Service and leadership in the university: duoethnography as transformation

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to use duoethnography to explore experiences of service as work in the university, an institution increasingly shaped by neoliberal values. The authors trace the shift in emphasis within the university from one of a care-oriented form of service to a highly managerial form of service. The authors first interrogate childhood stories to make sense of the initial response to the role of service in a lecturer position, and then to the increasing organisational demand for leadership within the university. Design/methodology/approach As two women academics the authors see the work in teacher education as a particular form of service—as “our calling”. Findings This duoethnography reveals different histories in relation to service, but similar ways of thinking about the changing nature of service in the university. With particular regard to women in the academy, it reveals the desire for a more transformative approach, recognising the importance of collegial relationships, and valuing an ethics of care, in order to develop inclusive and transformative service and leadership in the academy. Practical implications This paper provides clear links to how changes in the university are understood and approached differently by people. Originality/value This paper argues for the importance of autoethnographic and duoethnographic explorations of the personal stories in the university to better understand wider definitions of service and leadership.

Mother-teacher-scholar-advocates: narrating work-life on the professorial plateau

“…Similar to autoethnography, collaborative autoethnography connects the autobiographical to the cultural, social and political (Ellis, 2008); however, autoethnographers who collaborate can also illustrate how social issues are manifested within a community (Ellis et al , 2011). As researchers juxtapose their narratives, they reveal differences and commonalities that underscore both authors' social and cultural formations of self (Fitzpatrick and Farquhar, 2018). Like Fitzpatrick and Farquhar (2018) and Foster (2005), we adopt a feminist analytic stance that challenges dominant patriarchal narratives.…”

“…As researchers juxtapose their narratives, they reveal differences and commonalities that underscore both authors' social and cultural formations of self (Fitzpatrick and Farquhar, 2018). Like Fitzpatrick and Farquhar (2018) and Foster (2005), we adopt a feminist analytic stance that challenges dominant patriarchal narratives.…”

“…We exchanged our written narratives and discussed ideas for our conceptual framework and methodology, sharing research articles pertaining to our project (e.g. Fitzpatrick and Farquar, 2018; Mutter and Thorn, 2017). We divided up the work that needed to be done, and then took turns revising the manuscript until it felt complete.…”

Applying duoethnography to position researcher identity in management research

“…It is a form of collaborative autoethnography (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011). Duoethnography is rooted in the philosophical and theoretical foundations of autoethnography (Fitzpatrick & Farquhar, 2018;Norris, 2008). Autoethnography is a deeply personalised account of the researcher's experience to 'extend understanding about societal phenomena' (Anderson, 2006;Wall, 2006, p. 1).…”

When Everything Changes: Using Critical Family History to Deconstruct Keesing and Fitzpatrick Surnames

“…We are genealogists. We write this paper as a critical collaborative autoethnography (see Fitzpatrick and Farquhar 2018), juxtaposing and exploring our family histories alongside each other, and critically analysing our stories with theory. It is a critical family history (Sleeter 2015) and much more than a hobby (Hart 2018).…”