Social identities in the field: how fluctuating fieldworker identities shape our research

Abstract

Purpose 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. Design/methodology/approach 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. Findings 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. Originality/value 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.

“It’s okay even if you are a spy”: issues in researcher positioning within a precarious workplace

“…For example, being in my 30s while conducting the study resembled the age group of some seafarers with whom I shared references to music, films and video games; this served as another means of building trust and rapport. These experiences could also be related to the fluctuating identities in the field and the influential role identity plays in a researcher's positioning in the field, as also noted by Gosovic (2018) and Merriam et al (2001). Another identity I 'flaunted' (Mazzei and O'Brien, 2009) was my gender.…”

“Isn't it ironic…!?!” Mobility researchers go sedentary: A group auto‐ethnography on collective coping and care in pandemic times

“…As researchers who are personally familiar with the field, we are not only oscillating between the “hyphen‐spaces” engagement‐distance , as mentioned earlier, but as well between that of the insider‐outsider and the “hyphen‐space” sameness‐difference , thereby taking a stance regarding political activism versus active neutrality (Cunliffe & Karunanayake, 2013), for example, when addressing precariousness of professional isolation and limited contracts in early career research career. As stipulated by Gosovic (2018), these oscillations necessitate a ethnographic posture that allows for “fluctuating researcher identities,” which are at times intuitively, at times purposefully chosen.…”

Trapped in limbo – Academics' identity negotiation in conditions of perpetual liminality

“…Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007). Such oscillation is, however, not only a cognitive exercise, but it also extends to the social identities of ethnographers during the fieldwork (Gosovic, 2018). Negotiating between insider and outsider positions involves negotiating the relationship between two facets of the ethnographer's social identity (Järventie-Thesleff et al , 2016) that unfold cognitively; yet, as we would argue, also bodily in the field and the text.…”