“Caminhante, não há caminho. Se faz caminho ao andar”: narrativas de pesquisadores dos Estudos Organizacionais sobre a experiência sensível de pesquisa

Abstract

This doctoral thesis proposes to think about the knowledge production process from the perspective of sensitive research experience, in which sensitivity is related to the way the researcher experiences the multiple relationships that take place during this process. We start from the critique of modern science made by the decolonial thinkers to reveal the wasted experiences of knowledge, guiding us by the notion of experience/meaning, by Bondía, and the sensitive condition, by Haroche. The sensitive research experience contrasts with the conceptualization of experimental research, which is based on universality, neutrality and objectivity. In this sense, we ask: how are sensitive research experiences constructed and how do they influence the paths of people who do research? We did not restrict the research to field research, but included all the events and interactions that we experienced during the process. Modern science is suspicious of knowledge that emerges from experience. The affections, discomforts, mistakes experienced in the knowledge production process are rejected, considered as externalities. The general objective of this thesis is to understand the research processes of doctoral students in Organizational Studies from the perspective of sensitive research experience, and how such a perspective affects choices, decisions, stories and the construction of knowledge. As specific objectives, we intend to: (i) retrieve the stories about the doctoral experiences of EOR researchers; (ii) identify elements that reveal the sensitive condition of research experiences; (iii) analyze the personal, social and scientific implications of sensitive research experiences. To reveal the sensitive condition of these experiences, we built a path that was made in walking. This is a qualitative research project, which produced the information using an autoethnographic report; documentary research; and semi structured interviews. The choice of participants-researchers was based on the following criteria: (a) they belong to the field of Organizational Studies; (b) they have used qualitative research in their theses; (c) they have carried out field research in the doctorate; (d) they have defended the thesis in the last 10 years. New participants were recruited using the “snowball” technique. We interviewed 17 researchers, from eight different institutions, eleven women and six men. The information was analyzed using the Narrative Analysis method. We built eight categories of analysis, which are: (1) A gesture of interruption; (2) An opening to the unknown: unpredictable research; (3) Anti-experiences; (4) Thesis time: time to surrender and connect; (5) The others who support us in our vulnerabilities; (6) Get involved and let people get involved in the field; (7) Make experiences visible and credible; (8) Making sense of who we are and what happens to us. Understanding the sensitive condition of research experiences revealed that doubts, guilt, anxieties, and concerns did not turn the participants into less competent researchers, but made them more human. Breaking with the narrow ways of producing knowledge and with the idea of a fearless researcher, implies giving more life to the research process, a more pleasurable, more pulsating process, that is in line with our human condition.