Stories from the lived and living fieldwork process

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide a more expansive recounting of the process of fieldwork, taking place over a number of years in diverse locations, in order to show how research design develops through the process of field research, as well as to highlight the complexity of fieldwork, especially issues of access, identity, and power.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on the author's fieldwork experiences in Sierra Leone, working from and expanding upon fieldnotes from time in the field. Reflexive, autoethnographic personal narratives of fieldwork experiences are juxtaposed with theoretical writing about ethnographic observation and qualitative research.FindingsThe expansive discussion of the process of fieldwork and the development of the research project through time demonstrates and explicates the complexity and temporal dimensions of qualitative field research. Issues of access, identities, and power/privilege are also crucial aspects of the fieldwork process.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper shows the importance of acknowledging and articulating the development of fieldwork and research design over time and in different places. It also discusses the complexity of fieldwork due to issues of access, identity, and power. Its claims are limited by its focus on one case, the author's fieldwork.Social implicationsThis piece will help members of society better understand the process of qualitative fieldwork. Given its format and writing style, this piece can be easily read and understood by interested members of the public.Originality/valueThis paper provides narratives and commentary that provide a more complete picture of the practice of field research and the development of research design over the course of time and in diverse locations. This will be valuable to researchers, especially those preparing for field experiences for the first time or for their first time in a particular field, as well as students interested in learning about qualitative fieldwork practices.

A Dynamic Process Model for Finding Informants and Gaining Access in Qualitative Research

“…For example, it is often depicted as no more than an administrative hurdle that precedes “the ‘real’ research” (Crowhurst, 2013, p. 463), which entails collecting and analyzing data and writing the report. While gaining access might appear direct, even this “simple” stage of the research process can be fraught with challenges that rarely make it straightforward (Cole, 2013). Our study explores these challenges, revealing the uncomfortable and difficult experiences that researchers may encounter when trying to gain, secure, and maintain access as well as what happens when attempting to gain access fails.…”

‘Let’s Move on, Please’: Trust and Employment Relations in Early-stage Start-ups

“…Two directions of interpretation of the collected empirical materials were identified, partly inspired by the analytical model proposed by Saunders and Ahuja (2006): (a) the relation individuals establish with their employer organisation (strategy, management practices, tasks and work activities, employment temporariness) and (b) the relations established within the organisation (immediate relations established by individuals with managers, peers, external partners and their working or project teams). One narrative was drawn up (Cole, 2013; Czarniawska, 1997) as a vehicle aimed to condense and illustrate empirically observed social relations. The presented narrative is itself considered to be a vehicle of knowledge, a condensed research empirical result available to be challenged, discussed and interpreted.…”

Evidencing Gatekeeping Relations through Narrativity

“…Using narratives (Cole, 2013;Czarniawska, 1997Czarniawska, , 2004Muncey, 2005;Riessman, 1993;Wall, 2006) as an expositive and communication vehicle, concerning a researcher's reflexive experience of the aforementioned research processes, can constitute a valuable resource to promote additional viewpoints over specific research circumstances, helping to stabilize connections and interpretative templates around these (Czarniawska, 2014). This use can help shed light on processes typically neglected in research reports (Okumus et al, 2007), due to ascribed minor importance (Gummesson, 2000), a perspective that can trigger the existence of unexpected research events and obstacles (Burawoy, 2013;Siwale, 2015).…”