Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Apologizing in Business Situations
Authors: Junlaprom, Jakkarin 
Issue Date: 2011
Publisher: Chulalongkorn University Printing House
University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce
Source: Jakkarin Junlaprom (2011) Apologizing in Business Situations. University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce Journal Vol.31 No.2.
Journal: University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce Journal 
Abstract: This study attempts to analyze speech acts and patterns of apologies in businesscontexts among 135 students of the University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce andthe business staff. The subjects were asked to complete a Discourse Completion Test(DCT) with 12 situations in which they wrote down their apologies as well as aself-assessment of guilt in a particular circumstance. The study also corelatedthe relationship between the subjects’ assessment of guilt with gender, workresponsibilities, and knowledge background. The following issues were under scrutiny:(1) the subjects’ self-assessment of guilt, (2) apology strategies, and (3) apologypatterns. The analysis revealed that in a business context, the assessment of guiltwas primarily related to work responsibilities, rather than to gender or knowledgebackground. Interestingly, this reflects the significance of work roles in such a context.Nine apology strategies were found and classified into two groups: main strategy andminor strategy. While the former included seven methods, which were apologizing,explaining, taking responsibility, self-blaming, problem solving, offering help, and askingabout damage, the latter was composed of offering options and promising. Concerningapology patterns, the results indicated four apology patterns used in such situations:apologizing by using only a single method, apologizing by using two methods,apologizing by using three methods, and apologizing by using more than threemethods. The apology methods within each pattern were unequally applied. Theresults reported that the most frequently used patterns were apologizing by usingeither two methods or by using three methods, respectively. The least frequently used pattern was apologizing using more than three methods.
ISSN: 0125-2437
Rights: This work is protected by copyright. Reproduction or distribution of the work in any format is prohibited without written permission of the copyright owner.
Appears in Collections:JEO: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1102fulltext.pdf643.57 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
Show full item record Recommend this item

Page view(s) 5

checked on Jul 11, 2019

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.