Culture and Organization, December 2007, Vol. 13(4), pp.

349363

What Cultures Exist in the Tattooing

Collectivity? Ambiguity, Membership and
Participation1
DAVID WICKSa* and GINA GRANDYb
a
Sobey School of Business, Saint Marys University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 3C3, Canada; bMount
Alison University, Spekville, New Brunswick, Canada
Culture
10.1080/14759550701659052
GSCO_A_265746.sgm
1475-9551
Original
Taylor
402007
13
david.wicks@smu.ca
DavidWicks
00000December
and
&&Article
Francis
Organization
(print)/1477-2760
Francis2007 (online)

This study explores the presence of cultures in the apprenticed and self-taught collectivities of tattooists.
Adopting a fragmentationist perspective of culture we accept and explore ambiguities within and across these
collectivities. Distinguishing between membership and participation enhances our understanding of culture in
at least three ways. Firstly, individual tattooists can be members of single (for example, self-taught or appren-
ticed) or multiple (for example, self-taught and apprenticed), overlapping collectivities. Secondly, individuals
can be members of a collectivity, but not participants in the cultures. For example, not all individuals in the
apprenticed collectivity participate in the cultures emerging from this collectivity. Finally, individuals can
enact cultural identities from multiple, overlapping cultures. Apprenticed tattooists participate in cultures
evident in both their own collectivity espousing values of professionalism and tradition, as well as in other
collectivities privileging artistry and creativity. By distinguishing between membership and participation we
advocate a cultural perspective that envisions cultural boundaries as fluid and blurred.

Key words: Apprenticeship; Ambiguity; Culture; Collectivities; Fragmentationist; Tattooing

INTRODUCTION

Over the years culture research has been plagued by definitional, theoretical and methodolog-
ical debates (Smircich, 1983; Scheinder, 1987; Ott, 1989; Schein, 1990; Martin, 1992, 2002;
Martin and Frost, 1996; Ashkanasy et al., 2000). Recently, Martin (2002: 316) identified what
she referred to as a theoretical problem, one that has the potential to make us rethink the ways
culture has been defined and studied. She challenged the tendency to view cultural boundaries
as fixed and clearly defined and argued for an approach that views boundaries as fluctuating,
permeable, blurred and even dangerous (ibid.). Such a perspective allows for variations in
intensity of participation in cultures so that some individuals are more active than others in
particular cultures. In addition, it recognizes that cultural participants may engage in overlap-
ping, nested and contradictory cultures. In a related vein, while not calling themselves frag-
mentationists, there is a growing body of researchers that contend we need to embrace
ambiguity as a defining feature of organizational culture. Munro (1995) and Robertson and
Swan (2003), for example, illuminate how ambiguity plays an integral role in the construction
and regulation of organizational cultures in accounting and knowledge intensive firms, respec-
tively. In this article we build upon these insights to offer an alternative way to see and under-
stand cultures emerging from occupational categories. We do this by exploring an alternative

*Email: david.wicks@smu.ca; Tel: 902 420 5422; Fax: 902 420 5892

ISSN 1475-9551 print; ISSN 1477-2760 online 2007 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/14759550701659052
350 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

site of study (Parker, 2002) for management researchers, that is, tattooists. Adopting a frag-
mentationist perspective (Martin, 1992) of culture we explore how tattooists construct cultural
meanings associated with particular socialization processes (namely, self-taught versus appren-
ticeship). Specifically, we set out to explore the ambiguity that emerges in the cultures existing
within or arising out of apprenticed and self-taught tattooing collectivities.
Interestingly, much of the organizational culture-related research that explores ambiguity
reads like a neat story where ambiguity is presented as a theme, category or framework of
analysis (for example, Alvesson, 2001). As a result, individual stories sometimes become lost
to professional and organizational-level discussions (for example, Robertson and Swan, 2003).
Moreover, this literature often focuses upon ambiguity as a means of regulation, although it
sometimes recognizes agency as a part of this process (for example, Munro, 1995). In this
article we make a modest attempt to present our research a little differently. Once we provide
an overview of the key literature we draw upon, we represent the stories of six tattooists to
better illuminate the fragmented, fluid and even contradictory nature of cultural meanings across
members of a collectivity, that is, tattooists. Only then do we offer our interpretations of the
cultures that emerge from these stories. In this study we focus upon ambiguity that emerges
across members of collectivities and their participation in cultures, not within individual stories.
Adopting a lens that focuses upon the ambiguity of culture allows us to distinguish
between membership of a collectivity (that is, self-taught tattooists, apprenticed tattooists)
and participation in its associated cultures. For example, cultures emerge from the stories of
apprenticed tattooists that embody symbols of tradition, respect, sacrifice and professional-
ism. For some members, these cultures overlap and constitute a cultural identity that embod-
ies all of these themes. For others, however, the apprenticeship represents professionalism,
but little else. It is in this manner that participation, not membership, determines cultural
identity. Furthermore, the stories also reveal that many of the self-taught tattooists have been
re-socialized as apprenticed tattooists and now attach cultural meaning to the apprentice-
ship. Other self-taught tattooists do not appear to attach any cultural identity to their social-
ization processa case of membership, but not cultural participation. These self-taught
tattooists appear to develop cultural identities from other collectivities, most notably artists.
For example, cultural manifestations like tattooing design appear to represent interpretations
of cultural identities. It is here we begin to see the contradictions, ambiguities and uncertain-
ties of cultural boundaries. Some individuals are members of particular collectivities, but not
cultural participants, while others exist in multiple, overlapping and contradictory cultures.
Our decision to look to an alternative site of study (Parker, 2002) also offers a unique oppor-
tunity to see culture and organizational life differently in management studies. Looking to a
relatively unexplored site opens the possibility to see old issues (that is, organization culture)
in new ways as we are less likely to approach the site, as researcher or reader, with expectations
of what culture should look like. Furthermore, tattooing has and continues to confront various
historical, political and social barriers in society as marginal and even deviant work (Watson,
1998; Ashforth and Kreiner, 1999). Tattooing and related body art, however, is a growing
industry that is becoming more and more mainstream (Velliquette et al., 1998; Kjeldgaard and
Bengtsson, 2005). The very changing nature of the industry (for example, customers, number
of establishments) positions the profession as a fruitful area for various organization studies
topics, including small and medium enterprises, change, training, health and safety, and identity.

A CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

Incorporating the definitional, theoretical and methodological debates surrounding organiza-

tional culture studies, Martin and Meyerson (1988) propose a multi-theoretical approach to
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 351

studying and understanding culture. Their framework consists of integrationist, differentia-

tionist and fragmentationist perspectives of culture, and is employed to conduct an extensive
categorization of organizational culture research (Martin, 1992, 2002). The integrationist and
differentiationist perspectives give little or no recognition of ambiguity in understanding
culture, however, the fragmentationist perspective embellishes it. Fragmentationist research-
ers claim that the unity of the integrationists and the clearly defined differences of the differ-
entiationists are an oversimplified order imposed upon a socially constructed reality that is
characterized by complexity, multiplicity and flux (Martin, 1992: 132). It is from such a lens
that our study accepts the ambiguities and fluidity within and across cultures. Martin (2002)
challenges the edges of cultural theory and the assumption that cultural boundaries, in
particular, organizational cultural boundaries, are clearly defined and stable. We move her
argument forward by exploring the stories of individuals to understand the bases of member-
ship and participation in different social groups. In this way we follow Martin (2002: 329)
and instead of asking where a boundary should be placed or Who is in or out of a culture?,
we ask What is in and out of a culture?
We conceptualize culture as suggested by Martin (2002) and distinguish between collec-
tivities and cultures. A collectivity is a collection of bodies (people) that represent a structure
around which borders can be drawn. These borders are defined by some sort of interdepen-
dence among members, for example, departmental, nationality, organization, strategic
alliance, training, or occupational status (Martin, 2002). It is in this manner that members of a
particular collectivity can be identified and counted. Cultures are an aspect of collectivities. It
is through relationships within collectivities that cultures are created (Martin, 2002). In
conducting the current study, we define culture as interpretations of the meanings associated
with a diverse range of cultural manifestations such as stories, formal/informal practices, and
physical arrangements. Culture is therefore not equated with membership in a collectivity,
rather it is participation that defines culture and cultural identity. In this study, through
individual stories we illustrate how both personal (for example, agency) and social (for
example, group) identity construction are linked to participations in cultures. Participation,
rather than membership, acknowledges that people within a collectivity vary to the extent to
which and in the intensity with which they are involved in a culture (Martin, 2002: 332).
In this article, we explore apprenticed and self-taught tattooists as collectivities because
socialization has been identified in the extant literature as one of the primary ways through
which cultural values and norms are maintained (Louis, 1980). Organizational socialization
is the process by which newcomers learn the behaviours, values, beliefs and social knowl-
edge to accept their new roles and function effectively within the organization (Van Maanen,
1976). In this study, rather than viewing socialization as limited to the boundaries of the orga-
nization, we look to the socialization processes of a particular collectivitythe tattooing
profession. We do not think that only collectivities defined by socialization create cultures.
They do, however, seem like an interesting place to start because they are one way of catego-
rizing and identifying tattooists that is meaningful, both theoretically (for example, in how
values are instilled and techniques learned) and practically (for example, in how quality is
signalled to customers).
Similar to Robertson and Swan (2003), we broadly conceptualize ambiguity as that which
seems unclear. Ambiguity exists where there is lack of clarity in the interpretation of a
particular phenomenon or set of events (Feldman, 1991). A difficult concept to pin down,
ambiguity is often not clearly defined by those studying it. Munro (1995: 456) offers a
detailed discussion of how the absence of accounting management controls in a UK financial
services organization is employed as a managing by ambiguity strategy that serves to repro-
duce existing structures of domination. He does not offer a clear definition of the concept,
however, he does discuss several dimensions of ambiguity. He notes, organizational life is
352 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

ongoing interpretative activity and all interpretative activity is inherently ambiguous; manag-
ers may choose to (or not) resolve ambiguity through their formal authority; and ambiguity
may be perceived as environmentally determined, that is, out there to be managed. While
not defining the concept directly, Alvesson (2001: 864) also explores ambiguity, that is,
three kinds of ambiguity in his discussion of knowledge work, namely, of knowledge (or
the type of work performed), of the significance of knowledge (or centrality of knowledge in
organizational life); and of results claimed to be contingent upon knowledge work (or the
results produced). Throughout the piece, Alvesson (2001) does make reference to uncer-
tainty, controversy, complexity, instability and uniqueness in his discussions of ambiguity. In
an earlier article, Alvesson (1993: 1002) more clearly conceptualizes ambiguity, referring to
ambiguity as involving uncertainty, contradictions that can not be resolved or reconciled,
absence on agreement on boundaries, clear principles or solutions. In this essay we adopt
this conceptualization of ambiguity in exploring the cultural meanings of self-taught and
apprenticed collectivities as heard through the stories of six tattooists.

REFLECTING ON THE RESEARCH STUDY

The stories that inform this article are a part of a larger project that explores the nature of
company strategy and competitive advantage in the Canadian tattooing industry. The current
study sets out to explore the existence of cultures in the socialization collectivities of appren-
ticed and self-taught tattooists. Specifically, we set out to address the following questions:

Are there clearly defined boundaries to cultural identities?

Does membership to a collectivity equate cultural participation?
Can participants exist in overlapping, nested cultures?
How do individuals manage the ambiguity enveloping cultural identity?

