"You have been put into groups": Doing Team-Talk

Working within a team can be most rewarding however, it can also be met with conflict, some hierarchical/authoritative structures and opposing assessments. When two voices are joined to one mind-set, it can be difficult for all ideas to be agreed upon either through explicit (dis)preferred turns or reformulating others turn- constructed units (TCUs) to present a turn which one believes to be more appropriate and effective in task success (Clark, 1996; Pomerantz, 1984; Schegloff, 2016). This research relies heavily on conversation analytic focuses, such as turn-taking organisation, face theory and collaborative completion/collaborative increments (Goffman, 1955; Saks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1978; Schegloff, 2016). As assessments are “products of participation” it is shall be explored why certain assessments are re-formed, repaired, or collaboratively completed, within and across teams (Pomerantz, 1984). The data shall explore understanding how teams of people work jointly towards a goal and whether there are more effective ways for teams to communicate. Focusing specifically on how activity assessments are presented, there is always the option for them to be (non)explicitly declined. This may offer understanding to whether teams may need these assessments and declinations to be more or less effective, than if they were not present in team- talk. The data presented is retrieved from multiple pre-organised activities, completed by four participants in each interaction. Participants were provided with simple activities and the data presented explores participant assessments and subsequent participants assessments of either the prior participants turn or their own assessment of the obstacles found in the activity.