The Credibility of the Researcher Who Does Research in their Own Organisation:

The Perils of Participant Observation.

Smyth, A. & Holian, R., School of Management, Faculty of Business, RMIT.
Email: anne.smyth@rmit.edu.au, rosalie.holian@rmit.edu.au

Paper presented at the Association of Qualitative Research Conference: 'Issue of Rigour in Qualitative Research', Melbourne, July 6-10 1999.

Abstract

We must surrender the idea that researching the meanings and interpretations we make of people in social situations can be objective. The researcher who researches their own organisation can offer a unique perspective because of their knowledge of the culture, history and actors involved. They also face issues of credibility both within their own organisation and when reporting their research findings to an external audience. When the researcher has a shared history with research 'participants' and plans to continue in their work role after the completion of the research project then extra care needs to be taken to manage interdependence in working relationships and boundary issues during the research process. When reporting their research findings to an external audience issues of validity; such as bias and subjectivity and ethical issues; including anonymity and coercion, need to be addressed. Both internal and external credibility issues need to be considered during the initial planning phases of research when this is to be conducted in one's own organisation. There is a need to address impacts on the organisation, quality of the research and demands on the researcher. This enhances the potential for producing research findings which capitalise on the researcher's understanding of organisational behaviour.

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to address some issues that may be encountered by those engaged in doing insider research, those who supervise aspects of insider research and those who are or are thinking about doing either or both. We have drawn on our direct experience of insider research in both situations. In particular our learnings from working with managers who do action research in their own organisations and their experiences and reflections about the rewards, difficulties and risks and the personal attributes and skills needed. We offer a practitioners guide to the realities of insider research conducted by members of organisations and the contribution this can make to knowledge, meaning, understanding and practice. Those who try to solve practical problems with others in real situations can effect change to improve things and at the same time learn how to enhance their own practice.

Why Insider Research?

The ontological and epistemological debate around whether this is legitimate research is not the concern of this paper - that is an interesting story but for another place. We take the view, based on our experience, that insider research is worthwhile and useful. We also know that it occurs on a daily basis in organisations and decided that it might be a good idea to identify the factors that contribute to and detract from effective insider research practices. This is a different approach from either pretending that insider research does not happen, discounting its contribution by labelling it as subjective or anecdotal, and so not 'real' research, or trying to rationalise and sanitise it by collecting and analysing data that makes it appear to fit into a ‘scientific’ quantitative paradigm or an accepted qualitative framework.

We believe that insider research is worthwhile and special because it helps solve practical problems. It forces us to ground our work in everyday issues as those involved experience them, it confronts us and others with our assumptions, perceptions and their impact, it enables us to learn, reflect and act and it insists that we engage with what and who we are curious about. Above all it is about learning and making a difference - in our case about ourselves and others in organisations and how our practices might be more effective.

The issue of engagement is at the core of insider research, action research and participant observation within the researcher’s organisation. It is not possible, nor desirable to develop a relationship with ‘research subjects’ that is distant or 'objective', in the same way that a researcher entering an organisation to gather data and then take it away to contemplate does. ‘Scientific’ definitions of validity, reliability or generalisability cannot be meaningfully applied to the data and findings generated through insider research. The tests of ‘good’ insider research are rather around reflections on links between theory and practice, understanding meaning and the significance and impact of constructions of meaning, making knowledge shareable and perceived usefulness and relevance to practice. The learning, insights and contribution to shared knowledge and improved practice comes from immersion in the everyday workings of the organisation, the iterative cycles of interaction between data gathering, reflection, analysis, theory and action and the unique perspective all this offers.

This enables observations and learnings to be grounded in the often very messy and difficult to access multiple realities of organisational life, rather than filtered through a research approach concerned with only admitting data that is regarded as objective, measurable and triangulated. Sometimes as a consequence of such filters, meaning and application are ultimately strangulated!

So insider research is different, not better or worse than other forms of research, but is concerned with questions that cannot be tackled as effectively by more traditional forms of research. The focus is on changing and enhancing the organisation in which the researcher works and the researcher's practice in that organisation.