We do not approach this research from a neutral position. Our own interests and experi-
ences have brought us to the site, the exploration we pursued and our interpretations of the
stories we heard. In effect, in this article we make sense of how others make sense of their
experiences (Thomas and Davies, 2005). Our study is underpinned by social constructivism
to facilitate the surfacing of local, specific, and multiple constructed realities (Burrell and
Morgan, 1979; Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). We were attracted to the tattooing industry as an
interesting site to explore organizational issues for several reasons. The body as a site of
expression of identity is something that intrigues both of us. One of us began this research
partly as a personal journey to explore how tattoos might be a means through which to
express something about who she is or perhaps wanted to be. Having already acquired two
tattoos and considering another, the other one of us joined the research project with an inter-
est in delving deeper into the historical, social and business side of tattooing in Canada.
Moreover, the growth of the tattooing industry, comprised mostly of small enterprises (fewer
than 15 employees), and the rise in tattooing as a mainstream phenomenon, offered us an
opportunity to explore a relatively untouched and fruitful site in organization studies.
Furthermore, much of the tattooing literature concentrates upon consumers, that is, motiva-
tions for acquiring tattoos, consequences and risks of acquiring tattoos, decisions about the
type and location of tattoos, reflections upon the experience of acquiring tattoos, and identity
and tattoos (for example, Velliquette et al., 1998; Watson, 1998; Grief et al., 1999; Frederick
and Bradley, 2000; Mayers et al., 2002; Kjeldaard and Bengtsson, 2005). As a result, we felt
a contribution could be made through exploring the voices of tattooists to gain a different
appreciation of this growing and somewhat controversial profession and industry.
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 353

The individuals interviewed for this study include 10 tattooists, chosen partly based on
convenience and partly on the different competitive positioning of the studios in which they
workedin different parts of the country, experiencing different amounts of rivalry, with
different product offerings, at different price points and employing tattooists following
different career paths. Interviews with tattooists were supplemented by interviews with six
government representatives from departments regulating or overseeing tattooing establish-
ments in order to generate a deeper understanding of the industry trends, legislation and
influence of constituents. Archival information from tattooing associations, as well as legisla-
tion and guidelines governing tattooing and piercing establishments were also used to supple-
ment the primary textual data. To capture the richness of these stories and the ambiguity
surrounding membership and cultural participation emerging from individual experiences,
we decided to represent the stories of six of these tattooists.

APPRENTICED TATTOOISTSJORDON, JAMES AND MIKES STORIES

Jordons Story
Jordan works in a tattoo shop in a large city in Canada. He has been working in the industry
for four years and while he does not have any formal art training, he is quick to emphasize his
interest and background in art, as he puts it, I studied and studied and studied and drew and
drew and drew. He is an apprenticed tattooist who felt the best way to ensure his success in
the industry was through an apprenticeship. His apprenticeship was one year in duration and
he reflects upon the apprenticeship as a valuable and critical element to a career in tattoo-
ing. He discusses how an apprenticeship is not the only way to learn how to tattoo and a lot
of people like to try to study out of their basement, learn on their own, look at magazines, try
to see whats happening there (ibid.). In comparing his experiences to those that do learn on
their own, individuals referred pejoratively to as scratchers in the industry, he draws
parallels between tattooing apprenticeships and the training required to become a doctor.
Its like trying to learn how to be a doctor by watching ER [referring to self-taught tattooists]. No. You have to
go in and actually have somebody teach you how to do it and then you know whats wrong and whats right
and the ins and outsan apprenticeship, you know, its definitely worth it once youve done an apprentice-
ship. (ibid.)
Jordan draws upon well-established social and legal rules governing the processes through
which an individual becomes a doctor to illuminate the importance of an apprenticeship in
becoming a tattooist. First, tattooing is positioned as a legitimate profession, like medicine.
He does this again later in his interview when he discusses the prevalence of networks among
tattooists, not all doctors or dentists communication with each other although they are in the
same profession(ibid.). Second, he implies the inappropriateness, and even danger of, an
individual learning to become a doctor simply by watching television or by trial and error. In
doing this, not only does he align the tattooing apprenticeship to the esteemed position medi-
cal training holds, he discounts and discredits those that learn to tattoo by any other way. In
this way, he constructs the apprenticeship as the legitimate form of socialization, maintaining
the professionalism of the work. Moreover, in setting up the self-taught as an inferior other
he constructs a more favourable position for himself as an apprenticed tattooist.
In his comments below Jordan also highlights the role that work ethic, discipline and
perseverance play in becoming a tattooist via an apprenticeship. Jordan was cleaning, draw-
ing and practising on other objects for some time before he began tattooing on people. He
emphasizes that becoming a tattooist involves commitment of time and effort. Becoming a
tattooist, via an apprenticeship is an ongoing process, rather something just given to you.
Thus,
354 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

If you are going to sit around on your ass, then youre not showing any enthusiasm about it. Then youre not
going to succeed really. You really, really, have to put a lot of work into it. Theres a lot more to it than the
average person thinks you know youre not going to jump in and start tattooing right away. You got to start
at the bottom and work your way up show you are willing to go through anything to learn. (ibid.)
Jordans story of how he has become a tattooist and his experiences working in the indus-
try concentrate upon the necessity of the apprenticeship, that is, to get into the industry, to
succeed in the industry and to maintain the professionalism of the occupation. Becoming a
tattooist, however, does not happen overnight. It is a process driven by hard work, respect
and sacrifice. Jordan also discusses how some self-taught artists are successful. In retelling
his story, however, he often constructs the self-taught as less professional and less committed
than the apprenticed tattooists, thus positioning himself and other apprenticed tattooists in a
more positive light.

Jamess Story
James has been tattooing for over 20 years. He left the military and entered an eight-year
apprenticeship with his father. It was two years before he was permitted to use a needle. He
recounts how his father told him that success as a tattooist would only come through hard
work. James is quick to discuss the historical significance of tattooing, an appreciation that
can only be passed on through an apprenticeship. Like his father, James too emphasizes the
sacrifice involved in becoming a tattooist. His present apprentice, Phil, lives with his girl-
friend and she had to pay his rent for a full year while Phil was not earning any money during
the first year of his apprenticeship. During this time Phil was learning cleaning techniques,
pigments and observing James while he was tattooing. James is passionate about the impor-
tance of the apprenticeship. He notes that the government should move in and regulate the
industry, requiring individuals to demonstrate certification of apprenticeship before being
granted a business licence. He constructs a cultural identity premised upon respect, tradition
and sacrifice. For him, these elements are aligned with the apprenticeship process.

