Written by BKG and JVW
Several months ago a couple of research colleagues and I met with a cross-cultural worker to discuss some questions on a few people groups which were located in his area. The worker promptly assured us that he had reliable data on the peoples in question. He said he needed to go home and email the data to us. In a couple of hours, we received an email with an attachment that he downloaded from the internet. The worker proudly told us that he did his research in less than five minutes and that there was now no reason to waste time and organizational funds by making a trip to these peoples to conduct on- site field research. The problem was that we had already seen the material in question and knew for a fact that it was not accurate.
Too often cross-cultural workers do not spend enough time actually digging deeper and doing field research on their focus people group. Instead, they rely on information garnered from numerous “authoritative” [1] sources. Once they gather this information, they assume that they now “know” the people group. Consequently, they often base strategies and actions on such suspect data.
This article encourages cross-cultural workers to make field research a natural part of their lifestyle. It first considers several reasons why cross-cultural workers should not assume information from “authoritative” sources on people groups is accurate. Second, it discusses several benefits of conducting field research. Lastly, it discusses guidelines on how to conduct field research.
REASONS FOR NOT ASSUMING
Last year, I saw information from the World Christian Encyclopedia (WCE) regarding the Manadonese Malay of Northern Sulawesi in Indonesia. Although I knew the area fairly well, I had never heard of a people group named Manadonese Malay. WCE listed this people group with a population of 110,000 and more than 99% being Muslim.
The city of Manado where supposedly this people group resides has a church on almost every street corner. In addition, the population of the entire city is around 400,000 which would mean one fourth of the population were Muslim.
I checked another source to see if it said the same thing or if they had updated and corrected the information. It turns out that they had updated it, but the new information was even more inaccurate than the previous information. The population was now 700,000, and they were still listed at 99% Muslim.
After further investigation with an SIL friend, we determined that the WCE must be referring to Manadonese language speakers (700,000 according to SIL) who are actually Minahasa people and who, according to the government census, are around 90% protestant.
Unfortunately, however, the ramifications of this mistake went further than just the World Christian Encyclopedia. Joshua Project also added this “phantom” people group to their list as have others, all showing them as an unreached people group.
The accuracy of information from “authoritative” sources varies widely from people group to people group. In some situations, the data comes from reliable sources. Nevertheless, such information is only a portrait bound by time and space, no more and no less. With this in mind, some information may still be relevant and useful while other information may look radically different in the present time and context.
Cultures are not static entities that are enclosed in themselves--isolated islands that are independent and self-sufficient. Instead, they are dynamic and are ever changing so that cultural answers and questions change with time. People groups do not live in vacuums; they live in cultures; and, therefore, are constantly changing. As a result, over time, their demographic size, cultural distinctives, and even their status in regard to evangelization change. In terms of information, what was “then” ultimately becomes invalid for the “now,” constantly prompting a need to conduct field research.
In other situations, the data is not reliable and paints an inaccurate picture. For these, the people groups were often never adequately researched. Additionally, more often than not, when research was conducted, it was often based on information:
- Dated from thirty to forty year-old sources, and in some instances as far back as colonial times.
- Published by sources, such as governments, who have a vested interest in portraying the information in a certain light.
- Collected from various unknown sources, resulting in the reader not knowing the reliability of the source.
- Written by someone who may have spent a few days “checking out” the people group at some unknown point in time.
BENEFITS OF FIELD RESEARCH
The benefits of field research outweigh the neglect thereof. Obviously, field research validates or discredits the accuracy of information on a people group. However, it also helps us adjust to a new cultural setting. Donald Larson contends,
Field notes which record our impressions of ourselves and of others’ impressions of us have a way of keeping alive certain things which we might like to put to death. … Field notes which describe our reactions help to keep alive the differences we observe. A review of these impressions serves as a check list of our adjustment. (Larson 1964, 142-143)Adjustment comes when cross-cultural workers learn how to fit in the culture. It comes from learning why the focus people act and behave as they do. It comes by moving yourself from the status of “unacceptable outsider” to “acceptable outsider”. Field research provides you with the tools for knowing acceptable behavior and adjusting your actions accordingly.
Field research ensures our strategies connect with who a people are. Many times, cross-cultural workers miss key information needed to get into the minds of their people. Without this information, the strategies they implement fall short of fitting the local context. As a result, the questions in life that the people are asking are never answered.
