Problematising access: reflections on ethnography in a bureaucratic organisation

Abstract

PurposeThe article aims to explore the methodological implications of gaining access into a bureaucratic organisation for an ethnographic research project. It broadens the understanding of this crucial part of ethnographic research and problematises the notion of access by questioning the view of access as an official, singular and straightforward moment prior to fieldwork.Design/methodology/approachThe article is based on 10 months of ethnographic fieldwork at the office of a Dutch health insurance company.FindingsIn this article, the author shows that research in a bureaucratic setting requires a deep level of reflexivity especially in order to maintain access and deepen the relationships in the field.Originality/valueThe study of bureaucratic organisations is a relatively new field of investigation for anthropologists and is becoming more popular. The question of how to study these types of organisations in terms of access has not yet been fully addressed through an ethnographical lens.

“That's not a proper ethnography”: a hybrid “propportune” ethnography to study nurses' perceptions of organisational culture in a British hospital

“…Access to the field is always an issue for the ethnographer because of the intense and intimate nature of observational research and is especially difficult within healthcare settings because of the highly regulated environment and presence of vulnerable persons/patients. Oute and Bjerge (2019) highlight the difficulties in gaining access to care organisations, and Buskermolen (2023) considers similar challenges in bureaucratic organisations. We suggest researchers need to be able to navigate ethics boards and adapt their data collection activities to fit their temporal frameworks.…”

“…Instead, research in such a bureaucratic setting requires reflexivity to gain and maintain access and relationships in the field. While Buskermolen (2023) suggests the study of bureaucratic organisations is a relatively new field of investigation, such discussion is beyond this paper. What this vignette also reveals is opportunism in data collection, exposing much about the culture.…”

“…This was not in any way unethical, but the student felt guilty, almost deceptive, with a feeling of unease (Lindberg and Eule, 2020) The student had to develop guile to establish and maintain relationships with gatekeepers. Buskermolen (2023) notes the difficultly of gaining access to conduct ethnography in a bureaucratic organisation, and questions the view of access as an official, singular and straightforward activity before commencing fieldwork. Instead, research in such a bureaucratic setting requires reflexivity to gain and maintain access and relationships in the field.…”

“…For example, her experiences with institutional gatekeepers gave her valuable insights into the way the organisation works. Gatekeepers not only constrained access intentionally as described earlier but also inadvertently, driven by organisational bureaucratic processes which procedurally hinder progress (Buskermolen, 2023). Additionally, some gatekeepers can simply be so busy that despite claiming they are keen to facilitate the research, access is delayed because they do not return emails or calls promptly.…”

Field, place or space? A carnal ethnography of a therapeutic space-construct

“…In such a mainstream approach, field is a foundational part of any ethnographic research. Access to the field is at the heart of extended observational work and relationship building aimed at understanding behaviour, activities and value systems in a particular setting (Buskermolen, 2023). By access to the field, we commonly mean permission to visit a physical place and spend time with the people who navigate the said place.…”