On this project, it was clear early on that it was going to be crucial for us to establish a really thorough foundation of research. FoodShare is a complicated organization: the kind of work they do demands that they define ambitious missions, and as a result, there are often a lot of layered forces in tension for any given decision. This is undeniably a strength, allowing them to deliver many programs to a diverse set of audiences. It also means that tugging on any single string brings with it a cascade of parallel vibrations throughout the structure of the organization.
There are constant tensions of target audience, aims, and messaging. Almost everything else FoodShare does is thoroughly a program (where profit is not the goal), whereas the catering operation really needs to be thought of as a business to flourish. Really thorough research, then, was the key to pulling decision making out of the realm of internal politics and into something more objective and grounded. By observing how the kitchen functioned, how customers experienced the service, and how FoodShare staff talked and thought about the present and future of the catering operation, we could ground any conversation about change in something approaching fact.
With this in mind, we set out with an ambitious two-month research plan, built around three core pillars: ethnography, semi-structured interviews, and a market scan.
Our ethnographies were a combination of participant observation and strict observation:
We spent a few days as participant observers in the FoodShare kitchen, chopping produce and drinking in our informants lived experience.
We followed along on three catering jobs as observers, examining first hand how customers experienced the Field To Table Catering service. The first was an external lunch for a small creative company. The second was for a small internal event at FoodShare. Our final catering observation was of the FoodShare Annual General Meeting, giving us the opportunity to witness how the catering operation handled a large scale event (for the record, they did so with flying colours).
We spent some time participating in the boxing of vegetables for one of FoodShare’s other programs. This wasn’t an experience during which we officially collected data (it was part of a Bridgeable volunteering day at FoodShare), but it gave us a really good understanding of how the catering operation differs from the other social enterprise programs within FoodShare.
We’ve spent copious time as casual observers in the FoodShare HQ. We hang out for a few hours a day, usually two or three days a week.
Concurrent with our in-context fieldwork was our interviews, conducted with three loose groups of people:
FoodShare staff: We interviewed a half-dozen or so of FoodShare’s employees, attempting to discern not only of the logistical realities of the catering operation but also the shape of their organization as understood from various points of view. With that in mind, we chatted with people involved in food preparation and delivery, customer service, administration, and strategy and vision for the organization as a whole.
Field To Table Catering customers: We interviewed a number of customers of the catering service, asking them about their experiences, disappointments, and needs.
Food Issues Experts: We interviewed several folks with interests related to food, included a number of caterers, a producer of artisanal maple products, and an organic farmer.
Both of these research components were grounded in a market scan of catering and food services, with the goal of understanding the norms and expected level of service for a mid-level caterer in a large city.
