Search results

The purpose of this paper is to make a case for the strength of qualitative work, but more specifically for various kinds of ethnographies.

The authors argue that global neoliberal and audit culture policies have crept into academic research, tertiary education practice, and research culture.

The authors then discuss major tenets of and make the case for the use of auto-, duo-, and collaborative-ethnographies as caring practices and research method(ologies) that may in fact push back against such hegemonic neoliberal practices in the academy. Finally, the authors link these caring types of ethnographies to the papers within this special issue.

This is an original look at the concepts of auto-, duo-, and collaborative-ethnographies with relation to caring practices.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how the use of an auto‐ethnographic life history can provide rich, original data to critically analyse the interplay between the socially constructed self, a career journey over time and societal change.

A reflexive auto‐ethnography is used as a conduit to explore a career journey. The author draws on the fluidity of ageing to make visible gendered organizational processes. The setting is New Zealand.

To understand the interplay of a career journey through a life history approach and intersectional analysis reinforces the life‐long significance of gender with ageing.

The author suggests that by reflecting on the complex interplay of one's own life through an intersectional approach can add a further dimension to scholarly thinking on the “doing” of intersectionality when considering the career journey of others.

The purpose of this paper is to provide guidelines for reflexive ethnographic writing that transports the researcher's claims of having conducted participatory reflexive research to her audience.

Auto‐ethnographic vignettes from the author's own ethnographic research are used to establish five levels of reflexivity for writing organizational ethnography.

The author argues that the audience needs to be able to judge a researcher's claims to reflexivity through his/her writing. Yet, due to the participation mode of reflexivity while doing ethnographic research, the researcher is not in control over his/her own reflexive writing. Therefore, processes between three groups of stakeholders, namely researcher, field and audience, and their power relations need to be considered in reflexive writing. The author calls this process ethnographic triangulating and derives a five‐tiered model of reflexive writing from it.

The paper offers a perspective on how to write organizational ethnography. Others will have to put this perspective into practice.

The paper moves the participation mode of reflexivity to the level of writing, thereby offering a fully conceived view on reflexivity that acknowledges the influence of field and audience on ethnographic writing.

The purpose of this paper is to present an evocative story “Resisting the Ban” which illustrates the ethical and pragmatic issues that nurses face when contending with smoking ban policies in inpatient psychiatric settings.

The creative story “Resisting the Ban” was developed based on an organisational auto-ethnographic approach. The story was crafted through employing creative writing techniques and through framing and critiquing memories via several theoretical frames.

The story illustrates how smoking ban policies have created pragmatic and ethical issues on wards. The work practices of nurses have changed as have their relationships with patients. The liberties of involuntary patients have also been infringed.

This approach can illuminate links between acts of resistance and issues associated with public policies.

The effects of smoking bans need to be considered more carefully particularly in relation to their effects on workers and patients. The social meaning of the smoking bans needs closer investigation. Policy needs to be recrafted so that it better addresses the liberties of involuntary patients. Also ward nurses need to be able to carry out their roles in a manner which is consistent with their values.

Public policies, such as smoking bans, can produce negative consequences maligning relationships, practices and cultures. Critical auto-ethnography provides a means of understanding issues that have resulted from problematic policies.

Scholarly work conducted on the relationship between everyday resistance in workplaces and public policies is rare. This study offers new “insider” insights into the negative effects of a smoking ban policy in psychiatric inpatient settings.

The purpose of this paper is to explore Bryan Stevenson’s (2014, 2015) call to action from within two emergent schools of thought in criminology, “cultural criminology,” and “convict criminology”, which share a special concern with the contributions that criminological research makes to a climate of social control and punishment. The author’s central aim is to explore the capacity of what the author argues is a potentially under-leveraged tool of social change – the philosophies underlying and implemented in cultural and convict criminology.

To demonstrate the potential impact of this research, the author draws upon a purposive sample of qualitative studies that exemplify the particular emotive, moral, and aesthetic goals central to Stevenson’s call to action. The impact of the production of images of crime, crime control, and criminals that emerge in the development of the paradigms central to cultural and convict criminology is finally discussed in terms of Stevenson’s four prescriptions for social and criminal justice reform.

The underlying philosophies, theoretical assumptions, and methodological approaches dictated by convict and cultural criminology are uniquely equipped to make visible the forces linked to resistance to penal and social reform.

In synthesizing cultural criminology and the emergent convict criminology as guides to doing empirical research, and identifying each as embodying Stevenson’s call to action, the author hopes – maybe not to extract those easily ignitable, invisible forces away from reform efforts entirely, but at least – to provide those who are interested with a more nuanced map of where they are not likely to live and breathe them. Stimulating and widening the criminological imagination might not satisfy our need to quickly and concretely apply a solution to injustice, but it might be what the problem demands.

Stevenson (2014) argues that the extent of injustice in the US criminal justice system is so pervasive, extraordinary, and long standing, that everyone has a role to play in the course of our everyday lives in turning the tide of indifference and cruelty that feed mass injustice and incarceration. Applying his proposals to the on-the-ground working lives of empirical criminologists holds potential for effecting change from the top-down.

The purpose of this paper is to present a collaborative (auto)ethnography that has emerged from the meeting of four academic researchers working with and from the heart in various Latin American contexts.

Our “I’s” have mingled with our very varied participations in different themes, latitudes, and disciplines – health, education and psychosocial approaches. We have worked, variously, in both English and Spanish. At the core of this piece are our own biographies, motivations, senses, academic dreams, international contexts, and the injustices and suffering felt in our bodies.

