SALUD DE LOS TRABAJADORES Y SALUD EN EL TRABAJO

Given the intent of this research, the information sought, and outcomes proposed, it was thought that a qualitative research approach would provide the necessary flexibility through which the objectives of the Study could be met. ‘Flexibility’ in this context recognises that qualitative approaches can be systemic whereby the different parts of a research design form an integrated and interacting whole; approaches may need to be modified or expanded as a result of what is learned while doing the research ȋMaxwell, 2013Ȍ. In this way, and importantly, a qualitative approach was considered malleable enougŠ –‘ ƒ……‘‘†ƒ–‡ ¢‘”‹ ’Š‹Ž‘•‘’Š‹‡• ƒ† –Š‡ …‘”‡ ‡š’‡…–ƒ–‹‘• ‘ˆ –Š‡ ¢‘”‹ community.

Denzin and Lincoln describe qualitative research as a set of interpretive activities which privileges no single methodological practice over another and state that ȋʹͲͳͳǡ’Ǥ͸Ȍ:

…qualitative research [does not] have a distinct set of methods or practices that are entirely its own. Qualitative researchers use semiotics, narrative, content, discourse, archival, and phonemic analysis – even statistics, tables, graphs, and numbers.

17

Patton ȋʹͲͲʹȌ further refers to the features of qualitative research and how these can be classified according to data forms and the types of information collected, noting that it may consist of detailed descriptions of some particular situation, event, people, interactions and observed behaviours. It may also include direct quotations from people and their experiences, attitudes, beliefs and thoughts. Additionally, excerpts or entire pages from documentation may be included, likewise correspondence, records, and case histories. Qualitative data provide both depth and detail through direct quotation and careful description. Measurement relies on the use of instruments that provide standardised frameworks by which to limit data collection, to established criteria, or to analyse categories. The data are open-ended so as to discover what people’s lives, experiences, and interactions mean to them, in their own terms and in their natural settings.

Qualitative modes of inquiry typically strive to understand the phenomena or situations as a whole. Researchers are able to develop inductive strategies whereby they enter the setting with no preconceived ideas or expectation as to what results may be expected. Observations are made, patterns identified, and eventually conclusions formulated. The strategy of the qualitative researcher is therefore based on the premise that important dimensions will emerge from the analysis. There is no presumption as to what important issues, ideas or concepts may be expected. The naturalistic nature of a qualitative research design demands a focus on the research setting – understanding this without external modification and within its natural context ȋƒ––‘ǡʹͲͲʹȌ.

While this Study could have approached the research question from multiple perspectives through the application of statistical, survey, analytical or quantitative

18

research techniques, these methods were unlikely to offer the type of richness and depth required. These methods would further potentially remove conversation and …‘‡–ƒ”› ƒ† ’”‘˜‹†‡ Ž‹‹–‡† ‘’’‘”–—‹–› ˆ‘” –Š‡ ‡š’”‡••‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒ ¢‘”‹ ˜‘‹…‡Ǥ ‘ this end, qualitative methods provided an appropriate vehicle through which the ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š “—‡•–‹‘ …‘—Ž† „‡ …‘•‹†‡”‡† ƒ† Ž‹‡™‹•‡ –Š‡ ‡š’‡…–ƒ–‹‘• ‘ˆ –Š‡ ¢‘”‹ community met.

¢‘”‹Research Considerations

Although qualitative methods provided the broad foundation for the research, cultural …‘•‹†‡”ƒ–‹‘• ’”ƒ…–‹…‡• ƒ† ’Š‹Ž‘•‘’Š‹‡• ȋƒ• ‘–‡†Ȍ ™‡”‡ ƒŽ•‘ ˆ—†ƒ‡–ƒŽ –‘ –Š‡ overall integrity of the thesis and likewise guided the approach taken and the methods used. The need to consider these types of challenges, and how they might align with qualitative research methods was therefore a major consideration. Of aligned concern was the notion that the consequences and implications of historical research activity between non-¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‡”• ƒ† ¢‘”‹ …‘—‹–‹‡• Šƒ† ˆ‘” •‘‡ –‹‡ „‡‡ …”‹–‹…‹•‡†„›¢‘”‹ƒ†ǡƒ•ƒ”‡•—Ž–ǡƒ•‘‡™Šƒ–—‡ƒ•›”‡Žƒ–‹‘•Š‹’Šƒ††‡˜‡Ž‘’‡†Ǥ

