Abstract
Purpose
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.
Design/methodology/approach
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.
Findings
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.
Originality/value
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.
Reference41 articles.
1. Agar, M. (1995), “Literary journalism as ethnography”, in Van Maanen, J. (Ed.), Representation in Ethnography, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 112-129.
2. Albert, S., Ashforth, B.E., Barker, J.R. and Dukerich, J.M. (1998), “Identification with Organizations”, in Whetten, D.A. and Godfrey, P.C. (Eds), Identity in Organizations: Building Theory Through Conversations, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 209-272, available at: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452231495
3. Alvesson, M. (2009), “At-home ethnography: struggling with closeness and closure”, in Ybema, S., Yanow, D., Wels, H. and Kamsteeg, F.H. (Eds), Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexities of Everyday Life, SAGE Publications, London, pp. 156-174.
4. Brun-Cottan, F. (2012), “Doing corporate ethnography as an outsider (consultant)”, in Jordan, B. (Ed.), Advancing Ethnography in Corporate Environments: Challenges and Emerging Opportunities, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 163-174.
5. The self: measurement requirements from an interactionist perspective;Social Psychology Quarterly,1980
Cited by
23 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献