Whose voice is it anyway? Rethinking the oral history method in accounting research on race, ethnicity and gender

Drawing on contemporary feminist and postcolonial writings, this paper endeavors to provide a critique of some underlying assumptions of the oral history method. The very methodology of the oral history method re-enforces hegemonic Western ideologies about race/ethnicity, gender and class perpetuated through the connection between the cultural identity of the speaker and the notion of authenticity as a ground for academic authority. Without recognizing the inherent subjectivities of the research methods we use, we may unwittingly perpetuate these hegemonic ideologies, despite our good intention. If other histories are to be heard, this bias and viewpoint needs to be challenged, not in a threatening way but in an enlightening way, so that the “Other” voices can tell their stories in a more, if not fully, liberated way.