'Genre Blurring' and Public Administration: What Can We Learn from Ethnography?1. Issue 3 (September 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rhodes, R. A. W.
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of public administration. Volume 73:Issue 3(2014:Jul.)
• Page Start: 317
• Page End: 330
• Publication Date: 2014-09
• Subjects: Public administration -- Australia -- Periodicals; Policy sciences -- Australia -- Periodicals; Australia -- Politics and government -- Periodicals; 351.9405
• DOI: 10.1111/1467-8500.12085
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0313-6647

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <p>This article seeks to broaden the craft of public administration by 'blurring genres'. First, I explain the phrase 'blurring genres'. Second, I provide some examples of early work in administrative ethnography. Third, I compare this early, modernist‐empiricist ethnography with interpretive ethnography, suggesting researchers confront three choices: naturalism vs. anti‐naturalism; intensive vs. hit‐and‐run fieldwork; and generalisation vs. local knowledge. After this general discussion, and fourth, I discuss the more prosaic issues that confront anyone seeking to use ethnography to study public administration and look at fieldwork roles, relevance, time, evidence and fieldwork relationships. Fifth, I describe and illustrate the several tools students of public administration can use as well as observation and interviews; namely, focus groups, para‐ethnography, visual ethnography, and storytelling. Finally, I conclude that ethnographic fieldwork provides texture, depth and nuance, and lets interviewees explain the meaning of their actions. It is an indispensable tool and a graphic example of how to enrich public administration by drawing on the theories and methods of the humanities.</p> </abstract>