Search results

The purpose of this paper is to describe and reflect on the experience as corporate ethnographers working in (and for) a large, multinational company with a remit to study and articulate “the culture of the firm.”

The research relied heavily on interviews and some (participant) observation carried out periodically – in North America, Europe and Asia – over an eight-year period.

The authors discuss how the studies were produced, received, and occasionally acted on in the firm and the realization over time of the performativity of the work as both expressive and constitutive of firm’s culture.

The increasing entanglement in the organization raises questions regarding emic and etic perspectives and the possibility (or impossibility) of “enduring detachment” or “going native” and the associated, often unintended consequences of being both outsiders and insiders.

The authors start with the premise that ethnography is about producing a written text and conclude by arguing that ethnography is not fully realized until the writing is read.

The ethnographic reports, when read by those in the company, made visible a version of Trifecta culture that was interpreted, framed and otherwise responded to in multiple ways by members of the organization.

Corporate ethnography is a growing pursuit undertaken by those inside and outside firms. This paper focusses on how and in what ways corporate ethnography sponsored by and written for those in the company shifts the positioning of the ethnographer in the field, the kinds of texts they produce, and the meanings that readers take away from such texts.

To explore the relevance of Goffman's theatrical metaphor to describe video‐mediated interactions.

Grounded in four waves of observational data of MBA students interacting by videoconference in the context of a distributed course between Europe and Asia, with the students working in virtual teams on a consulting project.

People in video‐mediated contexts adjust and evolve the well‐established routines we have developed for interacting in everyday communication in order to build a “stage” for interaction. The stage does not only refer to a spatial frame of reference, but that it also refers to a shared social context, a ”place” that participants collaboratively construct.

The paper is based on observations of MBA students, and not teams of professionals in an organization.

The observations suggest that although people often blame the technology for frustrating or negative experiences and hoping for the development of better technology, practitioners aiming to support communication in video‐mediated settings should focus on building a stage and developing practices to support the interactional order. They should focus on the construction of a shared social context, a “sense of place”.

The use of Goffman's theatrical metaphor to study video‐mediated interactions. A suggestion for being innovative about the use of technology and avoid simply replicating face‐to‐face interactions.