One only need look at the primary tool Jesus used in His teaching ministry, His parables, to understand this. Parables “connected” with the oral society in which He lived, so Jesus used them often. People understood the topics and contexts of His parables because they were part of their everyday life. Because of His understanding of the desires and needs of the people He ministered to, Jesus was able to use simple stories to connect with people and profoundly impact their lives.
When it comes to your people group, do you really know what they want? Or, do you assume you know without ever digging deep enough to know whether the strategies fit the local context?
Too often cross-cultural workers do not dig deeper into verifying the accuracy of information or into discovering new information which will provide a true understanding of their people group and impact decision making. Field research can yield valuable results for improving such disconnects. In so doing, it avoids wasting time and resources. Field research provides a foundation to enable cross-cultural workers to make decisions that are strategically informed.
Field research allows us to approach people with an informed passion. Passion that is misinformed often results in misunderstanding. We have a passion to communicate a message. We should never let this passion depart. However, if the message is not communicated properly, it becomes misunderstood and even rejected for the wrong reasons. Conversely, when we take time for field research, we can avoid such miscommunication traps. As Eugene Nida points out,
Cultural anthropology only helps to guarantee that when the message is communicated, the people are more likely to understand. And it is this very fact of understanding in which may result in the people's rejecting it! But this is much better than to have them appear to accept it when they really do not understand its significance. Once, however, when a missionary has a thorough understanding of the cultural relevance of the symbols which he must employ in order to communicate, it is very much more likely that he can at least speak with meaning to the people; thus establishing the first, and indispensable level for any missionary undertaking. (1959, 114)Passion to communicate the message of Jesus Christ is needed. Nevertheless, passion that is misinformed often results in a misunderstood message. Good field research brings informed passion.
That is the work of cross-cultural workers. If we do our work with informed passion, we can make a difference: a difference that sees transformation to the very core of worldview take place. This informed passion requires both our hearts and our heads.
Related to this, field research helps us to grow in our love for our focus people group and our desire to see God glorified among them. There really is no secret here. The more time you spend with your people; the more you get to know and understand them; the more you know and understand them; the more you care about them; the more you care about them; the more passionate you are that they understand who God really is. In addition, the passion you now have for them is no longer based on “head knowledge” but has become internalized as it has developed into “heart knowledge.
GUIDELINES FOR FIELD RESEARCH
Before discussing guidelines for field research, let’s first address some common misperceptions about field research. Conducting field research does not mean that all should get doctorates in ethnographic studies. Nor should we spend all of our time in scholarly research at the expense of doing what we are called to do. Moreover, it does not mean that we should write an intricately detailed ethnography. It does mean, however, that we should always hunger to know our focus people group at a deeper level. No matter how long we’ve been serving among them, we should take every opportunity to increase our understanding of the people. In essence, this is really what field research is.
There are no absolutes regarding how to conduct field research. Nevertheless, several general guidelines do exist.
Conduct field research in natural everyday settings. Field research is not a sideline activity. It is something that is part of everyday life. We meet people everyday, and every one of these cross-cultural encounters serves as a way for understanding a people. Hence, field research should be a part of everything we do.
Watch people in context. By observing people in context, we gain an incredibly rich understanding of what the people really need.
Ask culturally appropriate questions.[2] Badly phrased questions produce misleading results. Avoid closed questions which encourage the answer “yes” or “no.”
Talk to the right people. Talking to people at a railway station, for example, will get answers from commuters; but if we want information on people who stay at home with young children, then we need to talk to those people. Moreover, opinion leaders often provide invaluable information but so do followers of opinion leaders, especially if they are spoken to in separate venues.
Talk to enough people. Talking to two people, for example, won't provide enough objective information. Each person you talk to will give you a different perspective, or piece of the puzzle, about your people group. It’s important to talk to a wide sampling of people (both men and women if possible) from different socio-economic groups, age groups, occupations, etc. The more people you talk to, the clearer the overall picture of your people group will be.
Keep field research impartial. It’s easy to encourage people to give the answer we want. For example, by asking leading questions or smiling at the “right” answer we induce answers that the people think we want to hear. Discussions, where we’re not working from a list of set questions, are particularly easy to distort.
Interpret results with care. We need to make sure we draw the right conclusions from our field research. Bear in mind that people may distort answers based on what they think we want to hear.