Mikes Story
Mike, an apprenticed artist with 17-years experience, immediately starts his story by privi-
leging the apprenticeship as the only legitimate way to learn to become a tattooist. He notes,
I was trained by another professional tattooist, which is the proper way to do it. Everybody
should go through an apprenticeship or a program or some sort. His apprenticeship was two
years in duration and he applies a similar standard to all individuals he takes on as apprentices.
He requires his apprentices to sign a four-year contract to work for him to demonstrate their
commitment to the process. In demonstrating the need for an apprenticeship in order to
become a successful, professional tattooist, Mike recounts his experience with a scratcher he
recently employed. This individual, Julian, had been tattooing for 14 years, but according to
Mike without an apprenticeship this individual could not proceed any further with his career.
I just hired a guy a month ago, Julian. Hes been tattooing for about 14 years, but he did the same as a lot of
them. He bought his equipment and doing it for years out of his apartment and went as far as he could. He did
it for 14 years and cant go any further. He learned all he can learn on his own so he came to me. I started to
take him on as an apprentice and show him how to clean up his work and stuff. He didnt even know how to
make his own needles. So now he is learning the stuff he couldnt learn on his own. (ibid.)
Similar to Jordan, Mike links the apprenticeship to other professions holding high occupa-
tional prestige, that is, medicine. He notes, its like a doctors office, when you walk in the
doctors office you can tell if its clean or not. You know tattoo shops are no different(ibid.).
In doing this, he emphasizes the strict hygiene standards that need to be employed in
tattooing shops. Furthermore, his earlier discussions in the interview imply that the only way
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 355

for an individual to learn how to ensure these standards is through an apprenticeship, not by
learning on your own. Moreover, not only does Mike construct the apprenticeship as the
professional way to become a tattooist but he also highlights the tradition and respect that is
integral to the process:
Thats the way [learning via apprenticeship] its been done over the years and been passed on. But you know
up until five to ten years ago a lot of us wouldnt give out our secrets. It was a hard business to get into because
other artists or tattooists did not want to tell you anything and not want to show you anything.
We can hear (or read) similarities in the stories of Jordan, James and Mike. All position the
apprenticeship as the gateway to becoming a successful tattooist. Jordan and Mike align
apprenticed tattooists with doctors and dentists, illustrating the professionalism underpinning
the apprenticeships and the cultures emerging from this collectivity. James and Mike also
both construct sacrifice, tradition and respect as defining characteristics of their cultural
identities. Despite this apparent unity across their stories, the individuals vary in the intensity
with which they seem to participate in these cultures. Mike is much more persuasive and
passionate than Jordan about his participation in these cultures. Furthermore, Mike illumi-
nates how membership to one collectivity does not necessarily mean exclusion from the
other, as noted with his story of Julian. It is here that ambiguity emerges around how individ-
uals construct cultures, how those cultures are linked to collectivities, and how participation
in cultures and cultural identities may vary.

SELF-TAUGHT TATTOOISTSSUE AND GLENNS STORIES

Sues Story
Sue was formally trained as an artist at one of Canadas top art schools. She started tattooing
because she found it difficult to find someone who could do good tattoos where she lived.
She started by practising on herself and her friends. She is a self-taught tattooist and works at
a very high-end Toronto tattoo studio, commanding some of the highest prices for services
that we encountered. Sue rejects the notion that apprenticeships are either necessary or all
that critical to success in the industry. She notes that her establishment no longer offers
apprenticeships, although it did for many years. She indicates that the apprenticeship process
itself is unrewarding for many people. Similar to many of the apprenticed tattooists, she too,
however, notes the sacrifice involved in apprenticeship, that is, hard work with little pay. Sue
notes that there is a lot of office work and cleaning involved in exchange for having access to
experienced and skilled tattooists.
Mike indicates that apprenticing is the proper way to do it and that those learning on their
own never get anywhere, their work never looks professional. Sue disagrees, showing us
her own professional tattoo, as well as a catalogue of work that illustrates covered up bad
tattoos done by others (it is quite common for tattooists to display their expertise in improv-
ing or concealing the poor work of others). She emphasizes the importance of the reputation
of the establishment and the portfolio of the tattooist as the most important determinants of
good tattoos. For her, success (and that of the high end studio where she works) comes from
providing only unique designs for customers, rather than using pre-drawn patterns or reusing
designs they had created for previous clients. This is referred to as custom versus flash art.

Glenns Story
Glenn, another self-taught tattooist, has been tattooing for five years. He recently opened his
own shop and he employs one other employee. He started tattooing because he had an
356 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

interest in art and had friends who wanted tattoos. As he puts it, Im pretty artistic mostly
everything I have done in my whole life has been something artistic, like drawing or
sculpting. I had friends who wanted tattoos and I figured who better to do them me. Five
years ago he made his first tattoo gun and began tattooing his friends. Like the apprenticed
tattooists, he emphasizes the need to learn a lot about sterilization, equipment and technology
in order to be successful in the industry. This knowledge, however, is not something that has
to be transferred via an apprenticeship. Glenn took the initiative himself and starting
acquiring the necessary information. He said:
Well we went to talk to dermatologist specialists and asked what would be good for the skin and whats going
to leave less scarring. A lot of myths are just myths, so you find all that out and talk to people about sterilizing
and get information on like what exacting sterilizing bath, like temperature and pressure. There are a lot of
books and you can talk to dentists. I talked to a couple of dentists who know a lot of more than I did. They are
really good and give me information sheets. (ibid.)
Interestingly, while Jordan parallels the apprenticeship to medical training and discounts
those that learn on their own, Glenn also draws links to the medical field in his references to
dermatologists and dentists, emphasizing the science behind good tattooing and becoming
a good tattooist. For Glenn, however, this knowledge, and resulting legitimacy, are not depen-
dent upon an apprenticeship. Glenn does express concern over the lack of regulation, provin-
cially and nationally, over who can set up a tattooing shop and begin tattooing the public, but
this is not linked to the apprenticeship. He emphasizes the importance of quality, control and
artistic abilities, however, such characteristics are not exclusive to apprenticed tattooists.
You really have to know what you are doing. You have to have a unique ability to pick out where the lines are
drawn and where everything is going to line up. Theres a lot to it, you have to practice. You could practice on
paper and even with the machine running its a hard thing to do. It takes a lot of dexterity to manipulate the
skin with both hands at the same time. Ive learned on my own. (ibid.)

