Ethnography

The research method chosen for this study is qualitative research. Its methodology is ethnography which incorporates non-participant field observation and non-structured interviewing. Observational field studies are the dominant research tool used to study expert teams (Salas, Rosen, Burke, Goodwin, & Fiore, (2006), which all tumor boards are. Salas et al (2006) also state that observational studies are necessary to access information about how teams operate in their environments, particularly in complex environments.

Rationale.
Because of the complex functioning of hospitals and tumor boards, ethnography is the most suitable tool for illuminating the subtle culture of tumor boards in their interactions of multidisciplinary physicians. In addition, in the cultural approach to
While ethnographic methods such as participant observation (fieldwork), interviewing, and archival examination are broadly applied in many qualitative studies, Wolcott (2008) argues that this approach, borrowing ethnographic techniques, needs to be separated from doing ethnography.
For Wolcott (2008), ethnographic researchers not only experience and enquire about cultures and human activities through participant observation and interviewing, but also strive to understand and create meaning out of specific human cultures and activities. Therefore, ethnographic inquiries involve both “descriptive questions as to how, and understanding questions as to meanings imputed to action” (Wolcott, 2008, p. 74). The inclusion of ethnographic research at the seven studied hospitals provides first-hand field insight into the organizational cultures of hospital tumor boards deciding on treatment options for patients with various types of cancers.
The advantage for ethnographers is that research is fairly flexible, sanctioning the lived realities of participants to evolve in their natural context (Creswell, 2003), so as