Para-ethnography involves collaboration with organization members who are themselves producers of cultural analysis rather than sources of raw data. It begins from the premise that contemporary workplaces involve internal theorizing that, although distinct from academic theorizing, can inform and ground organizational theory. Modern organizations, as highly professionalized, and based on conceptual design and legitimation, are a natural match for para-ethnographic methods, which have nevertheless been absent from organizational scholarship. As part of a general revisionist program in ethnographic theory, para-ethnography offers a way of reconceptualizing the role of the researcher, the nature of cultural knowledge, and the spatial boundaries of culture. After describing the similarities and differences between revisionist ethnographic approaches, I outline how para-ethnography differs from other forms of ethnography in practice. Finally, I discuss the challenges and opportunities of para-ethnography, suggesting that this methodological development may form part of a larger reconceptualization of the relation between theory and practice, and offering practical mechanics to ground such a reconceptualization.
AlvessonM.HardyC.HarleyB. (2008). Reflecting on reflexivity: Reflexive textual practice in organization and management theory. Journal of Management Studies, 45(3), 480–501.
2.
AmisJ.SilkM. (2008). The philosophy and politics of quality in qualitative organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 456–480.
3.
AppaduraiA. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural Economy. Theory, Culture & Society, 7(2), 295–310.
4.
BakerD. B.BenjaminL. T. (2000). The affirmation of the scientist-practitioner: A look back at Boulder. American Psychologist, 55(2), 241–247.
5.
BeechN.MacIntoshR.MacLeanD. (2010). Dialogues between academics and practitioners: The role of generative dialogic encounters. Organization Studies, 31(9-10), 1341–1367.
6.
BojeD.GardnerC.SmithW. (2006). (Mis)using numbers in the Enron story. Organizational Research Methods, 9(4), 456–474.
7.
BoltanskiL. (2011). On critique: A sociology of emancipation. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
8.
BrannickT.CoghlanD. (2007). In defense of being “native”: The case for insider academic research. Organizational Research Methods, 10(1), 59–74.
9.
BrownA. D. (2004). Authoritative sensemaking in a public inquiry report. Organization Studies, 25(1), 95–112.
10.
BurawoyM. (2000). Introduction: Reaching for the global. In BurawoyM. (Ed.), Global ethnography: Forces, connections, and imaginations in a postmodern world (pp. 1–41). Berkeley: University of California Press.
11.
ChristophersonS. (2008). Beyond the self-expressive creative worker: An industry perspective on entertainment media. Theory, Culture & Society, 25(7-8), 73–95.
12.
CliffordJ. (1983). On ethnographic authority. Representations, 2, 118–146.
13.
CliffordJ.MarcusG. (Eds.). (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
14.
CoghlanD. (2011). Action research: Exploring perspectives on a philosophy of practical knowing. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 53–87.
15.
ComaroffJ.ComaroffJ. (1992). The long and the short of it. In ComaroffJ.ComaroffJ. (Eds.), Ethnography and the historical imagination (pp. 95–126). Boulder, CO: Westview.
16.
CunliffeA. L. (2010). Retelling tales of the field: In search of organizational ethnography 20 years on. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 224–239.
17.
CzarniawskaB. (2012). Organization theory meets anthropology: A story of an encounter. Journal of Business Anthropology, 1(1), 118–140.
18.
DavisG. F.MorrillC.SouleS. A. (2008). Introduction: Social movements in organizations and markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53, 389–394.
19.
DeckerS. (2014). Solid intentions: An archival ethnography of corporate architecture and organizational remembering. Organization, 21(4): 514–542.
20.
EhrenreichB.EhrenreichJ. (1979). The professional-managerial class. In WalkerP. (Ed.), Between labour and capital (pp. 5–45). London, UK: Harvester.
21.
EllisC. S. (2005). Autoethnography. In LincolnY.DenzinN. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 48–51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
EllisC.BochnerA. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–776). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
FalzonM. (2005). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research. Surry, UK: Ashgate.
24.
FeldmanM. S.OrlikowskiW. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22, 1240–1253.
25.
FeyerabendP. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. New York, NY: Humanities Press.
26.
FineG. A.ShulmanD. (2009). Lies from the field: Ethical issues in organizational ethnography. In YbemaS.YanowD.WelstH.KamsteegF. (Eds.), Organizational ethnography: Studying the complexities of everyday life (pp. 177–195). London, UK: Sage.
27.
FreemanD. (1983). Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
28.
GeertzC. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.
29.
GeertzC. (1983). From the native’s point of view: On the nature of anthropological understanding. In Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology (pp. 55–70). New York, NY: Basic Books.
30.
GephartR. P. (2006). Ethnostatistics and organizational research methodologies: An introduction. Organizational Research Methods, 9(4), 417–431.
31.
GioiaD. A.PitreE. (1991). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584–602.
32.
GoodallH. (2010). From tales of the field to tales of the future. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 256–267.
33.
HolmesD. R.MarcusG. E. (2005a). Cultures of expertise and the management of globalisation: Towards a re-functioning of ethnography. In OngA.CollierS. (Eds.), Global assemblages: Technology, politics and ethics asanthropological problems (pp. 235–252). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
34.
HolmesD. R.MarcusG. E. (2005b). Refunctioning ethnography within cultures of expertise. In LincolnY.DenzinN. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 595–597). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
HolmesD. R.MarcusG. E. (2006). Fast-capitalism: Para-ethnography and the rise of the symbolic analyst. In FisherM.DowneyG. (Eds.), Frontiers of capital: Ethnographic perspectives on the new economy (pp. 34–57). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
36.
