course design, business communication should not be treated as something separate from the real business.
“First of all, in course design, business communication should not be treated as something separate from the real business, not as a skill separate from other professional skills, not as a store of phrases and idioms, but rather as a thread which is interwoven in everything that happens in business.”
(Louhiala-Salminen 1996, 50)
Louhiala-Salminen (1999a, 18–19) concludes that one needs to see teaching busi-ness communication as a dynamic, context-dependent process where such factors as time, roles, power relations, cultural aspects, and communication methods al-ways affect the message. She stresses that teachers should create a context for the students that would include cases and simulations, through which students’ atten-tion could thus be drawn to the complexities of each situaatten-tion.
7 In 2001, the Helsinki School of Economics, changed the name of the subject “English” into “Eng-lish Business Communication” to better describe the content of its Eng“Eng-lish program
8 For instance, the 160 credits currently required for the Master’s degree in the Helsinki School of Economics include the minimum of 20 credits consisting of language studies (1 Finnish credit cor-responds to 1.5 ECTS credits in the Finnish Schools of Economics).
English business communication has also established itself in the field of business communication research. Charles (2000) points out that the discipline of business communication is widely acknowledged especially in North America, but that it is still quite new in Europe9. Charles (1998, 85) also stresses that the Euro-pean business communication research is closely linked with the needs of foreign language teaching and learning. She further states that the situation thus reflects the multicultural and multilingual reality of the continent where, excluding the native speakers of English in general, most European businesspeople must use at least one foreign language to do business. Consequently, English Business Communication is to be placed under the umbrella of international business communication,10 which covers language-specific business communication processes conducted through English or some other language in international settings.
As a field or research, Charles (2000) indicates that English business commu-nication represents a multidisciplinary field of research, which has developed from practical business transactions. She further states that its predecessor in Europe was the Languages for Specific Purposes (LSP) movement, which currently focuses mainly on terminology research. However, Charles (2000) points out that the bor-derline between the research into business communication and LSP is a vacillating one. As for the special nature of business communication, Reinsch (1996, 36–37) in his discussion of business communication as a discipline designates it as a
“practical-science” that has both a dimension of intellectual content (‘knowing-about’ or ‘knowing-why’) and a dimension of effective practice (‘knowing-how’).
Reinsch (1996, 37) asserts that neither of these dimensions should be neglected or else the result is a trade-school approach (knowing-how without knowing-why) or an ivory-tower approach (knowing-about without knowing-how).
According to Charles (2000), the research orientations of international busi-ness communication mainly draw on three specific areas. The first area centers on the analysis of companies’ communication flows and systems and the companies’
communication practices and communication culture (cf. e.g., Louhiala-Salminen 1999b; 2002; Kankaanranta, forthcoming). The second major area includes the dis-course and conventions of business situations and events and their situational vari-ety (cf. e.g., Charles 1994; Charles & Charles 1999a; Yli-Jokipii 1998a; 1998b).
The third orientation focuses on creating favorable learning environments for busi-ness language and busibusi-ness communication (cf. e.g., Baker & Tammelin 1995;
Baten & Ingels 1998; Nikko & Kankaanranta 2000; Charles & Tammelin 2001). It is this third orientation that the current study draws upon.
9 Since 2000, the first European professorship in English Business Communication has been housed at the Helsinki School of Economics.
10Since 2002, it has been possible at the Helsinki School of Economics to enrol in a PhD. Program in International Business Communication.