84 research outputs found
Outsourcing the Business Services
No full textThe nowadays international market of outsourcing services is relatively mature and with age comes wisdom ... Thus, on a grown market, choosing to outsource services can not only be justified by the strive to reduce costs but it aims to meeting more advanced objectives as accurate alignment with business strategies of the enterprise. As a result, outsourcing has reached new forms of expression that can help the enterprises to gain competitive advantage. In the context of a grown market, a new concept appears, namely the multisourcing which it refers to the outsourcing model of the future [1] that businesses must prepare to accept and use. This concept or model of the future refers to working with several suppliers, which are competitors in a spirit of trust and teamwork, in a collaborative process to maximize the benefits associated with outsourcing process.Business Outsourcing, Audit, Economic and Financial Analysis, Information Technology Outsourcing
Pragmatic Argumentation in European Practices of Political Accountability
No full textIn this paper, the author examines the use of pragmatic argumentation in European practices of political accountability in which the politicians explain and justify a future course of action which they plan to undertake in order to solve an existing problem. The author explains some vital institutional characteristics of the practices under discussion and demonstrates how these institutional characteristics constrain the use of pragmatic argumentation. In addition, the author shows which criteria arguers commonly invoke in practices of political accountability to make their pragmatic arguments acceptable to critic
Maneuvering with the burden of proof: Confrontational strategies in dealing with political accountability
No full textIn this paper, the author examines the burden of proof in the argumentative confrontations taking part in practices of political accountability. She does so by explaining how politicians maneuver strategically with the burden of proof in an attempt at winning the discussion in which they are involved. After making clear the role of the burden of proof in defining the difference of opinion in argumentative confrontations, the author outlines the constraints imposed by practices of political accountability on the burden of proof. Finally, she analyzes in detail a concrete case in which a politician maneuvers in such a way that his burden of proof is significantly diminished
Strategic manoeuvring in a political interview: the case of responding to an accusation of inconsistency
No full textIn this paper the author analyses the way in which politicians manoeuver strategically in a political interview in response to an interviewer’s accusation that their position is inconsistent with a position they advanced before. This analysis is carried out by making use of the pragma-dialectical instruments for determining the strategic function of an argumentative move in a contextualized practice. The responses to the accusation of inconsistency are seen as strategic manoeuvers by means of which politicians try to maintain an appearance of reasonableness while arguing at the same time in their own favour. The author first characterizes an accusation of inconsistency as a form of criticism which the interlocutor can reject by maintaining his standpoint or accept by giving up his standpoint. Next, the author explains how the activity type of a political interview affects the way in which a politician responds to an accusation of inconsistency. Finally, the author gives a detailed analysis of a fragment from a BBC political interview in which a politician manoeuvers in such a way that the inconsistency of which he is accused is removed
Maneuvering strategically in a political interview: analyzing and evaluating responses to an accusation of inconsistency
No full textThe aim of this book is to provide a pragma-dialectical analysis and evaluation of the way in which politicians maneuver strategically in response to an interviewer’s accusation in a political interview that their position is inconsistent with another position they have advanced before. The author shows first what kinds of responses politicians can provide when they are confronted with a criticism of inconsistency. Next, she identifies the most important preconditions imposed on the argumentative discourse by the requirements of a political interview. Her analysis concentrates on the kinds of advantages a politician can gain in a political interview by responding to an accusation of inconsistency by retracting a standpoint that has been advanced earlier and subsequently reformulating this standpoint. In order to evaluate a politician’s responses, the author formulates a set of soundness conditions which she applies to a number of concrete cases taken from BBC interviews to judge whether the responses concerned are reasonable
Maneuvering strategically in a political interview: analyzing and evaluating responses to an accusation of inconsistency
No full textThe aim of this book is to provide a pragma-dialectical analysis and evaluation of the way in which politicians maneuver strategically in response to an interviewer’s accusation in a political interview that their position is inconsistent with another position they have advanced before. The author shows first what kinds of responses politicians can provide when they are confronted with a criticism of inconsistency. Next, she identifies the most important preconditions imposed on the argumentative discourse by the requirements of a political interview. Her analysis concentrates on the kinds of advantages a politician can gain in a political interview by responding to an accusation of inconsistency by retracting a standpoint that has been advanced earlier and subsequently reformulating this standpoint. In order to evaluate a politician’s responses, the author formulates a set of soundness conditions which she applies to a number of concrete cases taken from BBC interviews to judge whether the responses concerned are reasonable
The Analysis of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvres in a Political Interview
No full textConference Papers and Commentary.The aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political interview plays a role in a pragma-dialectical analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres. The author gives an account of the contextual pre-conditions created by the rules and conventions of a political interview for the performance by a politician of responses to an accusation of inconsistency advanced by an interviewer
The Analysis of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvres in a Political Interview
No full textConference Papers and Commentary.The aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political interview plays a role in a pragma-dialectical analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres. The author gives an account of the contextual pre-conditions created by the rules and conventions of a political interview for the performance by a politician of responses to an accusation of inconsistency advanced by an interviewer
The analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres in a political interview
No full textThe aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political interview plays a role in a pragma-dialectical analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres. The author gives an account of the contextual pre-conditions created by the rules and conventions of a political interview for the performance by a politician of responses to an accusation of inconsistency advanced by an interviewer
The analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres in a political interview
No full textThe aim of this paper is to indicate how knowledge of the argumentative activity type of a political interview plays a role in a pragma-dialectical analysis of confrontational strategic manoeuvres. The author gives an account of the contextual pre-conditions created by the rules and conventions of a political interview for the performance by a politician of responses to an accusation of inconsistency advanced by an interviewer
- …
