Interpretive Magic!: Ethnoconsumerism with Prof. Alladi Venkatesh

I must admit that although I say that technology usage is grounded in a cultural context, I struggle to operationalize “culture” for the fear of reducing it to some causal variable or some vague concept that dilutes what I am arguing. I haven’t found much solace in sociology’s linear models that isolate “culture’s” effects - as it repeats the whole divide of structure versus agency. Neither have I found much clarity in the interpretive tradition of culture, not because I don’t agree with it, but because am confused at how to methodologically move forward with an interpretive approach.
Well then came my meeting with Prof. Alladi Venkatesh, Assoc. Director of UC Irvine’s Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations (CRITO) (thanks for gloria mark for the introduction!).
Prof. Venkatesh has created methodology magic!
Ethno-consumerism is a methodology for doing cross-cultural research. It encourages the researcher to “study culture not merely as providing the context for the study of consumer behavior but study consumption itself as culturally constituted behavior. “In principle, the ethnoconsumerist perspective goes beyond the distinction of emic and etic research approaches.” The etic approach encourages the researcher to interpret from her/his point of view. On the other hand, the emic approach tells the researcher to look at the subject’s point of view. But ethnoconsumerism advocates for the next critical step, which is to then develop knowledge from subject’s point of view. “The research becomes more than an etic interpretation (researcher’s point of view) of the culture, but a view of the culture informed by the culture itself as demonstrated by the above” (Venkatesh and Meamber, 1997).
Venkatesh makes clear that this is methodology, not a method. It does not seek to promote any data collection methods.
Of course I think that qualitative methods (or a mixed-method approach of qual + quant) is the best way to arrive at what he is saying is the crux of ethnoconsumerism - developing a cultural framework of analysis from the consumer’s point of view.
Read his paper and other writings here.
I highly encourage you to read his 1995 paper below on Ethnoconsumerism (citation below). It’s a beautifully written paper that feels intellectually and spiritually moving at the same time. When I read it I felt as if the words has fallen out of the sky onto self-organizing fractals of joy. After 3 years of sociology coursework, I’ve become averse at times to theories by sociologists because the words just don’t stick in my brain or they just don’t inspire me anymore. There was something this 1995 piece that helped me deconstruct 3 years of wonderful and hellish sociological self-discovery to even learn about the cultural divide within the field of sociology (culture vs structure or culture as interpretive model). Dr. Venkatesh, coming from a business/economics background, beautifully reconstructs all the various authors of the interpretive tradition who I have come to love. He has inspired me to think of these authors - such as Geertz, in a new way for my own work on new technology users.
I will be thinking about this methodology for a while as I try to figure out if this framework makes sense for my dissertation. So I will be writing more about this model. In the meantime, two things come to my mind: how I can apply this for my research and how this intersects with Stuart Halls, et. al. 1997 book on Sony Walkmans.
How do I apply this this my research?
- study how new users use their technology as culturally constituted behavior.
- look at tech usage as set of practices
- Do not treat new tech users as objects.
- Do not treat their practices as economically motivated.
- People use techology to get things done. It is my job to understand as an outsider what is being “done” in their context.
- Don’t be culturally reductive by picking one feature of the culture and anchoring all analysis around the feature.
- If I want to compare two different regions with a cultural framework - this takes a realllllly long time because I have to understand the cultural categories and experiences of all the sites.
Circuit of Culture
In 1997, Stuart Hall, Paul Du Gray, and Linda James published Doing cultural studies: the story of the Sony Walkman. They created a model for the analysis of cultural objects called the circuit of culture. On page 3, they show this graph below. The book walks one through on how to deconstruct the Sony walkman as a cultural object.

