Search results

The purpose of this paper is to highlight levels of power in research ethics that are insufficiently addressed in self-ethnographic research literature.

The paper reflexively draws from a qualitative research that was conducted in a higher education institution (HEI) in South Africa. The reflection is substantiated with literature on various aspects of the reflection. The research design was self-ethnography, conducted within a postmodernist paradigm.

The reflection exposes the hidden levels of power in the process of ethical clearance and gatekeeping of access to participants. It also suggests that different theoretical perspectives about ethics work together throughout the self-ethnographic research process.

The research on which the paper is based was conducted in only one college of one HEI. Therefore its findings may only be contextual.

The exposure of the levels of power contributes to the discourses of research ethics and may caution self-ethnographic researchers about the complexities of research ethics involved in this research design.

Although there is plethora of literature about ethics and insider research, little has been done to bring to light the various levels of power that this paper highlights.

This paper aims at examining the prospects and possibilities of autoethnography in trust research. The focus of this study is on trust-building in a management team from an esthetic leadership perspective. The empirical context of the study is the organization of higher education during a funding reform.

This study adopted a qualitative research strategy with co-produced autoethnographic methods. The data comprised the researcher's diary, field notes and written texts from informants. Autoethnographic methods were applied in data gathering; more precisely, the data were collected by the moving observing method of shadowing and complemented with the management team's written texts reporting their feelings. The data were analyzed by constructing autoethnographic vignettes and a critical frame story.

The findings of the study contribute to the methodological discussion of autoethnographic research when studying a complex phenomenon such as trust-building. The findings suggest that the role of authenticity in trust-building may vary depending on the esthetic leadership style. Furthermore, the findings contribute to the esthetic leadership theory by a proposal of esthetic reassurance as intentional leader-embodied communication aiming to reinforce follower trust in a leader.

Co-produced autoethnography is applied in studying trust-building. Furthermore, this paper provides an inside view of the meaning of esthetics in leader-follower relationships in higher education organizations.

The purpose of this paper is to problematise the idea of “at-home ethnography” and to expand knowledge about insider/outsider distinctions by using insights from institutional ethnography (IE). It also examines the strengths and challenges of “returning” researchers recognising their unique position in overcoming these binaries.

IE is the method the researcher used to explore community-based water management in rural Chile. The researcher is interested in learning from rural drinking water organisations to understand the way in which their knowledge is organised. The data presented derived from field notes of participant observation and the researcher’s diary.

The notion of “at-home ethnography” fell short when reflecting on the researcher’s positions and experiences in the field. This is especially true when researchers return to their countries to carry out fieldwork. The negotiation of boundaries, codes and feelings requires the researcher to appreciate the complex relationships surrounding ethnographic work, in order to explore how community-based water management is done in the local setting, without forgetting where the setting is embedded.

Unique insights are offered into the advantages and tensions of conducting fieldwork “at home” when the researcher has lived “abroad” for an extended time. A critique and contribution to “at-home ethnography” is offered from an IE perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to present a specific case of at-home ethnography, or insider research: The German Public Employment Service (BA) commissioned its own research institute (Institute for Employment Research (Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung)) to evaluate the daily implementation of its core management instruments (target management and controlling). The aim of the paper is to explain the challenges faced by the ethnographers and to reflect on them methodologically.

At-home ethnography/insider research.

In the paper, it is argued to what extent conducting at-home ethnography, or insider research, is like “Walking the Line” – to paraphrase Johnny Cash. When examining a management instrument that is highly contested on the micropolitical level, the researchers have to navigate their way through different interests with regard to advice and support, and become micropoliticians in their own interest at the same time in order to maintain scientific autonomy. The ethnographers are deeply enmeshed in the micropolitical dynamics of their field, which gives rise to the question of how they can distance themselves in this situation. To this effect, they develop the argument that distancing is not so much about seeing what is familiar in a new light, as is mostly suggested in the literature, than about alienating a familiar research environment in order to avoid a bureaucratically contingent othering. It is shown what constitutes a bureaucratically contingent othering and how it should be met by an othering of the bureaucracy. Conclusions are drawn from this with regard to the advice and support required for the bureaucracy and concerning the methods debate surrounding insider research in general.

The paper contributes to the method debate with regard to at-home ethnography, or insider research, and particularly addresses organisational researchers and practitioners facing similar challenges when conducting ethnographic research in their own organisation.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the challenges the author had encountered and the counter-strategies she had adopted to overcome them while conducting ethnography for the first time during her doctoral research. In this paper, the author hopes to provide guidance for future researchers by discussing the role she played in her research, the experiences she gained as a result of it, the difficulties she faced and the strategies she employed to overcome these difficulties.

Following the social constructionist perspective, this paper analyses the experience that the author had gained during her field study. As a novice researcher, the author entered the field to study the relationship between caste and occupational mobility. The caste that she had selected was the Kansari caste to which the author belongs. Therefore, her position as a researcher while conducting ethnography became a crucial part of the methodological challenges the author faced. While insider ethnography has its advantages and disadvantages, this paper does not discuss these aspects of the methodology. Instead, it discusses how, as a novice researcher, the author had to negotiate her position as an insider and outsider.

While analysing her experience as a novice researcher, the author found that her journey of conducting insider ethnography was of rediscovering herself as a Kansari as well as a researcher. Through this research, the author found that as an insider ethnographer, certain strategies had to be adopted in the field by the researcher to be objective and unbiased throughout the research process. For example, whenever the author conducted an interview, she tried to try to say less, listen more and be as objective as possible, without allowing her preconceptions to influence the information she gathered from the field.

