Original way of thinking, new approaches and expected findings. Core research scheme should reflect perfect knowledge of topic within its research background. Triangulation methodology, priority of qualitative methods w strong selection of accessible quantative and statistics data. Creativity always is welcome. No room for fatigue, stereotyping and indifference. Always workable position of real investigator= innovator.

Original way of thinking, new approaches and expected findings. Core research scheme should reflect perfect knowledge of topic within its research background. Triangulation methodology, priority of qualitative methods w strong selection of accessible quantative and statistics data. Creativity always is welcome. No room for fatigue, stereotyping and indifference. Always workable position of real investigator= innovator.

I suggest the axiom of departure-- theory as an institution-- " set of believes about the world" ( North 2005) as an Evolutionarily Stable Strategy of Survival ( Boyer and Orlean 1993) -- actual time and place specific solutions as aspects of human conception and conceptualization. One theory the Neoclassical " Homo Economicus" is thus assumed to disclose one aspect not all-- and needs to be understood as complementary over time and space explaining in variegating proportion human decision making-- theory complementarity search as the method of approach may allow the discovery of previously untried empirical hypothesis-- I strongly agree with Olga Ivashchenko -- that knowledge in depth of the topic and the knowledge of previous research qualitative selection of quantitative material and hypothesis is the sine qua non-- however for novelty search ( Witt in Witt 1993) additional element is needed-- to depart from Kantian metaphysics as a multidimmensional cristal where the complementarity anchored in the divergent views of things may lead to novel set of inquiries-- to study what we think is fact defies the Popperian supposition-- facts gathering knowledge accumulation is theory bound-- search for novelty can not be blinded by one single understanding, conception-- while studying is is important to theoretically classify the source material and afford the due weight to theoretical discontinuities , and differences on one hand on the second acknowledge that " theories of human nature" ( North 1993) over time become institutionalized and do have an impact on behavior even if a priori implausible-- thus for example Homo Economicus conception can not be dispensed with , but should not be allowed to blind. The discovery of theoretical hybrids type Victor Vanberg 1994 " Rules and Choice in Economics " -- in my discipline The Economic History is very fruitful on the path to the discovery of novelty than then needs to be institutionalized towards becoming an innovative understood by all thought model. .

What an interesting question! I think there are many ways to be innovative, starting with the research question. Simply asking a question no-one else has posed can be innovative. Methods also offer much scope for innovation, such as a unique combination of visual, oral, observation or participatory methods. In the health and care sectors, innovation can come from 'co-production' - actually conducting research in full partnership with service users, and perhaps this idea can extend to other social science research. I think there is much potential to innovate by actively involving the people or communities who are the focus of the research in its design and implementation.

as Anthea's response suggests, the most crucial "innovations" may rest in actually applying what other anthropologists, sociologists, and psychologists pioneered 50-90 years ago: participant observation, Participatory Action Research, working in teams, writing 3-4-5 reports, each from a different person's perspective, combining modes (auditory, visual, etc.)

In 2011-2012 I lhave done the comparative research under Carnegie umbrella on Ukraine and Belarus as social states: how social they are? For Belarus case only ethnographic research was possible including participant observation surely. So, innovative could be the method also when the object is inaccessibl. Independent sociological surveys are forbidden. I very much like this my research experience and quite often refers to it.

There are thousands of places ethnographers have never been. Innovate starting with a place. Then the people in it. Who are you to them? Then record the interactions between them, and with you. What do these reveal? Start like Harvey Sacks did with a greeting. Then move on as William Foote Whyte did to places only "we can go". With that mountain of "data", you can spend a lifetime writing it up.

Colleague, have you ever experience to research people under dictatorship. I've done good work in this case, no problem for me as scholar from the former soviet union. I know what does it mean homo sovieticus, how to talk with them.R.Rose good example for scholar with 25 years experience investigating post Soviet space.

Olga, I was a student at Centre for Russian Studies, University of Birmingham in 1968 studying Juvenile Delinquency. My visit to USSR to "observe" in Leningrad was refused. With a colleague at Harvard we continued the research at a distance via Pravda reports. Very unsatisfactory so we changed our focus to US/UK.

Sincerely. Llike your answer. This is really another social environment- mostly unclear for foreigners. But very interesting as research laboratory. That's why I mentioned prof.Rose already heritage.

Animals have been left out of Social Studies research. Still, we seem unable to live without them. Animals ARE part of our landscape, of our history, of our uses and morals. Social Studies are not catching the whole picture of a human group/ society when not taking into consideration the relations between people and animals at a given situation. Animals participate and share space and time with humans. The lack of visibilization of animal lives and their struggle for survival in SSCC studies stands as the main instrument leading people to naturalize violence in society today. How "neutral" can be the sight of a dismembered sentient creature sold by weigh at the supermarket on the XXI century?

