Abstract
Purpose:
This article aims to incorporate scholarly work on autoethno-graphy into applied social sciences to solidify the knowledge that steers research methodology in the business and management field.
Originality/value:
In the sphere of social sciences, researchers are distinguished by their comprehensive practical acumen and adeptness at deciphering complex phenomena, bringing an array of insights to the dis-cipline that enriches surface-level understanding. However, due to the persistent sway of the functionalist paradigm, these insights are often disregarded in favor of traditional methodologies, thereby bypassing opportunities for advancement. The research methodology of autoethnography, characterized by distinctive elements diverging from conventional ethnographic methods, presents a promising avenue to harness these overlooked potentials. Despite its recent emergence in ethnographic discourse, the under-recognition and fragmentation of scholarly work on autoethnography within management research constitute a challenge that warrants attention.
Design/methodology/approach:
A systematic literature review was employed, consisting of books, book chapters, and peer-reviewed journal articles, to scrutinize both the theoretical underpinnings and practical applications of autoethnography, particularly within the domain of social sciences.
Findings:
This study illuminates the intricacies of employing autoethnography within management research. This article explores the method’s relevance, potentialities, and challenges, providing practical solutions to enhance its rigor and appeal. By synthesizing and integrating four main categories of autoethnography, this study contributes to the methodology in management studies. Case examples further enrich this discourse by highlighting the effective use of autoethnography in real-world scenarios. The product is a systematic and practical insight into harnessing the power of autoethnography for profound management research.
Keywords
autoethnography; management research; reflexivity; methodological challenges; autoethnographic writing