Both Sue and Glenn acknowledge the prevalence of the apprenticeship as a means through
which to become a tattooist. They do not, however, equate this particular socialization
process as the best and only way to become a successful tattooist. Sue redirects attention to
her formal art training and constructs herself as a good tattooist through emphasizing her
exclusive designs and the reputation of the shop where she works. Her membership to the
self-taught collectivity does not define how she constructs herself as a good tattooist. Glenn
emphasizes the professionalism of his work by highlighting the science (for example, steril-
ization techniques), art (although not formal training), and control (e.g. through self and
needed industry regulation) enveloping his practices, and thus how he constructs and presents
himself to others as a tattooist. Again, the apprenticeship is not positioned as the only means
through which cultural identity can be constructed. Furthermore, it appears, at least for the
two self-taught tattooists discussed, that the self-taught collectivity itself is not the basis
from which cultures are constructed. The ambiguity around cultural construction emerges.
Professional categories, or collectivities, are not enough to demarcate culture or participation
in those cultures. Both Sue and Glenn are members of the self-taught collectivity, but this is
not the basis from which they construct cultural identities. To complicate this even further,
they both draw upon different resources in constructing the cultural identities they do. For
Sue, it is exclusive design and organizational identity, while for Glenn it is professionalism
underpinned by science, art and control.

RE-SOCIALIZED TATTOOISTSTEVES STORY

To further illustrate the ambiguity enveloping cultural boundaries, we represent the story of
Steve, a 25-year-old self-taught tattooist who became an apprenticed tattooist after tattooing
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 357

what he refers to as underground for nine years. He notes that he had been drawing trying
to figure out everything the hard way since the age of 12, but started doing it [tattooing]
professionally at the age of 16. Just a little over a year ago at the age of 24, Steve began an
apprenticeship with an established tattooist. Although he does not state it explicitly, his
discussion about working in the tattooing shop for one year and prior to that tattooing under-
ground, implies the perceived necessity of the apprenticeship in order for him to progress to
a more legitimate or lucrative organizational arrangement. He describes the profession as a
school of hard knocks. Theres only so many people that are doing it and its basically closed
out to the public (ibid.). The apprenticeship for him serves as a gateway into a different
realm of business and clientele. The apprenticeship has served as a means to learn the busi-
ness point of view of tattooing (for example, filing taxes). He also emphasizes the cleaning
techniques and learning how to fix machines as part of the process.
At the same time, however, he does not link the apprenticeship to actually learning how to
tattoo. These skills he acquired on his own over the years. In fact, in his discussion of
professional service he links training to artistic ability and knowing how to use a tattoo gun,
elements he does not associate with the apprenticeship. He also notes that it would be unwise
to take on someone as an apprentice that has no experience tattooing at all. In describing what
he would consider before taking on an apprentice he notes,
Id say do you draw a lot? Go get you drawings and then come back and Ill see you. Then basically you got to
be able to draw anything. Anything that anybody wants. No experience at all? That wouldnt be a wise choice.
Youre basically letting loose an untrained person out on the public and the public doesnt know this. I mean
they walk in, they see a professional inside the shop or whatever and they expect professional service. If you
put an untrained person behind with a loaded gun, what you are going to get is accidents. (ibid.)

Like the apprenticed and self-taught artists discussed earlier, Steve emphasizes the impor-
tance of sterilization and technique (for example, with equipment and design) in becoming a
successful tattooist. Professionalism for Steve is constructed through artistic ability and
knowing how to tattoo. Interestingly, he does not appear to construct the apprenticeship as a
mean through which to acquire these aspects of professionalism. He does, however, imply
that operating a licensed tattooing business allows him to occupy the occupational status of
professional tattooist, rather than one who is limited to working underground. For him,
the apprenticeship was the means through which he could progress to this position. Part of his
cultural identity is informed by his artistic ability and experience acquired as a self-taught
artist, while other aspects of his cultural identity are informed by his business and cleaning
training learned as an apprentice. Steve maintains membership in both the self-taught and
apprenticed collectivities and constructs cultural identities from various experiences, some of
which are associated with particular socialization experiences, others which are not. More-
over, his construction and participation in these cultures in some ways align with the other
stories discussed above, while in other ways are unique and even contradict their stories.

CULTURES OF APPRENTICED AND SELF-TAUGHT TATTOOISTS

For apprenticed tattooists, cultures emerged that embody symbols of professionalism, tradi-
tion/respect, and sacrifice. Some of these cultures overlap and constitute a cultural identity
embodying all of these themes, while for others they exist in isolation. In some cases, cultural
identities attached to apprenticeship overlap with cultures arising from other collectivities to
which the tattooists are members, such as artistry. Also, within these cultures, there is some-
times little consistency in the constructed meanings around the symbols of professionalism,
tradition/respect and sacrifice. Moreover, cultural manifestations such as the length of
apprenticeship vary, which suggests a certain amount of differentiation between tattooing
358 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

studios and an element of ambiguity concerning the best or appropriate means of training and
socialization. Interestingly, for the self-taught the collectivity itself does not appear to evoke
any particular cultures and cultural identities. The self-taught tattooists interviewed construct
cultures drawing upon other aspects of their experiences. This is an example where member-
ship of a collectivity does not equate with culture construction.

Culture Evoking Professionalism

The Alliance of Professional Tattooists promotes tattooing as an apprenticed-based art
(Alliance of Professional Tattooists, 2001). This organization emphasizes the need to follow
the apprenticing route in order to learn the skill and art of tattooing in a professional
manner. They warn us that the trial and error approach is criminal. Apprenticeships are
not legislated or regulated in any way nationally in Canada, and any individual can open a
tattooing establishment. For many individuals, however, an apprenticeship is the only way
to become a professional tattooist. As heard through the stories of Jordan and Mike some
tattooists equate the apprenticeship to professional occupations such as medicine and
dentistry. This cultural identity is also informed in part by the meanings attached to the self-
taught counter-culture. Cultural participants who attach meaning to the professionalism of
the apprenticeship do so in part by contrasting the value of their apprenticeship to that of
scratchers socialization. Illustrative of the contradictory nature of cultural identity, some
apprenticed tattooists do acknowledge the skills of the self-taught, however, they note the
limits and risks of this type of training. Furthermore, the meanings associated with profes-
sionalism differ across tattooists. For example, as a re-socialized tattooist, Steve constructs
a cultural identity premised upon professionalism, however, his notion of professionalism
emerges both from his skills acquired outside of the apprenticeship, as well as the occupa-
tional status an apprenticeship affords him. Furthermore, Glenn, a self-taught tattooist,
aligns tattooing with the legitimacy associated with other science-based professions, yet for
him this is not constructed through his membership of a particular collectivity.