Maria, lots of animal-human interaction research. Check Symbolic Interaction, journal. Several articles by leading researchers.

Thank you everyone for sharing your experience, reflections and ideas. It is interessting to note that within these limited interactions how far the discussions are moving in the direction the initial query has pointed and also divergently to other areas of scholarly interest.

in my opinion innovation has much to do with innovative / distinctive thinking and asking new and unexpected questions. So do not hesitate to think new thinkings and ask new questions. You do not need a new field or undiscovered native people. You may also look at common topics and issues

from a new perspective or ask new questions to the material or focus on other details as the main fucus was sofar.

Innovation is often in the eye of the beholder. Think of the audience you're writing for in your grant application or manuscript submission. What seems innovative in one field might be old news in another. As an anthropologist, I find people in fields such as public health, organization studies, and political science find my work innovative, but an an audience well-versed in the anthropological literature might not. When writing for an audience outside your field, make sure that what you are proposing is still recognizable to that audience (not too innovative), and explain those methods or theoretical perspectives that mgiht not be evident in their literature base.

I agree Ulrike new perspectives may help research to go into the direction of innovation. And, obviously new question(s) leads us towards innovation but the question is how to arrive at those new questions.

You are are right Eric we innovation is contextual and of course, a question/perspective from one discipline (e.g. anthropology) can become innovative in new field (e.g. medicine). Such type of innovation might be useful to explore new area of implementation, whereas, to make ethnographic research innpvative, I think, we need it in our own respective filed/discipline.

I am finding in my research, as Karen Davis mentions, historical data has many hidden yet very insightful information. I have been digging through journals(1700's) and files from the earliest print in 1800's. It's astonishing what I am finding in simple side notes. I am researching Culturally Modified Trees that are bent/manipulated/burned for navigation, ceremony, and sustenance purposes. Clergy journals, Lewis and Clark mission, government documents, hand drawn maps, forestry surveys, etc. reveal incredibly descriptive first hand accounts of Native Americans and their relationship with the trees, among everything else. Genocide and perpetual oppression has attempted to wipe history of Native Americans. Tribes have lost much but antiquity can reveal forgotten information from the true curiosity of its authors through accidental and unintended documentation. Time travel and reengage with initial documentation. It's amazing what one can find in between the margins.

Superb experience you had acquired with historical data!

This raises a fascinating question for 'ethnomethodlogists'. How do you do "reading"? Do you read a historical document like a diary as you, now? Is there a 'you' then that can be identified as the "reader"? Was the document written to be read by a "reader" and what would such a reader look like? Or for some general, indescribable audience? Or was a diary written, and should be read, as "notes to myself"? And how do you describe the process of reader/writer interaction as a methodological problem? The solutions to these problems might reflect heavily on questions raised recently about reparations to enslaved people or Native Peoples in Australia or America.

KAPIL; new questions come with time. For example my research on traditional Dances and rituals of guest reception in Yemen was originally focossed on the stabiizing and identity building aspect of the ritual and the concept of "rites of passage". Then there was a phase in Yemen society where many changes and innovationas took place and my focus shifted towards the processual and flexible aspects of the ritual and its ability to integrate new things and ideas while keeeping it coherence. Then came the war and I thought that now these rituals and my research are no longer relevant. Yet shortly I was invited to give a paper at a coference on peace building and stae (re-)construction after the war and I was very surprised by the overwhelmingly positive and interested reactions of the audience when I now focussed on the peace keeping and conflict preventing aspects of the dances and rituals and their potencial to serve as cultural tools to re-establish stability and identity at a local level in Yemeni society and my be applied by peacebuilding organisations in a very practical way.

And the other way to shift perspectives and come to new questions is your own biography. When you make new experiences or have new interests and live changes your perspectives you may ask new questions (or do no longer engage in research...)

Innovation within any discipline has to do with deepening knowledge as much as with broading the scope of search. The exclusion of animals as "others" from Social Sciences stands as a current problem affecting the understanding of the context where facts and acts take/will take place. Specism invisibilizes animals from the social context while they are frequent players. Innovation and inclusion make sense together.

Russell, you have raised interesting issues. I think there will be a new "reader" after a significant interval of time/years even the reader is the one who has written the diary.

The "reading" 200 years after loses a problem. Literary analysts, for example, are reading into Jane Austen's novels a feminism that would have been meaningless at the time the novels were written. Same can be said of the "diaries". Can we "know" the intent of the writer? Or the cultural meaning of rituals, songs, from " Western" culture to Native American Indians in 1850s? And how can we test that "knowing" against a standard of "truth" to support or revise scientific propositions?