Manifesto for filmmaking as organisational research

Abstract

This article is an effort to build a manifesto for the academic acceptability of filmmaking as organisational research. While a film does not offer an argument with premises to reach a conclusion, it does accomplish its own distinctive manifestation of research as a performance of thought. Drawing on experience of academic film projects, we promote the idea of using filmmaking not only to convey research ideas but also to communicate the full sensory variety of organisational life. Finally, we see film as a powerful and valid feature of academic research output, providing opportunities for scholars to convey understanding to a broader public than the academy alone.

A different way of looking at things: The role of social science film in organisation studies

“…We are aware that there have been attempts to peer-review alternative modes of social scientific knowledge production, including film (see Wood et al, 2018). One example is the Sensory Ethnography Lab (SEL) at Harvard University and the peer-reviewed online Sensate Journal the SEL produces.…”

“…However, in our view, there are substantive differences between films produced for social science purposes 1 and general documentaries. First and foremost, a social science film is produced within an academic context, either to gather empirical material and conduct the analysis as a social process unfolds, or to enact and communicate the results of research to the social scientific community and beyond (we suspect that is why Wood et al (2018) use the general term 'film' but contextualize it as academic film projects or film-based research). While ethnographic film is traditionally used in cultural and social anthropology (Heinze and Weber, 2017;Miko and Sardadvar, 2008;Smith, 1982;Vannini, 2015), sociological film (Kaczmarek, 2008;Miko, 2013) is used as a special label for research in sociology.…”

“…The ways in which films as moving images can theorize and contribute to academic discourses are currently in 6 debate (e.g. Hietanen and Rokka, 2018;Wood and Brown, 2011;Wood et al, 2018).…”

“…There is growing recognition of the potential for, and effects of, film production in the social sciences (Banks and Zeitlyn, 2015;Bell and Davison, 2013;Christianson, 2016;Glisovic et al, 2016;Jarzabkowski et al, 2015;Pink, 2007;Rose, 2014Rose, , 2016Slutskaya et al, 2018;Vannini, 2015;Wood and Brown, 2011;Wood et al, 2018).…”

“…In this article, we focus on one example (a social science film produced by the first author) and discuss it both as an academic product and as an empirical method. Building on the work of Wood et al (2018), we show how social science films can express things that cannot be expressed in written form. We argue that the emphasis on writing for journals has created a gap that can be filled by film.…”