Negotiating field roles in manufacturing management research: The need for reflexivity

Abstract

Despite some notable exceptions, the intricacies, dilemmas and impact of manufacturing management researchers’ adoption of different field roles during data collection in collaborating organizations tends to be glossed over in published work. The aim of this paper is to investigate the potential impact of different field roles upon manufacturing management research. Through a discussion of the research methodology literature two ideal types are presented: the researcher field role and the consultant field role. By drawing upon examples from the authors’ own experience we argue that inadvertent oscillation between these roles influences research findings. Nevertheless it is argued that both field roles are important in manufacturing research, so what is important is to maintain a balance between them. Such a balance requires both situational and epistemic reflexivities. This paper seeks to encourage researchers to be more reflexive in their published research and to avoid the tendency to present rationalized (and sanitized) accounts. The consequence would be a more rigorous analysis of the impact of the researcher’s field role upon the manufacturing management research process and findings.

Citation

Johnson, P., Duberley, J., Close, P. and Cassell, C. (1999), "Negotiating field roles in manufacturing management research: The need for reflexivity", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 No. 12, pp. 1234-1253. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443579910294219