Drawing upon a case study with public prosecutors, this article seeks to illustrate a reflective methodology for the analysis of activities.
The paper first describes the origin of the intervention at the National School of Magistracy and the great diversity of public prosecutor daily activities, and then presents the theoretical and methodological framework employed: the “clinic of activity” and its associated analyses in “crossed self‐confrontation”. This perspective organizes a developmental process in the professional experience of professionals by the way of the analysis methodology, constructed in a Vygotskian interpretation of the thought‐language relations and its consequences for consciousness and psychological development. Finally, the paper illustrates the approach using the example of a micro‐event, a lapsus lingae that occurred during work activity, and shows how such an apparently insignificant “detail” can become a subject of reflection and enable an individual and collective elaboration of thinking about work.
By examining this singular event and the progression of its interpretation, the paper attempts to explain the approach and field of operation in the clinic of activity. This example shows how an apparently insignificant event can lead to an analysis of the work activity. In this example, an error in pronunciation, interpreted by the professionals as a lapsus linguae, is the basis of an analysis which makes it possible to show and develop the principle of the counter argument, the obligations that this principle carries, as well as the historical and generic forms of the counter argument within hearings.
This paper looks to transform preoccupied professionals into occupied professionals, or in other words, to expand the profession's limits.