In an upcoming post, I would like to discuss ways I could combine Ethnoconsumerism and the Circuit of Culture to work for my research. What’s interesting is that while both authors are talking about objects and the people who use the, these are two slightly different approaches. I want to think about to spatialize these approaches. I need to give this some more thought so until the next post on this!
Suggested Reading:
Gay PD, Hall S, Janes L. Doing cultural studies: the story of the Sony Walkman. SAGE; 1997.
Easterly W. The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good. Penguin Press; 2006.
“Ethnoconsumerism: A New Paradigm to Study Cultural and Cross-cultural Consumer Behavior,” Alladi Venkatesh. Marketing in a Multicultural World, J.A. Costa and G. Bamossy (eds.), SAGE Publications, 1995, 26-67.
Design Thinking as a Creative Process: Technology, Business, & Human Values
I just discovered this whole field called “DESIGN THINKING.” It’s a process for designing practical and creative resolutions for an end action/product/program that brings about improvement for a group of people. What I like about this process is that it defines itself against ANALYTICAL THINKING - because design thinking is a “creative process based around the ‘building up’ of ideas. There are no judgments early on in design thinking. This eliminates the fear of failure and encourages maximum input and participation in the ideation and prototype phases.”
NO JUDGEMENTS!!! This is big! So much of “analytical thinking” is about coming up with ideas that don’t look or sound stupid and ideas with minimum chances of failure. But that prevents people from thinking creatively and working as a team because everyone is too invested in their ego or their discipline or their theory.
EVERYDAY KNOWLEDGE! What I like about this philosophy is that it mirrors how people think about solutions in everyday life before they are socialized into institutionalized forms of thinking that require theoretical considerations or busines models. All around the world people are engaging in design thinking! India has been really good at tracking innovations by ordinary people who don’t have “design degrees” or have elite business social networks. Check out the National Innovation Foundation and Honeybee Network.
MULTIDISCIPLINARY THINKING!!! Yah I love things that promote multidisciplinary in a genuine way that values the role of professionals who work on understaning human values - so lookie I know where I fit in! There’s me - ethnographer/sociologist/anthopologist! I have a place in this world - this is so exciting :) I love learning about new business models and technologies - but at the end of the day i’m not a technologist or a hard-core business person - but my entry into both of those worlds is from the perspective of understanding the cultural practices and beliefs of new users who are consuming new technologies. Companies, like Google and P&G, are using this process to understand new markets. This makes me excited that I am employable in non-academic sectors! (thanks Tania Menendez! for the link)

IT’s ABOUT PEOPLE! Design thinking brings it all back to the humans - humans are the ones who use and interface with products - so this process is all about putting humans in all their capacities in the center. So much of design in the past focused on creating “sexy” products - I think that’s why people associate design with “aesthetic” - while I appreciate that aspect for I am just as enamored in beautiful packaging as anyone else - design thinking as a process beings the process back to the people and the people who use the products. GOOD DESIGN THINKING around a product CREATES SEXY PRODUCTS - designing for aesthetics only gets you so far - designing for people takes you a lot farther.
The three approaches to Design Thinking are (cited from here):
1. Proactively understand customer needs and cultural norms unique to each country.
2. Use those insights to run low-fidelity, strategic experiments.
3. Use the resulting assumptions to drive the development of local business models, including product development, marketing and branding, sales and distribution, and manufacturing.
Stanford has a whole institute dedicated to Design Thinking- The Hasso Plattner School of Design at STandford, started by David Kelly, the founder of IDEO. The whole philosophy at IDEO is Design Thinking:
Because design is messy and non-linear, each project we do is bespoke. We customize it for the challenge at hand. The scoping of the project plan is when our approach starts to take shape, and where our partnership with you begins…An inherently shared approach, design thinking brings together people from different disciplines to effectively explore new ideas—ideas that are more human-centered, that are better able to be executed, and that generate valuable new outcomes.
And I love Tom Brown’s (CEO of IDEO) blog on Design Thinking.
______________
I would like to think through the Design Thinking process for my work in Mexico with Barry Brown, Gloria Mark, Jesus Favela and Tanya Mendendez. We are working with a village in Oaxaca on designing appropriate technology for the people of this village. All along we’ve approached it from the circle that would be called “Human Values” according to DEsign Thinking. After two years of ethnography fieldwork in Oaxaca, we are finally in the phase where we are bringing in the technologists of CICESE and the people of the village to brainstorm ideas that would be useful for THEIR lives - not ours! We are hosting the design workshop in 2 weeks so I will post about that later.
Thanks Al Abut for pointing out some critiques of DEsign Thinking here and here - that essentially say this process nurtures the designer’s ego instead of removing it. Perhaps I am not clear about this process since my entry point isn’t as a designer nor as a corporation - but I would think that a more genuine implementation of Design Thinking requires an equal level of respect given to all the team-members that come from the all the other disciplines and the users. For me Design Thinking is exciting because it’s discusses a formal way to equally valorize the role of ethnographers/sociologists/anthropologists alongside the technologists and business heads. For too long psychologists were the only “people”-centered research folks allowed at the table.