‘ –Š‹• ‡†ǡ Š‹•–‘”‹…ƒŽŽ›ǡ ‹’”‡••‹‘• ‘ˆ ¢‘”‹ •‘…‹‡–› ƒ† culture have been

‹•‹–‡”’”‡–‡† –Š”‘—‰Š ™‡•–‡” ˜‹‡™• ‘ˆ ‘”ƒŽ‹–› ƒ† ‘”ƒŽ‹–›Ǥ •’‡…–• ‘ˆ ¢‘”‹ culture have been dissected, classified, and placed within frameworks devised through western academic institutions and paradigms. Many research processes have further •‡”˜‡†–‘ƒŽ‹‡ƒ–‡¢‘”‹„›’Žƒ…‹‰–Š‡—†‡”ƒ‘„•‡”˜‡”ǯ•‡–ƒ’Š‘”‹…ƒŽ‹…”‘•…‘’‡ with little opportunity for dialogue and interaction.

19

‘”‡”‡…‡–Ž›ǡ¢‘”‹Šƒ˜‡…‘‡–‘ƒ†˜‘…ƒ–‡‘”‡•—‹–ƒ„Ž‡ƒ’’”‘ƒ…Š‡•–‘”‡•‡ƒ”…ŠǤThe

last two decades have seen an emergence in New Zealand, particularly in the social •…‹‡…‡•ǡ‘ˆƒ„‘†›‘ˆ™‘”…‘…‡”‡†™‹–Š”‡…Žƒ‹‹‰¢‘”‹‘™Ž‡†‰‡ǡ¢‘”‹™ƒ›•‘ˆ

‘™‹‰ƒ†–Š‡ƒ’’Ž‹…ƒ–‹‘‘ˆ¢‘”‹˜ƒŽ—‡•ƒ†„‡Ž‹‡ˆ•–‘”‡•‡ƒ”…Š’”ƒ…–‹…‡ ȋBoulton,

2005Ȍ.

”‰—ƒ„Ž›ǡ‡ˆˆ‘”–•„›¢‘”‹–‘”‡…Žƒ‹–Š‡‹”‘™‘™Ž‡†‰‡ƒ†”‹‰Š––‘–Šƒ–‘™Ž‡†‰‡ had its foundations in the political upheavals of the late 20th _{century, particularly the} 1960s to 1980s ȋSmith, 1999Ȍ. Significant events such as the Land March of 1974, the emergence of the Kohanga Reo movement in 1982 and the Hui Taumata in 1984 ”‡ˆŽ‡…–‡†ƒ‰”‘™‹‰…‘…‡”ƒ‘‰•–¢‘”‹†—”‹‰–Šƒ–’‡”‹‘†–Šƒ–¢‘”‹…—Ž–—”‡™ƒ• being subsumed by the more dominant culture of the “colonist”ȋSmith, 1999Ȍ. And this

†‡‘‰”ƒ’Š‹… ƒ† …—Ž–—”ƒŽ ”‡ƒ‹••ƒ…‡ ‡š’‡”‹‡…‡† „› ¢‘”‹ contributed to the

increased pressure for theoretical and methodological frameworks that incorporated

¢‘”‹’‡”•’‡…–‹˜‡•ȋDurie, 2004Ȍ.

Š‡”‡ˆ‘”‡ǡ –Š”‘—‰Š‘—– –Š‡ Žƒ–‡ ͳͻͺͲ• ƒ† ‹–‘ –Š‡ ͳͻͻͲ•ǡ ¢‘”‹ „‡…ƒ‡ ‹˜‘Ž˜‡† ‹ ‡ˆˆ‘”–•–‘”‡ˆ”ƒ‡Dz¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Šdzǡ™Š‡”‡„›‹–™ƒ•˜‹‡™‡†ƒ•ƒ˜‡Š‹…Ž‡„›™Š‹…Š¢‘”‹ could reclaim their own theoretical and methodological perspectives ȋBoulton, 2005Ȍ. In the main, these frameworks have been developed by and within academic institutions, which perhaps reflects the background of the main practitioners of such study. ‘By

¢‘”‹ˆ‘”¢‘”‹ǯ‹•ƒˆ”‡“—‡–Ž›used expression to describe the requisite for research

ȋ™Š‹…Š‹˜‘Ž˜‡•¢‘”‹Ȍ–‘„‡…‘†—…–‡†„›¢‘”‹‹˜‡•–‹‰ƒ–‘”•ǤŠ‡ƒ••—’–‹‘‹•–Šƒ– those with cultural knowledge are best positioned to conduct research in a manner sensitive to the needs of the informants. Appropriate processes and protocols are

20

observed and there is some general understanding on how the information is to be used, •–‘”‡†ǡ ƒ† ƒ……‡••‡†Ǥ —”–Š‡”‘”‡ǡ ƒ† ’‡”Šƒ’• ‘•– ‹’‘”–ƒ–Ž›ǡ –Š‡› ȋ¢‘”‹

”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‡”•Ȍƒ”‡ƒ„Ž‡–‘…‘•‹†‡”‹ˆ‘”ƒ–‹on from a position more akin to the reality of

the informants. Data are therefore less likely to be misinterpreted due to contrasting views of the world.