Culture Evoking Tradition and Respect

As heard (or read) through the stories discussed, some apprenticed tattooists associate their
training (via apprenticeship) with industry tradition and respect. This respect manifests itself
in two ways. Firstly, there is respect for experienced tattooists by apprentices. Secondly,
respect from peers is only achieved via an apprenticeship. Apprenticeships symbolize an
appreciation or understanding that tattooing is a profession that has been protected by tradi-
tion. Participants convey respect for those who hold the secrets of success the necessary
skills and abilities. The Alliance of Professional Tattooists also emphasizes the importance of
veneration of peers and this association claims that this is not bestowed without an appren-
ticeship. It is an industry that places heavy emphasis on respect; respect for the history and
traditions and for those that have come before (Alliance of Professional Tattooists, 2001).
It appears that the appreciation for tradition is in part, tied to entry barriers faced by many
tattooists. As discussed by Mike, Steve, James and Jordan the apprenticeship serves as a
gatekeeping mechanism determining who is permitted to hold the esteemed position of
professional tattooist, whatever professional might mean for these individuals. For Mike
and James, securing an apprenticeship with an experienced tattooist means access to
techniques that only a select group of individuals possess. Put another way, Mike notes that
an apprenticeship means training by another professional.
This theme of tradition and respect did not, however, evoke meaning for all apprenticed
tattooists. Tradition and respect were neither mentioned nor implied by Steve and Jordan. For
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 359

Steve and Jordan, access via apprenticeship is not necessarily tied to tradition and respect,
rather it is seen as a necessary career stepping stone. This is an example of cultural
membership, that is, to the apprenticed collectivity, but not cultural participation through the
possession of shared values. In this way, cultural boundaries of apprenticed tattooists do not
appear to be fixed and stable. As Martin (2002: 332) acknowledged, members of a particular
collectivity vary to the extent to which and in the intensity with which they are involved in a
culture.
Mike and James exert great efforts to construct the apprenticeship as core to their cultural
identities and to that of a good tattooist, while Sue, Glenn and Steve separate the training of
the tattooist from the quality of the tattoo produced, saying that there are good and bad
tattooists out there, not all of whom are self-taught. Overall, from the stories discussed the
ambiguity around respect, tradition and professionalism is reflective of the lack of agreement
about the bases of quality tattoos, the professionalism of the tattoo artists who perform
them, and the establishments who employ them.
The construction of an apprenticeship as critical to becoming a good tattooist may partly
be explained by changes occurring in the macro environment. This type of institutionalized
myth (Meyer and Rowan, 1977) is expected to be prevalent in industries where customers
lack knowledge and experience with the product and objective assessments of a firms
performance are difficult to make. As tattooing shifts its position in the paid work hierarchy
from socially marginal and risky (Watson, 1998: 172) to mainstream activity, the clientele
demanding tattoos is changing and growing immensely (Frederick and Bradley, 2000; Kjeld-
gaard and Bengtsson, 2005; Velliquette et al., 1998). It can be expected then that a lack of
clarity around what constitutes good training, good tattooing and good tattooists would
underpin meaning making for individuals working in this profession. Alvessons (1993,
2001) work on ambiguity in knowledge-intensive firms offers support for the discussion in
this article. Alvesson (1993: 100203) notes, ambiguity means that the possibility of ratio-
nality clarifying means-ends relationships or exercising qualified judgement becomes
seriously reduced. Thereby a space is created for what Meyer and Rowan (1977) call the
adoption of institutionalized myths. He also argues that ambiguity is a defining feature of
knowledge-intensive work and workers (Alvesson, 2001). He concludes that there is a lack of
agreement around how knowledge is defined, the importance of it in organizational life and
how knowledge work is evaluated. As such, this creates both opportunity for new cultural
identities, but also places pressure on individuals to defend the cultures they participate in
and the identities they construct.
Ambiguity leads to space for innovative constructions of identity at both organizational
and personal levels, but also puts pressure on activities to develop and obtain validation of
these constructions. Ambiguity, in other words, provides an open arena for positive action,
but also represents a tendency calling for defensive measures (Alvesson, 2001: 883).
Alvessons (2001) quote above offers insight into explaining why apprenticed tattooists
often draw upon the counter-culture, that is, self-taught tattooists, as an inferior point of
comparison in constructing their own, more positive cultural identities. Self-taught tattooists,
in turn, draw upon other aspects of their experiences, like artistic training and control, from
which to construct positive cultural identities themselves. These identities are not necessarily
associated with their membership of the self-taught collectivity.

Culture Evoking Sacrifice

There appears to be consensus across the apprenticed tattooists (and even by some self-taught
tattooists) that the apprenticeship symbolizes sacrifice. An apprentice has to be willing to
start with the basics including, cleaning, needle preparation, and practising on other objects
360 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

like grapefruits. For most, an apprenticeship also means a period of time with little or no
incomethe period prior to tattooing. Some individuals are under the impression that in
some countries to become a tattooist requires the individual paying an up front fee for the
apprenticeship. For these tattooists, this knowledge seems to mediate the intensity of sacrifice
made. In other words, although their apprenticeship is hard work at least they do not have to
pay for it directly. Most apprenticed tattooists seem to accept that apprenticeships will
necessitate significant sacrificehard work with little pay. As discussed by Sue, even for the
self-taught tattooists an apprenticeship symbolizes sacrifice on the part of the apprentice.

