impose prior theoretical construct to field materials (Dyer and Wilkins, 1991). This does
not mean, however, that sound knowledge is totally free from any theoretical bias
(Eisenhardt, 1989). As argued by Evans-Pritchard (1976):
“And of course the Anthropologist’s observations are biased by his theoretical dispositions which merely means that he is aware of various hypothesis derived from existing knowledge and deductions from it and, if his field data permit, he tests these hypothesis. How could it be otherwise? One can’t study anything without a theory about its nature.” (pp. 241-242)
In this study, I have used the theoretical framework as a guide for the conduct of the
fieldwork, but not to restrict the selection of the data. I have adopted “positioned (and
repositioned) subjects” (Rosaldo, 1993). I entered the field with the intention to study the
implementation of Key Performance Indicators, but as the research progressed I noted the
influence of subcultural practices in daily activities. At the same time the organisation
actively introduced a corporate culture programme that aimed to change the way they
behaved in the organisation. It promoted a spirit of co-operation and openness, and a
passion for excellence and caring. The KPIs, the corporate culture programme and the
organisational activities encouraged me to pursue an investigation beyond what I
expected when I first embarked on the study of the organisation, thus confirming
Rosaldo’s argument (1993); a researcher cannot predict beforehand what she will
encounter in the field; the best a researcher can do is to adopt some hunches (Van
Maanen, 1979), enter the field with an open mind and allow the questions to emerge
(Silverman, 2001).
As suggested by Van Maanen (1988) fieldwork encourages the researcher to immerse in
background, language and rituals, and the social relations of a particular group of people.
The belief is that through such activities, a rich, concrete, complex and hence truthful
account of the social context being studied is possible. Fieldwork is then a means to an
end. In this section I will discuss the conduct of my fieldwork, explain how I gained
access to the organisation, and describe the methods of inquiry adopted in this study.
3.6.1 Gaining Access
My search for an organisation to be the subject of my study began in June, 2008, by
reviewing the companies listed in the country’s stock exchange. E-mails explaining the
scope of the study and requesting access were sent out to a number of potential
organisations and in August, 2008, I managed to secure access to MNPharma. Prior to the
fieldwork, the annual report of the organisation for the current year was reviewed; a
telephone interview was also conducted with a senior executive in the Organisational
Development Department in order to agree on the method of the study. Further, I
requested preliminary information about the organisation’s structure and activities. The
first phase of fieldwork began on 2nd September, 2008, and continued until 30th
November, 2008. During this period, I visited the organisation every day during their
working hours.
Following analysis of the data collected during the first phase of the fieldwork, I noted
Ministry of Health who were responsible for monitoring the concession agreement.
Contact details of the key person from the Ministry of Health were obtained from the
organisation, and I made an appointment to interview the officers involved. Additionally,
I re-interviewed selected organisational members to elicit their views on the outcome of
the initiatives noted in the first phase of the fieldwork, and the consultant who had
introduced performance improvement initiatives during this phase. A week of observation
at the manufacturing division was conducted during the second phase of the fieldwork,
which took place during 2nd September - 28th October, 2009. I was granted access as a
management trainee; sometimes I was regarded as an intern in the organisation. My
everyday presence in the organisation gave me the advantage of discussing any emerging
issues with organisational members during that period.
3.6.2 Data Collection Methods
Three main methods of collecting data were employed in this study, i.e. observation, interview and document review. The next paragraph discusses the conduct of each of these methods. The organisational structure at the time of the study, the number of interviews and observations and a review of documents conducted in the course of this study are presented in the Appendix 1. While their job positions have been revealed in the empirical data, the identity of individual respondents has been concealed to protect their anonymity (with the exception of the MD, since this is the only position in the organisation, so his identity cannot be concealed). In order to avoid disclosure of the identities of the significant group of respondents, the range of job titles from senior manager to senior general manager is categorised as ‘senior manager’. The range of job titles from manager to deputy senior manager is categorised as ‘manager’. Other job titles
of the respondents remain unchanged. All government officials interviewed are categorised as ‘senior government officer’.