This is an original paper based on the primary data collected by the author.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to developing the understanding and practice of fieldwork in familiar settings by expanding the literature on fieldworker identities.

Based on ethnographic fieldwork in a multinational biopharmaceutical corporation, and drawing on anthropological theory of social identities, the paper demonstrates the multiple and fluid identities that we as organizational ethnographers purposefully take on, accidentally acquire, unintentionally are ascribed with and experience during ethnographic fieldwork in familiar settings.

Building on these insights, and by expanding the literature on researcher identities, the paper develops a critique of the spatial and temporal notions often attached to fieldwork in familiar settings by demonstrating how outsider identities are ascribed even “at home” and how insider identities can be experienced when away. It further reflects on the ways in which these identities shape the data generation and interpretation process.

This paper argues that to properly grasp the multiple identity processes involved in a fieldwork, we must escape the spatial and temporal conceptualization of being either an insider or an outsider. Instead, the paper argues for a relational and situational perspective on being an insider and an outsider in the field and proposes to conceptualize “insider” and “outsider” as ascribed, changing and sometimes volatile social identities.

This study aims to explore the challenges of being simultaneously “intimate insider” and “relative outsider” whilst undertaking an ethnography into a statutory child protection team. As a novice researcher seeking to explore a world of which he was already part, ethnography was considered the most suitable means for exploring child protection social workers’ discretion. However, by subscribing to binary notions of “insider” and “outsider” at the commencement of the study, the author underplayed the dilemma of reconciling friendships with his researcher role, as well as the barriers that his more junior organisational status could create.

This study provides an autoethnographic account of these challenges, and the author’s evolving status and movement between “insider” and “outsider” relative to different groups within the children’s services department.

The implications include the potential for being simultaneously “insider” and “outsider” when undertaking research within one’s employing organisation; the need to reconcile challenging social work tasks with researcher responsibilities; and the difficulty of maintaining pre-existing relationships, whilst also cultivating an objective research profile.

This paper offers an important contribution to the limited accounts of conducting research from “inside” a statutory children’s services department and will be of benefit to early career researchers considering a research project within their own “backyard”.

The use of organizational ethnography has grown significantly during the past decades. While language is an important component of ethnographic research, the challenges associated with language barriers are rarely discussed in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to open up a discussion on language barriers in organizational ethnography.

The author draws on her experience as a PhD student doing an organizational ethnography of an emergency department in a country where she initially did not speak the local language.

The paper examines the author's research process, from access negotiation to presentation of findings, illustrating the language barriers encountered doing an ethnography in parallel to learning the local language in Sweden.

This paper calls for awareness of the influence of the ethnographer's language skills and shows the importance of discussing this in relation to how we teach and learn ethnography, research practice and diversity in academia.

The paper makes three contributions to organizational ethnography. First, it contributes to the insider/outsider debate by nuancing the ethnographer's experience. Second, it answers calls for transparency by presenting a personal ethnographic account. Third, it contributes to developing the methodology by offering tips to deal with language barriers in doing ethnography abroad.

The purpose of this paper is to consider “at home ethnography” and “abroad ethnography” not as labels standing for different kinds of fieldwork “out there” but rather as the poles of a continuum identifying the ethnographer’s situated, relative and ever changing epistemic status.

Building on data from a recent fieldwork in an intensive care unit, the author identifies the different epistemic circumstances that originate from the entanglement of the multiple territories of knowledge at stake in any ethnography of complex organizations.

The analysis shows how the participants’ relative access to knowledge and rights to claim it vary according to the circumstances and the unfolding of the interaction. The discussion advances that the ethnographer oscillates between “being abroad” and “being at home” as if he was constantly moving between the two classical positions of ethnographic work: making the familiar strange as it is typical of ethnographies focusing on the “very ‘ordinariness’ of normality” (Ybema et al., 2009, p. 2), and making the strange familiar as it is typical of anthropologists studying exotic communities.

The paper contributes to the still ongoing debate on “at home” organizational ethnography, by addressing the limits of the “insider doctrine” (Merton, 1972) that still pervades contemporary ethnography and proposes cognitive oscillation as the challenging mindset of any ethnographer-in-the-field.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the fluidity of the fieldwork roles “insider” and “outsider.” The paper aims to move the discussion of insiders from an a priori categorized status and contribute to the literary insider–outsider debate by unfolding the micro process of how the role of an insider is shaped in situ. Grounded in empirical examples, the paper illustrates how the researcher’s role is shaped through interactions with organizational members and by context.

The paper is based on an ethnographic study in an IT department of a Nordic bank and draws on empirical material generated through a combination of data: shadowing, interviews, observations and documents. Excerpts from fieldnotes are included to invite the reader into “the scenes” played out in the field and are analyzed in order to illustrate the shaping of roles in situ.

The study finds that, independent of the researcher’s role as sponsored by the organization, the interactions with organizational members and context determine whether the researcher is assigned a role as insider or outsider, or even both within the same context.

The paper contributes with a new discussion of how the roles of insiders and outsiders are fluid by discussing the shaping of the roles in situ. By drawing on relational identity theories, the paper illustrates how interactions and context influence the researcher’s role, grounded in empirical examples. In addition, the paper discusses what the assigned roles enable and constrain for the ethnographer in that particular situation.