Dual/Multiple Organisational Roles (Participant) & Researcher (Observer)

Whilst doing research in your own organisation can potentially deliver enormous benefits in terms of learning and improvement of organisational (and researchers’) practices, there are also some real risks to the researcher and the research. In our experience insider researchers have often been in roles and positions of power and authority, both formally and informally, that place both constraints on and opportunities for access to people, processes and information.

The insider researcher has a past, current and expected future role in the organisation, which bring aspects of the organisational history, working relationships and personal alliances into play in the research process. These considerations and influences shape the perception and behaviour of the researcher and organisational members involved in the research. This impacts on the nature and extent of the content of data and how this is interpreted. The risk to the value of the research is not so much that the researcher may not receive or see important information because of the nature of their organisational membership and the relationships she/he has developed, but that she/he will see more. This is used as a basis for arguing that all insiders will be biased in some ways, so only outsiders - who are assumed to be able to make value free observations can do some types of research. The greater risk may be that the insider gains access to organisationally sensitive information and risks exposing previously ‘undiscussable’ issues, disturbing arrangements that serve particular people or purposes, confronting others with less than welcome observations regarding organisational practice and surfacing and naming ethical dilemmas. The ability to conduct credible insider-research involves an explicit awareness of the possible effects of perceived bias on data collection and analysis as well as ethical issues related to the anonymity of the organisation and individual participants. It also involves the influence of the researchers organisational role on coercion, compliance and access to privileged information. These issues need to be considered and addressed at all stages of the research, including planning, how it is conducted, methods of analysis and publication/dissemination of findings and recommendations.

When all this has to be managed while continuing to operate in their organisational role there can be some stress involved in maintaining working relationships and considerable tension may build from continuing to address the issues, do the research, and keep on top of job requirements and role expectations.

In addressing practical problems and real issues in their own organisation an insider-researcher can experience both external pressures and internal dilemmas. They may be the target of personal abuse or general organisational defensiveness and anger, which sometimes has a negative impact on their work and career. The perceived risk of becoming ‘Joan of Arc" or a ‘sacrificial lamb’ can be real. In some cases the justified fear of such outcomes can result in a temptation and sometimes the need to beat a tactical retreat and occasionally the decision to separate from the situation or the organisation. One of our suggestions is to be aware of the disturbance that may arise and have a contingency plan for ‘where to stand when it hits the fan’. This does not mean that no real issues can ever be confronted. Initial resistance to facing challenges to the status-quo may be converted to working out ways to overcome the barriers to improving organisational and individual practice. Indeed, it is at points of disturbance that some of the most valuable organisational and personal learning and change can potentially take place.

If you have been abseiling you would know that feeling when you defy gravity, lean back into empty space parallel to the ground far below and step off down a cliff-face. Insider-research can also be a little like abseiling, which is why we advise careful thought before starting out, going with others experienced in the process, and having both a main line and a safety line. As part of your safety plan we advise having a co-researcher, advisor, consultant or supervisor who is interested in but not directly involved in your organisation or your research project, who you meet with regularly and can also contact in case of ‘emergencies’. This contact can assist your decision making and learning by inquiring about your choices and reflections, perceived risks and observations and challenge you to explore blind-spots, assumptions and new ways of approaching or interpreting events. It is difficult to assess risk, to know when you are taking a gamble because of the potential for a significant breakthrough, when it may be a ‘suicidal’ mission and when it is just ‘tilting at windmills’. The insider-researcher must be able to alternate between immersing themselves in the situation and withdrawing to reflect and analyse what is going on and the next steps they may take; an external advisor can assist with this.

Effective insider research requires considerable self and organisational awareness, a range of personal competencies including a high tolerance for tension and anxiety and knowledge about specific methodological strategies. It is without a doubt a much more complex and confronting experience to engage with this than to do research from a safe distance.

To do it well, the researcher must engage and in so doing, display real courage and commitment. For anyone contemplating such an approach to research, this essential difference between insider research and more traditional forms needs to be clearly understood.

The Insider-Researcher

So what does it take to do insider research? Our learnings from our own work and the work of those managers we supervise have enabled us to gain some insight into the attributes, competencies and methodological tools that support effective practice.

