Who do we think we are? : Analysing the content and form of identity work in the English National Health Service

Purpose – The language used by National Health Service (NHS) “commissioning” managers when discussing their roles and responsibilities can be seen as a manifestation of “identity work”, defined as a process of identifying. This paper aims to offer a novel approach to analysing “identity work” by triangulation of multiple analytical methods, combining analysis of the content of text with analysis of its form. Design/methodology/approach – Fairclough's discourse analytic methodology is used as a framework. Following Fairclough, the authors use analytical methods associated with Halliday's systemic functional linguistics. Findings – While analysis of the content of interviews provides some information about NHS Commissioners' perceptions of their roles and responsibilities, analysis of the form of discourse that they use provides a more detailed and nuanced view. Overall, the authors found that commissioning managers have a higher level of certainty about what commissioning is not rather than what commissioning is; GP managers have a high level of certainty of their identity as a GP rather than as a manager; and both GP managers and non‐GP managers oscillate between multiple identities depending on the different situations they are in. Originality/value – This paper offers a novel approach to triangulation, based not on the usual comparison of multiple data sources, but rather based on the application of multiple analytical methods to a single source of data. This paper also shows the latent uncertainty about the nature of commissioning enterprise in the English NHS.