Other Aspects of Cultural Ambiguity

Although apprenticed tattooists perceive considerable value in their apprenticeship in terms
of technical ability, reputation and the respect they can command, there are many contradic-
tions in the particularities associated with apprenticeship. For example, there appears to be
little consistency in the duration of apprenticeships across tattooists. The length of appren-
ticeships for the individuals interviewed varied in duration from one to eight years. This
inconsistency cannot be fully explained by the apprentices natural ability, past experience or
willingness to learn. In addition, the degree of formality in the employment arrangement
surrounding the apprenticeship varies significantly. Whereas some apprentices have to sign a
formal contract binding them for four years, others have no formal employment contract.
Mike goes a step further to formalize the process and uses the first month as a probationary
period to see if they have the aptitude and attitude to do it.
It is in recognizing these inconsistencies in and across cultural manifestations that we
accept ambiguity as a normal and inescapable part of tattooing cultures and cultural identities
(Martin and Meyerson, 1988; Feldman, 1991; Meyerson, 1991a; Martin, 2002). Rather than
these contradictions being problematic in facilitating our understanding our culture they in
fact constitute the culture. Embracing ambiguity as a cultural phenomenon means that we are
more likely to recognize a potentially diverse chorus of voices, interests, and perspectives
(Meyerson, 1991b: 260) that exist within and across collectivities.

The Absence of Cultural Participation?

Self-taught tattooists appear to be an example of a collectivity that does not evoke any
particular cultural identity in its members. Thus, in this case, membership of a collectivity
does not equate itself with the presence of, or participation in cultures and cultural
identities. Some self-taught tattooists have been re-socialized through apprenticeships
because they indicate their careers could not progress without being apprenticed. Most of
these re-socialized tattooists were working out of their homes or as Steve coined it, working
underground. The apprenticeship symbolizes professionalism and, at least for some (not
discussed here), respect and tradition. Participation in these cultures is, at least in part, tied
to entry barriers faced by them prior to the apprenticeship. The re-socialized tattooists that
participate in the apprenticed based cultures do not dismiss their experience as self-taught.
However, it is not clear what, if any, meanings the self-taught experience symbolizes for
them.
The self-taught tattooists that are not re-socialized develop cultural identities from other
collectivities, in particular art or artists. This association is also evident in the label tattoo
artist often used in common language to refer to tattooists (the term we, and many of the
individuals we encountered, used to refer to people who tattoo for a living). Their artistic
ability, acquired through formal training or not, informs their cultural identities. Many also
maintain portfolios of their work.
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 361

An interesting application of the efforts of these individuals reflects the apparent situation
of having no universally accepted notions of quality that are understood by the market or the
firms competing in it. As a result, the investments individuals and tattoo studios make in
differentiating themselves may be only partially understood by the market, and as such may
not translate into improved financial performance. These investments, however, create norms
that are internalized by existing firms and subsequently diffuse into the market. This is
almost inevitable in the context of ambiguity and uncertainty that prevent clear assessments
of product quality (Galaskiewicz and Wasserman, 1989). Because no objective measures of
goal accomplishment or product quality exist, organizations act on myths (that is, about
disease) or beliefs about achieving organizational ends (namely, about apprenticeship). In
other words, the ambiguity associated with the absence of objective indicators of customer
satisfaction creates a situation in which different levels of involvement in various collectivi-
ties are witnessed, each with different ideas about the value of both cultural membership and
participation.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

As Meyerson (1991a: 144) asks us, Why then do investigators of culture tend to ignore
ambiguities and concentrate instead on that which is agreed upon and clear? We too tend
to construct ambiguities as pathologies as conditions to control or cure (Meyerson, 1989).
Thus, to include ambiguity in the study of culture is to challenge our definition of culture and
to question the ideology underlying that definition. Our exploration of cultures in tattooing
collectivities highlights the fluidity of cultural boundaries. Distinguishing between member-
ship and participation enhances our understanding of culture in at least three ways. First, indi-
viduals can be members of single or multiple, overlapping collectivities. Some tattooists are
only members of the apprenticed collectivity, while others are members of the apprenticed
and self-taught collectivities. Second, an appreciation of membership versus participation
acknowledges that individuals can be members of a collectivity, but not participants in the
cultures. This emerges through Jordan and Steves stories which did not necessarily attach
respect and tradition to the apprenticeship. They are members of the collectivity, but not
participants in particular cultures. In addition, the intensity with which some participants
experience cultures vary as illustrated by the apprenticed tattooists that do not internalize the
self-taught counter-culture as a means to enhance their cultural identity. Finally, individuals
can acquire cultural identities from multiple, overlapping cultures. There are tattooists who
are totally immersed in the cultures of professionalism, respect, tradition, artistry and unique-
ness. For some, professionalism, respect and tradition overlap, while for others they do not
appear to be linked.
Ambiguity therefore exists at the collectivity and individual level. The lack of consensus
among apprenticed tattooists in socialization standards illustrates ambiguity at the collectiv-
ity level. At the individual level, re-socialized tattooists hold multiple beliefs about the best
way to become a tattoo artist. They acknowledge and accept the prevalence of self-taught
training, including their own, while they may also enact the cultures of professionalism of
apprenticeships. This study illustrates that cultural boundaries are anything but clearly
defined and stable. Embellishment or even recognition of ambiguity means we can learn
much about the cultures we are studying. We can look beyond single meanings of cultural
participants to uncover multiple meanings. Similar to the discussion offered by Robertson
and Swan (2003), we note that individuals can also construct and sustain multiple identities
in the face of this ambiguity. We are not concluding that socialization process determines
cultures, nor are we claiming that socialization is the only manifestation of cultures. Rather,
362 D. WICKS & G. GRANDY

socialization collectivities are merely a starting point from which to explore the emergence of
cultures and cultural identities in our study.
To further unravel the ambiguity enveloping culture, we call for more research that looks
across different levels of analyses. An exploration into the stories of individuals, groups and
organizations would likely reveal the messy and ambiguous nature of culture and cultural
identity construction, contrary to the picture of culture as a unifying and stable force. In this
way, the interactions between individual agency, social identity, organizational regulation
and societal influence would illuminate the mutually constitutive process of culture. Building
upon Alvessons (2001) claim that social constructivism and institutionalism are fruitful
lenses from which to explore ambiguity and culture, we argue that integrating insights from
both of these perspectives will allow cultural researchers to capture the macro (for example,
organization, social), meso (for example, group) and micro (for example, agency) consider-
ations that play a role in culture construction and the defining role of ambiguity in this
process. Moreover, given the historical positioning of tattooing as dirty work (Ashforth and
Kreiner, 1999) this site serves as an ideal from which to illuminate these intersections
between communities, organizations and individuals.
In looking to exploring an alternative site of study, that is, tattooists, our aim has been to
make a contribution by offering insights into a relatively unexplored site in organization studies.
We reflect upon critique offered by various researchers about the narrow range of formal orga-
nizations studied in organization studies (cf. Weick, 1979; Brewis and Linstead, 2000; Jones
and Surman, 2002; Parker, 2002). By studying an alternative form of organizing, what some
categorize as dirty work (Ashforth and Kreiner, 1999), we begin to shift the boundaries of
how we define and understand organization studies. Furthermore, Grandy and Mills (2004)
argue that looking at well-studied topics through alternative lenses offer fresh and different
insights on embedded ways of understanding. In this research, we offer a similar contribution.
As an understudied site we, and others, are less likely to be bound to preconceived notions of
what culture is and how cultural identities are constructed in this context. As such, it offers us
a freedom of sorts to explore and accept ambiguity as a normal feature of culture, thus chal-
lenging taken-for-granted assumptions about how we come to understand and study culture.