HuenW. (2009). What is context? An ethnophilosophical account. Anthropological Theory, 9(2), 149–169.
37.
IslamG. (2010). Backstage discourse and the emergence of organizational voices: Exploring graffiti and organization. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(3), 246–260.
38.
IslamG. (2013). Finding a space for story: Sensemaking, stories and epistemic impasse. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(1), 29–48.
39.
JayJ. (2013). Navigating paradox as a mechanism of change and innovation in hybrid organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 137–159.
40.
KallebergA. (2009). Precarious work, insecure workers: Employment relations in transition. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 1–22.
41.
KarraN.PhillipsN. (2008). Researching “back home”: International management research as autoethnography. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 541–561.
42.
KozinA. (2007). The legal file. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 20(2), 191–216.
43.
LearmonthM.HumphreysM. (2011). Autoethnography and academic identity: Glimpsing business school doppelgangers. Organization, 19, 99–117.
44.
Leonard-BartonD. (1990). A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multi sites. Organization Science, 1, 248–266.
45.
MarcusG. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.
46.
MarcusG. E. (2005, June). Multi-sited ethnography: Five or six things I know about it now. Paper presented at the Problems and Possibilities in Multi-sited Ethnography Workshop, Sussex, UK.
47.
MarcusG. E. (2007). Collaborative imaginaries. Taiwan Journal of Anthropology, 5(1), 1–16.
48.
MartinP. Y. (2002). Sensations, bodies, and the “spirit of a place”: Aesthetics in residential organizations for the elderly. Human Relations, 55(7), 861–885.
49.
McKinlayA. (2013). Following Foucault into the archives: Clerks, careers and cartoons. Management & Organizational History, 8(2), 137–154.
50.
MillerD.WoodwardS. (2007). Manifesto for a study of denim. Social Anthropology, 15(3), 335–351.
51.
MillsD.RatcliffeR. (2012). After method? Ethnography in the knowledge economy. Qualitative Research, 12(2), 147–164.
52.
MosseD. (2007, June). Notes on the ethnography of expertise and professionals in international development. Paper presented at Ethnografest III: Ethnography and the Public Sphere, Lisbon, Portugal.
53.
Nippert-EngC. E. (1995). Home and work: Negotiating boundaries through everyday life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
54.
NtarangwiM. (2010). Reversed gaze: An African ethnography of American anthropology. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
55.
OrtnerS. B. (1997). Fieldwork in the postcommunity. Anthropology and Humanism, 22, 61–80.
56.
PelsP. (2008). What has anthropology learned from the anthropology of colonialism?Social Anthropology, 16(3), 280–299.
57.
PerkmannM.WalshK. (2009). The two faces of collaboration: Impacts of university-industry relations on public research. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(6), 1033–1065.
58.
PfefferJ.SuttonR. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths and total nonsense. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
59.
PhillipsN.LawrenceT. B.HardyC. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635–652.
60.
PrasadA.PrasadP.MirR. (2011). One mirror in another: Managing diversity and the discourse of fashion. Human Relations, 64(5), 703–724.
61.
RabinowP. (1986). Representations are social facts: Modernity and postmodernity in anthropology. In CliffordJ.MarcosG. F. (Eds.), Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography (pp. 234–261). Berkeley: University of California Press.
62.
RabinowP. (1996). Making PCR: A story of biotechnology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
63.
RabinowP.MarcusG. E.FaubionJ. D.ReesT. (2008). Designs for an anthropology of the contemporary. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
64.
Reed-DanahayD. (1997). Leaving home: Schooling stories and the ethnography of autoethnography in rural France. In Reed-DanahayD. (Ed.), Auto/ethnography: Rewriting the self and the social (pp. 123–144). Oxford, UK: Berg.
65.
ReichR. (1992). The work of nations: Preparing ourselves for 21st century capitalism. New York, NY: Knopf.
66.
RowlinsonM.HassardJ.DeckerS. (2014). Research strategies for organizational history: A dialogue between historical theory and organizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 250–274.
67.
SalzmanP. C. (1986). Is traditional fieldwork outmoded?Current Anthropology, 27(5), 528–530.
68.
ShotterJ. (2008). Dialogism and polyphony in organizing theorizing in organization studies: Action guiding anticipations and the continuous creation of novelty. Organization Studies, 29(4), 501–524.
69.
SiggelkowN. (2007). Persuasion with case studies. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 20–24.
70.
ThompsonP.WarhurstC.CallaghanG. (2001). Ignorant theory and knowledgeable workers: Interrogating the connections between knowledge, skills and services. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 924–942.
71.
TostL. P. (2011). An integrative model of legitimacy judgments. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 686–710.
72.
Van MaanenJ. (1995). Style as theory. Organization Science, 6, 133–143.
73.
Van MaanenJ. (2010). A song for my supper: More tales of the field. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 240–255.
74.
Van MaanenJ. (2011). Tales of the field (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
75.
VaughanD. (2004). Theorizing disaster: Analogy, historical ethnography, and the Challenger accident. Ethnography, 5(3), 315–347.
76.
VaughanD. (2007). Ethnographic Analytics. In HedstromP.BearmanP. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Analytical Sociology (pp. 1–33). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
YanowD. (2012). Organizational ethnography between toolbox and world-making. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, 1(1), 31–42.
79.
ZickarM. J.CarterN. T. (2010). Reconnecting with the spirit of workplace ethnography: A historical review. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 304–319.
80.
ZilberT. B. (2002). Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings and actors: The case of a rape crisis center in Israel. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 234–254.
