CHAPTER TWO
2.1 Introduction
which relies on qualitative expertise, judgements and decisions based on practical wisdom. The research on how the ISKCON Durban Temple devotees create their identities, I maintain, would not have been effective without the influence of my own personal involvement, and personal insights and realizations40. The chapter concludes with the specific research methodology used in the study and a description of the context, research participants and instruments.
2.2 Positionality: The "Deep-insider"
According to Edwards (1999) the deep-insider is an observer/researcher who has been a
"member for at least five years of the organization/group under research". In investigating the ISKCON Durban Temple as a case study my position as
observer/researcher is regarded as a category of participant observation, which occurs when the "researcher is playing an established participant role in the scene to be studied"
(Denzin and Lincoln, 1998: 111). Distinctions are made however, to the degree of which the researcher is involved as participant, viz. complete observer, observer as participant, participant as observer, and complete participant - a continuum from complete
detachment to complete participation. Flyvbjerg (2001: 83) asserts that the ".. .most advanced form of understanding is achieved when researchers place themselves within the context being studied. Only in this way can researchers understand the viewpoints and the behaviour which characterize social actors". Although it would seem from my position as deep-insider that the category of complete participant may be directly applicable to me, for the purposes of increased objectivity, I would tend toward the position of participant as observer. This allows me sufficient space to balance my involvement with detachment, closeness with distance, and familiarity with aloofness (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000). My privilege as a member is used as a conscious methodological strategy to access certain information that is usually not available to an outsider, yet simultaneously I voluntarily adopt the outsider position as an academic researcher and in the analysis of the data. As a participant observer I occupy an
Realization, I define, is a more intuitive and self-reflective state of consciousness, where one becomes aware that lessons learnt in theory, especially those of life choices and values, are indeed tangible realities.
uncommon position as an observer/researcher of an organisation of which I am an active member for many years. The particular benefit of such a position is the knowledge I have about the history, culture, "body language, semiotics and slogan systems" (Edwards,
1999) as well as the tensions, joys, and problems that operate within the organisation.
By privileging the insider it is not suggested that an outsider will be unreliable, nor do I wish to minimize the position of the outsider. Several categories of observation
described above remain to such a researcher. Furthermore I am aware of the particular complexities of the "deep-insider" position, especially the duty that impinges upon the insider to become a total objective outsider to himself in his effort to objectify what he experienced or saw from the inside.
The Advantages of the "Deep-insider" Role
Borrowing from the discussion by Edwards (1999: 3-7) on the position of the deep-
insider to frame my role as participant observer, I delineate further advantages of such a stance below:
•
•
The information obtained from the interviews is based on long standing relationships between the participant and researcher, and as such a trust and rapport has already been established.
Two elements exist that validates the data against being fabricated, viz. the interviewee is aware that the interviewer will be able to detect posturing, and the researcher will be familiar with the jargon used within the organisation.
The researcher has knowledge the history of the organisation, its successes and failures, behaviours and attitudes of members, and about other issues and
"unspoken agendas" within the organisation.
The position of deep-insider brings with it the following particular complexities:
•
The Disadvantages of the "Deep-insider" Role
The deep-insider has to be cautious about the following limitations:
• It is much easier to overlook certain data because of familiarity. Since the data is so commonplace for the researcher, many nuances and subtleties may escape scrutiny. Furthermore, the researcher must be aware of his own subtle influence on the interview situation, and choose appropriate ways of responding that will not compromise his position as researcher and simultaneously, since he is already well-known, not portray his attitude as unfeeling when the interviewee reveals incidents of personal distress.
• The role of the researcher will change as he now accepts the position of an
observer/investigator, and thus he may no longer be seen as a colleague or friend.
Such shift in the power relationship may work against the interviewer since the interviewee may be hesitant to reveal information knowing that every detail will be subject to scrutiny and possible publication, even though anonymity may be guaranteed.
• The researcher may feel hesitant to reveal issues of the organisation due his own feelings of allegiance (the case of dirty laundry in public!) or be apprehensive to face antagonism from the management who may regard his reporting as
betrayal.41
While the insider-outsider status of a researcher produces certain particularities and complexities described above, several researchers argue for the advantages of such a position, emphasizing propinquity between an ethnographer's personal history and involvement, and data collected (Mouton, 1990; Kanpol, 1997; Breuer, 2000; Flyvbjerg;
41 The advantages and disadvantages are derived from Maykut and Moorhouse, 1994; Clandinin and
Connelly, 1998; Morgan, 1986; Burke, 1989; Humphrey, 1995, Goodson, 1992, all cited in Edwards (1999).
2001), indicating that Truth could be more clearly understood if it includes the respondents frame of reference.