Elmes, Michael

Riad, Sally

English

Seton Hall University Libraries

Organization Management Journal Volume 5 Issue 4 Article 2 12-1-2008 Introduction to First Person research: on teaching and becoming Sally Riad Michael Elmes Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/omj  Part of the Organizational Behavior and Theory Commons, and the Organizational Communication Commons Recommended Citation Riad, Sally and Elmes, Michael (2008) "Introduction to First Person research: on teaching and becoming," Organization Management Journal: Vol. 5 : Iss. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/omj/vol5/iss4/2 EditorialIntroduction to First Person research:on teaching and becomingSally Riad and Michael ElmesCo-EditorsOrganization Management Journal (2008)5, 187–188. doi:10.1057/omj.2008.27This issue of First Person research includes two papers, bothfocusing on the dilemmas of teaching and learning in theclassroom. In the first, Dave O’Connell describes making light of‘‘gutting roosters’’ in an introductory classroom exercise on worstjobs; after processing the experience with a colleague, however, heconfesses some surprise at his reaction and subsequently engages inself-inquiry with regard to the nature of work and the tensionbetween his espoused theories and theories-in-use as a professor inthe classroom. In the second paper, Joy Beatty, Jennifer Leigh andPaul Szwed describe the process by which they acknowledge pastfrustrations with team-based classrooms, create their own team forthe purpose of investigating the problem, and take an action-inquiry approach to setting up, experimenting with and reflectingon new approaches to a team-based class.As First Person research, the interpretive process of these twopapers reflects an ethic of reflexivity that is shaped by language,ideology and culture (among other factors). The notion of‘‘validity-as-reflexive-accounting’’ places the researcher, the topicand the interpretive process in interaction (Altheide and Johnson,1994: 489). Such a reading on validity is not confined to pureknowledge or truth claims; rather, the accounting process needs todescribe interactions among researcher, context and actors –examples of which we find in the papers included. Authors alsoneed to faithfully represent the varying perspectives and voices,and then show where their own voice stands in relation to these.Or, simply put, what happens within the researcher ‘‘must be madeknown’’ (Behar, 1996: 6).As points of entry into our discussion of the relevance of reflexiveaccounting to First Person research, we draw on two metaphorsused by the authors to the papers included. The first metaphor isthe ‘‘confession’’ used by Dave O’Connell in discussing hisexperience with ‘‘a messy day one.’’ The second metaphor isthe quest for the ‘‘Holy Grail,’’ used by Joy Beatty, Jennifer Leighand Paul Szwed in reflecting on the process of their team’s self-inquiry into working with student teams. We discuss eachmetaphor in turn.First, a confession is someone’s acknowledgement of personalactions and thoughts, and the ‘‘confessional tale’’ is a well-documented genre in ethnography (Van Maanen, 1988). Confes-sion, private or public, is a valued technique for producingthe truth, and its effects are far-reaching (Foucault, 1980). Theconfession is a ritual in which the speaking subject is also often thesubject of the statement. However, it always sits within a powerOrganization Management Journal (2008) 5, 187–188& 2008 Eastern Academy of Management All rights reserved 1541-6518relationship: one does not confess without thepresence (or virtual presence) of an authority thatrequires, prescribes or appreciates the confession,and then intervenes to judge, punish or forgive,console and reconcile. Who is such an authority inacademic contexts? Is it our peers? Or is it someother voice that resonates within us? Further, theconfession involves the truth to be corroborated bythe obstacles it has had to overcome so that it couldbe formulated. And last but not least, the confes-sion is a ritual in which the expression, in and ofitself, can bring about intrinsic change in theperson who articulates it (Foucault, 1980).Next, there is the search for the ‘‘Holy Grail.’’ TheGrail is a highly significant and desired object thatholds the essence of all that is good. Ultimately,however, narratives of the Holy Grail are about a‘‘quest;’’ while such a prolonged endeavor may notyield its object, it is the pursuit that matters. Thereare many genres for inscribing a quest, but the mostcommon in interpretive organizational research isthat of the ‘‘epic.’’ Jeffcutt (1994) describes the epicas an account of a perilous journey with a crucialstruggle or an ordeal; success then results in theexultation of the heroes involved. The ‘‘heroes’’in an epic can be people in the organizationsresearched, or the researchers themselves. So whilereflexivity can be a matter of methodology, itschallenge is that it can become a quest for the statusof reflexive piety (Shotter, 1993). If reflexivitybecomes a means of attaining theoretical redemp-tion by legitimating one’s stance – through aconfessional or epic narrative – then it becomes aself-defeating strategy.Reflexivity is not about attaining a better statusfor an account, but about openness and transpar-ency in research that is explicitly value-laden (e.g.Gergen, 1988; Shotter, 1993; Gergen, 1995). Thechallenge in including the ‘‘self’’ is that First Personresearch is not so much about the self as it is aboutthe ‘‘other’’ in relation to the ‘‘self.’’ Its focus is oninteractions with other people or other cultures. Soan ongoing issue revolves around how muchreflexivity is appropriate for a narrative so that itdoes not become an expression of self-indulgence.There is always a balance of representation to benegotiated between the transparency of the ‘‘self’’and the expression of the ‘‘other’’ so that one doesnot lose sight of what is being represented (Jeffcutt,1994; Behar, 1996). This is what enables one tonegotiate the fine line between the humility of‘‘confession’’ and the confidence of ‘‘profession,’’as Dave O’Connell puts it.Both papers included in the First Person researchsection involve a discussion of personal challengesand some of the means by which the authors havetried to surmount them. Neither paper uses aconfession or epic narrative to make truth claimsor to prescribe lessons and techniques for thereader. Both papers underline that our learning isnot so much about attaining a secure status andthen resting on our laurels as it is about theongoing pursuit of becoming ‘‘good’’ teachers toour students. Both papers depict the centrality ofcollegiality, and both papers draw on experienceswith colleagues that shaped the authors’ thinking.Finally, both papers involve a departure from the‘‘tidy’’ (Beatty et al.) and the simultaneous embraceof the ‘‘messy’’ (O’Connell) to articulate theongoing challenges to attaining teaching ideals.Far from self-aggrandizing narratives, reflexiveaccounts by members of the academy bring usdown from those imaginary pedestals to illustratethe practical, everyday struggles involved inbecoming ‘‘good’’ teachers, and in realizing ourambitions to serve our students well. To borrowfrom Beatty et al., reflexivity involves ‘‘sharingthe uncertainty our students face.’’ Abdicatingthe pedestal brings our role as teachers intosharp relief; drawing on O’Connell, one is wellreminded that ‘‘shining the light’’ does not require‘‘a shiny job.’’ReferencesAltheide, D. & Johnson, J. (1994). Criteria for assessinginterpretive validity in qualitative research. In N. Denzinand Y. Lincoln (Eds), The Handbook of Qualitative Research,485–499. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Behar, R. (1996). The vulnerable observer. Boston: Beacon Press.Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. New York: Pantheon.Gergen, K. (1988). If persons are texts. In S. Messer, L. Sass, andR. Woolfolk (Eds), Hermeneutics and Psychological Theory. NewJersey: Rutgers.Gergen, K. (1995). Social construction and the educationalprocess. In L. Steffe, J. Gale (Ed), Constructivism in Education.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Jeffcutt, P. (1994). The interpretation of organization: Acontemporary analysis and critique. Journal of ManagementStudies, 31(2): 225–250.Shotter, J. (1993). Cultural politics of everyday life: Socialconstructionism, rhetoric and knowing of the third kind. Toronto:Toronto University Press.Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the Field. Chicago, IL: TheUniversity of Chicago Press.Editorial188Organization Management Journal

Introduction to First Person research:
on teaching and becoming

https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1159&context=omj

Introduction to First Person research: on teaching and becoming

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Seton Hall University Libraries