Reconsidering Power and Legitimacy in Technical Communication

Abstract

This article considers how issues of power and legitimacy in technical communication are connected to clearly defining what a technical communicator does. An articulation of what technical communicators do can grant the field power in presenting a united front to employers with respect to the value technical communicators bring to the workplace. So as to leverage the power and legitimacy associated with articulating what technical communicators do, this article reviews and revises the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH)'s definition of technical communicator.To effectively revise the OOH's definition, this article reviews academic and practitioner scholarship in technical communication and the administration of technical and professional writing programs. It demonstrates that concerns about practical skills, conceptual skills, and flexibility are related to legitimacy and power. These concerns can be used as criteria to evaluate and revise the OOH's definition of technical communicator. In closing, the article discusses the benefits associated with the revised definition and how these benefits are related to issues of power and legitimacy in the field.

Introduction to Special Issue: Educating Global Communicators: How Communication Scholars Create Value in Challenging Environments

“…Communication studies departments in universities worldwide seem aware of the expectation to demonstrate pragmatic relevance to global workplace concerns and recognize this is a source of strength. As Henning and Bener (2016) note, "(h)aving the capability to fill roles in the workplace is a way to have power" (p. 319). In a similar vein, Craig (2018) describes communication as a discipline that "may be somewhat lacking in intellectual distinctiveness as well as institutional mass" but which has "sociocultural relevance as a source of legitimacy that warrants institutional support" (p. 292).…”

“…Communication is often a “chameleon” discipline that takes the form and shape of its environment, often in an attempt to maintain independence and integrity. Henning and Bener (2016, p. 313) note that despite numerous attempts, a universally accepted definition of a technical communicator still eludes us—and a similar claim can be made about the definition of a “communicator” or even a “communication specialist.”…”