Published
February 16, 2010
Keywords
- intervention,
- interference,
- seduction,
- accreditation,
- actor-network theory,
- ethnography,
- sorting attachments,
- participative research
...More
Less
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2005-2018 Journal of Research Practice (ISSN 1712 851X) and the authors
The copyright of the material published in the Journal of Research Practice (JRP) is held primarily by the respective author(s). By agreeing to publish their work in JRP, they permit the journal (JRP) to electronically reproduce and disseminate their work over the Internet, including measures to ensure continued availability of the work, should the journal ever be discontinued for any reason. However, the authors retain all rights over their articles, including self-archival, reproduction, commercial use, etc. After the authors, the copyright passes over to JRP, unless transferred by the authors to any other designated person or entity.
Readers are welcome to use these material with due acknowledgment to the source, as indicated in the suggested citation for each article. The readers can also print and make copies of JRP articles for the purpose of education, learning, and review. However, the articles cannot be used for any commercial purpose without the consent of the respective author(s).
Archival agencies, libraries, publishers, and other agencies associated with academic/scholarly publishing are welcome to contact the Editors to discuss any specific proposals they may have. If the proposal involves a commercial interest, they would be expected to share a part of their benefit with JRP.
Abstract
This article reports on a researcher's experience of being invited to improve upon an organisational situation in a hospital in Denmark. Being engaged with different networks of participants in the organisational situation, the researcher found himself wrapped up in various agendas, with different sections of the staff trying to persuade him to support their own respective interests. The article theorises these persuasions as "seductions." Consequently, the task of the researcher involves selecting, prioritising, and working upon his connections with various networks, while each continues to represent a different set of values, expectations, interests, and experiences. Based on this conceptualisation, the article interrogates the notion of interventionist research. Intervention is not limited only to a simple one-way causation where the interventionist does something useful in a studied field; it also involves engagement with multiple networks present in the field, each of which tries to seduce the researcher in order to befriend this potentially powerful collaborator. Using the term "interference," rather than intervention, to represent the researcher’s action, the article suggests that the researcher is often not able to control the effect of his or her action unilaterally. Neither is the researcher able to establish an overarching perspective which can be used to evaluate the final outcome. The article calls for fresh thinking on how a researcher may be engaged usefully in an organisational situation, working within the boundaries defined by the institutional logic, confronting the seductions from multiple sources, and still seeking to maintain a ground that justifies one's identity as a researcher.