ƒ’ƒ”–‹ƒŽ”‡•’‘•‡–‘–Š‡•‡‹••—‡•ǡǮƒ—’ƒ’ƒ¢‘”‹ǯŠƒ•‡‡”‰‡†ƒ•ƒ†‹•–‹…–”‡•‡ƒ”…Š approach and is often promoted as an appropriate means through which research, …‘†—…–‡†™‹–Šǡ„›ǡ‘”‹˜‘Ž˜‹‰¢‘”‹ǡ•Š‘—Ž†’”‘…‡‡†Ǥ‘™‡˜‡”ǡ–Š‡†‡„ƒ–‡…‘…‡”‹‰ the components of this continues to evolve, with a number of different positions and perspectives having been promoted.

Nepe ȋͳͻͻͳȌǡˆ‘”‡šƒ’Ž‡ǡ•—‰‰‡•–•–Šƒ–ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ¢‘”‹‹•„ƒ•‡†‘‡’‹•–‡‘Ž‘‰‹…ƒŽƒ† metaphysical concepts which may, and should, be distinguished from the more

‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡†Ȁ™‡•–‡”–”ƒ†‹–‹‘•Ǥ–‹•ƒ••‡”–‡†–Šƒ–¢‘”‹Šƒ˜‡“—‹–‡†‹ˆferent and unique

epistemological traditions and that this may in turn impact on the way in which the world is viewed, how it is organised, and how questions are phrased and solutions formulated. These issues bring into question the validity of investigations that are —ƒ„Ž‡ –‘ …‘•‹†‡” ¢‘”‹ ™‘”Ž†˜‹‡™• ‘” –Šƒ– ƒ”‡ …‘†—…–‡† ˆ”‘ ™‹–Š‹ ‡•–ƒ„Ž‹•Š‡† western traditions. Irwin ȋͳͻͻͶȌ adds to this debate by pointing out that those involved

™‹–Š ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š ƒ› ‹ ˆƒ…– „‡ •‘‡™Šƒ– ”‡Ž—…–ƒ– –‘ ‡‰ƒ‰‡in such

deliberations as they are fundamentally designed to establish comparisons with ™‡•–‡” •…‹‡…‡ǡ ™Š‹…Š •Š‡ •–ƒ–‡• Dz‹• ‡šƒ…–Ž› ™Šƒ– ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ ‹• •—’’‘•‡† –‘ „‡ resisting” ȋͳͻͻͶǡ’Ǥʹ͹Ȍ.

21

Reflecting this type of diversity, Smith ȋͳͻͻͻǡ ’Ǥ ͳͻͲȌ sta–‡• –Šƒ– ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ research is both more and less than a paradigm. In this regard she adds:

It does set out a field of study which enables a process of selection to occur, and which defines what needs to be studied and what questions ought to be asked. It also has a set of assumptions and taken for granted values and knowledge, upon which it builds. In this sense it can be fitted into some of the ways in which a paradigm is defined. It is also, however, more –Šƒ ƒ •— ‘ˆ –Š‘•‡ ’ƒ”–•Ǥ ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ ”esearch is a social ’”‘Œ‡…–Ǣ‹–™‡ƒ˜‡•‹ƒ†‘—–‘ˆ¢‘”‹…—Ž–—”ƒŽ„‡Ž‹‡ˆ•ƒ†˜ƒŽ—‡•ǡ‡•–‡” ™ƒ›• ‘ˆ ‘™‹‰ǡ ¢‘”‹ Š‹•–‘”‹‡• ƒ† ‡š’‡”‹‡…‡• —†‡” …‘Ž‘‹ƒŽ‹•ǡ

‡•–‡”ˆ‘”•‘ˆ‡†—…ƒ–‹‘ǡ¢‘”‹ƒ•’‹”ƒ–‹‘•ƒ†•‘…‹‘-economic needs,

and Western economics and politics.

