Abstract
PurposeIn multi-sited ethnography, “following” (of, e.g. persons, objects and events) is used as a device to structure fieldwork. The purpose of this paper is to problematize and substantiate the notion of following, illustrating that, when adopting a “following” strategy, the endless number of potential trails one could follow may lead a fieldworker to be both everywhere and nowhere at once.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is based on the experiences and insights derived from a multi-sited ethnography of the strategic collaborations that emerged after the Dutch healthcare reform of 2015. Fieldwork was conducted between 2015 and 2017, and consisted of participant observations, shadowing and interviews.FindingsAn approach well suited to studying the contemporary problems that cut across organizational boundaries, multi-sited ethnography is both valuable and more challenging due to: (1) the continuous need to negotiate access, which stimulates the researcher to reflect on his or her positionality in the field; (2) the inevitable pressure it puts on a researcher to “unfollow” their field(s) and to regain critical distance and (3) its perplexing ability to highlight the lack of a whole, unveiling instead a plethora of perspectives across sites which may or may not align.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper ends with three key considerations for future multi-sited research endeavours.Originality/valueAlthough the metaphor of following can help to structure fieldwork, the practice of following in multi-sited ethnography is not as straightforward as it appears: there are countless potential “paths” to follow, and researchers themselves must decide which trails to choose and when to step back and “unfollow” their field(s).
Highlights
In 2015, the Netherlands underwent a huge transformation in domestic governance: the decentralization of the organization of healthcare and its financing, which transferred responsibility from the central government to local municipalities and healthcare insurers
While local actors were still expected to deliver the same quality of healthcare, this transition was accompanied by significant budget cuts
Local actors were expected to transform their current practices into an “integrated” system, with a strong emphasis on collaboration
Summary
In 2015, the Netherlands underwent a huge transformation in domestic governance: the decentralization of the organization of healthcare and its financing, which transferred responsibility from the central government to local municipalities and healthcare insurers. By using a multi-sited approach in my own fieldwork, I was able to follow collaboration across the reformed areas of the healthcare system and understand how the various actors tried to construct new forms of governance both collectively and within the boundaries of their own fields.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
