Anthropology: What Is It?

Anthropology is a social science that studies the social environment in which people live and the impact of this social environment on feelings, attitudes, behaviour, and so on. Although often dismissed as an ‘ivory tower’ discipline, anthropology has much to contribute to the study of contemporary problems such as urban life, ethnic conflicts, and postmodernism (Armansyah, 2003). Although it may appear to be a discipline and methodology only recently employed by business researchers, in reality anthropology has a long history within business research. For instance, Edward T. Hall introduced his seminal ‘silent language’ approach in the 1950s and 60s (Hall, 1959, 1960). The classic anthropological methods of research such as ethnography, observation, interviewing, furthermore, have proved to be appropriate for business research (Walle, 2000, 2002; Jordan, 2003)

The scientific method is a process for experimentation that is used to explore observations and answer questions. Scientists use the scientific method to search for cause and effect relationships in nature. In other words, they design an experiment so that changes to one item cause something else to vary in a predictable way. The ‘naturalistic method’ that has risen to prominence in consumer research in recent years is clearly indebted to anthropological methods (Belk et al., 1989). The basic strategies of this approach are to engage in participant observation and to observe and interpret what people actually do in a real-life environment. 

Like anthropological fieldwork, this naturalistic method demands that researchers interpret behaviour from the informant’s perspective, not with reference to the feelings or opinions of the investigator. As a result of this informant-centred focus, researchers are able to more effectively perceive what motivates consumers and affects their responses.

While this method does not adhere to the principles of ‘scientific method’ (Walle, 2002) and the rigour demanded by science and has been criticised by some for this reason, the results of the qualitative, naturalistic method have been widely applauded. In many ways, the naturalistic techniques employed by Belk et al. (1989) are reflective of the ethnographic method of anthropology. Related to this is the work in what Elizabeth Hirschman (1986) has called ‘humanistic’ marketing research which, like anthropological methods, is based upon qualitative methods of research and analysis. Thus, the current vogue of anthropology in marketing and consumer research can be viewed as a part of a larger qualitative and humanistic research agenda for the field.

In this context, ethnography is a process of describing a culture in subjective ways that stem from the feelings of informants who are functioning members of the group being investigated (Mulroney, 2002; Tian, 2007). Anthropologists have long argued among themselves regarding the appropriateness of basing research upon the feeling of the subjects being investigated. In the 1960s, these differences led to a heated debate between advocates of humanistic research and those who favoured scientific rigor (Walle, 2002; Jordon, 2003).

The seminal work leading to this conflict is Kenneth Pike’s book, “Language in Relation to a Unified Structure of Human Behaviour” (1967), in which he suggested that all research can be characterised by two linguistic terms: phonetic and phonemic. Phonetics is the branch of linguistics that objectively and scientifically observes sound patterns. Phonemics, on the other hand, does not examine empirical verifiable phenomena (observed sounds), but focuses on the categories that exist within the human mind that cannot be empirically verified. A short example demonstrates the difference: phonetically, a person with a speech impediment would have a distinctive pattern of speech that can be verified empirically. Phonemically, on the other hand, people could still understand this person because of the underlying structure of the language that exists in the minds of both the speaker and the listener. These patterns, however, are not empirically observable (Pike, 1967).

Pike generalised rigorous and verifiable research as ‘etic’ while more humanistic research that could not be so verified was depicted as ‘emic’. In general, ‘emic’ and ‘etic’ are terms used by scholars in the social and behavioural sciences to refer to two different kinds of data concerning human behaviour. An emic report is a description of behaviour or a belief in terms meaningful to the actor, consciously or unconsciously. An etic report is a description of a behaviour or belief by an observer, in terms that can be applied to other cultures. Discussing the advantages and disadvantages of each side of this dichotomy led to a major debate within anthropology. While initially both parties strongly upheld their own arguments, scholars eventually recognised that both methods have valuable contributions to make (Pike, 1967; Walle, 1998).

 

Those engaged in ethnographies tend to focus upon the emic feelings of informants. They typically seek this information by interacting within a community as much as possible and becoming a functioning part of the social networks that exist there. The strategy of this ethnographic method is to use actual participation among actual residents in order to discover the emic structures that are embraced by the subjects. In naturalistic consumer research, these emic methods are adapted and applied to a research agenda. For example, in order to explore how flea markets actually function, researchers went to such gatherings and observed consumers and sellers interfacing and striking deals (Belk et al., 1989). While this method may not be a sound scientific approach, it does provide useful information that could not be gathered using formal techniques that demand the researchers remain completely impartial and distanced from the events being analysed.

Anthropology also provides useful methods for analysing particular cultures. Harris and Moran (1987), for example, indicate that culture provides people with a sense of who they are, gives them a feeling of belonging, establishes rules of how to behave, and offers rankings of what goals are important. Culture provides a learned, shared, and interrelated set of symbols, codes, values, and knowledge which justify and motivate human behaviour. In recent years, those with international experience have written articles and books about foreign countries that help those in international business to understand diverse cultures in order to be more effective within that context. These monographs tend to be emic-oriented (Sunderland & Denny, 2007).

Although consumer behaviour textbooks typically include an obligatory discussion of culture, such content is often truncated, combined with other issues, and as a result it can easily be overlooked or discounted. From a practical point of view, the concept of culture and its implications for consumer research are often misused. However, the profound impact of culture upon consumer response is observable and undeniable (Douglas & Craig, 1995; Griffith & Ryans, 1995). Those teaching marketing, consumer research and advertising need to scan the textbooks they use to be sure these topics are adequately addressed. Where they are not, professors may want to consider adding supplemental materials.

Anthropology uses the concept of culture to describe and analyse human behaviour, values, choices, preferences, practices, beliefs and attitudes (Costa, 1995). According to classical anthropological theory, culture is an underlying dimension of all societies and all social life. All human behaviour, including consumption, takes place within a cultural context (Harris & Moran, 1987). The embrace of cultural beliefs and values is an integral part of being human. Indeed, it is culture that makes social life and economic cooperation possible and meaningful. The concept of culture, therefore, is invaluable for those who seek to understand consumption, especially when the researcher is studying a modern industrial country or a small, remote village.

Baba and Batteau (2003) indicate that since the 1930s, cultural anthropologists have conducted a vast amount of research in industrial and corporate settings, focusing largely on corporate cultures in the United States. The human relations school of organisational research of the 1930s and 1940s, for example, produced a number of ethnographies that demonstrate how informal cultural patterns, and cohort groups, influence organisations. More recent studies of corporate cultures have shown how specific configurations of values within organisations can contribute to their success or failure. Anthropology has made a significant contribution to this research agenda. The use of anthropology and qualitative anthropological methods is increasing in business research (Jordan, 2003). With their traditional emphasis upon participant observation, business anthropologists are in a position to gather information on grassroots corporate culture.

The Xerox Corporation, for example, used an anthropologist to help the company devise more effective training programs for their service technicians. Julian Orr (1996), the anthropologist assigned to the project, received training as a technician and personally went on service calls in order to understand what happened when technicians interfaced with clients. This research revealed that teaching people how to use the copying machine was an important task. Orr found that a large number of service calls were not required from a mechanical standpoint – people simply did not know how to operate the machine. That insight, gained through firsthand participant observation, encouraged Xerox to emphasise customer relations when training technicians (Baba & Batteau, 2003).
From http://businesseducation.co.in