Content area
Full text
Introduction
As a methodological approach, introspection is virtually unseen in the academic organisational studies literature. Subjective personal introspection (SPI) involves the generation of rich, impressionistic narrative accounts of the writer's own experiences regarding a particular phenomenon of interest ([27] Holbrook, 2005). It has its roots in the "personal essay" approach developed by Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592), as a mode of expression. Holbrook (2006, p. 716) states "because [de Montaigne's] purpose was to explore the human condition and because he himself was human - in describing himself, he inevitably achieved the desired objective". Historically, the use of SPI has been limited to consumer behaviour researchers describing their own personal consumption experiences ([17], [18] Gould, 1991, 1995; [25], [26], [27] Holbrook, 1986, 1995, 2005; [48] Shankar, 2000). However, in none of these works is there ever any explicit mention of the underlying epistemological or ontological foundations for such a methodological approach. I view SPI as being grounded in a post-phenomenological orientation where there is a focus on the researcher-researched relationship, on the conceptual assumptions on the link between self and other and on the exploration of preconsciousness in revealing much of the "hidden mechanisms of research" ([35] Letiche, 2009, p. 292). In addition, [35] Letiche (2009, p. 294) argues that a post-phenomenological perspective stresses "that there is no 'object' (the seen or observed) without the 'subject' (consciousness), and that there is no perceiving subject without something (or 'object') that is perceived [...] the phenomenology of perception identifies being with seeing, listening and feeling, wherein the being of consciousness is the same as the being of perception".
In its purest form, SPI utilises the researcher as subject. [51] Wallendorf and Brucks (1993) term this researcher introspection. This is in contrast to three other forms of introspection: guided introspection involves the researcher asking participants (informants, interviewees, etc.) to introspect; interactive introspection involves both researcher and participants introspecting and the data results from their interaction; and syncretic introspection denotes any combination of the three. Despite the differences, all three fundamentally involve "at least one individual providing verbal data on aspects of his/her experience that are consciously available to the introspector but not directly observable by another person" ([51] Wallendorf and Brucks, 1993, p. 340).
For this reason, SPI is...