Paper short abstract:

Questioning the assumption that anthropologists have a special 'way of seeing', I explore whether other practitioners of ethnography could do the work that anthropologists do, and if applying anthropology is not the same as applying common sense.

Paper long abstract:

This presentation questions the assumption that anthropologists have a different or even special 'way of seeing' through our ethnographic practice/s. By listing and examining several examples (in business process re-engineering, business models, writing training materials, in education practices, social care arrangements, etc.) of how I have applied - I thought - my special way of seeing and anthropology in analysis and coming up with the required solutions, I question whether it was my training in anthropology and ethnographic methods that really played a significant part. Could another practitioner without a background in anthropology have done the same, or perhaps even better?

Was I applying anthropology based on ethnographic data, or common sense?

Have l become so thoroughly an anthropologist that whatever l observe in social life whether or not it constitutes 'official' research data, ethnographic or otherwise, is filtered through anthropological lenses? Is this any different from the engineer or architect who looks at a building and knows exactly where a structural wall should be positioned, or a mathematician who knows which theorem to apply to solve a seemingly intractable problem?

Anthropologists have prided themselves in questioning everything in making the familiar strange. I wish to scrutinize our own practices to contemplate how exactly does anthropological wisdom benefit life's processes outside academia. Is it necessary, or even possible, to teach 'applied anthropology' (or 'applied ethnography') within the academy? While anyone can do ethnography, or so it seems, I will assert that not everyone could do anthropology.