Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Considered Language” in Public Service: Changing Discourses and Their Implementation in Practice

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant

  • 145 Accesses

Abstract

Buzzwords and acronyms are ubiquitous throughout public service provision worldwide. Additionally, such terms are subject to frequent change, and public servants are expected to use the most up-to-date language in their work in order to reflect current policy, mirror institutional norms, and for purposes of equality or public value. This chapter provides two examples of language use in health and social care services in the UK, focusing on the terms “intellectual disability” and “frailty.” Both are relatively recent clinical terms adopted in health and social care public service provision. The chapter draws on empirical findings from a discourse analysis of interviews with public servants to explore their perceptions of these terms and how they have come to use them in their practice. The discourse analysis reveals a number of tensions, benefits, and challenges associated with changing terminology and the expectations that come with this. In conclusion, changes to terminology are generally made to benefit public value and service experience; however, such changes can give rise to personal dilemmas for the public servant in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Age UK. 2015. Frailty Language and Perceptions (online). Britain Thinks. Available from https://www.ageuk.org.uk/documents/en-gb/for-professionals/policy/health-and-wellbeing/report_bgs_frailty_language_and_perceptions.pdf?dtrk=true

  • Becker, H. 1963. Outsiders, New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. 1988. Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Medical Association. 2014. Recognising the importance of physical health in mental health and intellectual disability: Achieving parity of outcomes. London: BMA Publications Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. 2007. Public value and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism. Washington, DC, Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cluley, R. 2013. What makes a management buzzword buzz? Organization Studies 34 (1): 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cluley, V. 2018. From “Learning disability to intellectual disability”—Perceptions of the increasing use of the term “intellectual disability” in learning disability policy, research and practice. British Journal of Learning Disabilities 46 (1): 24–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cluley, V., and Radnor, Z., 2019. Progressing the Conceptualization of Value Co-creation in Public Service Organizations. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance (online). Available at https://academic.oup.com/ppmg/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ppmgov/gvz024/5628190. Accessed December 2019.

  • Cluley, V. Martin, G. Radnor, Z and Banerjee, J. forthcoming. Talking about frailty: healthcare professional perspectives and an ideological dilemma. Ageing & Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cumella, S. 2008. New public management and public services for people with and intellectual disability: A review of the implementation of valuing people in England. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 5 (3): 178–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Health 2001. Valuing people, London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, M. 2018. A pragmatic investigation into the emotions of pride, shame, guilt, humiliation, and embarrassment: Lived experience and the challenge to established theory. Social Science Information 57 (4): 616–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, M. 2019. The role of pride, shame, guilt, and humiliation in social service organizations: A conceptual framework from a qualitative case study. Journal of Social Service Research 45 (1): 112–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. 1963. Stigma. Englewood Cliffs: Spectrum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, S., C. Davis, E. Karshmer, P. Marsh, and B. Straight. 2005. Living stigma: The impact of labeling, stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination in the lives of individuals with disabilities and their families. Sociological Inquiry 75 (2): 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.2005.75.issue-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grenier, A., L. Lloyd, and C. Phillipson. 2017. Precarity in late life: Rethinking dementia as a ‘frailed’ old age. Sociology of Health & Illness 39 (2): 318–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harwood, R. 2019. Editors review. Age and Ageing 48: 465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, A. 2014. Intellectual disability or learning disability? Lets talk some more. Research and Practice in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 1 (2): 142–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/23297018.2014.961527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kernaghan, K., and J. Langford. 2014. The responsible public servant. Cork: BookBaby.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansell, J. 2010. Raising our sights: Services for adults with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. London: Royal Society for Mentally Handicapped Children and Adults.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, H. 2009. What’s in a name: ‘client’, ‘patient’, ‘customer’, ‘consumer’, ‘expert by experience’, ‘service user’ – what’s next? The British Journal of Social Work 39 (6): 1101–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meynhardt, T. 2009. Public value inside: What is public value creation? Intl Journal of Public Administration 32 (3–4): 192–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S.P. 2017. From public service dominant logic to public service logic: Are public service organisations capable of co-production and value co-creation? Public Management Review 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S.P., Z.J. Radnor, and K. Strokosch. 2016. Co-production and the co-creation of value in public services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Management Review 18 (5): 639–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petelin, R. 2010. Considering plain language: Issues and initiatives. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 15 (2): 205–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., Wetherell, M. 1987. Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radnor, Z., S.P. Osborne, T. Kinder, and J. Mutton. 2014. Operationalizing co-production in public services delivery: The contribution of service blueprinting. Public Management Review 16 (3): 402–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, S. 2018. Living with frailty: From assets and deficits to resilience. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, M. 2016. ‘You’ve got autism because you like order and you do not look into my eyes’: Some reflections on understanding the label of ‘autism spectrum disorder’ from a dishuman perspective. Disability & Society 31 (9): 1301–1305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritt, M., J.I. Ritt, C.C. Sieber, and K.G. Gassmann. 2017. Comparing the predictive accuracy of frailty, comorbidity, and disability for mortality: A 1-year follow-up in patients hospitalized in geriatric wards. Clinical Interventions in Aging 12: 293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockwood, K., Song, X., MacKnight, C., Bergman, H., Hogan, D.B., McDowell, I. and Mitnitski, A. 2005. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. Cmaj 173 (5): 489–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R.L. 2007. The renaming of mental retardation: Understanding the change to the term intellectual disability. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 45 (2): 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556(2007)45[116:TROMRU]2.0.CO;2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.R. 2013. Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Maanen, J. 1978. The asshole. In Policing: A view from the street, 221–238. Santa Monica: Goodyear Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warmoth, K., I.A. Lang, C. Phoenix, C. Abraham, M.K. Andrew, R.E. Hubbard, and M. Tarrant. 2016. ‘Thinking you’re old and frail’: A qualitative study of frailty in older adults. Ageing and Society 36 (7): 1483–1500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cass Business School, City, University of London, London, UK

    Victoria Cluley & Zoe Radnor

Authors
  1. Victoria Cluley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zoe Radnor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victoria Cluley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia

    Helen Sullivan

  2. UNSW Australia, Campbell, ACT, Australia

    Helen Dickinson

  3. College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Hayley Henderson

Section Editor information

  1. Brigham Young University, Provo, USA

    Eva Witesman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Cluley, V., Radnor, Z. (2020). “Considered Language” in Public Service: Changing Discourses and Their Implementation in Practice. In: Sullivan, H., Dickinson, H., Henderson, H. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_82-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03008-7_82-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03008-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Political Science and International StudiesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation