A discourse–design approach to multimodality: the visual communication of neoliberal management discourse

This paper takes a discourse–design approach to communication, providing a framework as to how this should be done. Design here is how individuals and institutions realize their interests in the world. We show how it is fruitful to link design more closely to the way discourse has been used in critical studies which draws attention to the motivated use of design, for thinking about design in terms of socio-political context. Due to their affordances, semiotic modes such as photography, graphics, layout, colour, numbers and writing will be deployed and co-articulated. The aim, using a discourse–design approach, is to show how we can best identify the very different affordances of such modes and how they rely on the principled design of a discourse. We illustrate this using examples from management documents at a university which draw on these different affordances in different ways to communicate the same discourse. Through this analysis we see how a neoliberal discourse based on a general design principle of coordination enters everyday practices and become very difficult to challenge.     

What can a baby's skull withstand? Testing the skull's resistance on an anatomical preparation

A fall scenario is often given to explain the reason for a head injury to an infant. Mostly the examining doctor or forensic expert has to rely on his own experience and to appraise the situation to be consistent or not with his finds. An experiment carried out on an anatomical preparation showed that the skull of a newborn baby was able to repeatedly resist forces of up to 1000 N before breaking in. Even then the fracture lines followed the bony spikes (spiculae) from the ossification centers of the skull bones. If fractures are running across these spiculae there is reason to believe that high local force has been used, and a blow against a sharp edge must be considered.     

Power and Democracy in Norway: The Transformation of Norwegian Politics1

The Norwegian Power and Democracy Project concluded that the parliamentary chain of government is weakened in every link; parties and election are less mobilizing; minority governments imply that the connection between election results and policy formation is broken; and elected assemblies have been suffering a notable loss of domain. Popular participation has moved from long‐term organisations and political parties to short‐term action groups and associations with immediate concerns. The judicialisation of politics has strengthen the legal system and weakened the autonomy of local democracy, while the expansion of market forces further affects the span of parliamentary rule. The mass media has become politically more independent, while adapting more closely to economic forces and the quest for return of investment. There has, accordingly, been centralisation of economic power through mergers and acquisitions following the globalisation of the Norwegian economy. The so‐called ‘Scandinavian’ (or ‘Nordic’) model is increasingly strained, while corporatism is partly weakened and partly restructured. After the end of the Cold War, there has also been a consistent strategy in foreign policy for the branding of Norway as a champion for peace and human rights. There is a cluster of corporate bureaucratic agencies around the high‐profile peace mediation and humanitarian engagement.     

Performance Management and Public Sector Reform: The Norwegian Hospital Reform

This article addresses the development of new performance management systems related to public sector reforms. One such system is Management by Objectives and Results (MBOR), based on an official OECD model. Such a system tries to establish unambiguous goals, objectivity, and incentive elements into often traditionally trust-based systems embedded in a complex political-administrative context. To analyze such performance management systems and how they work in practice, we focus on a recent reform of the hospital structure in Norway. Using a broad institutional perspective, we argue that the MBOR-system in Norway is a mixed and complex system encompassing different kinds of logic. These include instrumental elements from the new performance management systems combined with ad hoc preventive efforts by the political leadership, the influence of cultural constraints, elements of rather inappropriate self-interested action, and pressure from the environment. The study reveals that the hospital reform in Norway in practice can be seen as an integrated model, combining informal trust-based approaches and formal performance management measures. It also shows that negative side effects and dysfunctions might occur.