NOTES

1. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada Confer-
ence, Halifax, NS, Canada, 14-17 June 2003.

References
Alliance of Professional Tattooists (2001), available at http:// www.safetattoos.com/wanttobe.htm (accessed
15 June 2001).
Alvesson, M. (1993) Organization as rhetoric: knowledge-intensive firms and the struggle with ambiguity, Journal
of Management Studies, 30(6), 9971015.
Alvesson, M. (2001) Knowledge work: ambiguity, image and identity, Human Relations, 54(7), 86386.
Ashforth, B. and Kreiner, G. (1999) How can you do it? Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive
identity, Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 41334.
Ashkanasy, N., Wilderom, C. and Peterson, M. (2000) International Handbook of Culture and Climate, Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Brewis, J. and Linstead, S. (2000) Sex, Work and Sex Work: Eroticizing Organization, London: Routledge.
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, London: Heinemann.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. (2000) Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: N. K.
Denzin, and Y. Lincoln (Eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 128.
Feldman, M. (1991) The meaning of ambiguity: learning from stories and metaphors. In: P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M.
R. Louis, C. C. Lundberg, and J. Martin (Eds) Reframing Organizational Culture, Newbury Park, CA: Sage,
pp. 14556.
 WHAT CULTURES EXIST IN THE TATTOOING COLLECTIVITY? 363

Frederick, C. M., and Bradley, K. A. (2000) A different kind of normal? Psychological and motivational characteris-
tics of young adults tattooers and body piercers, North American Journal of Psychology, 2(2), 38094.
Galaskiewicz, J. and Wasserman, S. (1989) Mimetic and normative processes within an interorganizational field: an
empirical test, Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(3), 45479.
Grandy, G. and Mills, A. J. (2004) Strategy as simulacra? A radical reflexive look at the discipline and practice of
strategy, Journal of Management Studies, 41(7), 115370.
Grief, J., Hewitt, W. and Armstrong, M. (1999) Tattooing and body piercing, Clinical Nursing Research, 8(4), 36885.
Jones, C. and Surman, E. (2002) After organization studies, Ephemera. Critical Dialogues on Organization, 2(3),
86192.
Kjeldgaard, D. and Bengtsson, A. (2005) Consuming the fashion tattoo, Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 17277.
Louis, M. (1980) Surprise and sense making: what newcomers experience in entering unfamiliar organizational
settings, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 22651.
Martin, J. (1992) Cultures in Organizations: Three Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. (2002) Organizational Culture: Mapping the Terrain, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Martin, J. and Frost, P. (1996) The organizational culture war games: a struggle for intellectual domination. In: S. R.
Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (Eds) Handbook of Organizational Studies (pp. 599621), London: Sage.
Martin. J. and Meyerson, D. (1988) Organizational cultures and the denial channelling and acknowledgment of
ambiguity. In: L. R. Pondy, R. J. Boland and H. Thomas (Eds) Managing Ambiguity and Change, Chichester:
John Wiley, pp. 93125.
Mayers, L., Judelson, D., Moriarty, B. and Rundell, K. (2002) Body piercing and tattooing prevalent among univer-
sity students, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, January, available at http://www.mayo.edu/news (accessed 1
September 2002).
Meyer, J. W. and Rowan, B. (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony, Ameri-
can Journal of Sociology, 83, 34063.
Meyerson, D. (1989) The social construction of ambiguity and burnout: a study of hospital social workers.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, CA.
Meyerson, D. (1991a) Normal ambiguity?: A glimpse of an occupational culture. In: P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R.
Louis, C. C. Lundberg, and J. Martin (Eds) Reframing Organizational Culture, Newbury Park, CA: Sage,
pp. 13144.
Meyerson, D. (1991b) Acknowledging and uncovering ambiguities in cultures. In P. J. Frost, L. F. Moore, M. R. Louis,
C. C. Lundberg, and J. Martin (Eds) Reframing Organizational Culture, Newbury Park: Sage, pp. 25470.
Munro, R. 1995 Managing by ambiguity: an archaeology of the social in the absence of management accounting,
Critical Perspectives in Accounting, 6, 43382.
Ott, S. J. (1989) The Organizational Culture Perspective, Pacific Groves, CA: Brooks/ Cole Publishing Co.
Parker, M. (2002) Against Management, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Robertson, M. and Swan, J. (2003) Control what control? Culture and ambiguity within a knowledge intensive
firm, Journal of Management Studies, 40(4), 83158.
Schein, E. (1990) Organizational culture, American Psychologist, 45(2), 10919.
Scheinder, B. (1987) The people make the place, Personnel Psychology, 40, 43753.
Smircich, L. (1983) Concepts of culture and organizational analysis, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 33958.
Thomas, R. and Davies, A. (2005) Theorizing the micro-politics of resistance: new public management and
managerial identities in the UK public services, Organization Studies, 26(5), 683706.
Van Maanen, J. (1976) Breaking in: socialization to work. In: R. Dublin (Ed.) Handbook of Work, Organization and
Society, Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Velliquette, A. M., Murray, J. B. and Creyer, E. H. (1998) The tattoo renaissance: an ethnographic account of
symbolic consumer behaviour, Advances in Consumer Research, 25, 46167.
Watson, J. (1998) Why did you put that there?: Gender, materialism and tattoo consumption, Advances in
Consumer Research, 25, 45360.
Weick, K. (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.