A Taste Of Fieldwork

Irvine, H. and M. Gaffikin (2006). "Getting in, getting on and getting out: reflections on a qualitative research project." Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 19(1): 115-145.

After reading Irvine and Gaffikin (2006) about the methodological analysis on fieldwork studies, I seem to start to get a sense of what fieldwork is like. Very different from quantities study, qualitative study has its advantage of capturing the dynamic and contextual complexity of “living” organisations. It can reflect multiple realities, which helps researchers to understand what it is like for people in a particular situation. Whereas, quantitative study only can examine one reality and it is harder to draw a complex picture maybe due to e.g. the statistical limitations. There are several points they need to be aware of before going into the field. First, as mentioned before, we need to recognise there might not be one single answer. Second, the researcher needs to keep a “right” distance with the field in order to observe and maybe participate in the field, but still can be reflexive and see the big picture. Thus, reflexivity is the third important criteria. Fourth, after the fieldwork, as a researcher, we need to reconcile the evidences you gather in the field and procedure a complete story which other people can see how this story can support your research objective. Last but not least, doing fieldwork need researchers to meet high ethical requirements as confidentiality, anonymity and etc. as this kind of research requires strong human interaction and needs good delicacy when handling some sensitive situations in the field.