These include the following:

environmental intelligence and continuing sensitivity to events - the capacity to constantly monitor the environment to anticipate developments and capture observations relevant to the research in parallel with the conduct of one's role. This includes sensitivity to power and authority issues

judgement - the ability to read people and events to determine the appropriate time to intervene, step into the situation or to step back. This requires a lot of

toe-dipping - a critical awareness of the dynamics of the situation and the likely impacts of intervention through testing

tap-dancing - always remaining alert and on the move as people and situations change, often subtlety and to determine where to stand when it hits the fan. Also refers to flexibility in thinking and action

perceptual objectivity - the capacity to distinguish between one's own construction, assumptions and filters and that of others and the structure of the situation

reflection and diagnosis - the habit of reflecting on oneself and the situation to generate insights that inform action and learning from theory and action

resilience - (and a sense of humour), the emotional strength, maturity and flexibility to contain the tensions, contradictions, anxieties, role ambiguity and reactions inherent in such research without them paralysing the researcher

role and boundary management - the awareness of and ability to be neither over-bounded nor under-bounded

an ethical framework - to recognise the ethical conflicts and tensions that often arise from the above issues, particularly the fundamental tension between researcher, practitioner and organisational member

not knowing - being comfortable with not having the answers and the ability to suspend your answers so the researcher remains open to the interpretations of others

interpersonal sensitivity – supportive communication skills and the capacity to manage closeness and distance in relationships

self-awareness - a high degree of understanding of the impact of intra-personal factors, especially one's own, on what and who is being researched. Critically important as the researcher is the primary interpreter of the situation

The insider-researcher differs from the usual role of an organisational member or practitioner. In addition to their immersion in performing their organisational role they seek, from time to time, a position of relative distance in order to take time out to understand what is going on. While it is difficult at times to withdraw from the detail and day to day issues the perspective that this ‘research’ offers can facilitate change and benefit practice.

The Advisor/Supervisor and Insider-Research Relationship

The insider-researcher and their advisor/supervisor need some tools and strategies in place to support both in dealing with the demands of insider research. Those we have found to be most useful include:

a professionally intimate supervisory relationship - involves a strong and deep engagement between supervisor and researcher on an ongoing basis, where the supervisor exhibits similar attributes and competencies to those listed above, particularly self-awareness and interpersonal skills in the context of a helping relationship

process consultation skills - sensitivity to the centrality of process as content alongside traditional substantive content as a source of learning and a critical influence in the research itself. The skills to know when and how to act on this awareness

a substantive knowledge base in the topic area - important but of lesser importance than other attributes

rigorous use of a journal - the use of a journal by the insider-researcher to capture data about the research, the organisation, the researcher, the supervisory relationship and anything that impacts on these, is essential. Reflections on that data are even more essential. This enables all of the factors that influence the research and the researcher: thoughts, feelings, actions, behaviours, events, rumours, fears, values, assumptions, beliefs etc to be surfaced, named and in so doing, their influence better understood and managed

advisor/supervisor supervision - the keeping of a journal and opportunities for supervision of the supervisor by peers and more experienced practitioners is desirable

peer and other review in a group setting - the use of groups of action researchers with their supervisor(s) and other practitioners provides a supportive environment, feedback, critique and scrutiny of the research from those not intimately involved in the situation. This prompts critical reflection from a range of sources by those who understand the action research approach and do not attempt to impose a traditional paradigm on the research

It is probably clear from this that we believe that this approach is not for the faint-hearted. Distance in the supervisory relationship is not possible and its presence will jeopardise the quality and rigour of the research. Openness to challenge and learning is a key attribute,

as is a fundamental interest in making a difference to the practice of others and oneself.

So Why do Insider Research?

In suggesting that insider-research is special, worthwhile and beneficial to organisations and individual practitioners we do not suggest that other forms of research are not also valuable as they also have their place. Insider-research is particularly suited to assisting practitioners

engaged in learning, action, decision making, planning, and initiation of change as part of their day to day operations. In fact, it does these things better than other forms of research. It does not seek to find definitive causal relationships between objects the behaviour of which can then be predicted. Rather, it adds to existing practices in real organisations by assisting in the analysis and interpretation of ‘why do we do things that way around here and where appropriate, how can we do them better?’ The insider-researcher by linking research with practice can thereby improve practice. In our field of management we also believe knowledge and experience from practice is relevant to research, and that a reciprocal relationship is the best practice of all.