Research ethics and organizations: the neglected ethics of organizational ethnography

Abstract

PurposeWorking with organizations is central to organizational ethnography. However, while research ethics relating to individual participants is widely discussed, research ethics relating to the organizations has been neglected. The purpose of this article is to address this shortcoming and introduce the concept and domain of “meso-ethics” in research ethics. Meso-ethics pertains to organizations as research participants and thus allows for the explicit inclusion of organizations in ethical considerations and practice. Meso-ethics complements the known domains of micro-ethics and macro-ethics in research ethics.Design/methodology/approachThe concept of meso-ethics takes point of departure in the micro-ethical principles of “respect, and avoiding harm” and adjusts these to apply to organizations. The organizations are first defined as a distinct type of research participants, which differs from individual participants. The organizations are formally organized units that possess resources to assert power and stakeholders with a vested interest in the research. Second, the relationship between researchers and organizations is related to issues of power, allowing for a view of the power relations as flexible and relational. Moreover, this includes a potential vulnerability to harm on both sides.FindingsThe new concept and domain meso-ethics allows for explicit reflections and practice of research ethics in relations to organizations, a central participant in organizational ethnography. There is a discussion that meso-ethics should be combined with micro-ethics and macro-ethics in future practice to allow for comprehensive reflections and practice of research ethics.Originality/valueThe article contributes a new concept and domain of research ethics, meso-ethics, in organizational ethnography and related research to explore and practice research ethics in relation to organizations participating in our research. Meso-ethics complements the known domains of micro-ethics and macro-ethics in research ethics.

Academic librarians’ perceptions of mobile technology’s usefulness in library service delivery at universities of technology in South Africa

“…Researchers must prioritise the consideration and application of ethical principles during their studies (Mena and Hilhorst, 2022, p. 310). Neglecting research ethics can adversely impact the validity and reliability of the study’s outcomes (Kristensen, 2023, p. 2; Li and Wan, 2023).…”

Recovery college dropout: A qualitative study of external, relational and course‐related dropout drivers in co‐produced mental health care

“…At the level of mesoethics, defined as ethical considerations in relation to the participating organization (Kristensen, 2023), reflections concerned our position in relation to the RC. Some RC studies adopt 'the RC ethos' to create entirely co-produced research where academic scholars and recovery staff design, manage and disseminate research in partnerships (Yoeli et al, 2022, p. 1).…”

“That's not a proper ethnography”: a hybrid “propportune” ethnography to study nurses' perceptions of organisational culture in a British hospital

“…Should I have asked if I could quote them? Did they think they were just chatting or did they mean me to hear their stories for my research?These last two reflections and the badge vignette reveal some of the dilemmas of what might be considered covert research and might raise meso-level(Kristensen 2023) ethical issues. However, we are confident that the student was compliant with ethical considerations.…”