Be realistic. It can be tempting to pick out that which confirms what we want to hear, and ignore the rest. By ignoring the rest, we can damage how we design our strategy. Be prepared, no matter how out of line with what you want to hear, to modify information and your plans based upon what the people are saying.
Focus upon the people and not the task. People are the task. Being relational and involved in the lives of the people unearths a reservoir of information of what is important to the people. Therefore, the focus of field research is people.
To conclude this section, contrast the introductory story with the following story from another Strategy Coordinator also serving in Southeast Asia. His people group is spread out over a large area, primarily rural. He writes:
My initial learning about my people group came mainly through a two-page survey that I developed which asked basic demographic and worldview questions. Where I could, I began with believers throughout my people group’s area and asked for recommendations of others to talk to, trying to follow relationships that are so important here. Often I met people over meals and cultural events where people gather and you see and hear some of the celebrations that reveal more of the culture of a people. In the world view questions I would often ask some questions related to their families, beliefs, hopes, meaningful stories/fables, and obstacles/needs related to them and their communities. At one point, we moved to a rural area deep among our people group and lived there for 4 years — gave us many insights into what life is like there — not just theory. Finally, I spend a lot of time in prayer asking God to guide in this process, showing me where and with whom He was at work and how we needed to respond.CONCLUSION
Information from “authoritative” sources is both reliable and unreliable. In some situations, this information is out of date. In others, it is published without being confirmed or verified through field research. One task of cross-cultural workers is to check this information. In so doing, the information is verified and modified so that it paints an accurate picture of a people.
When field research is consistently practiced, it becomes a habit which can become second nature whereby cross-cultural workers can easily evaluate the meaning of what is happening among a people. It enables seeing the “here and now” and not the “there and then” for a people’s demographic size, cultural distinctives, and even their status in regard to evangelization. It becomes a way of developing cross-cultural perceptiveness and enables you to truly get to know and understand your people group. It engenders an informed passion for your people group which will in turn impact your work among them. Succinctly put, it narrows the gap between cross-cultural workers and a people group, leading to understand how God is going to bring people to Himself.
ENDNOTES
[1] Some “authoritative” sources include www.peoplegroups.org, Joshua Project (JP), Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), World Christian Encyclopedia, Operation World, etc.
[2] Joseph E. Grimes (1959:275-276) lists fifteen questions that cross-cultural missionaries should strive to answer.
- Describe thoroughly the person-to-person links by which news and gossip get around the community. These are the channels the gospel also follows.
- How are decisions regarding various matters reached by the community as a whole? By groups in the community? By households? How do these decision-making patterns influence people's decision about Jesus Christ?
- What do people of different statuses want most out of life? How does their action show what they think to be most important? What do they think you feel is important?
- In the community, which persons control the actions of which other persons? In what ways? On what grounds? What is your place in this system?
- How does each kind of object produced or imported by the community (goods and services) get to its ultimate user?
- Who lives where? Give all names, ages, titles, and kinship ties to other people. Use maps.
- How is each individual trained from birth to become a fully participating member of the community? Each recognized group within the community? What do they do about people like you who have not gone through these processes?
- Give a resume and evaluation of everything that has ever been written about the language, culture, and general area.
- How is sexual behavior channeled in marriage? Outside of marriage? What is the rationale for each practice?
- Who controls each piece of land and how is that control expressed? In what ways is the land utilized?
- How are differences between persons or groups settled, either in or out of court? Do all differences stay settled?
- Who are considered deviant or marginal by most people? Why? What is done about them? How do you know your work is not limited to deviants?
- Describe all practices and idea systems of the religion you are trying to see superseded.
- What groups of people does marriage bring into relationship? What is the nature of that relationship? Who may or may not get married? Why? Who actually does marry whom, regardless of the rules?
- What things and ideas from alien sources are fully accepted? Partially accepted? By what process did they get accepted? What makes people accept some things from outside and reject others? What has been accepted from you, and what rejected? Why?
Grimes, Joseph E. (1959) “Ethnographic Questions for Christian Missionaries.” Practical Anthropology 6(06): 275-276.
Larson, Donald N. (1964) “Making Use of Anthropological Field Notes.” Practical Anthropology 11(3):142-144.
Nida, Eugene A. (1959) “The Role of Cultural Anthropology in Christian Missions.” Practical Anthropology 6(03):110-116.
