Teadmiste saamise viis on hangitavate teadmiste kvaliteedi tähenduses kriitiline. Ometi on metoodika osa teadmiste hankimisel sageli alahinnatud, kuigi vildakatel teadmistel tuginevad otsused võivad sillutada otsetee ebaõnnestumisteni. Siinviidatu leidis oma koha mitmel põhjusel. Minuni jõudvad praktikad erinevatest organisatsioonidest viitavad, et teadmiste hankimise viisid organisatsioonidest on üsna ühekülgsed ning valitud peamiselt valija teadmistest, mitte probleemist ja eesmärgist lähtudes. Samal ajal raamistab nö õppekavakeskne haridussüsteem – siin ei ole tegemist minu kriitikaga õppekavakesksest haridussüsteemist – ka tudengitööde võimalused. Isegi magistriõppes on etnograafiameetoditel tuginevate uuringute tegemine tõsine väljakutse ja nõuab märkimisväärset pingutust nii autorilt, juhendajatelt kui teistelt osalistelt. Aga see on siiski võimalik. Tekst on nii tihe, et allnevalt esitan vaid mõned vihjed lugemishuvi suurendamiseks.

Konteksti avab autor kohe härjal sarvist haarates:

This article addresses the question of how scholars achieve immersion in organizational ethnography. Immersion involves delving deeply into the lives of research participants (e.g., Adler and Adler, 1987; Becker and Geer, 1957; Emerson et al., 2011) and is central to participant observation (e.g., Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007; O’Reilly, 2005; Ybema et al., 2009), which is considered to be the cornerstone and most distinctive feature of ethnographic research (e.g., Daynes & Williams, 2018; Malinowski, 1922). Immersion is a practical, intellectual, and emotional exercise whereby ethnographers achieve the social competence necessary to investigate a phenomenon (Wacquant, 2015) and capture what people do, think, and believe, resulting in granular descriptions and nuanced analyses of aspects of organizational life that are typically invisible to distant observers (e.g., Van Maanen, 1988; Watson, 2011).

Autor lubab:

I synthesize a broad set of ethnographies in organization studies, sociology, and anthropology, and advance that immersion requires optimizing: (a) involvement, by establishing a social role; (b) engagement, by adhering to participants’ ways of thinking; (c) duration, by aligning with the temporal pacing of the field; and (d) sites, by constructing the field as a space for social action.

“Muutumine kohalikuks” – üks paljudest uurijat varitsevatest ohtudest:

Engagement also requires ethnographers to avoid the pitfalls of going native. Going native is associated with a high level of embeddedness in the phenomenon, potentially leading ethnographers to reproduce and celebrate the view of group members instead of spelling out what drives their behavior (Narayan, 1993; Olivier de Sardan, 1995).

Sedastus kokkuvõttest:

Finally, throughout my discussion of the three points above I have grappled with the issue of reflexivity. If these four methodological principles are employed with analytical distance, they yield great promise for revealing the iterative nature of the ethnographic objects constructed by organizational scholars. These iterations can be uncovered by examining the relationship between the object and the ethnographer’s immersion, a task that is epistemological and requires unpacking the mutual influence between the degree of immersion and the construction of the object, and thus, the conditions of the production of ethnographic knowledge.

Dumont, G. (2022). Immersion in Organizational Ethnography: Four Methodological Requirements to Immerse Oneself in the Field. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281221075365