Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
or are trying to second-guess the research agenda. Deceptive approaches rein-
force this participant strategy and undermine the trust essential to any ethno-
graphic effort.
Trust
Ethnographers need the trust of the people they work with to complete their
task. An ethnographer who establishes a bond of trust will learn about the
many layers of meaning in any community or program under study.
Ethnographers build this bond on a foundation of honesty, and communicate
this trust verbally and nonverbally. They may speak simply and promise con-
fidentiality as the need arises. Nonverbally, an ethnographer communicates
this trust through self-presentation and general demeanor. Appropriate
apparel, an open physical posture, handshakes, and other nonverbal cues can
establish and maintain trust between an ethnographer and a participant.
Actions speak louder than words. An ethnographer's behavior in the field is
usually his or her most effective means of cementing relationships and build-
ing trust. People like to talk, and ethnographers love to listen. As people learn
that the ethnographer will respect and protect their conversations, they open up
a little more each day in the belief that the researcher will not betray their trust.
Trust can be an instant and spontaneous chemical reaction, but more often it
is a long, steady process, like building a friendship.
Ethnographers usually maintain an implicit trust with the people they work
with in a study. A powerful black leader invited me to his home to discuss his
successful orchestration of political support for the dropout program. During
the middle of this informal late-night interview, he explained why he would
never hire a white person in his organization. He argued that the issue of qual-
ifications was not pertinent and that hiring a white would rob a black of the
job. Moreover, whites had made his life miserable, and hiring a white would
be a form of “self-contempt and self-hatred.”
This type of reverse discrimination did not become an issue at that time.
The purpose of the meeting was to gain access to the leader's organization and
to understand his worldview. He provided both in an extremely hospitable
manner. The reverse discrimination discussion became relevant later in the
study, however, as a guide to understanding the organizational dynamics of his
institution. I collected the information without reaction because I had implic-
itly promised a nonjudgmental trust, and I never linked his name to the senti-
ment because he had spoken in confidence.
The demands of personal tolerance and trust came into play again when I
was working as an assistant director and ethnographer in a senior citizen day
care center. I was collecting initial interview data as a means of gaining the
trust of program participants when I ran into Betsy. Betsy was a 90-year-old
