Organizational autoethnography allows for specific insights concerning the understanding of economy, finance, business and management. It takes into account the lives and biographies of individuals in organizations, their emotions, normative orientations, their perceptions of work cultures, the stickiness of social relations in organizations and wider society, and the experienced material realities in these fields. These social dynamics cannot be grasped with (neo)classical economic theory and the idea of the homo oeconomicus. Rather, organizational autoethnography furthers the consideration and investigation of critical reflections on lives in and of institutions. Furthermore, it allows to better understand the relation between people in a problematic system and the system and to differentiate between the two.
Methods and ethicsOrganizational autoethnography draws on a variety of methods, including the ethnographer's and others' accounts, organizational documents, more or less critical autobiography, memory work, creative and experimental writing, as well as ethnographic methods more generally, 3 oral history, reminiscence work, and psychoanalytic approaches. With Adams, Jones and Ellis (2014) we understand "[a]utoethnographic stories" as "artistic and analytic demonstrations of how we come to know, name, and interpret personal and cultural experience" (p. 1). Autoethnography uses "deep and careful self-reflection -typically referred to as 'reflexivity'to name and interrogate the intersections between self and society, the particular and the general, the personal and the political" (p. 2). The potential and contribution of organizational autoethnography is thus fairly clear in the reflexive exploration of experience of, and orientation and relation to, organizations, but perhaps less obvious is how organizational autoethnography may contribute to the study of and provide specific new insights on the economy, finance, business and management. Furthermore, in studying the economic and the financial, many methodological issues arise, for example around research access, ethics, as well as what kind of data is usable, and what data is ethical to use? What is formally public data? And to what extent should one respect financial and legal and business privilege of economic actors? And should one tread lightly or more confrontationally in analyzing the economic and the financial?There are also what can be called narrative challenges in doing organizational autoethnography in and on economic, financial, business and managerial sites. Does one seek a neutral or a class-, gender-or ethnically-conscious narrative? How is domination of the public sphere and public discourse over the private sphere to be challenged? Is this suggestive of a shift in attention from heroic postures in the public sphere to lived contradictions between and within the public and the private, for both researcher and researched? And how is time to be represented, with temporal challenges moving from chronological linearity to some non-linearities? (s...