Building on this, Bishop ȋͳͻͻͶǡ ’Ǥ ͳͺͶȌ ƒŽ•‘ •–ƒ–‡• –Šƒ– ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ Dzƒ††”‡••‡• –Š‡ prevailing ideologies of cultural superiority which pervade our social, political and

‡…‘‘‹…‹•–‹–—–‹‘•dzǤ —”–Š‡”‘”‡ǡ–Šƒ–ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‹•located within an

alternative perspective of the world from which solutions and cultural aspirations can be generated.

Š‹Ž‡–Š‡”‡…‘–‹—‡•–‘„‡†‡„ƒ–‡‘–Š‡‘–‹‘‘ˆƒ—’ƒ’ƒ¢‘”‹ǡ—…Š‘ˆ–Š‹•…‡–”‡• on the shape or characteristics of the approach as opposed to its existence as a distinct method or research paradigm. Powick ȋ2002Ȍ notes that it is possible to say what

ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Šƒ›– and may not – include, rather than “pin-pointing an exact

definition of the approach”.

To this end, there is broad agreement that cultural factors, perspectives, or paradigms can inform M¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Šƒ…–‹˜‹–›Ǥ‘”‡‘˜‡”ǡ–Šƒ–”‡•‡ƒ”…Š…‘†—…–‡†™‹–Šǡ„›ǡ‘”ˆ‘” ¢‘”‹•Š‘—Ž†„‡…‘‰‹œƒ–‘ˆ–Š‡•‡…—Ž–—”ƒŽ’ƒ”ƒ†‹‰•ƒ†–Š‡‹”’‘–‡–‹ƒŽ–‘‰—‹†‡ƒ† inform the research process.

22

In reflecting on how these philosophies might be translated into tangible research methods, a number of useful frameworks and models have been developed. In an

ƒ––‡’– ȋ–Š”‘—‰Š ƒ ‡š–‡•‹˜‡ ‡–ƒ-ƒƒŽ›•‹•Ȍ –‘ …‘•‘Ž‹†ƒ–‡ ƒ† •›–Š‡•‹œ‡ –Š‡•‡ǡ

Bevan-Brown ȋͳͻͻͺȌ identifies ten ‘ingredients’ that are stressed or deemed as being Š‹‰ŠŽ›†‡•‹”ƒ„Ž‡‹–‡”•‘ˆ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Šǡƒ†–Šƒ–ƒ”‡”‡Ž‡˜ƒ–‹–‡”•‘ˆ†‡˜‡Ž‘’‹‰

ƒ¢‘”‹‡–Š‘†‘Ž‘‰‹…ƒŽ’”‘…‡••‡•ǤThe ten components are relatively generic and have

been deliberately kept so to ensure that the model is both useable and applicable to a wide range of research initiatives. The ten components are described below:

1. ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š —•– „‡ …‘†—…–‡† ™‹–Š‹ ƒ ¢‘”‹ …—Ž–—”ƒŽ ˆ”ƒ‡™‘”Ǥ Š‹•

requires a base developed fro ƒ ¢‘”‹ ™‘”Ž†˜‹‡™ǡ Ž‹‡† –‘ ¢‘”‹ ‡’‹•–‡‘Ž‘‰›ǡ ƒ† ‹…‘”’‘”ƒ–‹‰ ¢‘”‹ …‘…‡’–• ‘ˆ ‘™Ž‡†‰‡ǡ •‹ŽŽ•ǡ ‡š’‡”‹‡…‡•ǡ ƒ––‹–—†‡•ǡ ’”‘…‡••‡•ǡ ’”ƒ…–‹…‡•ǡ …—•–‘•ǡ –‡ ”‡‘ ¢‘”‹ǡ ˜ƒŽ—‡•ǡ ƒ† beliefs. 2. ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Š—•–„‡…‘†—…–‡†„›’‡‘’Ž‡™Š‘Šƒ˜‡–Š‡‡…essary cultural, te ”‡‘ ¢‘”‹ǡ •—„Œ‡…– ƒ† ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š ‡š’‡”–‹•‡ ”‡“—‹”‡†Ǥ Š‡› —•– ƒŽ•‘ ’‘••‡•• ƒ …‘‹–‡––‘–Š‹‰•¢‘”‹ǡ–Š‡–”—•–‘ˆ–Š‡¢‘”‹…‘—‹–›„‡‹‰”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‡†ǡ cross-…—Ž–—”ƒŽ…‘’‡–‡…‡ǡ’‡”•‘ƒŽ“—ƒŽ‹–‹‡••—‹–‡†–‘†‘‹‰¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Šƒ† an understanding of and commitment to the obligations, liabilities, and ”‡•’‘•‹„‹Ž‹–‹‡•–Šƒ–ƒ”‡ƒ‹–‡‰”ƒŽ’ƒ”–‘ˆ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…ŠǤ

3. ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Š•Š‘—Ž†„‡ˆ‘…—•‡†‘ƒ”‡ƒ•‘ˆ‹’‘”–ƒ…‡ƒ†…‘…‡”–‘¢‘”‹Ǥ

23

4. ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š •Š‘—Ž† ”‡•—Ž– ‹ •‘‡ ’‘•‹–‹˜‡ ‘—–…‘‡ ˆ‘” ¢‘”‹Ǥ Š‹• ƒ› „‡

manifest in many different ways, e.g., improved services, increased knowledge, Š‡ƒŽ–Š ‰ƒ‹• ‘” ‘”‡ ‡ˆˆ‡…–‹˜‡ —•‡ ‘ˆ ”‡•‘—”…‡•Ǥ Šƒ–‡˜‡” –Š‡ ˆ‘”ǡ ¢‘”‹

r‡•‡ƒ”…Š•Š‘—Ž†„‡‡ˆ‹–¢‘”‹‹•‘‡™ƒ›Ǥ

5. •—…Šƒ•’‘••‹„Ž‡ǡ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Š•Š‘—Ž†‹˜‘Ž˜‡–Š‡’‡‘’Ž‡„‡‹‰”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‡†

as active participants at all stages of the research process.

6. ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š •Š‘—Ž† ‡’‘™‡” –Š‘•‡ „‡‹‰ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š‡†Ǥ Š‹• ‡’‘™‡”‡–

should stem from both the research process and product.

7. ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…Š•Š‘—Ž†„‡…‘–”‘ŽŽ‡†„›¢‘”‹ǤŠ‹•‹•–‘‡•—”‡‹–‹•…ƒ””‹‡†‘—–

™‹–Š‹ ƒ ¢‘”‹ …—Ž–—”ƒŽ ˆ”ƒ‡™‘” ƒ† –Šƒ– ¢‘”‹ ‹–‡”‡•–• ƒ† ‹–‡‰”‹–› ƒ”‡

’”‘–‡…–‡†Ǥ Š‡ …‘–”‘Ž ‘ˆ ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š •Šould extend to control in matters

relating to ethical requirements, assessment, funding, intellectual property rights and ownership, and dissemination of knowledge.

8. ‡‘’Ž‡ ‹˜‘Ž˜‡† ‹ …‘†—…–‹‰ ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š •Š‘—Ž† „‡ ƒ……‘—–ƒ„Ž‡ –‘ –Š‡

people they resea”…Š‹’ƒ”–‹…—Žƒ”ƒ†–‘–Š‡¢‘”‹…‘—‹–›‹‰‡‡”ƒŽǤ

9. ¢‘”‹ ”‡•‡ƒ”…Š •Š‘—Ž† „‡ ‘ˆ ƒ Š‹‰Š “—ƒŽ‹–›Ǥ – •Š‘—Ž† „‡ ƒ••‡••‡† „› …—Ž–—”ƒŽŽ›

ƒ’’”‘’”‹ƒ–‡‡–Š‘†•ƒ†‡ƒ•—”‡†ƒ‰ƒ‹•–¢‘”‹-relevant standards.

10.Š‡ ‡–Š‘†•ǡ ‡ƒ•—”‡•ǡ ƒ† ’”‘…‡†—”‡• —•‡† ‹ ¢‘”‹research must take

…‘‰‹œƒ…‡ ‘ˆ ¢‘”‹ …—Ž–—”‡ ƒ† ’”‡ˆ‡”‡…‡•Ǥ Š‡› —•– –ƒ‡ ‹–‘ ƒ……‘—– –Š‡ ’”‡˜‹‘—•‹‡”‡“—‹”‡‡–•‘ˆ¢‘”‹”‡•‡ƒ”…ŠǤ

24

• ƒ „”‘ƒ† ‰—‹†‡ –‘ –Š‡ ‹…Ž—•‹‘ ‘ˆ ƒ—’ƒ’ƒ ¢‘”‹ –‡…Š‹“—‡• ™‹–Š‹ ƒ “—ƒŽ‹–ƒ–‹˜‡ research paradigm, this model provides valuable clues. Importantly, it offers a structure upon which the more pragmatic aspects of the thesis and research methods can be applied. To this end, this model was used to guide the research and the research methods, and to consider how the Study …‘—Ž†„‡•–‡‡––Š‡‡š’‡…–ƒ–‹‘•‘ˆ¢‘”‹Ǥ