We seek to reflect from our experience of traveling as young researchers and as women with Latin souls. Through our stories, we show how crossing cultures as part of our research and work gives us both a privileged position but also the constant stress and questioning that goes beyond the intellectual and appears in our embodied experiences of interculturality.

The limitation of this piece of research is that it is based on personal experiences, that although there may be people who feel identified with these experiences, these are not generalizable or transferable.

Performative autoethnography is an instance to understand the world like a crisol with different faces; self, social, cultural and methodology, which allows us to understand the world from a holistic perspective.

With this paper, we hope to contribute for other women in academia to see themselves reflected in the experience of moving through a globalized world.

Through both living in and reflecting on this process, we show how our experiences provide us with new, intercultural “worlds under construction.”

The purpose of this paper is to outline the challenges and complexities in conducting research faced by scholars utilizing postcolonial feminist frameworks. The paper discusses postcolonial feminist key concepts, namely representation, subalternity, and reflexivity and the challenges scholars face when deploying these concepts in fieldwork settings. The paper then outlines the implications of these concepts for feminist praxis related to international management theory, research, and writing as well as entrepreneurship programs.

This paper discusses the experiences of the author in conducting fieldwork on Turkish high‐technology entrepreneurs in the USA and Turkey by focusing explicitly on the challenges and complexities postcolonial feminist frameworks bring to ethnography and auto‐ethnography.

The paper suggests that conducting fieldwork guided by postcolonial feminist frameworks faces challenges related to representation inclusive of the author and the participants in the study. It offers subalternity as a relational understanding of subjects in contrast to comparative approaches to the study of business people. The paper also discusses how positionality impacts reflexivity through gender, ethnicity, and class relations.

This paper offers a critical perspective on conducting research related to non‐Western subjects by addressing issues arising from feminist and postcolonial intersections. It is a valuable contribution to those researchers who are interested in conducting feminist research particularly with non‐Western people and cultures.

Cyber incivility is a form of unsociable speech and a common daily workplace stressor. The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of cyber incivility on non-profit leaders in Canada and share an intimate portrait of their personal experiences and perceptions.

The study advances our understanding of how qualitative methods can be introduced into the study of a phenomenon which has been broadly examined in a positivist tradition. The paper draws epistemologically and methodologically on a fusion of critical discourse analysis and auto-ethnography to present emic and experiential insights.

The findings offer three conceptual contributions: to introduce a novel qualitative method to a dynamic field of study; to advance a critical dimension to our understanding of cyber incivility; and to explore the challenges which emerge when qualitative research must draw largely on positivist, quantitative literature. Additionally, this paper makes three contributions to our understanding of cyber incivility: by introducing organizational context conditions which encourage incivility; by identifying commonalities between incivility and bullying, by challenging the existing taxonomy; and by examining the personal experiences of non-profit leaders in Canada (in operationalized settings).

Quantitative analysis has been limited to the relationship between supervisor and employee and consisted mostly of cross-sectional self-report designs, online surveys and experimental manipulation in simulated workplace environments. This study serves up a deeper analysis from within organizational environments.

The purpose of this reflective paper is to discuss and reflect and in the process celebrate the development of a qualitative research stream which continues to interrogate the unusual topic of illegal rural enterprise. The authors discuss how a common interest in rural entrepreneurship and rural criminology led to a very productive and continuing research collaborations.

To discuss, reflect and evaluate several qualitative methodologies arising out of a research stream into illegal rural enterprise.

The findings are tentative and subjective in nature but the authors strongly believe that writing qualitatively over a number of related topics and over several published articles legitimises the use of niche qualitative research methods and methodologies. Ultimately it will help develop robust methodologies. The authors agree that just as there is no single, universally applicable theorisation of entrepreneurial behaviours, actions and antics there is no single qualitative methodology that provides constant explanations.

This reflective paper being a subjective and emotive rhetorical piece has obvious limitations in that the advice proffered may be strongly disputed by research managers and heads of department trying to build an orthodox research output. Also the understanding of qualitative research may differ from that of other scholars. This is surely cause for celebration! This will help the authors better understand the heterogeneity of entrepreneurship.

By discussing and celebrating a qualitatively driven research stream rather than discussing individual qualitative publications in isolation this reflection makes a contribution. The professional and institutional pressures to conform to productive mainstream research topics capable of publication in top tier journals poses a danger to the practice of conducting qualitative research which exist at the margins of individual disciplines. It is hoped that this discussion will act as an inspirational beacon to others to pursue research agendas for which they have a passion.

This reflective piece identifies and discusses an under researched area of entrepreneurship research namely how to craft and develop a unified qualitative research stream at the margins of entrepreneurship research.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and reflect on mutual relationships between the researcher’s life experiences, encounters and personal learning, and how they can influence the research process of designing and writing research publications as well as their dialectical influences on the emergence and evolution of researcher identities in these processes.

This research is inspired by auto-ethnography. While the descriptions and analyses of the selected moments from the pre-research period are based on retrospective reflection and memory, the descriptions and analyses of the moments from the research period are in addition to the memories, based on notes and diary entries about my encounters with various people, documents, events and literature.

The paper shows that researchers’ attempts to understand the Other through studies of certain phenomena are a production between them and their past, their experiences and people encountered, as well as between them and the research literature they use. In these encounters and processes, the researcher’s multiple identities emerge and evolve with significance for how the research is socially produced.

The paper takes a broader perspective than usually seen in studies of researcher identities and is based on a researcher’s life history rather than only on a specific field-situation. As such, it has a longitudinal character, and it implies a broader, multilevel area of reflection, emphasizing dialectical relationships between the researcher, the context(s) and people involved in these, as well as the subject(s) of research, which are characterized by mutuality and continuality.