Löwstedt, M (2015) 'Taking off my glasses in order to see': Exploring practice on a building site using self-reflexive ethnography. Construction Management and Economics, 33(5-6), pp. 404-414. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
There has recently been a growing interest for ethnographic studies in construction, predicated upon the belief that ethnographic research in the construction industry can provide a powerful way of illuminating construction practices in new ways. Focusing on the ethnographic method, it is demonstrated how a self-reflexive ethnography can contribute to a deeper understanding of the variations, contradictions and tensions underlying practices on a building site, thereby serving as a complement to other qualitative approaches. A short four-week ethnographic study illustrates how the subjective 'I' of the ethnographer can be used as an active producer of knowledge, by reflecting on how insights from an individual’s role, both as an observer and as a worker, can account for the complex interplay between socialities and materialities on a building site. The results also contribute to the discussion regarding the length of ethnographic studies, by showing how valuable insights can be drawn from shorter 'ethnographic episodes', studied through a self-reflexive lens.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building site; construction practice; ethnography; self-reflexivity |
| Index terms: | variation, materiality, reflexivity, building site, construction industry, ethnography, qualitative approach |
| Subjects: | research paradigm research concept, industry analysis, sociology, site and location studies, contractual condition, qualitative and interpretive research, research methods |
| Topics: | Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here