Convention and expedience, not law, govern interbank deal conversations
Evidence
More substantive institutional constraints emerge from the way that information is requested, delivered, and received. Such constraints were found, in the past, to be strongest in courtroom settings, in which participants orient their conduct by reference to legally enforceable rules. Here, convention and expedience, rather than legal constraints, appear to guide conversational form, and this is where the economic character of the transaction becomes more apparent—specifically, in the desire to perform deals swiftly, without cost in terms of time and money for oneself and others; transparently, oriented to the fact that deals are recorded and open to inspection by supervisors and others; and in a conflict-free manner, free of complex interpretative issues among counterparts. Economic expedience translates into minimalism; deals are basically performed in three turns (see lines 3 to 5 above), each specifying bare essentials: volume and kind of currency (“CHF 10”), price (“6267”), and buy or sell request (“67”). — Karin Knorr Cetina & Urs Bruegger, Global Microstructures, 111
Categorization
- DEFINE: Contrasts institutional speech-constraint research in courtrooms with the trader setting where convention rather than legal form constrains talk.
- XREF: connects to: Conversation itself is the instrument of global interbank exchange. — Karin Knorr Cetina & Urs Bruegger, Global Microstructures: The Virtual…, 102
Related
- Conversation itself is the instrument of global interbank exchange. (similarity 0.84)
Broader Connections
- Conversation itself is the instrument of global interbank exchange.
#expands(0.82) — Karin Knorr Cetina & Urs Bruegger, Global Microstructures, 102