We explore the nature of reflexivity in the context of social action and community work. In using the term social action, we are referring to collective action which seeks to transform the nature of local and societal conditions. We characterise such action as the creation of a social space in which stakeholders, representing different interests, come together to engage in joint activities to address issues of inequality and power. In such contexts, reflexivity is something more than the ‘self-reflexivity’ of the individual stakeholder, as social action requires a joint deconstruction of power in the voices and relationships operating between the stakeholders within a performative space. We name this form of reflexivity ‘inter-relational reflexivity’ and explore what such reflexivity may look like. We will suggest that inter-relational reflexivity goes beyond self-reflexivity and occurs dialogically including a concern for moral agency and the negotiation of accountability and responsibility for action. This in turn could lead to the translation of critical awareness in relation to others into social action, referred to as performativity.
AlvessonM.SkoldbergK. (2000). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research.London: Sage Publications.
2.
BaydounN.WillettR. (1995). Cultural relevance of Western accounting systems to developing countries. ABACUS, 31, 22–30.
3.
ButlerJ. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity.New York: Routledge.
4.
ButlerJ. (1997). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative.New York: Routledge.
5.
ButlerJ. (1999). Revisiting bodies and pleasures. Theory Culture and Society, 16, 11–20.
6.
CampbellC. (2003). ‘Letting Them Die’ Why HIV/AIDS Intervention Programmes Fail.USA: Indiana University Press.
7.
ChaiklinS.LaveJ. (1993). Understanding practice. Perspectives on activity and context.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
ConquergoodD. (1998). Beyond the text: Toward a performative cultural politics. In DailyS. J. (Ed.), The future of performance studies: Visions and revisions.Washington, DC: National Communication Association.
9.
CrickB. (1972). Political theory and Political Practice.London: Allen Lane.
10.
DarwallS. (2006). The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
DayP.KleinR. (1987). Accountabilities: Five public services.London: Tavistock.
12.
DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
DerridaJ. (1978). Writing and difference.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
15.
FreireP. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York: Seabury.
16.
GergenK. J. (1997). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
GergenK. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction.London: Sage Publications.
18.
GergenM. M.GergenK. J. (2000). Qualitative enquiry: Tensions and transformations. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd edn, pp. 1025–1046). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
GregsonN.RoseG. (2000). Taking Butler elsewhere: Performativities, spatialities and subjectivities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18, 433–452.
20.
HarawayD. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privileged of partial perception. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.
21.
HastrupK. (1995). A passage to anthropology. Between experience and theory.London: Routledge.
22.
HertzR. (1997). Reflexivity and voice.Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
23.
HsuD. L. (1970). The myth of the ‘five human relations’ of the Confucius. Monumenta Sinica, 29, 31.
24.
JacksonA. Y. (2004). Performativity identified. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 673–690.
25.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2000). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemologies. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, pp. 257–278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
26.
Langellier. (1999). Personal narrative, performance, performativity: Two or three things I know for sure. Text and Performance Quarterly, 19, 125–144.
27.
MartinP. Y. (2006). Practising gender at work: Further thoughts on reflexivity. Gender, Work and Organization, 13, 254–276.
28.
Oxford English Reference Dictionary. (1996). 2nd edn.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29.
PrattenD. (2008). The Thief Eats His Shame: Practice and Power In Nigerian Vigilantism. Africa, 78, 64.
30.
ScottM. B.LymanS. M. (1970). Accounts, deviance, and social order. In DouglasJ. D. (Ed.), Deviance and Responsibility.New York, NY: Basic Books.
31.
SliepY. (1996). CARE counselling model: A handbook.Harare, Zimbabwe: SAP AIDS Publications.
32.
SliepY. (1998). Working with communities: Pang'ono pang'ono ndi mtolo — Little by little we make a bundle. In WhiteC.DenboroughD. (Eds), Introducing narrative therapy (pp. 141–158). Adelaide: Dulwich.
33.
SliepY. (2009). Teaching for transformation: Developing reflexive professionals through narrative metaphor (in press).
34.
SliepY.GilbertA. (2006). Promoting inter-relational reflexivity with psychosocial workers in community work: A case study from Burundi. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 2, 293–302.
35.
SliepY.WeingartenK.GilbertA. (2004). Narrative theatre as an interactive community approach to mobilizing collective action in Uganda. Families, Systems and Health, 22, 306–320.
36.
SwartzL.GibsonK.GelmanT. (2002). Reflective practice: Psychodynamic ideas in the community.Cape Town: HSRC.
37.
VelayuthamS. (1999). The discharge of accountability and responsibility in Asian societies: An evaluation. Asian Profile, 27, 18–32.
38.
VelayuthamS. (2003). “No shame or guilt” the crisis of governance and accountability in Asian economies”. Humanomics, 19, 52–64.
39.
VygotskyL. S. (1976). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
WeedonC. (1997). Feminist practice and poststructural theory, 2nd. edn.Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
